mspguy
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 11:49 pm

Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:20 pm

Sorry I'm new here and tried searching and gave up.  ashamed 

But why Did NW choose Airbus over Boeing?
If it ain't broke, DON'T touch it!!!!
 
CPDC10-30
Posts: 4681
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 4:30 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:35 pm

I can't give you the exact reason, but remember that this decision was made back in the 1980s. The A320 was quite a bit more capable than the Boeing competition at the time, the 737-400 which couldn't be used on long transcons.
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:01 pm

It was the best jet available at the time to start replacing 727s and DC-9s. It's exceptionally economical, pretty reliable, and offers a comfortable cabin. When compared to 737-400 and MD-80, it's really not hard to see, A320 is in a league above those both. I'm pretty sure they'd have bought the A320 even if 73G had been out at the time, given NW's general satisfaction with airbus lately. Airbus losing the A350 against the 787 really surprised me.

Short and simple, the A320/319 did everything they could have ever asked for, nothing else available came close.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
baron95
Posts: 1106
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 10:19 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:43 pm

Because as a new entrant Airbus fought hard for the order and likely gave them a good price and a good support package to break into the US market.

I'm amazed how everyone in this forum forgets the importance of price in these transactions particularly when oil was cheap at $15/bbl in the late 80s.
Killer Fleet: E190, 737-900ER, 777-300ER
 
gunsontheroof
Posts: 3226
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:30 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:51 pm

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 2):
I'm pretty sure they'd have bought the A320 even if 73G had been out at the time, given NW's general satisfaction with airbus lately.

Northwest had no experience with Airbus and plenty of experience with Boeing when they placed that order, it's quite likely that they would have chosen the 737NG if it had been available. Of course, no one can say for sure. I'm not sure how their current satisfaction with Airbus would have anything to do with their choice of the A320 series unless they could look into the future and see how well they'd work out.
 
MaxQ2351
Posts: 321
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 6:41 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:56 pm

Quoting MSPGUY (Thread starter):
But why Did NW choose Airbus over Boeing?

Boeing's arrogance.

Mind you, this is coming from someone is is ultra-radicalist pro-Boeing!! Boeing had NWA on the line for a large order of 737-300's and 737-400's. However, Boeing was so convinced that NWA would not go out on a limb, and order planes from the relatively young company of Airbus, that they refused to negotiate on price. So, NWA ended up ordering the A-320 over the 733 and 734. Just as a quick note, the A-319 order came quite a bit after the original A-320 order.

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 2):
I'm pretty sure they'd have bought the A320 even if 73G had been out at the time, given NW's general satisfaction with airbus lately. Airbus losing the A350 against the 787 really surprised me.

What makes you so sure??? When NWA first got the A-320, they were pretty unhappy with them. At the time, my family and myself were living in San Diego, and my dad was having to commute to MSP/DTW. The 727's did better out of San Diego than the original A-320's did.......as far as weight limits and performance went. The A-320 was a miserable plane at the time, and commuters (and the company) hated it. On a hot day, SAN-DTW flights were being weight limited to maybe 80 people and 100 bags.

Current satisfaction??? I think NWA is still kicking themselves about getting the A-330 over the 772ER. The A-330 is not meant for TransPac's while the 772ER can do a LONG Transpac any day of the week. JFK-NRT for example, whereas the 332 is pretty much relegated to SEA-NRT. Satisfied?!?! Nah. NWA didn't want to make the same mistake twice. When was the last time Boeing under-delivered??? The 747-100.....maybe. Boeing even under-promised with the 772A. NWA may have learned from their mistakes (if I may be so bold to say), and went with the 787 instead of the A-350 rev.XXXVI

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 2):
Short and simple, the A320/319 did everything they could have ever asked for, nothing else available came close.

Again, you shouldn't be so confident in saying things like this. The 727-251/Adv........a 727 powered by the standard (bordering on underpowered) JT8D-15's, had better performance than the original A-320/211's. As for the JT8D-17R powered 727-2M7's acquired through the Republic merger.....those were leagues ahead of the original A-320/211's.

Nothing else came close???? If a 727 does BETTER, than a LOT of other planes would come close sir!!! It wasn't until NWA started receiving the A-320/212's that they started performing better than the planes they were supposed to replace anyway.....727-200 and MD-82.

