Pilotfox From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 546 posts, RR: 0 Posted (7 years 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 9563 times:
Here's an interesting Article from the Star Tribune about Northwest Airlines. I know there is always talk about NWA and their DC-9's, but this article mentions that they plane to "phase out one-third of its aging DC-9 planes within two years". Any way, heres the article, http://www.startribune.com/535/story/1060988.html
Centrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3598 posts, RR: 21
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 9464 times:
Get this out quickly...NW getting rid of the DC-9s? Never!
What is really the interesting parts are...
Quote: Northwest intends to shrink its mainline fleet -- aircraft used for domestic and international flying and seating 100 or more people -- from 375 planes in 2006 to 337 in 2008. Northwest also plans to substantially increase its fleet of regional planes, which seat up to 76 passengers -- from 226 planes in 2006 to 262 in 2008.[quote]
More work for Mesaba, Pinnacle and Compass.
[quote]The airline is projecting that aircraft used solely for overseas flights will grow from 61 this year to 74 by 2011.
That is only 13 planes... but by then there will be an increase of 18 aircraft. Maybe the 742s are going.
More crews training to do international routes? I think someone mentioned in another thread about Jr staff now gettng more chances to work WBC.
Quote: In a bankruptcy court filing, Northwest said its international flight capacity is expected to grow an average of 4.3 percent a year between this year and 2010. Meanwhile, domestic flying is projected to decline by an average of 2.7 percent a year.
Flying done by regional affiliates is expected to mushroom by 16.9 percent a year, Northwest said.
That is a huge increase in regional flying. Are other carriers seeing this kind of increase?
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
Bicoastal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 9403 times:
United has been doing this for what seems like years now. During bankruptcy, United reduced its fleet quite a bit and had its regional United Express contractors pick up the routes. Though some of these routes could certainly use larger aircraft at times, its seems more cost effective to fill an RJ consistently rather than a 737 occasionally. Plus they've been able to get rid of expensive union labor at many stations and replace them with the contractors' employees....Skywest, Mesa, Air Wisconsin (operations only), etc.
PU752 From Uruguay, joined Mar 2005, 584 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 9387 times:
Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 2): United has been doing this for what seems like years now. During bankruptcy, United reduced its fleet quite a bit and had its regional United Express contractors pick up the routes. Though some of these routes could certainly use larger aircraft at times, its seems more cost effective to fill an RJ consistently rather than a 737 occasionally. Plus they've been able to get rid of expensive union labor at many stations and replace them with the contractors' employees....Skywest, Mesa, Air Wisconsin (operations only), etc.
Remeber at IAD, ACA was flying thos Bae and CRJs now they fly ERJs !
Lexy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2514 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 9241 times:
Quoting Bicoastal (Reply 2): its seems more cost effective to fill an RJ consistently rather than a 737 occasionally
Here at BNA, that's the case and I just don't believe that for one second. Eg. CO flies around 17 flights a day from here all on E145's and E135's. That is just stupid. Especially when you have a mainline 737 in the system that comes as close as MEM on the routing system on a daily basis. That is just laziness on the part of the carrier to provide a positive, and enjoyable, experience for the paying customer. To this day, I will not fly Continental, United, and even some Northwest flights out of Nashville due to their reliance on smaller, less comfortable, aircraft. Call me stupid, call me an idiot, but all three of them flew mainlines into here on an almost regular basis up until two years ago. Now, with the exception of Northwest which is dwindling fast as well, you are lucky to even get a mainline diversion here. What a joke. I'm glad we have Southwest and Frontier to cover the majority of places a Legacy flies from BNA to. That assures, at the very least, a somewhat confortable flight on a mainline jet. I look at it like this, BNA is capable of mainline flights on all three of these carriers named above. If we are no better than some tiny town out station, then give your gate space up and hit the road. I am sure we could find someone to fill your flights and space up.
Nitrohelper From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 466 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 9164 times:
In one of the other DC -9 threads I guessed 2012 for the end of an era. The article says 75 still flying in 2011, so maybe my new guess is 2015 for the answer to the famous A-net question.
"when will NW retire the DC-9s ? "
Gregarious119 From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 531 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 9042 times:
Quoting Lexy (Reply 5): CO flies around 17 flights a day from here all on E145's and E135's. That is just stupid. Especially when you have a mainline 737 in the system that comes as close as MEM on the routing system on a daily basis. That is just laziness on the part of the carrier to provide a positive, and enjoyable, experience for the paying customer.
While I can understand your perspective (as I don't much love the RJ's either), it's not too stupid of a concept from the airlines perspective.
Imagine the needs of a heavily traveled leisure market. People traveling there don't particularly care whether their flight leaves at 10am or 2pm or 5pm...they just want to go lay on the beach for a week. So send 3 737's, fill the seats, and you're using your aircraft well.
Now...take a place that is a heavy business market. If you're catering to corporate execs who have a meeting at 10 and need to be back by 3, it makes sense to have 17 flights a day staggered an hour apart. Although I'm sure any exec would love to have a nice big first class seat - lots of frequency gives them better use of their time and they're more likely to fly you again.
