Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DL MD-88 Fleet Strategy - Late Build Ex-TW MD-83s?  
User currently offlineTrijetsRMissed From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2230 posts, RR: 7
Posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 9686 times:

Topic: DL's MD-88 fleet strategy, and the possibility of acquiring the M88-compatible ex-TW MD-83s. A sub-fleet of 39 frames currently at AA, which may be phased out in the next 2-3 years. (Note: I do anticipate the healthy skepticism, 'Ala 717 and MD-90 discussions  )


Fleet strategy is fluid, but the DL MD-88 may be here to stay. Word is it's more likely now that DL will operate the MD-88 for another decade-plus. As part of a longer term fleet strategy, younger/lower MX frames would be beneficial to add.

First the facts: AA currently operates 39 ex-TW MD-83s that were built in 1997-1999. They were ordered and delivered to full MD-88 spec, with an additional aux fuel tank. Every MD-80 PIP that culminated in the MD-88, apply to these specific MD-83 aircraft - making them compatible with the existing DL fleet. On-boarding them would be e a seamless transition.

Adding to the argument: These frames are in premium shape. All that's needed is a paint job and cabin reburb - just like the MD-90s. Of which would cost $1.5M per plane. In short, these aircraft could be paid-off in one payment.


In conclusion: DL will get their ROI from decreased MX costs and increased reliability; compared with the MD-88s they would replace - which are 10-12 years older. DL can park and cannibalize the oldest 1/3rd of the -88 fleet for part inventory, while maintaining a premium economies-of-scale. DL has proven they can make money with this model.


Thoughts? Continued discussion welcome.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I created this topic in order to avoid hijacking the recent TW 717 thread. This keeps the side discussion going. My responses to previous replies are pasted below:

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 11):
these M83 aircraft that TWA flew at first, that went to AA were also over water equipped, with the appropriate equipment to operate PDX-ANC-PDX for years.

   Indeed that is true. To add, TW had longer thin ops in mind, when the final order was placed in April 1998. A bit of trivia: Following the deliveries, TW operated the longest ever regularly scheduled westbound segment for MD-80 operations: JFK-PHX


Quoting akelley728 (Reply 12):
So these have the same EFIS flightdeck as the Delta MD-88? I believe that's the major difference between an MD-83 and MD-88. I wonder if Delta would rename them to MD-88?

Absolutely they have the same flightdeck. And tail-cone, composite panels, engines, improved fairings, etc. As I've said previously, (and above), these aircraft are virtually MD-88ERs...if there ever was a variant.

Compare this '99-build with the DL MD-88 flightdeck. You tell me the difference. 
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter Spence
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tamas Kolos-Lakatos




There's nothing quite like a tri-jet.
33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9071 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 9532 times:

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Thread starter):

very possible, but I think somewhat unlikely. Unlike the 90s/717s the 83s, as nice and new as they may be, still have JT8Ds. The Rolls and V2500s on the other t-tails are much more fuel friendly than the 219.

that being said, its not an airbus, it is a Douglas, its mainline and it is an airplane that has most of its work done by TechOps.... not going to b**ch if they add em. (just don't have high hopes.)

oh and rumor has it that cockpit configs don't mean nearly as much as they use to. Hopefully that means more M90s (and maybe a V2500 engine line in ATL and/or MSP....  )   



yep.
User currently offlinedalmd88 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2503 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 9325 times:

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Thread starter):
Compare this '99-build with the DL MD-88 flightdeck. You tell me the difference.

On a quick glance the TW, I can't find the wing heater blanket switch, just to the right of the flight instrument stack Capt side on DL. The center pedestal is different, can't find ACARS screen, but there is some other control panel I can't ID.


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8089 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 9114 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Thread starter):
First the facts: AA currently operates 39 ex-TW MD-83s that were built in 1997-1999. They were ordered and delivered to full MD-88 spec, with an additional aux fuel tank. Every MD-80 PIP that culminated in the MD-88, apply to these specific MD-83 aircraft - making them compatible with the existing DL fleet. On-boarding them would be e a seamless transition.

Those are probably the last MD-80's AA will retire. IF DL wants them so bad they should buy them now, AA would probably love to get rid of them at the right price.


User currently offline727forever From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 793 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 9103 times:

Quoting dalmd88 (Reply 2):
The center pedestal is different, can't find ACARS screen, but there is some other control panel I can't ID.

On the center pedestal is the AA electronic checklist system, but I'm not sure about the panel above the Captains right knee. It looks like it could be a cargo smoke panel.