Again, it is not because the A-319/320 were some stellar performers, it was because Boeing had overconfidence in themselves over winning NWA in a deal for 733's and 734's. Boeing wouldn't budge on the price, so NWA went elsewhere. If Boeing had negotiated, NWA would be flying 733's and 734's today. Boeing has learned from their mistakes, and won the NWA contract for 787's, which could have gone to the A-350 had Boeing made the same mistake twice. NWA is not a loyal Airbus customer, they just bought them because they really had no other option.

-Max
The 777-200LR......2 engines 4 longer haul
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 3:14 pm

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 4):
Northwest had no experience with Airbus and plenty of experience with Boeing when they placed that order, it's quite likely that they would have chosen the 737NG if it had been available. Of course, no one can say for sure. I'm not sure how their current satisfaction with Airbus would have anything to do with their choice of the A320 series unless they could look into the future and see how well they'd work out.

No, you're right, but the service they got from Airbus up front sold them completely. Even with the A320's toothing problems, they stuck with it, and are solidly in the Airbus narrowbody fold.

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
What makes you so sure??? When NWA first got the A-320, they were pretty unhappy with them. At the time, my family and myself were living in San Diego, and my dad was having to commute to MSP/DTW. The 727's did better out of San Diego than the original A-320's did.......as far as weight limits and performance went. The A-320 was a miserable plane at the time, and commuters (and the company) hated it. On a hot day, SAN-DTW flights were being weight limited to maybe 80 people and 100 bags.

Well, that under dirt cheap oil. the 727s were getting older, and burned fuel at an unholy rate. Admitted the -212's made a huge difference, and a miserable plane? the 734s are no better (if not worse) in hot and high.

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
Current satisfaction??? I think NWA is still kicking themselves about getting the A-330 over the 772ER. The A-330 is not meant for TransPac's while the 772ER can do a LONG Transpac any day of the week. JFK-NRT for example, whereas the 332 is pretty much relegated to SEA-NRT. Satisfied?!?! Nah. NWA didn't want to make the same mistake twice. When was the last time Boeing under-delivered??? The 747-100.....maybe. Boeing even under-promised with the 772A. NWA may have learned from their mistakes (if I may be so bold to say), and went with the 787 instead of the A-350 rev.XXXVI

You think they are kicking themselves? Because when they ordered the A333's, they said they looked at 772ER, and said it didn't do what they needed for pacific routes, and they planned only to use it as a DC-10 replacement for translatlantic and hawaii routes, and so the cheaper, lighter A330 made more sense. I would have loved if they bought the 772ER, but for MSP and DTW to HNL and AMS, which is primarily what they do, the A333 is an ideally suited aircraft.

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):

Again, you shouldn't be so confident in saying things like this. The 727-251/Adv........a 727 powered by the standard (bordering on underpowered) JT8D-15's, had better performance than the original A-320/211's. As for the JT8D-17R powered 727-2M7's acquired through the Republic merger.....those were leagues ahead of the original A-320/211's.

Nothing else came close???? If a 727 does BETTER, than a LOT of other planes would come close sir!!! It wasn't until NWA started receiving the A-320/212's that they started performing better than the planes they were supposed to replace anyway.....727-200 and MD-82.

Pff, you could run what, 2 A320's on the same amount of fuel as a 722? Basically. They A320 was never as bad as you'd like to portrey it. At worst, it was roughly comperable to the 737s of the time. Once the -212's came out, it was way ahead, and NWA's gamble on airbus paid off.

My guess is if you asked NWA leadership now if they could go back and buy 737s, they'd say no.

And the buying 787s? They wanted a smaller jet, and in all honesty, Boeing has had their act much more together on 787 than Airbus has on A350 all along, and that is just more confidence inspiring. The 787 is going to do great things for NW, I'm convinced, and is going to make them the premier American airline, or perhaps the premier airline period for transpac crossings.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
trex8
Posts: 4657
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:21 pm

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
Current satisfaction??? I think NWA is still kicking themselves about getting the A-330 over the 772ER. The A-330 is not meant for TransPac's while the 772ER can do a LONG Transpac any day of the week. JFK-NRT for example, whereas the 332 is pretty much relegated to SEA-NRT. Satisfied?!?! Nah. NWA didn't want to make the same mistake twice.