Bear in mind - i know these are gross generalities, however, they were made just to show the case why in some cases, more frequency on smaller jets can be better than the same capacity spread out over fewer (albeit larger) flights.
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3758 posts, RR: 28
Reply 13, posted (7 years 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 8872 times:
There will always be a need for a 100 seater in the NWA route structure. That is where the mystery lies... what will they buy/lease to replace the remaining DC9s? My guess is EMB195s flown at the mainline level. The scope prevents any airlink from totally replacing the domestic operatio, let alone flying anything more than 100 seats. It seems that NWA has identifed the needs for about 75 or less 100 seat jets, down from the nearly 100+ we see today.
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3758 posts, RR: 28
Reply 16, posted (7 years 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 8775 times:
The old days of NWA are over, therefore we have to forget about the replacement plans for the fleet as we saw it before ch11. It would be innacurate to simply think of a replacement for the DC9-30/40/50 fleets on a one for one basis. Same goes for the 742 fleet. It seems that the fleet requirement is shifting to smaller a/c worldwide therefore the fleet plan going forward has shifted. NWA traditionally has had a much larger domestic mainline operation than all the others, who relied heavily on RJs. NWA was late to the party with this respect, but pad off with the DC9s. Without the DC9s the costs to operate the "same" domestic fleet would be out of control. So, we see the push for large RJs and less mainline a/c.
I think it would be pretty safe to say the DC9-50s would be replaced by the 319. That is only however, NWA still finds the need to maintain a fleet of roughly 100 frames (combined 319s and D95 today). If they think they'll only need to operate a fleet of roughly 70, 125 seat a/c, there is no replacement required. The same goes for the 100 seat market. If the new business model requires roughly 75 frames, then all will likely be replaced by a new type. If they identify the need for only 50, then only 50 will be replaced and the remainder will shift to the 76 seat large RJ to be operated at airlink.
NWA has always matched capasity to demand pretty well, while also maximizing revenues and attempting to be profitable. Operating widebodies in the domestic system does not fit the business model for a profitable operation. Even though it could be filled, this is the reason you don't see a 330 flying MSP-SEA. Delta finally realized that flying 767s from ATL-JAX is probably not the brightest idea, even though they could be full. Delta has always tried to be EVERYONES airline and it doesn't work. NWA has always tried to serve the markets that they do best... midwest, asia and AMS with KLM. The future of NWA is likely to be the same, but on a scale that ensures profitability.
As for the saabs... there have been rumblings at XJ regarding this. Apparently the new agreements with the leasing companies have some of the leases starting to expire in 5 years time. The only real solution to serve the same markets with the same capacity would be the bombardier Q family, or the ATR 42. Since for some reason the company wanted a Q400 pay rate, I would think the logical solution would be the Q family. The only stumbling block would be the costs of operating the dash again. The dash was abandoned in the 90s for the saab because they could get more than 1 saab, for the price of ONE dash. But with the new efficiencies the company has found in its fake bankruptcy, perhaps they kind find a way to operate the dashes better than they could in the past. So... for saab replacement, my vote goes to a mix of the Q family products by bombardier.
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3758 posts, RR: 28
Reply 19, posted (7 years 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 8261 times:
If the fleet has net growth, nobody has to worry about anything. Plus, if the net growth is in lager equipment, that means more pay and a better lifestyle. I"m sure the DC9 drivers who bounce around the midwest won't be so unhappy they'll get to bid the airbus or 757 sooner than later. If there is a net decrease in planes, then there is a problem. Only the problem has been partially solved by the creation of Compass...
Nwarooster From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 982 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (7 years 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 7474 times:
Quoting Centrair (Reply 1): That is only 13 planes... but by then there will be an increase of 18 aircraft. Maybe the 742s are going.
Northwest intends to replace all Boeing 747-200s. They probably will be with new Boeing 787s.
The new larger regional jets, along with the A319/A320will replace the DC-9s.
The 747-400s Northwest has will continue as passenger jets. However, the 400s that Northwest operates will be converted into BCFs as the airline has to retire the 747-200Fs it has. Will they buy new 747 freighters with a nose door? Good question.
Bobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6326 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (7 years 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7367 times:
Quoting Nwarooster (Reply 20): The 747-400s Northwest has will continue as passenger jets. However, the 400s that Northwest operates will be converted into BCFs as the airline has to retire the 747-200Fs it has.
Isn't this a contradiction? They can't be both passenger and freighters.
Only way to completely replace the DC9 fleet with the A320 family would be for them to acquire A318s.
And that is not one of the possible scenarios.....the A318 and 737-600 are desperate attempts to recapture the days when running a mainline jet with 100 passengers, at 125,000 to 150,000 pounds made some amount of sense. The EMB-195 does almost the same thing, but with 30,000 to 50,000 pounds less. (Depending on what it is being compared to.)
With Northwest, the DC-9-30 seats 100 and the -40 seats 110....I don't really see NW putting an A318 with 124 seats onto a route that was once served by aircraft of 100 and 110 seats.
Enter the E190 and E195.....or the CRJ-900/1000....much better replacements. But they are going to have a hornets nest with the pilots....who say they will be 1 for 1 mainline replacements, while management is going to say they are regional jets.