This could be possible for the right price, but it would have to be an incredible deal. I don't see any technical challenges as all of the differences can be overcome. One big one that would have to changed which I assume is possible without too much fuss is the flight directors. The DL fleet is 100% dual que vs. the TW MD-80s are single que.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 1):
very possible, but I think somewhat unlikely. Unlike the 90s/717s the 83s, as nice and new as they may be, still have JT8Ds. The Rolls and V2500s on the other t-tails are much more fuel friendly than the 219.

I don't know that I'd completely agree with this logic. I've flown all 3 types. The MD-90 has better sfc, but actual fuel burn is about the same as the MD-83/88 with the -219. The problem with the MD-90 is the wing is too small for the additional weight so it can't really get high enough to take advantage of the lower fuel burn of the V2500. The MD-83/88 flown with 717 loads has nearly an identical fuel burn as the 717. I think the MD-88 will be around for some time to come.

727forever



727forever
User currently offlinePSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7342 posts, RR: 28
Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 9029 times:

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Thread starter):
. A sub-fleet of 39 frames currently at AA, which may be phased out in the next 2-3 years. (Note: I do anticipate the healthy skepticism, 'Ala 717 and MD-90 discussions )

It is a very plausible idea. DL is likely to start removing the oldest MD88s from the fleet in the 2017-2018 timeframe.
The question is when exactly is AA planning to remove these aircraft from the fleet. If is really is 2-3 years, then I most certainly believe DL will jump on this opportunitiy. If AA decided to fly them another 5-7 years, then probably not as likely.

Right now DL is focused on the narrowbody fleet renewal through a combination of the 739ER order and 2nd hand MD90s. Plus they are focused on the regional fleet/small narrowbody fleet renewal with the CR9s and 717s. They still have a lot of 757s and A320s to replace before the end of the decade, not to mention the MD88 fleet.

Plus, but the 2017-2020 timeframe they will have to address the international fleet which will require a significant amount of resources to replace the 744 and older 763ERs.

So, DL is going to have to continue to employ this strategy of buying new and also acquiring second-hand aircraft simply to keep their capital expeditures under control. Getting newer and cheap used MD-88s to replace older MD88s certainly could make sense.

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Thread starter):
In conclusion: DL will get their ROI from decreased MX costs and increased reliability; compared with the MD-88s they would replace - which are 10-12 years older. DL can park and cannibalize the oldest 1/3rd of the -88 fleet for part inventory, while maintaining a premium economies-of-scale. DL has proven they can make money with this model

Exaclty. Not necessarily to grow the fleet.

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 1):
very possible, but I think somewhat unlikely. Unlike the 90s/717s the 83s, as nice and new as they may be, still have JT8Ds. The Rolls and V2500s on the other t-tails are much more fuel friendly than the 219.

Well we are talking about an airline that still has DC-9-50s in operation from the late 70s/early 80s.

If they are cheap enough, they still could make sense to operate on the short mainline flights out of ATL, DTW, MSP.


User currently offlineMIflyer12 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 783 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 8885 times:

Interesting theory, but the 717s and MD-90s actually bring fuel savings, not just newer frames and engines. That really makes the $ math hinge on refurb/fleet entry costs. Picking up a few for spare parts, sure.

User currently offlinePSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7342 posts, RR: 28
Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 8872 times:

Good point, not just MD-90s/717s but they will also llikel look to see if there are used 737NG/A320 aircraft on the market too.

User currently offlineN737AA From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 270 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 8859 times:

Those will be the last to go from the AA fleet. I could see that happening before 2017 as its published now with the integration of the US fleet and additional RJ flying the APA agreed to. AA (TWA) got the last frame off the line.

N737AA


User currently offlinePIEAvantiP180 From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 522 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 8644 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting MIflyer12 (Reply 6):
Interesting theory, but the 717s and MD-90s actually bring fuel savings, not just newer frames and engines. That really makes the $ math hinge on refurb/fleet entry costs. Picking up a few for spare parts, sure.

Excellent point, but could the cheaper MX on a newer MD88 frame offset the cost not gained by fuel burn advantages you would get by buying MD90 and 717. Is there a large enough MX cost from a frame that is 20-25 years old compares to a frame 15-20 years old?