NW chose the A330 specifically because a pratt 777 was too expensive to run for the transatlantic DC10 routes they wanted new aircraft for. for transatlantic routes the A333 was perceived by NW as being perfect, the 777 way too heavy and expensive. when they ordered the A330 they had no intention of using them transpac to asia.
 
Magyarorszag
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:53 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:28 pm

Quoting CPDC10-30 (Reply 1):
but remember that this decision was made back in the 1980s

And back then, NW had also a large order for A340-300s. This was put on hold, when at the beginning of the 1990s the airline was nearly bankrupt. Then, years later they went for the A330. Coclpit similarities must have played a role in that decision back in the '80s.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 6177
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 10:57 pm

The first A320's in the late 1980's were ordered to replace the older 727-100's & 200's, along for domestic expansion following the merger with Republic.

The A319's were ordered in the late 90's to replace the remaining 727-200's, MD-80's, and some of the oldest DC-9's, and again for domestic expansion.


Reasons why NW went with the A320 over a Boeing aircraft:
-Improved performance versus the 733 or 734. The A320 a better fit for NW's hub structure, hence being able to reach the West Coast from DTW & MSP, despite some of the initial challenges.
-Boeing arrogance in the late 80's, believing that they had a lock on North American orders and their traditional customers, hence not willing to bargain.
-Airbus attempting to make inroads in North America, and offer attractive deals. Same reason (along with the one above) as to why AA ordered the A300 during the similar time.

Northwest is neither a dedicated Airbus or Boeing customer. They drive a hard bargain (just like they do with their labor groups.) They evaluate each suitable type and determine what fits their fleet best and which can get the best overall ecomonics and financing.
 
N867BX
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:19 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 11:15 pm

And the number one reason Northwest choose the A320:

The DC9 was no longer in production.
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4485
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 11:17 pm

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
Current satisfaction??? I think NWA is still kicking themselves about getting the A-330 over the 772ER.

Quite the contrary, everything I have have ever heard at NWA, is they are very happy with the 330.
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 11:19 pm

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
Current satisfaction??? I think NWA is still kicking themselves about getting the A-330 over the 772ER. The A-330 is not meant for TransPac's while the 772ER can do a LONG Transpac any day of the week.

Don't know where you pulled that one out of, but NW is very happy with the A330 fleet. The A330 was meant for transatlantic, they didn't go with the 777 because it was too large for many of the transpac flights, too heavy, and too expensive compared. The A332 is a great addition for some of the smaller cities to Asia. Again, the purpose of the A330 wasn't for trans-pacific flights, it was meant for mostly Europe.

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
went with the 787 instead of the A-350 rev.XXXVI

Wrong... NW ordered the 787 because at the time airbus said they couldn't promise any commonality with the A350 and A330 flight decks, and most likely would be a seperate rating. With that, and the fact the A350 at the time would be two yaers behind Boeing's 787, and all other were the same, if not better, NW choose the 787.
 
N231YE
Posts: 2620
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:24 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sat Aug 05, 2006 11:43 pm

Many of you guys are forgetting the basic point: purchase price.

I talked to a NW executive a few years ago (does the last name Phelka or something like that ring a bell?) who told me why NW did what they did:

The 777 was too expensive, so NW went with the A330

The then-in-design A320 was offered cheaper than the 737-400*

*By the way, NW was one of the launch customers for the A320.
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1609
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:20 am

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
I think NWA is still kicking themselves about getting the A-330 over the 772ER. The A-330 is not meant for TransPac's while the 772ER can do a LONG Transpac any day of the week. JFK-NRT for example, whereas the 332 is pretty much relegated to SEA-NRT. Satisfied?!?! Nah.