A battle of semantics.if you ask me....desperate times: desperate measures.
Ain't that the truth. The entire way of thinking in running an airline is being challenged. Airlines are fighting to stay in business, employees fighting to keep their families fed....
The employees have a valid point, 100 seats used to mean mainline, now in the middle of the game the rules are being changed....now management says 100 seats, 110 seats is: Regional, and with it, less money.
From a non-industry perspective, it looks to me that the airlines are using the shift in manufacturers to perpetuate a "Fairy Tale" ....."Well, Boys, Bombardier and Embraer make regional jets, so anything they produce that we will fly, has to be at the regional pay-scale!"
Even though the boys at "B" and "E" are assuming the manufacturing position once held by McDonnell-Douglas, and BAe.....the airlines (NW) are still trying to ram this down the employees throat; "If you fly anything made by Embraer or Bombardier, it is not worth as much as what the Airbus and few Boeing drivers earn."
In their attempt at changing the plot of the story for their benefit, NW has given us Compass. Well. That makes everything better.
It's just the way I see it....my perception of a very complicated situation with no real clear solution no matter how much the A.Net CEOs would like to have us believe.
Quoting Azjubilee (Reply 16): I think it would be pretty safe to say the DC9-50s would be replaced by the 319.
At a difference of only one seat that would seem the safe bet.
Quoting Azjubilee (Reply 16): NWA has always matched capasity to demand pretty well, while also maximizing revenues and attempting to be profitable. Operating widebodies in the domestic system does not fit the business model for a profitable operation. Even though it could be filled, this is the reason you don't see a 330 flying MSP-SEA.
QANTAS found this out in trying to fly the 330 domestically....it just didn't work, 1700nm SYD-PER just didn't work out, no matter what the brochure said.
The A330 series was supposed to have been the high-tech replacement for the A300 that could make a profit on runs of less than 2500nm....even down to 750nm-1000nm.
Just look at Eastern and how they used their A300 fleet up and down the East Coast....the typical stage length being 500nm (MIA-ATL), up to a max of 1400nm (SJU-JFK/PHL), and as short as 200nm (SDQ-SJU). The A330 is a fine airplane, but no where as versatile as the A300.
Air Inter of France was an even better example, the A300 performed handsomely, in a country where no route is longer than 500nm....I wish I had some empirical evidence to back this up, alas, I only have anecdotal information from ex-Air Inter employees that did not have much good to say about the A330 they received. ORY-TLS a popular route for the A330-300, while nice from the customers point of view, was too much aircraft for a 308nm route.
This fact has not escaped Northwest.
Once upon a time, Northwest would send up to 7 DC-10s a day MSP-ORD, 290nm, exactly half of the 14 daily flights between the two cities. Today, they operate only 10 flights a day!
7 DC-9 variants, 2 A320s, and 1 A319.
Granted, there is a little more competition on the route, but not so much that their capacity has been cut by almost 60%?
It would have seemed logical, a natural progression if you will, to replace those 7 DC-10s with A330-300s they have, or -200s, maybe even some 757-300s, but no, another troubling incident in how the world of aviation as we know it, is changing before our eyes. It would not surprise me in the least to one day see E190/E195s or CRJ-1000s dominate on the route...or whatever the fleet at NW looks like in 10 years.
Quoting Lexy (Reply 5): laziness on the part of the carrier to provide a positive, and enjoyable, experience for the paying customer.
I am afraid you are just going to have to get used to it, the situation, for all airlines, is not going to get better.
Within 10 years the predominant type in the NW fleet is going to be a mix of the CRJ-700s, CRJ-900s, maybe some -1000s, and the E190/E195 serving the majority of their domestic flights, with the obvious exceptions of course. The smaller jets are becoming the baseline equipment, while a few years ago that position was held by aircraft of the 737/MD80/320 variety, and the mainline fleet went up from there.
The 737 family and A320s are assuming the position the widebodies held not even 15 years ago.....when flying a "Big" aircraft to your domestic destination meant an L-1011, DC-10, 767, or in some limited cases even a 747. From here on out, flying a "Big" aircraft from here on out will mean a 737-900 or A321. (Not to veer off topic too much, but with this paradigm shift happening before our eyes, where is the case for the A380? Or even 747-8i? Except for a few international carriers?)
Southwest will remain the anomaly, and those that will try and emulate their success, but will be destined to failure for the simple reason of not having the economy of scale that makes having a "Large-Jet" fleet possible.
The world is changing, we can piss and moan ad nauseum, but the days of big jets are over. Get used to the new products coming out of Canada and Brasil.....otherwise stay home. Sorry, I don't mean to sound harsh.
SESGDL From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3451 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (7 years 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7278 times:
I'm very disappointed with this move by NW. It's look like this will cut overall capacity in their system, further shrinking MSP, DTW, and MEM. When will airlines (legacy carriers besides CO) start to grow again?
Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 12):
I would wager that not one of those markets will be flown in 2008.
Why? It's only a matter of time before MSP-CDG is started, the others, however, are a bit of a stretch.