Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Northwest: Are They Really That Safe?  
User currently offlineCoolchris122 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2233 times:

Is Northwest really that safe of an airline both in financial and technical issues? They still fly DC-9's and DC-10's. I think they are the only major U.S. carrier that does so. Also, could they be short on money to not buy new aircraft? Anyone who can explain this, please do so.

33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDelta777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 658 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2037 times:

wow. what is this? Bash Nothwest Week? Northewest is a safe airline. below are stats.

Northwest Airlines/Airlink-rate:0.43-events:4
United Airlines/Express-rate:0.50-events:9
American Airlines/Eagle-rate:0.53-events:9

so you can see from above that between those 3, Northwest is hte most safe.

D E L T A 7 7 7




User currently offlineH. Simpson From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 949 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2015 times:

flying old jets doesn't mean they have poor maintainence. Abex are still delivering the billion dollar business on their damn old DC-8!

User currently offlineFlyCMH From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 2293 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2000 times:

I personally feel very safe flying on Northwest's DC-9's. While they are getting up there in years, they still have some life in them, and it seems that Northwest maintains them very well. I flew back to Columbus from Detroit on one of their DC-9-30's yesterday. There was a problem with the radio, so a replacement part had to be brought in an installed. We had to wait inside the aircraft for a little over an hour, but the flight itself was fine. Besides, takeoff on a diesel 9 is great.

User currently offlineNWA From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 1200 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1984 times:

yea, this seems to be bash NW week. I have seen dumb posts, but this has to beat them all out. NW is one of the safest airlines flying, and the maintiance has was awards for how good they are. they are not even close to being short on money. want to know why? because they use the aircraft they have paid off!! its a concept that must be brand new, because people here seem to think that its the dumbest thing on earth. they have one of the largest cash reserves in the industry, so before you post somthing like that, read up on it first K?


23 victor, turn right heading 210, maintain 3000 till established, cleared ILS runwy 24.
User currently offlineExnonrev From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 621 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1966 times:

Another one of those "newer is better" kids. I feel much safer on an old tank from the "Long Beach Iron Works" than on some Boeing tin can or an Airbus toy airplane.

User currently offlineNwa747-400 From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1337 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1927 times:

Seriously-

Let's rename this "A select few airliners.net decide this is BASH NORTHWEST week"

----------------------------------------------
Now more than ever, FLY THE RED TAILS!!!


User currently offlineFrequentFlyKid From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1206 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1914 times:

I am one of those "newer is better" kids, but I don't think the DC-9 or Northwest is unsafe. Maybe its the high tech age I grew up in, but it's been beaten into us since birth that newer, high tech, computerized things were better. As an example, I would rather fly a 73G then a 733 for the lone reason they are newer. However, I don't think 733's are unsafe by any means. I do agree that the post is kind of stupid.

User currently offlineBraniff727 From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 686 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1907 times:

I'm so sick of this!

Yes! Their planes do not fall out of the sky. They have an INCREDIBLE maintenance team. Their airplanes are better taken care of than most people's cars.

Are some of the planes dirty? Yes. But that's what happens when you fly as many flights and maintain over 400 aircraft.

I would much rather trust my life with an "old" NW plane than I would with some other airlines with FAR less than sterling records.

Northwest will not only get you there, they will get you there safely, and on time.



Climbing
User currently offlineAzjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4022 posts, RR: 27
Reply 9, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1888 times:

I'm not even going to touch this one... it isn't worth my sanity anymore to even try to educate people on the realities in aviation.

This probably goes down as the most rediculous post lately...

Not PMSing, just frustrated,

AZJ


User currently offlineBmi330 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1450 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1873 times:

is it mabe not the case that the nwa aircraft are so well taken care of they dont have to renew all the time also would you not fell safer on a tried and tested machine than a protatype or new machine plus when was the last time a nwa plane crashed? infact have they ever had a major incident? There is also the chance you are safer on an older aircraft because there crew's and mantince people have already delt whith most things or everything that can go roung or could anticipate problems better before they happen. I could go on but I dont want to ramble on even more.

User currently offlineAzjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4022 posts, RR: 27
Reply 11, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1839 times:

NW has had its share of incidences to make the news...

There was an MD80 that crashed in DTW in 1987.
There was also a rwy incursion between a DC9 and a 727 while on the ground in thick fog in DTW in the early 90s. Since those there have been minor incidences... so no, NW is not perfect, but they sure have a better record than AA and US and other US carriers.

