Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Aircraft Airlines Regretted Ordering And Flying  
User currently offlineCairnterriAIR From United States of America, joined Jun 2008, 409 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 18558 times:

Yout often hear about how a given airline proudly advertised operating a certain type of plane...good example is Pan Am proudly using the 747 or 707 in adds or whatnot. But what aircraft type did an airline order with high expectations only for the company to regret the order and quickly (or not) remove the plane from the fleet? Any good example of airlines and planes?

116 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinewilco737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 9100 posts, RR: 76
Reply 1, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 18542 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting CairnterriAIR (Thread starter):
But what aircraft type did an airline order with high expectations only for the company to regret the order and quickly (or not) remove the plane from the fleet? Any good example of airlines and planes?

I think CX got rid of their 340-600 quite quickly and preferred the 777 instead.

I don't know what they exactly were complaining about, but it looks like this airplane wasn't best for CX, so they got rid of them.

Not 100% sure, but didn't AC use 340-500 for a short period as well?

wilco737
  



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
User currently offlinebomber996 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 18511 times:

MD-11 anyone?   

Peace   



AVIATION - A Vacation In Any Town, I Own Nothing
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17118 posts, RR: 66
Reply 3, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 18507 times:

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 1):
I think CX got rid of their 340-600 quite quickly and preferred the 777 instead.

I don't know what they exactly were complaining about, but it looks like this airplane wasn't best for CX, so they got rid of them.

AFAIK CX leased the 340-600. When the lease ended, they returned the planes. My impression is that the plane was fine but once the lease ended the 777 was a better choice for CX for those routes.

[Edited 2013-07-25 23:08:04]


"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlinewilco737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 9100 posts, RR: 76
Reply 4, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 18481 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 3):
AFAIK CX leased the 340-600. When the lease ended, they returned the planes. My impression is that the plane was fine but once the lease ended the 777 was a better choice for CX for those routes

That could be. But the lease seemed to be rather short. Only couple years.

wilco737
  



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
User currently offlineStarlionblue From Greenland, joined Feb 2004, 17118 posts, RR: 66
Reply 5, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 18463 times:

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 4):
That could be. But the lease seemed to be rather short. Only couple years.

CX operated the 340-600 for seven years so not super-short. I'm guessing they had options to extend but didn't.



"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots."
User currently offlinewilco737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 9100 posts, RR: 76
Reply 6, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 18457 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 5):
CX operated the 340-600 for seven years so not super-short. I'm guessing they had options to extend but didn't.

Then it was longer than I thought. I had 3-4 years in mind. It is not super short, but not particular long. I guess they recalculated with the 777 and found that it is more efficient for them.

Thanks for the info.

wilco737
  



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
User currently offlinedavidho1985 From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2012, 376 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 18380 times:

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 3):
Quoting wilco737 (Reply 1):I think CX got rid of their 340-600 quite quickly and preferred the 777 instead.

I don't know what they exactly were complaining about, but it looks like this airplane wasn't best for CX, so they got rid of them.
AFAIK CX leased the 340-600. When the lease ended, they returned the planes. My impression is that the plane was fine but once the lease ended the 777 was a better choice for CX for those routes.[Edited 2013-07-25 23:08:04]
Quoting wilco737 (Reply 6):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 5):CX operated the 340-600 for seven years so not super-short. I'm guessing they had options to extend but didn't.
Then it was longer than I thought. I had 3-4 years in mind. It is not super short, but not particular long. I guess they recalculated with the 777 and found that it is more efficient for them.

Thanks for the info.

wilco737

Becasuse thos A346 are over-weighted, which affect the fuel efficiency.


User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 18373 times:

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 6):

I think CX got the early model birds with the heavy wing and so performance wasn't the best. And when the leases expired the 77W was getting better by the day...



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlinejoffie From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 814 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 18321 times:

Virgin Blue ordered the E-170 and got rid of them about 4 years later in favour for the ATR.