User currently offlineAlnicocunife From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 144 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 8524 times:

Delta will most likely keep 75-80 MD88's and utilize them on short (1 1/2 hour or less) markets. There is not much fuel savings between a JT8-219 and a CFM in short haul markets and when you need 140+ seats. If they purchase any additional frames it will be for parts only (as they are doing right now). All of the lease planes will go back unless the rates go down further. 8 to 10 years from now you will see the last of the MD88's in Delta's fleet.

User currently offlineSELMER40 From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 8432 times:

Quote:
OP

Delta has already bought two ex-TW/AA DC-9-83s. Airwaysmag.com reports that Delta bought N9302B/LN 1383 and N9304C/LN 1397 in early February '13 for PARTS. I guess the Delta strategy is to look at all MDs for parts.



Teaching this old dog a new trick
User currently offlineSpacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2864 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 8348 times:

Quoting SELMER40 (Reply 11):
Delta has already bought two ex-TW/AA DC-9-83s. Airwaysmag.com reports that Delta bought N9302B/LN 1383 and N9304C/LN 1397 in early February '13 for PARTS. I guess the Delta strategy is to look at all MDs for parts.

These two MD-83s had well over 70,000 hours on them each.



The last of the famous international playboys
User currently offlineakelley728 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2160 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 8261 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 1):
very possible, but I think somewhat unlikely. Unlike the 90s/717s the 83s, as nice and new as they may be, still have JT8Ds. The Rolls and V2500s on the other t-tails are much more fuel friendly than the 219.

If Delta keeps MD-88s for another ten years, I wonder if there is any possibility of a re-engine program for them? The fleet will remain at 100+ frames for some time to come, especially if Delta picks up these prime ex-TWA ships as TrijetsRMissed is suggesting.

In this hypothetical situation, what engine would be suitable? PW6000? BR715C1-30? PW1000 (GTF)? The engine would need only have to have a similar thrust as the JT8D-219, but they would have to weigh the same as the or there would be CG issues.


User currently offlinePSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7342 posts, RR: 28
Reply 14, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 8214 times:

A re-engine program is in no way feasible, based on the huge investment and payback period. Huge engineering and certification costs, not going to make economic sense.

User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5065 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 8125 times:

I don't think AA is in any great hurry to retire all of its MD-80s. The TWA MD-83s aren't that much older than AA's older 738s. My understanding is that the MD-80 isn't at a great disadvantage in fuel economy on shorter flights. It's flights over 2 hours that the 738 shows its increased fuel efficiency.

So, for routes like DFW-IAH or ORD-STL, the MD-80 still works well. The MD-80 retirement schedule probably depends on how AA/US decide to redeploy the A319s and A320s in the US fleet, once the merger is complete.


User currently offlineMIflyer12 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 783 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 7742 times:

Quoting Alnicocunife (Reply 10):
Is there a large enough MX cost from a frame that is 20-25 years old compares to a frame 15-20 years old?

Maybe, but I'm skeptical. For a commercial transaction there needs to be a willing seller and willing buyer. AA has a high cost of capital, two mid-con hubs with lots of short-haul flying, and zero acquisition cost. If these late MD-83s aren't economically viable for AA (that willing seller thing), I don't believe they'll be attractive to Delta.

Somewhere along the way Delta's going to need to buy fuel efficient aircraft or be at significantly greater risk from fuel price spikes than its competition. Recall that Trainer isn't a solution to poor fuel efficiency - it's a gambit to reduce the crack spread. 100 739ERs is just a drop in the bucket on some 10-year fleet projections.


User currently offlinedalmd88 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2503 posts, RR: 14
Reply 17, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 7741 times:

Quoting SELMER40 (Reply 11):

Delta has already bought two ex-TW/AA DC-9-83s. Airwaysmag.com reports that Delta bought N9302B/LN 1383 and N9304C/LN 1397 in early February '13 for PARTS. I guess the Delta strategy is to look at all MDs for parts.

True about the parts. The main parts we want are the landing gear. These planes have time left on their gear and we have planes that have gear that need expensive gear overhauls. They may also have time left on the engines. I think gear have a 10 or 12 year overhaul cycle. So it doesn't make sense to layout the cash for a overhaul if you are planning on scrapping the plane in 4 or 5 years.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7276 posts, RR: 52
Reply 18, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 7691 times:

This is just a theory, right? Not something you heard?

I'd join the crowd of seeing some bought for parts, though I wouldn't be too surprised to see them bought in full



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineNWAROOSTER From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1010 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 6323 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Unlike the Airbus aircraft, the Douglas DC-9, MD80 series aircraft and MD90 and MD95 (717) are well built aircraft are built to last a long life. Also, the total of ownership and operation of the Douglas Aircraft may be substantially less than that of any new build Airbus or Boeing aircraft. The Airbus aircraft will never have the total flight lifetime that the Douglas aircraft have.   