BS. NW-spec'd 777-200ER (with PW engines) range wasn't enough for their trans-pac operations and it was too heavy for their transatlantic routes. PW-powered A330-200 serves them just fine on their NRT routes from West Coast and allows them to gain ETOPS experience on the longer trans-pac runs before 787s start arriving. And yes, they are VERY satisfied with A330s. They bought them for specific missions and if they were not satisfied with them, they wouldn't place a follow-on order for A330-200s. As far as 787 order goes, at the time A350 was not competitive enough against it and NW got the launch-customer discount pricing along with superior performance and economics. If they were issuing that RFP today, with A350XWB available, I wonder if their choice would have been the same.
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
Dtw757
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:05 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:35 am

Wasn't there an order for 340's before they changed it to 330's?
721,2,732,3,4,5,G,8,9,741,2,3,4,752,3,762,3,4,772,3,788,D93,5,M80,D10,M11,L10,100,AB6,319,20,21,332,3,346,388,146,CR2,7,
 
lhrmaccoll
Posts: 567
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 6:12 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:42 am

Do NW own all of their Airbii?
 
LX23
Posts: 337
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 5:54 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:17 am

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
my dad was having to commute to MSP/DTW

You always know a post is going to be full of crap when the poster starts things off with what "my dad/uncle/aunt's-half-cousin-twice-removed" experienced
 
Glareskin
Posts: 1004
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:35 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:34 am

Quoting LX23 (Reply 17):
You always know a post is going to be full of crap

I think most of this tread is crap. Most of the posters seems to agree that the reasons for NW choosing Airbus must be the price, Boeing arrogance or no comparable aircraft available from Boeing.... BS! At the time NW ordered the Airbus planes the A320 was simply superior to the 737 and the A330 to the 767. As simple as that! And even now, when Boeing is offering the almost perfect 787 the A330 is not making a bad figure and sales figures seems to tell us the A320 is still the better narrowbody over the 737NG.
There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:41 am

Quoting N867BX (Reply 10):
The DC9 was no longer in production.

Well yeah, they don't need to build anymore, since the DC-9's never wear out and last forever, they never need to be replaced.... When the last A320NG is retired, I'll still be flying on DC-9's from MSP-JFK, lol.

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 11):

Quite the contrary, everything I have have ever heard at NWA, is they are very happy with the 330.

They are extremely happy. So happy in fact that they did not delay, defer, or cancel any A330 orders despite their bankruptcy. My guess is that the 777 was bigger, heavier, and more expensive than what they needed for both Europe and Asia. It was heavier and more expensive than A330 for European routes, and it was bigger than what they wanted for Asian expansion. 772ER has range roughly equivalent to 744 according to Boeing.com, even PW powered. NW needs the 744's for inter-asian routes and DTW/MSP - NRT. For things like ORD/JFK/SEA/PDX/SFO/LAX etc. to NRT, they wanted something smaller.

Quoting Lhrmaccoll (Reply 16):
Do NW own all of their Airbii?

They've basically gotten rid of all the A320/A319's they leased at this point as part of bankruptcy, so they own their own Airbuses.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
JetBlueGuy2006
Posts: 1482
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 5:38 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:53 am

[quote=MSPGUY,reply=0]Sorry I'm new here and tried searching and gave up.

Welcome to a.net MSPGUY
Home Airport: Capital Region International Airport (KLAN)
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 6177
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:10 am

Quoting Glareskin (Reply 18):
I think most of this tread is crap. Most of the posters seems to agree that the reasons for NW choosing Airbus must be the price, Boeing arrogance or no comparable aircraft available from Boeing.... BS! At the time NW ordered the Airbus planes the A320 was simply superior to the 737 and the A330 to the 767. As simple as that! And even now, when Boeing is offering the almost perfect 787 the A330 is not making a bad figure and sales figures seems to tell us the A320 is still the better narrowbody over the 737NG.

What?????
Your post makes no sense whatsoever. First you call us all stupid, then you agree with our statement. And then you go and make some off-based comparisons.

You don't get it. The NW A320 decision WAS NOT up again the 737NG. The A320 was a decision again the 737-300 & 737-400, which in that case, the A320 was a far superior aircraft TO SUIT NW's ROUTE REQUIREMENTS. The current A320 vs 737NG is a tie. And NW has never considered the NG's because of their enormous Airbus fleet.

Neither aircraft is better suited or superior in all cases. It completely depends on the route structure of the airline that is obtaining the aircraft and of course economics, which is a combination of operational performance and cost of ownership/leasing.
 
cobra27
Posts: 939
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:57 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:19 am

Quoting N867BX (Reply 10):
And the number one reason Northwest choose the A320:

The DC9 was no longer in production.