User currently offlineImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2630 posts, RR: 23
Reply 10, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 18257 times:

B-307 New technology. High ops costs. Not kept in service any longer than necessary.
Martin 202 Poor design. Bad Karma.
Tudor?
Deux Ponts?
Hermes?
B-377 Reliability/ mx issues. High ops. costs. Not kept in service any longer than necessary. WFU ASAP!
Comet 1 Pioneering design issues led to crashes/grounding. New 4 series too late entering market. Unable to compete.
L1049-L1649 all series. Unable to generate extra revenue expected because of excessive ops/mx issues. WFU ASAP!
DC-7 all series. Unable to generate extra revenue expected because of excessive ops/mx issues. WFU ASAP!
L-188 Design flaws (Typical Lockheed flutter issues   .) Poor timing. (Adored by EA,RA,VG for niche use.) Found niche as freighter.
Vanguard Poor timing for pax. found niche as freighter.
Cv-990 Design issues/Performance issues.
Mercure?
MD-11 Poor timing. Should have had a new wing. Redesign (from DC-10) of horizontal tail surfaces caused critical landing issues (although some carriers ops the aircraft for many years without incident!.)

Comments/fill in blanks-----------?  



"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
User currently offlineCaptCufflinks From UK - England, joined Dec 2012, 96 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 18188 times:

Quoting wilco737 (Reply 1):

Not 100% sure, but didn't AC use 340-500 for a short period as well?

AC had both the -300 and the -500.

They operated the -500 for about 3/4 years as a stop gap between the 744 and the arrival of their 777's.

The -300's were slightly more successful with them and were operated from the mid 90's until their retirement in 2008. I was fortunate enough to be on one of the very last trips of the A343 to LHR.


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5763 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (1 year 4 months 3 days ago) and read 18158 times:

AS was never particularly happy with its 737-700s. After operating them for a short time they switched all orders going forward to the 737-800. Now they are gradually leaving early, even though there are still 737-400s in the fleet.

User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6957 posts, RR: 76
Reply 13, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 18009 times:

Quoting CairnterriAIR (Thread starter):
But what aircraft type did an airline order with high expectations only for the company to regret the order and quickly (or not) remove the plane from the fleet? Any good example of airlines and planes?

SQ with the 757-200... they preferred the A310...

Bouraq... MD-80s... copycat move (when Lion got the MD-80s)... their ops geared to the 732, adding new type resulted in ops and mx nightmares.
Star Air... MD-80s... copycat move (when Lion got the MD-80s)... their ops geared to the 732, adding new type resulted in ops and mx nightmares.
Indonesian Airlines... 727... bought 20... cheap to lease/buy, fuel hog, maintenance hog... ruined the airline (along side with the 747-200SR and -300). Regretted giving back their 737-330s they leased. Then RVSM killed it (their 727 was non-RVSM).
Mandala... 727... copycat move (Jatayu was operating up to 5 727s and enjoying full loads while Mandala was on 732s). They got rid of it pretty quickly.
Merpati... 727... same story as Mandala.
Merpati... MA-60... expensive to operate (more expensive than the ATR72 they leased) and they can't get rid of it (one reason driving Merpati into deeper financial problems).

All the above were highly advertised... and it disappeared quick enough   



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlinegolfradio From Canada, joined Jun 2009, 814 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 17929 times:

AI and its Government imposed purchased of the 77L. They are still trying to sell them.

[Edited 2013-07-26 12:46:53]

User currently offlineImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2630 posts, RR: 23
Reply 15, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 17881 times:

I think EI used 720's trans-atlantic for a while and couldn't wait to trade them in for something with longer legs.


"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2313 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 17847 times:

Quoting CaptCufflinks (Reply 11):
They operated the -500 for about 3/4 years as a stop gap between the 744 and the arrival of their 777's.