[Edited 2013-03-01 18:30:15]

[Edited 2013-03-01 18:31:10]

User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5960 times:

Quoting dalmd88 (Reply 2):
On a quick glance the TW, I can't find the wing heater blanket switch, just to the right of the flight instrument stack Capt side on DL.

It's behind the captains seat.


User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5883 times:

Quoting 727forever (Reply 4):
but I'm not sure about the panel above the Captains right knee. It looks like it could be a cargo smoke panel.

That's the terrain warning inhibit. The panel of cargo smoke detection/fire suppresion is on the overhead panel.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 15):
The TWA MD-83s aren't that much older than AA's older 738s.

There are some ex TWA MD-80's that are younger the the early delivery 737's. Not many but some.


User currently offlineTrijetsRMissed From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2230 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4873 times:

Thanks to all that responded and contributed to the discussion.    A few posts concerning how long AA will operate these -83s and would they sell them?

With the merger, it looks like most/all will be retired by late-2016/mid-2017. I previously thought some would be active by 2018, but now the majority will be retired in the next 2-3 years. Age is a driving factor for the immediate retirements (current parkings are '87-'88 builds). But once you get down to 1800 line numbers of the AA fleet, it will be less significant. Rather dictated by HMVs.

Now, what makes this interesting, is these late-build M83s are leased from BCC. In fact, I believe it's the second largest book at BCC only behind...wait for it.. the 88 717s. Yes, they are sub-leased through WN, but BCC contributed $40m to make it happen. I believe DL will buy the 717s from BCC, as they begin to come off lease in 2017.

If BCC believe an outright sale for the MD-83s is there to be had, BCC and AA will come to an agreement to term the lease early. FWIW, it's plausible AA had term dates accelerated in Ch.11 as well. Ultimately, AA is looking to shed MD-80s quick and would probably prefer to fly older owned-outright MD-82s, towards the end, than continuing with lease payments.

Quoting dalmd88 (Reply 2):

Thank you for adding your expertise. Do you think it would require two separate pilot groups? My point exactly... 
Quoting 727forever (Reply 4):
This could be possible for the right price, but it would have to be an incredible deal. I don't see any technical challenges as all of the differences can be overcome.

Thanks for your input as well. With the MAX and NEO around the corner, used 737NG and A320 prices will plummet. Taking that in consideration for the MD-83.., by 2015, an "incredible deal" could be a forgone conclusion.


Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 5):
So, DL is going to have to continue to employ this strategy of buying new and also acquiring second-hand aircraft simply to keep their capital expenditures under control.

Exactly. You detailed it with the fleet breakdown. To avoid the mix of buying new/used, DL would need to pull an AA-sized 450 aircraft order. Which doesn't match the current strategy.



There's nothing quite like a tri-jet.
User currently offlineTrijetsRMissed From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2230 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4822 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 15):
I don't think AA is in any great hurry to retire all of its MD-80s.

A reliable source tells me that 45-55 MD-80s would be parked in 2013. This was months prior to the merger. Post-merger, it's a virtual certainty that the phaseout will be accelerated. It's a pressing action item; along with the 734.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 18):
This is just a theory, right? Not something you heard?

Yes, this topic is a theory. Put together from from information that I've learned/heard/experienced. Added up at a close look, it's certainly plausible. I concede 50/50 at best.

Quoting MIflyer12 (Reply 16):
Quoting Alnicocunife (Reply 10):
Is there a large enough MX cost from a frame that is 20-25 years old compares to a frame 15-20 years old?

Maybe, but I'm skeptical.

The truth is we're comparing frames of 24-26 years old with those that are 14-15 years. Now multiply that by 39 aircraft.

I think DL are cognizant of the difference - they have their records to compare from the late '90s. The reality is more significant than the comparison you question.

Quoting MIflyer12 (Reply 16):
For a commercial transaction there needs to be a willing seller and willing buyer. AA has a high cost of capital, two mid-con hubs with lots of short-haul flying, and zero acquisition cost. If these late MD-83s aren't economically viable for AA (that willing seller thing), I don't believe they'll be attractive to Delta.

Please take note, AA is the lessor, not the owner/seller. In this scenario, AA would have little leverage to prevent a deal, if it was drafted between BCC and DL. Also you cannot make a simple conclusion on the assumed economic viability between AA and DL. Far more to it than face value.