Good one. They have scrap 2 A320 and kept DC-9. How awful
 
Ben330NWA
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 11:02 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:21 am

Quoting DTW757 (Reply 15):

yes at one point NWA was supposed to take delivery of 24 A340's but that never materialized...I forgot why. The mockup of the A340 is still in the flight attendant training facilities though
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 6177
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:41 am

NW was in poor financial shape at the time in the early 90's and defered on the order of A340's. When the NW/KLM alliance took shape, NW decided to obtain low-time, good condition, 2nd hand DC-10-30's to allow them to grow their Trans-Atlantic operations.

In reality, it is probably a good thing that NW didn't end up getting those A340's, as they would be odd-balls and not fit into NW's current fleet or route structure. The DC-10's were a much better fit operationally, and obviously now they are well-suited for the A330's.
 
Glareskin
Posts: 1004
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:35 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:01 am

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 21):
First you call us all stupid,

No I didn't.

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 21):
The NW A320 decision WAS NOT up again the 737NG.

I never stated that nor suggested that.

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 21):
the A320 was a far superior aircraft TO SUIT NW's ROUTE REQUIREMENTS

 checkmark 

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 21):
The current A320 vs 737NG is a tie.

I only stated that sales figures indicate that the A320 is slightly better...

Don't get upset. I just hate it when people only mention pricing and politics and other non-arguments for Airbus success. Just accept that they sometimes have the better aircraft on offer.
There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 6177
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:31 am

Quoting Glareskin (Reply 25):
I only stated that sales figures indicate that the A320 is slightly better...

Sales isn't a good measure to indicate which is better, plus the term "better" is very vague and not something you can accurately measure.

By that statement, its saying the Honda Civic is better than a Porche since the Honda has greater sales. Airlines do not take into account sales volume in determining which aircraft to purchase.

Quoting Glareskin (Reply 25):
Don't get upset. I just hate it when people only mention pricing and politics and other non-arguments for Airbus success. Just accept that they sometimes have the better aircraft on offer.

Again, you ignore how people have repeatively said that Airbus had the better performing aircraft in this situation, no one disagrees with you there. You can't ignore the politics and pricing though, as airlines are a business and must make financially prudent decisions. Pricing plays a huge factor, and in some instances pricing may trump performance. You can't ignore how Boeing, at the time, thought that NW would NEVER go with Airbus, same with AA. As they found, arrogance can get you in a lot of trouble, and wouldn't counter the Airbus offer. The reason was a combination of performance and pricing, and can't ignore either one as being a valid reason in the NW A320 decision.
 
thering
Posts: 527
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 1:44 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:52 am

Quoting N867BX (Reply 10):
The DC9 was no longer in production.

The MD-80 was..
146 319 320 321 332 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 742 743 744 762 763 772 773 CRJ ER4 100 F50 F27 M11 D10
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 9:16 am

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 19):
So happy in fact that they did not delay, defer, or cancel any A330 orders despite their bankruptcy.

Right, in fact they accelerated the them and ordered more.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 9:31 am

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
Quoting MSPGUY (Thread starter):
But why Did NW choose Airbus over Boeing?

Boeing's arrogance.

Not particularly. At the time, the 737s could only compete on routes within a 1500-1800nm range band. That is the main reason NW went Airbus

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
Again, you shouldn't be so confident in saying things like this. The 727-251/Adv........a 727 powered by the standard (bordering on underpowered) JT8D-15's, had better performance than the original A-320/211's. As for the JT8D-17R powered 727-2M7's acquired through the Republic merger.....those were leagues ahead of the original A-320/211's.

There is nothing "leagues ahead" about a 727 v. an A320. They burn as much fuel as a 767-200, don't have transcon range, have higher MX costs due to the greater number of engines and have higher crew costs because they have a 3 member cockpit. The only thing a 727 can out do an A320 on is cruising speed, which really makes very little difference at that level

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 14):
NW-spec'd 777-200ER (with PW engines) range wasn't enough for their trans-pac operations

And if you think that, I have a bridge to sell you. Even PW4090 powered 772ERs have transpac range on all but the longest routes. Making NRT, SEL or PEK from DTW would not be a problem.