The A345s were not intended to be a stopgap, AC at one point also had A346s on order. They eventually decided to switch to the 777s (which CEO Milton allegedly preferred in the first place, but Airbus offered a much better deal that AC couldn't refuse).

Anyways AA/DL and the MD-11s come to mind. DL also was initially unhappy with the MD-90 and had plans to get rid of them to simplify their fleet, but eventually changed their mind obviously.


User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6428 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 17808 times:

AA and DL: 747-100's...


Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25860 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 17804 times:

Quoting bomber996 (Reply 2):
MD-11 anyone?

KLM would probably disagree.

Quoting CaptCufflinks (Reply 11):
Quoting wilco737 (Reply 1):

Not 100% sure, but didn't AC use 340-500 for a short period as well?

AC had both the -300 and the -500.

They operated the -500 for about 3/4 years as a stop gap between the 744 and the arrival of their 777's.

AC's 2 A345s were acquired for the YYZ-HKG-YYZ route which the A343 couldn't easily operate nonstop. So they were unrelated to the 744 which also wasn't capable of YYZ-HKG nonstop. The 2 A345s were the only A340s actually owned by AC. The A343s were all leased. AC still owns the A345s. They're stored at Malta if not mistaken after their fairly brief lease to TAM.

Quoting ImperialEagle (Reply 10):
B-307 New technology. High ops costs. Not kept in service any longer than necessary.
Martin 202 Poor design. Bad Karma.
Tudor?
Deux Ponts?
Hermes?
B-377 Reliability/ mx issues. High ops. costs. Not kept in service any longer than necessary. WFU ASAP!
Comet 1 Pioneering design issues led to crashes/grounding. New 4 series too late entering market. Unable to compete.
L1049-L1649 all series. Unable to generate extra revenue expected because of excessive ops/mx issues. WFU ASAP!
DC-7 all series. Unable to generate extra revenue expected because of excessive ops/mx issues. WFU ASAP!
L-188 Design flaws (Typical Lockheed flutter issues .) Poor timing. (Adored by EA,RA,VG for niche use.) Found niche as freighter.
Vanguard Poor timing for pax. found niche as freighter.
Cv-990 Design issues/Performance issues.
Mercure?
MD-11 Poor timing. Should have had a new wing. Redesign (from DC-10) of horizontal tail surfaces caused critical landing issues (although some carriers ops the aircraft for many years without incident!.)

I would add the Bristol Britannia. Very late going into service and many problems, mainly with the engines and electrical system. Two prototypes were written off during the development program.


User currently offlineopethfan From Canada, joined Dec 2012, 640 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 17673 times:

Quoting Polot (Reply 16):
The A345s were not intended to be a stopgap, AC at one point also had A346s on order. They eventually decided to switch to the 777s (which CEO Milton allegedly preferred in the first place, but Airbus offered a much better deal that AC couldn't refuse)

Which would probably explain why AC have 8 A333s in the middle of their 767s and 777s.


User currently offlineImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2630 posts, RR: 23
Reply 20, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 17623 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 18):
add the Bristol Britannia



yeah. if they hadn't had the engine issues they would have had more of them online earlier. Bad timing with the jets right on their heels. Same for the CL44 D and J's.

I thought of a few more.

Air Florida started-up in '72 with a $19.00 fare and a 707-321 to hop around Florida in!    Can you imagine the fuel situation! And I remember a lot of those flights were less than half-full! They couldn't wait to get their hands on a fleet of L188's!

Then there was the PA blunder of ordering a small fleet of L15's. That was a cluster f%#k.

Still 'thinkin.



"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6428 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 17564 times:

Then there was Delta, who was the launch customer for the MD-90. They cancelled the order after just 16 were delivered, citing the fact that the thing was a maintenance nightmare for themselves.

Then who starts grabbing up every second hand MD-90 in existence in the late 2000's?   



