Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Valujet: Why Did AirTran Get Rid Of DC9-21  
User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2890 times:

What was wrong with the DC9-21?

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jay Selman


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael F. McLaughlin



If anything they were newer than the -30s. Why did Valujet/Airtran ditch them after the ACCIDENT?

This one has me stumped.

12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLN-MOW From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1908 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2874 times:

After the accident, valuJet ditched not only the -21, but also some MD80's that they just had gotten hold of. Due to reduced traffic, they chose to stick to their -30's and get rid of the other aircraft types.




- I am LN-MOW, and I approve this message.
User currently offlineLowfareair From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2869 times:

Easier to focus on one type of aircraft. If I remember, J7 only had a couple of -21s, so they didn't make any sense to operate.

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16280 posts, RR: 56
Reply 3, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2862 times:

Most of the VJ DC-9-30's were also likely younger than the -20's. The '20's were all built in the late 60's.

Only 10 -20's were ever produced, of which only a couple were operated by VJ.




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2857 times:

Two reasons...

1/ After the 592 crash in the swamp, they took huge PR hits. While some were unjustified, what mattered more was the perception of the flying public. It wasn't just the 592 deal, it was also the earlier uncontained engine failure and aborted takeoff at ATL, which burned up the aircraft. The public perception seemed to become that they acquired used aircraft from other airlines that that "used them up" to keep their costs down. Dumping all the old aicraft in favor of the 717 dealt with that...

2/ Irrespective of the low acquisition cost of used aircraft, they are more-expensive maintenance-wise. In the aftermath of the Aloha 737 affair, "aging aircraft" now had much tougher inspoection intervals, and thus higher MX costs, especially if problems were found. It essentially became a case of "you can put a pig in a dress and use lipstick on it, but it's still a pig". In other words, they could still spend the bucks to overhaul and spruce-up the older aircrafr, but they were still going to e high-time high-cycle aircraft.

Overall, they've done a pretty good job of re-inventing themselves....



User currently offlineCody From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1932 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2857 times:

I think there were four. Did you know they used to operate them from Boston nonstop to Florida? I flet so bad for those passengers on there.

User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16280 posts, RR: 56
Reply 6, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2846 times:

Did you know they used to operate them from Boston nonstop to Florida?

Yes, that does ring a bell. For some reason, VJ operated the -21 on some of their longest routes (BOS-MCO etc).




Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineTravatl From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2173 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2778 times:

I was based in BOS at the time, and often worked the DC9-20s. It was a love/hate relationship.

I loved their performance (rocketed off the runway), but hated being the layout. 89 seats, and NO place to go. To top it off, we always staffed them with three flight attendants.

Biggest reason the DC9-20s left? Actually, they had already decided to sell them BEFORE the crash, but they were still flying. If they had intended to keep them, the FAA wouldn't have allowed it anyway. One concern in our infrastructure was consistency. At the time, ValuJet operated 11 different types of aircraft in terms of cockpit commonality. Eliminating DC9-20s and -80s was one way to narrow those differences. Second, when we came back to service in September, 1996...we were flying a grand total of SEVEN aircraft (and restricted in growth to 15). The original seven were tails 934, 935, 937, 938, 940, 945, and 946.

Travis


User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2764 times:

Travis, Thanks for the info. I did not know they had 11 different cockpit layouts. That is amazing. I know they had the Delta Cockpits, KLM Cockpits, -20 Cockpits, and MD80 Cockpits, and Turkish Cockpits. But I only counted 5 different layouts there. Where did 11 come from?

User currently offlineFBU 4EVER! From Norway, joined Jan 2001, 998 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 2671 times:

Well,the -21's were all ordered and operated by SAS so you can add another layout there!
It was basically a KSSU flight deck.(KSSU=KLM,SAS,Swissair,UTA).In the late sixties and up through the 80's,there was a technical co-operation between these airlines to order and operate the DC-10 with identical specifications and equipment.This co-op also included the DC-9.



"Luck and superstition wins all the time"!
User currently offlineElwood64151 From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2626 times:

Another reason for dropping the -21s was layout commonality. The -21s were, as stated above, 89 seats, while the -31s were (and are) in 106 seat configurations. Also, the -21s would have to have different load plans, MTOW, and landing fees from the -31s.

Now the 717 offers similarities in cockpits, weight (in almost all a/c), seating, noise/vibration levels, and servicability. Plus the lavs and potable water are easier to service.



Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
User currently offlineCF-CPI From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 1062 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2613 times:

The DC-9-21 was a special variant which mated the larger DC-9-30 wing with the smaller DC-9-10 fuselage. I'm sure that the large wing was a fuel-wasting liability for Air Tran, but those rare birds sure are interesting! I suppose that SAS needed the extra lift to get out of small airports.

User currently offlineLGB Photos From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (11 years 10 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2586 times:

That is correct FBU 4EVER!. My grandfather who worked for SAS from 1948 until 1982 worked with Douglas to come up with the DC-9-21. It was also my grandfathers idea for the KSSU to happen and since he was pretty good friends with several technical people at KLM, Swissair and UTA, that went together pretty smoothly. You know that the first KSSU delivery ceremony was the delivery of the DC-10 to all 4 carriers. I have photos at home framed from Douglas of the even which were given to my grandfather. He passed away 3 years ago and I have inherited all of his airline memorabilia, all sorts of stuff. Man what a rich life he had with SAS.

Stephen


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...
Why Did FCA Get Rid Of An A321? posted Sun Sep 26 2004 00:12:39 by A340600
Why Did SAA Get Rid Of Their A320's? posted Fri Jan 3 2003 19:34:13 by American 767
Why Did Britannia Get Rid Of A 767-300? posted Sun Aug 18 2002 19:41:18 by By738
Really Why Did BA Get Rid Of Their 'tails'? posted Sat Oct 13 2001 14:31:51 by Braniff Place
Why Did Delta Get Rid Of Their A310? posted Wed May 2 2001 19:06:05 by Oliver
Why Did Midway Get Rid Of The A320? posted Tue Sep 26 2000 07:06:32 by Rotate777
When Did Delta Get Rid Of Ex-Pan Am Airbus A310s? posted Sat Aug 24 2002 23:12:09 by Bobcat
When Did United Get Rid Of The Friend Ship? posted Thu Apr 26 2001 05:29:38 by KonaB777
When Did COAir Get Rid Of Their 747 posted Mon Oct 16 2000 22:58:46 by Critter592
Why Doesn't Northwest Get Rid Of It Junkers? posted Sat Jan 8 2000 22:18:15 by Buyaboeingnow