Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Would Have Made The MD-90 Better?  
User currently offlinec5load From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 7 months 10 hours ago) and read 2667 times:

I like to get your guys' opinions on what you think would have made poor selling or poor performing airplanes better at the tie of manufacture. I asked a while ago about the MD-11 and got overwhelming responses mostly with the stabilizer. So now I ask what about the MD-90? Would it be a new wing? More reliable engines (CFMs vs. IAE2500 series)? What would have made it formidable competitor to the A320 and B737 series without changing that MD design (t-tail)?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © John Tiplady
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kaoru Kojima



[Edited 2010-09-18 18:10:33]


"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
4 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 9 hours ago) and read 2656 times:

Quoting c5load (Thread starter):
So now I ask what about the MD-90?

I think it was a fine aircraft...it didn't die because it wasn't a good design, it died because of the merger.

Quoting c5load (Thread starter):
What would have made it formidable competitor to the A320 and B737 series without changing that MD design (t-tail)?

It *was* a formidable competitor to the A320/737 for the short/medium haul market. What would have kept it that way would have been MD not merging with Boeing.

Tom.


User currently offlinec5load From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 7 months 9 hours ago) and read 2651 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 1):
It *was* a formidable competitor to the A320/737 for the short/medium haul market.

I was under the assumption that it lacked performance on longer routes that the A and B were able to tackle, like the transcon routes. I also thought I read that the engines were pretty maintenance hungry machines.



"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 7 hours ago) and read 2611 times:

Quoting c5load (Reply 2):
I was under the assumption that it lacked performance on longer routes that the A and B were able to tackle, like the transcon routes.

That's why I threw in the "short/medium haul" qualifier...the MD-90 just didn't have the legs for transcon. If you want an all-round US domestic machine, the 737/A320 were better choices. But if your route structure didn't need that kind of range, the MD-90 was a really nice plane.

Quoting c5load (Reply 2):
I also thought I read that the engines were pretty maintenance hungry machines.

They're IAE2500's...shouldn't be much better or worse than the IAE A320's.

Tom.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15438 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 7 hours ago) and read 2596 times:

Quoting c5load (Thread starter):
So now I ask what about the MD-90?

Basically many of the same things as the MD-11. Too little effort and investment, too late to keep superior planes from eating their lunch.

Quoting c5load (Thread starter):
Would it be a new wing?

A better wing would definitely have helped the MD-90 compete.

Quoting c5load (Thread starter):
More reliable engines (CFMs vs. IAE2500 series)?

I've never heard anything bad about the IAE engines, and they seem to work fine for A320 operators.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 1):
I think it was a fine aircraft...it didn't die because it wasn't a good design, it died because of the merger

It was a very good plane, but compared to the 737NG and A320 it wasn't quite there. But the merger was the factor that really did it in. The MD-90 suffered from the struggles at McDonnell Douglas but was certainly not a cause of them and had it been allowed to continue would have sold in significant numbers and turned a profit for the company so I couldn't call it a failure.

Really, the MD-90 was a good plane that could have been better.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic What Would Have Made The MD-90 Better?
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...
What Would Have Made The MD90 Better? posted Fri Apr 2 2010 19:16:42 by 747400sp
Factors That Ruined The MD-90's Reputation... posted Sat Mar 13 2004 05:04:31 by John
Details And/or Photos Of The MD-90-EFD posted Wed Aug 6 2003 06:40:01 by Mirrodie
The MD-90 And UHB Fans posted Fri Aug 17 2001 01:49:34 by Boeingmd82
The 717 Wing Vs. The MD-80/MD-90 Wing posted Thu Sep 16 2010 09:36:32 by tsugambler
757 Vs. MD-90 For The Takeoff Crown? posted Sun Sep 21 2008 17:39:49 by EA772LR
MD-90 - Less Range Than The MD-83? posted Fri Jul 27 2007 17:03:03 by 1337Delta764
What Made The L1011 Tristar A "maintainance Hog"? posted Mon Dec 11 2006 01:26:28 by Jimbobjoe
What Is This In The Delta MD-11 Cockpit? posted Mon Oct 30 2006 10:11:58 by MD11Fanatic
Problem In The Cockpit - What Would You Do? posted Fri Jan 6 2006 22:02:10 by Julesmusician

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format