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlinedlednicer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 547 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 17525 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

America West and the 747-200. They leased four after Ansett invested in the company. I have heard first-hand that one actually departed on a scheduled flight with only one passenger on board.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Stuart Haigh



User currently offlineDL_Mech From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 1979 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 17491 times:

I would think that WN would rather be flying a large fleet of -800s instead of -700s at this point.

TW almost flew the 707 into 1984. Not many airlines flew 707s and 767s side-by-side.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © George Gayuski
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © George Gayuski


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © George Gayuski
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © George Gayuski




This plane is built to withstand anything... except a bad pilot.
User currently offlineImperialEagle From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2630 posts, RR: 23
Reply 24, posted (1 year 4 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 17381 times:

DL and the 310's.
Seems like there was "bad-blood" for quite a while between Ron Allen and Airbus over that one.



"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough!"
25 planewasted : The Q400 was not a success with SAS. After three crash landings in a short time frame because of landing gear problems passengers started to refuse fl
26 bohica : There were many airlines worldwide who jumped on the 747 bandwagon for prestige reasons. I don't have any numbers available, but I wonder how many ai
27 Post contains links and images KELPkid : DL did for sure. AA kept them going on NY-LA domestic flights until about 1984 or so...although one of their early 747's became NASA 905, the (origin
28 bohica : I thought AA discontinued 747 ops before 1980 then got a couple SP's in the 80's for the NRT flights. I could be wrong though. Possibly the worst buy
29 B777LRF : SAS and the Q-400. Took three incidents involving collapsed landing gears before they pulled the plug, put the fleet up for sale and got a very good d
30 Post contains links and images Viscount724 : I think 1984 is correct for the last AA 747-100s in passenger service. In the July 1, 1983 OAG AA had 4 daily 747s LAX-JFK. They were operating 747 f
31 clickhappy : How about SQ and their A340-300's?
32 Post contains images bohica : I humbly stand corrected. It's been a while. I must be getting old.
33 Yukon880 : You're painting with an incredibly broad brush here Eagle! Perhaps I am detecting some personal bias, coming from your own experiences with some of t
34 Post contains images HAWK21M : Add the B739 to the list after the B739ER was available
35 AmericanB763ER : SIA went the extra mile by ordering MD-11's in late 80's/early 90's, then cancelling the order in favor of the A343's which didn't exactly arouse the
36 Post contains links and images Devilfish : Surprised no one has mentioned the "critters" yet..... View Large View MediumPhoto © Royal S King Apparently, F9, Mexicana/Avianca or LA didn't exact
37 Post contains images ImperialEagle : Well, he asked! I just threw some examples out there off the top of my head. Oh, and yes, I am deffinately opinionated. Like everyone else I formed t
38 Post contains images Yukon880 : For starters, step up to the pulpit and give us the CV-990 sermon! I may well counter with the 's advocate point of view. We'll see how it goes.
39 cornutt : I've never heard that the 307 had high ops costs; it was a pretty similar aircraft to the DC-2. It might have been priced a good bit higher than the
40 RussianJet : There is of course the Armavia SSJ situation, but it's very difficult to fully pick the bones out of that one. Likely a combination of some concern wi
41 okie : TWA was replacing over a hundred engines a month for their fleet. That takes a lot of Mx to R & R and even more to overhaul that many engines. Th