Quoting 727forever (Reply 4):
I don't know that I'd completely agree with this logic.

I think his point is DL would not have purchased ~ 150 MD-90/717s if they had JT8Ds...Which is true.



There's nothing quite like a tri-jet.
User currently offlinedarksnowynight From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1281 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4762 times:

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Thread starter):
Compare this '99-build with the DL MD-88 flightdeck. You tell me the difference. 
Quoting dalmd88 (Reply 2):
On a quick glance the TW, I can't find the wing heater blanket switch, just to the right of the flight instrument stack Capt side on DL.
Quoting LMP737 (Reply 20):
It's behind the captains seat.

What an odd place for that. The G4 MDs I've worked usually had this under the glareshield by the fire handles.

Quoting akelley728 (Reply 13):
In this hypothetical situation, what engine would be suitable? PW6000? BR715C1-30? PW1000 (GTF)? The engine would need only have to have a similar thrust as the JT8D-219, but they would have to weigh the same as the or there would be CG issues.

If we're talking strictly hypothetical, then I'd say it's best to avoid PW for this one. I'd go V2500 here, as this would work best for MX planning given the larger pool of usable parts and accessories they'll have accumulated for the 717/S90 fleets.



Posting without Knowledge is simply Tolerated Vandalism... We are the Vandals.
User currently offlinePanAm788 From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 290 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4586 times:

I like this theory a lot. The only things I can see preventing it from becoming a reality is if there becomes a surplus of used NG/A320 frames so that DL would rather buy them at cheap prices than the MD83s or if oil becomes very expensive again and MD88s simply become unprofitable.

This would be a very "Northwesty" move by DL.

[Edited 2013-03-02 10:40:32]


heroes get remembered but legends never die
User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 26, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4577 times:

Quoting darksnowynight (Reply 24):
What an odd place for that. The G4 MDs I've worked usually had this under the glareshield by the fire handles.

It is an odd place that's for sure.


User currently offlinesxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1250 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4641 times:

Quoting PIEAvantiP180 (Reply 9):
Excellent point, but could the cheaper MX on a newer MD88 frame offset the cost not gained by fuel burn advantages you would get by buying MD90 and 717. Is there a large enough MX cost from a frame that is 20-25 years old compares to a frame 15-20 years old?

MX on newer MD88 frames is neglibily better than on older frames. No where close to offsetting the fuel burn disadvantage compared to aircraft with better engines.

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 22):
If BCC believe an outright sale for the MD-83s is there to be had, BCC and AA will come to an agreement to term the lease early. FWIW, it's plausible AA had term dates accelerated in Ch.11 as well. Ultimately, AA is looking to shed MD-80s quick and would probably prefer to fly older owned-outright MD-82s, towards the end, than continuing with lease payments.

AA has not yet modified the MD-83 leases in bankruptcy. This says to me that AA either intends to keep the planes through the duration of the lease or it is not economically feasible for the leases to be modified (AA really can't say to "screw you" to Boeing in bankruptcy, since they need their support and cooperation).


User currently offlineMIflyer12 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 783 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4551 times:

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 23):
Please take note, AA is the lessor, not the owner/seller. In this scenario, AA would have little leverage to prevent a deal, if it was drafted between BCC and DL. Also you cannot make a simple conclusion on the assumed economic viability between AA and DL. Far more to it than face value.

Your thesis hinges on savings from reduced maintenance costs as a simple factor of age will exceed Delta's induction costs, yet you cite no verifiable or comparative data on either side. As for comparing economic viability, sure I can: post Ch 11 AA costs are going to be very close to DL's, and only 39 narrowbody frames is trivial in either fleet - they could be used to their optimum in either route network without displacing a lot of other aircraft.

[Edited 2013-03-02 12:13:02]

User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5065 posts, RR: 1
Reply 29, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4547 times:

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 23):
A reliable source tells me that 45-55 MD-80s would be parked in 2013. This was months prior to the merger. Post-merger, it's a virtual certainty that the phaseout will be accelerated. It's a pressing action item; along with the 734.

I agree that AA will probably retire the entire MD-80 fleet sooner with the merger, than if the merger wasn't proposed (or gets rejected by the Feds). But, depending on the AA and US delivery schedules of A319s and A320s, and how long it takes to integrate the F/A and pilots work forces, AA will probably still have MD-80s flying for 4 to 5 years out of ORD and/or DFW.