Quoting Ben330NWA (Reply 23):
yes at one point NWA was supposed to take delivery of 24 A340's but that never materialized...I forgot why

No money

Quoting Thering (Reply 27):
The MD-80 was..

NW actually had small fleet of MD80s but was apparently dissatisfied with their fit in their operation and ditched them when the A320s (which are not significantly larger) came along.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 6177
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 9:59 am

NW held onto the MD-80's until 1999, when they removed the small subfleet from service. It made no sense to operate them in conjunction with the A320. The only reason they stuck around for so long was because NW needed the additional capacity during the 90's boom and do to leasing terms.
 
A388
Posts: 7238
Joined: Mon May 21, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 11:46 am

Didn't or doesn't UA fly ORD-SYD nonstop with their PW-powered 777s? I remember seeing this in a documentary about the 777 on the discovery channel last year.

Wouldn't this make DTW-NRT 'do-able' as well?

A388
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:26 pm

Quoting A388 (Reply 31):
Didn't or doesn't UA fly ORD-SYD nonstop with their PW-powered 777s? I remember seeing this in a documentary about the 777 on the discovery channel last year.

I don't think so. That would be getting into 777-200LR territory there.

Quoting A388 (Reply 31):
Wouldn't this make DTW-NRT 'do-able' as well?

If UA can do JFK-NRT with a Pratt 772, then NW should be able to do DTW-NRT. The reason NW went with the 333 over the 772, IIRC, was that the 772 wasn't going to fit well into both the Atlantic and Pacific operations. The Pacific side needed more premium seats than the Atlantic side (or perhaps the other way around - my memory is kind of shaky on this), and the 777 just wasn't flexible enough. Thus, they decided to get the best plane for the Atlantic side (333), and deal with the Pacific side at a later time (which they seem to have done with the 787, plus their 744s are still quite useful). Replacements for the DC-10s were needed more than replacements for the 747s (which still don't have a true replacement).

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Glareskin
Posts: 1004
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:35 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:23 pm

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 26):
By that statement, its saying the Honda Civic is better than a Porche since the Honda has greater sales.

For daily purposes, yes it is.

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 26):
Again, you ignore how people have repeatively said that Airbus had the better performing aircraft in this situation

No I don't, and I respect al who use real arguments. I've just read to many non-arguments. That's all there is.
There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
 
FI642
Posts: 992
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 9:48 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:17 am

One thing no one here has yet to mention: A320 engine selection.

Northwest went with CFM over the V2500 because of the teething problems
they had had when they took their PW powered 757's.

NW even "borrowed" an A340 from Airbus (abeit in AF livery) to fly around
their system to show employees before the order was killed. There were even models of the A340's for sale in the employee store in MSP!
737MAX, Cool Planes for the Worlds Coolest Airline.
 
brons2
Posts: 2462
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 1:02 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:57 am

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
Again, you shouldn't be so confident in saying things like this. The 727-251/Adv........a 727 powered by the standard (bordering on underpowered) JT8D-15's, had better performance than the original A-320/211's. As for the JT8D-17R powered 727-2M7's acquired through the Republic merger.....those were leagues ahead of the original A-320/211's.

a.net never ceases to amaze me. Can't say I've ever seen a 722 compared to an A320, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

The 722 is a good performer, if you ignore the fuel burn. And the maintenance on 3 engines. And the 3 man cockpit. And the limited range...

It is fast, with a high degree of sweep and sprint capability to mo .86!!!
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
 
MaxQ2351
Posts: 321
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 6:41 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:19 am

Quoting Brons2 (Reply 35):
a.net never ceases to amaze me. Can't say I've ever seen a 722 compared to an A320, but hey, whatever floats your boat.

Or whatever you choose to disillusion yourself with!!! By the way, it was "72S", not "722".

The 727-2M7's were powered by the JT8D-17R, the strongest motor ever put on a 727 other than the -217 and -219 retrofits. When NWA first got the A-320/211, it was so helplessly underpowered that out of SAN, going to DTW, it was weight limited to maybe half capacity, both pax and cargo. The 727-2M7 would easily make it out of SAN, without weight limit, on the same route to DTW.