42 Post contains links and images CitationJet : America West - 747-200 AA - MD-11 AA - F100 I would add the Mercure & Air Inter. Only 12 aircraft were built. The plane had a very short range. Th
43 Aircellist : Would you be meaning the 247? Air Inter barely flew out of France: they were the domestic airline, save for a few liaisons, a few years before their
44 Post contains links and images HA_DC9 : Two airlines come to mind for this thread: HA and AQ In the case of HA, they were a longtime user of the DC-9 series all the way up to the current 717
45 Viscount724 : For their entire history, Air Inter was almost exclusively a French domestic carrier.
46 bohica : Back in the mid 1990's Atlantic Coast Airlines purchased 12 Dash 8's from Air Wisconsin. At the time, ACA was not prepared to handle operating the Das
47 Post contains images ImperialEagle : Huh? The 307 was introducing pressurizaton, superchargers, high altitude structural technology, etc. with plenty of weight penalty. Neither PA nor TW
48 Post contains links dlednicer : And then there was Airpac and the BAe-146. Airpac sued BAe and Avco (the engine manufacturer) for $100m, claiming that claiming that the airline had b
49 Max Q : Continental and the 737-500. Little pig of an Aircraft, carrying significantly less passengers than the -300 but with almost identical fuel burn, very
50 ImperialEagle : I have been sitting here writing a whole lot of stuff and when I sat back and looked at it----it is all the same stuff we already know about the 990.
51 NorthStarDC4M : One that hasn't been mentioned: Northwest and the DC-8 They bought the DC-8 on a promise from Douglas to push the range up to 5500nm (or was is 4500nm
52 PSAJet17 : PSA-Pacific Southwest Airlines was doing well in the California Intrastate market in the late 60's and early 70's. To help on certain high density rou
53 Viscount724 : 8 Pan Am DC-8s also went to UA, one more than the 7 that went to DL. A few went to various other carriers.
54 Post contains images cornutt : Yes, sigh.
55 Sinlock : I think one of the planes not mentioned yet, serves to underscore what a disappointment it was to the few operators who had them in their fleets. The
56 okie : The 328 was tough enough to market, Dornier just kept putting more lipstick on a pig so to speak. The only thing left would have been to put winglets
57 Post contains images Starlionblue : Farnborough. Futurama slip?
58 Post contains images northstardc4m : Yes sorry, they sold some off directly, Delta bought 7 via Boeing, I read the listing wrong
59 Post contains images ImperialEagle : Yeah, it was kool to see them ops in and out of ATL. Last time I flew on one was early in '71. Took an "Early Bird" to TPA one morning and to my surp
60 daviation : I don't know if these aircraft would qualify as 'regrets,' but they certainly seemed like oddities to me when I flew on them: AA - BAC-111 (way back i
61 Viscount724 : Assume you're referring to the cabin interior? How did they differ from DL's own early model DC-8s that made you identify it as ex-PA?
62 Yukon880 : If Eagle will allow me, I would say he had probably ID'd the DC-8 as an ex-PAA a/c before he even stepped aboard. As a kid riding on the Widget fleet
63 ImperialEagle : Oh yeah. You explained it very well. Just a glance and you would know it was a JT-4A powered bird.Even if you never looked at it the start sequence w
64 travelavnut : Out of curiosity, why didn't AA like the F100?
65 exFWAOONW : I don't know how accurate this one is: UA and the caravelle. My dad's comment was the cargo bins were so small, they could barely fit the luggage in,
66 ImperialEagle : It's true. Ridiculous!
67 Post contains links and images Viscount724 : They had the Palomar seats with Pan Am, like all DC-8s prior to some of the last -50 series and all -60 series. Looks like Pan Am referred to the DC-
68 Post contains images ImperialEagle : And in 1971 I do not recall any of the Palomar seats left on any of the Company -8's!
69 Post contains links and images Devilfish : A bit off-topic...but that feature reminded me of this PANAM promo video in German..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owCWG4d0KAw Although I can't u
70 Yukon880 : Though it was never an official model designation, Douglas originally marketed DC-8A and DC-8B models, based on the engines installed, either the JT3