AZJ


User currently offlineATA L1011 From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1392 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1829 times:

Some of our fellow brotherren need to be educated on Aircraft. Aircraft are not like cars they go through major inspections often and its life is based on cycles and hours not years. Some 30 year old aircraft might be in as good shape or better than a 5 year old one, its all called maintenance practice.


Treat others as you expect to be treated!
User currently offlineGD727 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 925 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1833 times:

Northwest, not safe? Not true. Old aircraft are ANY less unsafe than new aircraft? Also untrue. Heck, I feel even safer on older planes, It is my belief that they are more solidly built. Especially the DC-9 and DC-10, I feel safer on them than a new A-320 or 737NG.

-GD727



Mmmm forbidden donut.
User currently offlineRogueTrader From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1822 times:

Don't you think some of you NW guys could take it easy on this kid?

coolchris122 looks like he was just asking a question without intending to bash NW.

Its a great opportunity to turn this into a positive and point out that

a. older planes are just as safe new planes
b. planes don't wear out in the same way as cars, and a well maintained plane is partially rebuilt every few years
c. NW is a conservative carrier and this has many advantages
d. most flyers don't know much about what they're flying on anyway
e. these a/c may be particularly well suited to NW's routes

etc....

I think its a good question and deserves a thoughtful answer.

kind regards,

RogueTrader


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8034 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1775 times:

However, like it or not NW will have to seriously consider replacing the DC-9's sooner or later.

There are two reasons for this:

1. The plane's engines aren't going to pass muster with the new ICAO jet engine noise and exhaust emission rules coming into force in a few years.

2. Despite NW's great efforts to keep the DC-9 in good shape, the planes' takeoff and landing cycles are getting way, way up there.

This is why I think NW has probably started planning for the post-DC-9 fleet. If Boeing does succeed in buying into Fairchild-Dornier, I personally think NW may start expressing serious interest in buying the F-D 928 series to replace the DC-9 starting the latter half of this decade. The current Boeing 717-200 would be perfect for NW's post-DC-9 needs, but I have serious doubts NW wants this plane.


User currently offlineAer777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1754 times:

I just recently flew on a Delta 727 and I can tell you that all jokes aside, the older planes are VERY safe.

I have never thought NWA was unsafe.

Rude, cheap, and a nightmare to fly in winter? Sure.


I think NWA is better than they were even 4 years ago.

They are a very safe airline.

Actually the parts that are falling off of planes recently and in the not so distant past have not been NWA planes.

So dont stop flying them because you think they are unsafe. Stop flying them cause the interiors are old and they dont show movies.


:0



User currently offlineThomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 4021 posts, RR: 26
Reply 17, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1748 times:

Next week is 'Bash America West week'.... so stay tuned!

Thomas



"Show me the Braniffs"
User currently offlineHlywdCatft From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5321 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1743 times:

I don't recall any of Northwest's crashes at least in the past 25 years due to maintenance problems. Let's see the last crash by a Northwest aircraft?? yes the fog at DTW when a DC-9 and 727 collided- pilot and ATC error was the case along with poorly marked taxiways, basically not much damage to the 727 other than the wing, DC-9 written off. Flight 255 crashed due to pilot error and not mechanical, incidentally it was an MD-80. Yes I think NW needs to replace their DC-9s but none have fallen out of the sky yet. Is United really safe is the question? Since NW last crash (collision 1991) United has had two crashes (not counting sept 11) both that I recall were mechanical error- the 733 in Colorado Springs and the DC-10 in Sioux City.

What about American? Three crashes since, (not counting Sept 11) the 757 in Colombia (fog and mountain), the MD-80 (thunderstorm in Little Rock) and the A300 (right now ruled as a mechanical/structural problem). Also the American Eagle ATR that crashed in Indiana a few years back after icing up causing the entire fleet of ATRs to be moved to warmer climates that winter. Then there was also the DC-10 in Chicago in the late 70s that was a mechanical error.

USAir- quite a few since- one due to mechanical/structural (still a mystery) 737 outside of Pittsburgh.

Delta-The L1011 at DFW was before 1991 and was due to thunderstorms, but what was the reason for the 727 crash a few years later at DFW? Their affiliates ASA and Comair both had crashes with their Emb 120s in the 90s- ASA had one outside of ATL I thought due to mechanical and Comair had the crash outside of Detroit- still sort of a mystery in 1997.