User currently offlineakelley728 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2160 posts, RR: 5
Reply 30, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4132 times:

Quoting darksnowynight (Reply 24):
If we're talking strictly hypothetical, then I'd say it's best to avoid PW for this one. I'd go V2500 here, as this would work best for MX planning given the larger pool of usable parts and accessories they'll have accumulated for the 717/S90 fleets.

The V2500 wouldn't work. It weights almost 1000 lbs higher and would cause severe CG issues. That's why the MD90 is longer than the MD88, to counter the CG issue with the higher weight engine.

My vote would be for the BR715C1-30, as the weight and thrust is very similar to the JT8D-219. Plus it's the engine on the HGW version of the 717, so there is some history of it working on a 'MD' series plane.


User currently offlineTrijetsRMissed From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2230 posts, RR: 7
Reply 31, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3691 times:

Quoting sxf24 (Reply 27):
MX on newer MD88 frames is negligibly better than on older frames.

It's true that the MD-88 has aged gracefully to this point. But this is more about the future planning. To say projected MX costs of a 28 year old MD-80 will be negligibly more compared to an aircraft that's half it's age is an understatement. Ask the folks at AA how the 2012 MD-80 MX costs compare to 1992. It may not seem tremendous for a multi-billion dollar company, but it is millions of dollars.   

Quoting MIflyer12 (Reply 28):
Your thesis hinges on savings from reduced maintenance costs as a simple factor of age will exceed Delta's induction costs, yet you cite no verifiable or comparative data on either side.

Well, it is a thesis, as you note. And perhaps outside the box. But if there's one airline I could see use this strategy, it would be DL.

As for data analysis, a team would need spend weeks working the numbers to determine the viability of the strategy. You nor I can definitively say we know all there is to know here. I spent 15 years of my career as a third party involving several MD-80 transactions. When it comes to "verifiable or comparative data," I don't think any ethical professional would violate their non-disclosure agreement and share intellectual property on an open forum.

Quoting MIflyer12 (Reply 28):
As for comparing economic viability, sure I can: post Ch 11 AA costs are going to be very close to DL's,

Specific to MD-80 lease costs, apparently not that close, according to sxf24. DL, on th other hand, modified their leases to very favorable long term payment terms. If you're so sure, why don't you cite some verifiable or comparative data for either side?  
Quoting sxf24 (Reply 27):
AA has not yet modified the MD-83 leases in bankruptcy. This says to me that AA either intends to keep the planes through the duration of the lease

IMO, if the leases have not been modified, it adds validity to theory that AA may shed them. Some of these leases go beyond the end of this decade. AA will not be operating MD-83s in 2020...

Quoting ckfred (Reply 29):
AA will probably still have MD-80s flying for 4 to 5 years out of ORD and/or DFW.

I hope you're right; I'd prefer they stick around for a while.



There's nothing quite like a tri-jet.
User currently offlineN737AA From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 270 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3445 times:

Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 22):
AA is looking to shed MD-80s quick and would probably prefer to fly older owned-outright MD-82s

There are very few of those, most if not all are mortgaged, haven't kept up with all the BK changes though.

N737AA


User currently offlineTrijetsRMissed From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2230 posts, RR: 7
Reply 33, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3070 times:

Quoting N737AA (Reply 32):
There are very few of those,

It is between 50-75 frames, no?



There's nothing quite like a tri-jet.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
DL MD-88 Fleet Question posted Tue Mar 6 2012 10:09:47 by fanoftristars
DL Old MD-88/90 FC Cabin/galleys Question posted Sat Jan 5 2013 13:49:03 by fawannabe
DL MD-88 Drifting On Taxi posted Sun Jun 3 2012 20:33:22 by beau222
DL MD-88 Nose Wheel Skid On T/O posted Sun Apr 15 2012 06:39:51 by andyinpit
DL MD-88 Out Of LAX posted Wed Mar 28 2012 12:17:32 by Jackbr
Question About DL MD-80 Fleet posted Sun Nov 27 2011 12:46:55 by 727LOVER
DL MD-88 Reconfiguration posted Wed Dec 1 2010 18:19:07 by DLD9S
DL MD-88 Goose Strike On Approach To LGA posted Wed Sep 30 2009 10:16:48 by Clemsonaj
DL MD-88 Doing ATL-LAX posted Tue Jun 2 2009 20:07:52 by Tinpusher007
DL MD-88 In WN Hangar At MDW? posted Fri May 29 2009 11:21:41 by Seattle ops