71 ImperialEagle : Well the sales departments were quick to jump on the "C" bandwagon because it reminded people of the DC-7C or at least that was what they thought. The
72 BoeingGuy : Unfortunately that's true all over the world. Have you ever seen promotional videos of Southern California from like the 1940? Now it's all ugly stri
73 Post contains links and images Devilfish : PR had the DC-10 (leased & owned) for the longest time until they could spring for the 747..... View Large View MediumPhoto © Carlos A. Morillo
74 KELPkid : Initially, they loved it. Then around the early 2000's, they decided they were paying too much for spare parts. So much so that they set out on their
75 BoeingGuy : I was referring to PSA as in Pacific Southwest Airlines, not Philippine Airlines. However, I do remember that PR had a new DC-10 seized for awhile by
76 Post contains links and images Viscount724 : This DL DC-8-51 photo is dated 1976 and it has the Palomar seats. View Large View MediumPhoto © Ellis M. Chernoff
77 Devilfish : That was clear...I was just citing PR's experience with the DC-10. That's hazy to me too...though it might have had something to do with fuel account
78 Post contains images Yukon880 : I take you at your word sir, especially the last five of them! I too could be wrong, but I really don't think Boeing had anything to do with the sale
79 Post contains images travelavnut : Thanks KELPkid! It's a damn shame that bankcruptcy But good to hear their beef had more to do with spare parts than the aircraft itsefl.
80 Post contains images KELPkid : And every F100 I ever personally spoke to loved every second of flying the oval-windowed wonder
81 ImperialEagle : Right. Boeing (reluctantly) took them on trade for 722's. I believe the last company -51 I was on was in 1977 and we did ATL-MCO-TPA. I don't recall
82 Post contains images KELPkid : Should read F100 pilot...
83 Post contains links and images RogerThat : AA's BAe-146 acquired from OC Air Cal. In a late 1980s speech to employees, AA's then SVP Operations Bob Baker stated the flight costs per hour were s
84 Klaus : On the same route? Or the 146 on its short hops vs. the DC-10 on long haul, which is a completely different metric?
85 RogerThat : He really didn't go into those details. The theme of his speech was future challenges and opportunities; this nugget has stuck in my memory over the
86 srbmod : Not too mention lower than expected range which by the time was rectified, it was too late. Delta's MD-11s were still fairly new when they retired th
87 TrijetsRMissed : Sometimes regretted aircraft orders have less to do with the types' potential and more to do with the fit for for the airline. In short, ordering new
88 TrijetsRMissed : Indeed they were very new, with several frames being late-build PIP modles. IIRC, the last three frames delivered were only 4-6 years old at the time
89 Post contains links srbmod : Eastern had been having financial issues for years and the 757s didn't help at all. They probably would have been better off with the 737-300 or the
90 Polot : Last flight was in 2004, they just didn't sell it to FX until 2007.
91 Post contains links TrijetsRMissed : I agree with the MD-82.... In fact, I said as much in our Carriers Who Flew DC10 & L1011 Huge Mistake? thread a few months ago. IMO, the 733 lack
92 aviatorcraig : 91 posts and nobody has used AA and A300 in the same sentence yet - amazing!
93 TrijetsRMissed : Funny you say that, as I thought about AA and A300 while contemplating my above post. But the A300 made a lot of money for AA. They were perfect for
94 Starlionblue : For years people on this board were saying AA would never order another Airbus and blablabla. I kept thinking "we'll see..." And now...
95 okie : I had always thought the A300 operated out of JFK and not so much MIA because of its longer legs. Did they move them south later in life? Okie
96 Post contains images KELPkid : And it really makes sense to introduce the A320 series, in parrallel with the 737Max, when you're already operating a sizeable fleet of 737-800's? Th
97 Starlionblue : Three things: - It makes sense to not have one supplier who feels they have your full attention. - I'm pretty sure that one supplier would not have b
98 Post contains images TrijetsRMissed : Well, I don't think you can truly say "never" in terms of aircraft orders, but there most definitely was a rift between AA and Airbus following 587.
