Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MD-90 Efficiency Over MD-80  
User currently offlinePC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2585 posts, RR: 5
Posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7624 times:

Just curious to know how much more efficient is the MD-90 vs. the MD-80? Thanks.

Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
4 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineMSNDC9 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 7467 times:

If I recall, the MD-90 burns close to 15% less fuel on an hourly basis and carries 12 additional pax. I think the overall trip cost was about 16-17% lower for the MD-90 and 20% lower on a per seat basis for a 750 mile trip.

The problem was that it was a bit of a maintenance pig and MCD was well into its slow death at the time.

[Edited 2009-09-25 11:56:52]

User currently offlineElpinDAB From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 489 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 7391 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 12):
Using that data (which I have also), we can compare DL MD-80s vs US 734s. During 2005, the DL MD-80 had an average flight distance of about 550 miles. The US 734 fleet had a distance of about 540 miles. DL seats 142 passengers; the US aircraft 144 passengers. DL about 1,180 gallons per revenue flight hour. US just about exactly 1,000 gallons per hour.

The MD-80 clearly burns more fuel than the 734. About 18% more, in the usage of DL/US.

This is from the competing thread: MD-80 Vs 737-400 Economics (by 1337Delta764 Mar 17 2008 in Tech Ops)

So I guess the MD-90 burned about as much fuel as the 734. It really should have had transcon range for it to have been competitive. I wish it would have. DL might have ordered more. It needed a new wing, I think. The engine was good, and the fuselage worked, but a new wing would have propelled it to success. Instead, McD relied on the already under-winged MD-80 wing for the stretched, re-engined re-placement, which was a mistake. I think the MD-90's shortcomings might have accelerated it's takeover by Boeing.

edit: Could a transcon MD-90 have justified equal fuel burn to the 733/4/5 srs, competed with the 757 upon its introduction, and given airlines justification to order or keep MD-90's over 737NG's?

[Edited 2009-09-25 20:24:36]

User currently offlineB767 From Norway, joined Feb 2008, 132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 7220 times:

Just a quick question.At the time the MD80 were introduced,wasn,t the CFM 56 already availiable?

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 29484 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 7190 times:

Quoting B767 (Reply 3):
Just a quick question.At the time the MD80 were introduced,wasn,t the CFM 56 already availiable?

CFM56 was still in the development phase when the MD-80 first flew in 1979. The first CFM56 in service was the large-fan CFM56-2 used in the DC-8-60 series re-engining program. I believe the first of the re-engined -70 series DC-8s went into service in 1981. The first smaller-fan CFM56-3 wasn't certified until early 1984 for the 737-300, the first of which went into service in late 1984.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic MD-90 Efficiency Over MD-80
No username? Sign up now!

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!
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

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

Similar topics:More similar topics...
MD-80 Pilots, Know About Fuel Savings? posted Wed Sep 16 2009 17:18:01 by SLOflyer
MD-80 Series -- Strings Tied To Wing? posted Sun Jul 26 2009 23:07:53 by Brenintw
MD-80 Take Off At 109 Degrees F posted Sat Jul 18 2009 17:43:20 by TAN FLYR
DC-9/MD-80/717 Eyebrow Plugs? posted Tue Apr 14 2009 21:40:36 by SXDFC
Md-80 Delivery Question posted Tue Feb 3 2009 12:13:01 by Uhntissbaby111
Northwest's MD-80 Interiors posted Tue Sep 30 2008 13:33:25 by NWA320
757 Vs. MD-90 For The Takeoff Crown? posted Sun Sep 21 2008 17:39:49 by EA772LR
MD-90 Engine Mounting posted Thu Aug 14 2008 13:37:36 by Misterdsdan
Winglets On The MD-80 posted Mon Aug 11 2008 00:49:20 by L1011CPH
MD-90 Cruising Altitude posted Sat Aug 9 2008 21:38:14 by Smokint

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format