Continental had the DC-9 crash at DEN, I can't remember the reason for it either, that was sometime in the late 80s.

Southwest is the only US airline that I can name in the US that has over 100 planes and could really be considered more safe than NW.


User currently offlineAzjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4022 posts, RR: 27
Reply 19, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1721 times:

Southwest has had a few debacles though... not killing anyone but coming very close.

Can we say hot dogging a 737 onto the rwy in BUR, running through a fence and nearly into a gas station?

There have been other rwy excursions with Southwest as well... they're not immune to incidences either.



AZJ


User currently offlineRogueTrader From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1714 times:

Azjubilee,

I think your showing some resentment here. WN serves almost as many passengers as AA, UA, or DL in high frequency ops - with no deaths. I think it has to be more than luck.

regards,

RogueTrader


User currently offlineNwa757300 From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 299 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (12 years 8 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1690 times:

"Also, could they be short on money to not buy new aircraft? Anyone who can explain this, please do so."

I could have sworn we've discussed this in depth but NW is getting a new plane like every other week this year. They are the only major to take delivery of all aircraft they have on order. They're retiring 14 727s this year that's almost half of that fleet. They get 7 757-300s, almost 30 airbus, 2 747-400s etc....
I think NW is doing it's part on fleet renewal.


User currently offlineAzjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4022 posts, RR: 27
Reply 22, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1652 times:

No resentment whatsoever... just pointing out that WN has had a few incidences that are worthy of talking about. I also just wanted to pint out that WN is as vulnerable to mistakes as the next airline. That's all...




AZJ


User currently offlineShort_final From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 10 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1637 times:

I believe they are planning on retiring the DC-10 fleet by September and replacing them with B-757's. The DC-9's are being replaced by A-319's, A-320's.

User currently offlineBobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6532 posts, RR: 9
Reply 24, posted (12 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1625 times:

Short_final,

I think you had better do your homework. Only the DC-10-40's will be retired by September and the A-319's and A-320's are not replacing the DC-9's. No decision has been made on replacing the DC-9's.


25 NWA : Also mind you, the 727 and Dc-9 rwy incursion was ATC fault. that had nothing to do with the planes.
26 Ups763 : Enough of the this Northwest crap, it has been discussed over and over again, yes they are a very safe airline coolchris122, go to airdisaster.com and
27 Pilothica737 : FLY DELTA!!!!!
28 Covert : i thought it was fun actually, flying in their dc-9, even though there was no entertainment
29 Arsenal@LHR : How can a mega worldwide carrier like Northwest not be safe? Every major airline is safe, and have the highest safest standards. If NW wasn't safe, th
30 Zeus01 : Serisouly, did a bunch of people get together and decided to post everyday on NW? This is getting old. IF ANYONE WANTS TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT NW: Look
31 N202PA : If NW wasn't safe, the FAA would come down on them like a ton of bricks! Riiiight. Just like they did with ValuJet. I'm sure Northwest is a reasonably
32 Setjet : If NW is bad, just how bad is it really? Also, I heard that they fly pretty old planes which are unsafe in most cases. Somebody who took NW once told
33 Turtle : Don't you think some of you NW guys could take it easy on this kid? coolchris122 looks like he was just asking a question without intending to bash NW
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...
Virgin: Are They Really That Green? posted Wed Oct 4 2006 17:45:36 by BA787
UA Vs F9.. Are They Really All That Different? posted Wed May 11 2005 16:18:12 by Azstar
CLICK-MX Routes Are They Really For A Lclf posted Wed Apr 13 2005 03:18:28 by MYRIJET
Emirates Airlines? Are They Really Going To ....? posted Sun Jan 6 2002 06:35:16 by Fly_emirates
BAe 146/Avro RJ/Avro RJX: Are They Really RJs? posted Mon Mar 26 2001 21:06:01 by BA
Virgin, Impulse..Are They Really Here To Stay? posted Sat Jan 13 2001 04:45:33 by Flightboy24
ATA: Are They Really 10th Largest? posted Thu Oct 26 2000 08:47:59 by EIPremier
Cubana Maintenance - How Safe Are They? posted Wed May 25 2005 02:58:20 by AkjetBlue
Frequent Flyer Programs, Are They That Important? posted Thu Dec 18 2003 06:47:16 by Pmanchuk
Scanners....Are They That Bad? posted Fri Mar 28 2003 05:21:05 by DeltaASA16