99 n5014k : This happened a long time ago and not many will remember it, but Lake Central was all but ruined by the Nord 262. LCA had other issues, including a hu
100 Post contains links and images DIJKKIJK : KLM ordered the A310-200, and were very unsatisfied. They lasted only 13 years or so. View Large View MediumPhoto © N94504 Also AC and the A343.
101 Post contains links and images Viscount724 : I don't think KLM's 767-300ERs, which replaced the A310s, lasted that long. View Large View MediumPhoto © Gerhard Vysocan
102 Post contains images Aircellist : KL's A310 were a delight on AMS-CDG, though: no flaps on take-off, and to the sky so quickly!
103 Post contains images prebennorholm : SAS and A300. 40 years ago SAS bought four A300-B2 for use on high traffic European routes. Even before they were delivered, strategy was changed - hi
104 Post contains images RyanairGuru : Another A300: TAA. They only ordered 4, which then spent most of their life in the 1980s leased out, and they went away very quickly after the merger
105 Max Q : Yes, the 735 was taken on specifically for CAL LITE, if you remember that ill fated operation and after that fell apart Continental was stuck with an
106 Post contains images KELPkid : How are you getting at that? The 737 NG series and the A32X series are almost neck and neck as far as operating costs go, with no clear advantage to
107 RyanairGuru : I know that is true for the 320 v 73H (there is practically no difference on the same mission) but I though that the 319 was lighter (for want of a b
108 longhauler : The A340-300 was the best aircraft at the time, and fit very well into AC's fleet. They were also much more efficient than what they replaced. Howeve
109 Post contains links and images srqkef : Icelandair leased a DC-10 in the late 70's. Only a few weeks after it arrived in Keflavik the DC10 grounding took place and the plane sat unused while
110 Post contains images KELPkid : From the respective manufacturer's websites: A319: Maximum Zero Fuel Weight: 57,000 KG B737-700 with winglets: Maximum Zero Fuel Weight: 55,202 KG (A
111 YQBexYHZBGM : Eastern's 747s and DC-10s AA's F100s and BAC 1-11s I'm not sure whether the aircraft contributed to the airline's demise or vice-versa, but the Dornie
112 Post contains images mandala499 : They were not the only B4-220s... Garuda had them too! But if you said they were the only B4-220s with 3-man crew, that's a different story as Garuda
113 Post contains images KELPkid : IIRC, it was described to me as thus: -The A320 series uses an optimal sized fan for the thrust of the engine on the CFM56 (and indeed, the IAEV2500)
114 Post contains images mandala499 : Yeah that explanation works fine for me... Although a correction is called for... I call it the lawnmower efficiency combo... Amputate a good engine
115 YQBexYHZBGM : I don't know if they truly regretted ordering them, but after operating 747s for a number of years, SK realized that "Huge Viking" and its sisters wer
116 CairnterriAIR : I have to disagree with EA and the DC-10. They only bought three of them second hand in order to serve a route from Miami to London. The L-1011's EA h
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Aircraft Airlines Regretted Ordering And Flying
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...
Mobile Phone Apps And Flying posted Thu Oct 29 2009 14:30:58 by GolfOscarDelta
Seaplanes And Flying Boats (What Are The Obstacle) posted Sat Feb 17 2007 02:23:21 by Blackbird
Heights Of Thunderstorms And Flying Over Them posted Sun Apr 30 2006 21:14:04 by JulianUK
Aircraft With "turning And Burning"- Engines. posted Sun Oct 30 2005 22:32:08 by AmericanB763ER
Alcohol And Flying - Where To Draw The Line? posted Wed Nov 12 2003 14:26:09 by Gordonsmall
Attention Deficit Disorder And Flying posted Tue May 20 2003 20:52:54 by JBirdAV8r
Night Taxing And Flying posted Tue Jul 17 2001 04:39:01 by David B.
Aircraft Type Rating And Different Airlines posted Tue Mar 1 2011 11:32:43 by goinv
Which Airlines / Aircraft Have You Been Flying? posted Thu Jun 3 2004 18:45:03 by INNflight
Aircraft Cycles And Flight Hours posted Sun Jul 14 2013 09:34:36 by whiplash

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format