747400sp From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3301 posts, RR: 2 Posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3151 times:
I have been wondering this for while. Northwest seem to have retired there MD80 fleet, yet they still have older DC-9's. Why, it do not make since to keep the DC-9 and not the MD80? What your thoughts on this?
AsstChiefMark From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3134 times:
The MD80 was an oddball that they inherited in the Republic merger. They didn't have that many of them. It was financially beneficial to sell them rather than maintain a handful of that model in their fleet.
COERJ145 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1420 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3113 times:
Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter): I have been wondering this for while. Northwest seem to have retired there MD80 fleet, yet they still have older DC-9's. Why, it do not make since to keep the DC-9 and not the MD80? What your thoughts on this?
Perhaps that the MD-80s were so few in numbers in the NW fleet, they thought it would be more economical to keep the DC-9s than buy new MD-80s(also NW had just done a DC-9 interior refurbishment).
TrijetsRMissed From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2164 posts, RR: 7 Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3089 times:
They served no purpose once NW had a substantial fleet of A320's. And as mentioned they were an oddball in the fleet consisting of only eight aircraft. It was more cost effective to retire them in the age of fleet commonality. Not to mention they were among the oldest MD-82's, off the line in between 1981-83. I'm surprised NW kept them as long as they did. The DC-9's have been refurbished and re-engined. They are in better condition than many Boeing 733's and such that are half the age.
Lucky42 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3010 times:
The reason they got rid of them is because they only had about 8 of them and they could not use the DC-9 crews to fly them . A pilot could fly a DC-9 10-30-50 in a single day but the MD-80 was a seperate flight crew and training due to the differences...The MD-80 did not fit with only having 8 it was easier to get rid of the 80.
Jetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7365 posts, RR: 51 Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2473 times:
Before the A320's came into the fleet, they were the long-range workhorses used to fly into the noise-sensitive airports like SNA, ONT, PSP, BUR(although we never ended up serving BUR). But remained in the fleet becuase of the long-term lease agreements is what I heard form the MD80 guys I flew with. By the end of 1999, they were retired in December of that year. We removed the MD80 tab from our FA manuals in Feb of 2000. The MD80 segments were usually built into A320/727 pairings becuase we never becuase the flight deck and cabin crews split up after any given leg and were 3 FA crew patterns unlike the DC9 trips. We hardly ever saw an MD80 on a DC9 pairing. In closing years, they were usually running them on short segments between MSP-ORD or DTW-IND. This was especially difficult becuase the bins were so small and carry-on luggage was a problem. You used to see a line of gate chacked bags half way up the jet-way. The frequent flyers hated that plane. I can still remember hearing, "it fit on the last DC9 I was on".
Jetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7365 posts, RR: 51 Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2178 times:
We had this really odd looking trolley that was specific to the MD80. It was heavy and cumbersome. We nicknamed it the Jurassic Cart, becuase it was this gross maroon colour. Yes, very stylish. We used to have to chase people out of the E position j/s that was paired with a passenger seat across from the galley service door.