Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MD-90 - Less Range Than The MD-83?  
User currently offline1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6646 posts, RR: 2
Posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5733 times:

On Wikipedia, I found something that might seem quite odd: the MD-90 has less range than the MD-83. It states that the MD-83 has a range of 4,600 km, while it states that the MD-90 has a range of 3,860 km. The MD-90-30ER still comes short of the MD-83, with a range of 4,426 km.

Why would McDonnel Douglas give the MD-90 less range than the MD-83? Yes, I know that the MD-90's lack of range was a reason for its failure, but at least it should have been given more range than the MD-83. The MD-90 is only superior to the MD-83 in more powerful and fuel efficient engines, allowing for better hot-and-high performance. But it seems strange that it would feature less range than its predecessor. The A320 and 737-800 offer more range than all MD-80 and MD-90 variants.


The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4700 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5638 times:

Here's the payload-range chart:

MD-80 series aircraft:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/md80sec3.pdf

MD-90:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/md90sec3.pdf

So yes, the MD-83 has more range.



Exceptions confirm the rule.
User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5621 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
Why would McDonnel Douglas give the MD-90 less range than the MD-83?

Because they are aimed at different customers and different type flights ?

Because the MD90 carries more weight on the same basic engines and fuel load?

There are many, many reasons why the model 90 would be different than the model 8x series - and range is only one of the possible considerations.


User currently offline1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6646 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5582 times:

Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 2):

There are many, many reasons why the model 90 would be different than the model 8x series - and range is only one of the possible considerations.

Well, each generation of the Boeing 737 got their range increased. The 737-100 and 737-200 were designed for short-haul routes. The 737 Classics have more range than the original models, and 737NGs have transcontinental range.

The point is, the MD-90 was designed to be a successor to the MD-80 series, and should theoretically have more range than its predecesor. While the MD-90 features more range than the MD-81, MD-82, and MD-88, it has less than the MD-83.



The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5543 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 3):
While the MD-90 features more range than the MD-81, MD-82, and MD-88, it has less than the MD-83.

Was the 83 configured for extra range for some reason?


User currently offlineDl_mech From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 1987 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 5382 times:

The MD-83 has fuel tanks in the cargo compartment for extra range.


This plane is built to withstand anything... except a bad pilot.
User currently offline1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6646 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5329 times:

Strangely, the MD-90 was originally supposed to be Delta's 727 replacement. The MD-90 actually features less range than the 727-200s that they were supposed to replace. The 727-200 has a range of 4450 km, while the MD-90 (non-ER) is 3860 km. Why would the MD-90 be a good 727 replacement? Delta soon cancelled their remaining MD-90 orders for the 737-800. The 737-800 has a range of 5665 km, making it useful on transcontinental routes.


The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5947 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5129 times:

You're not comparing apples to apples.
The MD-83 was the long-range bird in the -8X fleet, with more tanks.
The MD-90-30 was not a long range bird. The -ER, which I believe never made it into production, was the long range bird.

So let's compare that way... 4600 versus 4426.
That's a very close range. 174 miles difference.
When you were looking at all that stuff, did you notice that the MD-90 is a longer, larger aircraft? With far heavier engines?

As far as why the MD-90 would make a good 72S replacement for DL, you're forgetting that very few of the flights these birds fly are at max range. Especially at that time, when DL was doing DFW-MCO runs with MD-11s and L-1011s... just as an example.

So yeah, the MD-90 would have been a good replacement for Delta's 727 fleet had things worked out properly.

The biggest shortcoming in the arcraft was its wing, in my opinion. If Douglas had upped the budget to put a better wing on it, they might have increased range, reduced parasite drag, helped out the lackluster climb and cruise performance, etc.


User currently offlinePr1268 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 232 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5073 times:

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 7):
So let's compare that way... 4600 versus 4426.
That's a very close range. 174 miles difference.

Actually, it's 108 (statue) miles difference - the 4600 and 4426 were kilometer values. But, yes, it's an almost-negligible difference.



The only time an aircraft has too much fuel is when it is on fire.
User currently offlineDl757md From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1562 posts, RR: 17
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4963 times:

Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 2):
Because the MD90 carries more weight on the same basic engines and fuel load?

Wrong, completely different engines and less fuel on the 90.



757 Most beautiful airliner in the sky!
User currently offlineTrijetsRMissed From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2398 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4757 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
Why would McDonnell Douglas give the MD-90 less range than the MD-83?

Good question. While the MD-90 is a more advanced aircraft, the -30 was not a direct replacement of the MD-83. The MD-90-30 was intended to take the place of the MD-82. The -30ER, the MD-88. The MD-90-50 was the long range version that would take the place of the MD-83, although that ended with the merger. This explains why TW was receiving new build MD-83's four years after the MD-90-30 was in production.

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 7):
The -ER, which I believe never made it into production, was the long range bird.

The -30ER was produced in limited numbers.

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 6):
The 727-200 has a range of 4450 km, while the MD-90 (non-ER) is 3860 km. Why would the MD-90 be a good 727 replacement? Delta soon cancelled their remaining MD-90 orders for the 737-800. The 737-800 has a range of 5665 km, making it useful on transcontinental routes.

Most DL 727's did not fly routes longer than three or four hours. The MD-90-30's were intended to replace 727's on shorter distance routes. After the first 50 were to be delivered, DL planned to exercise a portion of the 115 options, many of which would be the MD-90-50 series (assuming MDC was still in business). The MD-90-50 would have a range of 5600 km, allowing for transcons and very comparable to the 738.

Quoting Dl_mech (Reply 5):
The MD-83 has fuel tanks in the cargo compartment for extra range.

And higher performing JT8D's.

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 7):
The biggest shortcoming in the aircraft was its wing, in my opinion. If Douglas had upped the budget to put a better wing on it, they might have increased range, reduced parasite drag, helped out the lackluster climb and cruise performance, etc.

 checkmark  You pretty much hit the nail on the head. In addition, the electrical system should not have been revised, this was the major reason for the DL cancellation as it was an mx nightmare. Furthermore, MD should have implemented the MD-95 FBW system in the MD-90.



There's nothing quite like a trijet.
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4666 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
Why would McDonnel Douglas give the MD-90 less range than the MD-83?

No room for extra fuel in the wings or fuselage without reducing cargo space.

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 3):
The point is, the MD-90 was designed to be a successor to the MD-80 series, and should theoretically have more range than its predecesor.

Not without a new, larger wing (like the 737NG's got).


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic MD-90 - Less Range Than The MD-83?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
MD-90, So Different From The MD-88? posted Mon Nov 11 2002 20:52:59 by Astrojet
Do A 747400 Burn Less Fuel Than A L1011? posted Tue Dec 26 2006 20:22:47 by 747400sp
A 744F Requires Less Runway Than A 742F? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 18:00:38 by F.pier
Airliners Burn Three Times Less Fuel Than A 777? posted Thu Jul 13 2006 18:02:52 by 747400sp
An Airliner That Burn 3 Time Less Gas Than A 737 posted Wed Jun 21 2006 18:06:04 by 747400sp
Actual Range Of The A321-200? posted Wed Dec 28 2005 18:01:36 by CRJ900
What Was The Range Of The DC-8-62? posted Sun Oct 30 2005 03:01:05 by AmericanB763ER
Was The DC-8-62/-63 Quieter Than The 707-320B/C? posted Thu Oct 20 2005 00:52:19 by Happy-flier
Does The A321 Sit Higher Than The 319? posted Mon Sep 13 2004 23:44:01 by Qantas777
Faster Than The Speed Of Light posted Sat Feb 21 2004 23:29:52 by Saintsman

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format