It is in this way, that the 72S is easily comparable to the 320. Whatever floats my boat?!?! I mean, I guess I did bring up the points about the 3 engines and 3 crew cockpit:

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 5):
a 727 powered by the standard (bordering on underpowered) JT8D-15's, had better performance than the original A-320/211's. As for the JT8D-17R powered 727-2M7's acquired through the Republic merger.....those were leagues ahead of the original A-320/211's.

You see, I WAS talking about crew and engines!!! It was right there!! Wait, I don't see it anymore. I guess I wasn't comparing the 72S and 320 in those ways after all!!! Damn, so much for making good arguments, eh Brons2?!? I mean, I guess it always helps if you randomly make up things to make counter-points against!!!

Quoting Brons2 (Reply 35):
The 722 is a good performer, if you ignore the fuel burn. And the maintenance on 3 engines. And the 3 man cockpit. And the limited range...

Limited range, huh??? I guess other than ATL-SEA, PIT-SAN, LAX-HNL, MIA-LAX, and other such routes, it did have a pretty limited range, didn't it???

The 727 obviously has 3 engines and a 3-crew, but this still does not negate the fact that it was a superior performing aircraft on some routes, when compared head to head with the A-320/211.

-Max
The 777-200LR......2 engines 4 longer haul
 
brons2
Posts: 2462
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 1:02 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:17 am

The 727, any version, would not be economically competitive against the A320-211 in today's fuel price environment. Period! Even back in the late 80s/early 90s, the A320-211 clearly had lower trip costs. If the A320-211 did not have enough lift to make SAN-DTW with a reasonable load (thereby affecting revenue opportunities), they could always use the 752.

Let's not also forget the displaced runway at SAN when it comes to talking about SAN-DTW performance.
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
 
MaxQ2351
Posts: 321
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 6:41 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:31 am

Quoting Brons2 (Reply 37):
Let's not also forget the displaced runway at SAN when it comes to talking about SAN-DTW performance.

So??? Do we always call the shots on account of optimal conditions??? Under perfect conditions, the 320, even the 320-211 will outperform the 72S. However, it is places like SAN that do make the 72S a better performer than the 320.......in these circumstances!!!

Quoting Brons2 (Reply 37):
If the A320-211 did not have enough lift to make SAN-DTW with a reasonable load (thereby affecting revenue opportunities), they could always use the 752.

This is not the point. Could you imagine how airlines would be, if they just accepted failure???

"Well, the A-320/211 really isn't hacking it, so let's just put a 757 on that route!!"

You think that would be the better option???.....as opposed to going back to Airbus and CFM International, and fixing the problem with the -211's (which is what NWA did)??

The A-320 is very superior to the 72S, as you have asserted. This is my whole point......if a 72S is outperforming a model of the A-320, then there is something very wrong with that specific model of A-320. That is NOT right!! That is why NWA was NOT happy with them when they first got them!! They did not want to have to put a 757 on those routes, when they were told the A-320 could easily handle it. If the A-320 was not able to maintain the bar set by the 72S, much less set a higher bar.....what good then is that aircraft??

Since then, NWA has installed mods on the -211's, and the -212's no longer have those issues.

-Max
The 777-200LR......2 engines 4 longer haul
 
JetBlueAUS
Posts: 852
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:15 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:52 am

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 38):
The A-320 is very superior to the 72S, as you have asserted. This is my whole point......if a 72S is outperforming a model of the A-320, then there is something very wrong with that specific model of A-320. That is NOT right!! That is why NWA was NOT happy with them when they first got them!! They did not want to have to put a 757 on those routes, when they were told the A-320 could easily handle it. If the A-320 was not able to maintain the bar set by the 72S, much less set a higher bar.....what good then is that aircraft??

Brons2, MaxQ2351 is right. The A320 was not as stellar as NW first thought when they ordered them. Infact, the A319/320 was supposed to replace the replace the oldest of the 727's. Soon after the MD-80 (Northwest had eight of them) faded away as more Airbus aircraft were being introduced and added to the fleet. Airbus was not quite ordered as a direct replacement for the MD-80, but it just sort of ended up doing that anyways. The first 727's (The Boeing 727-251) were replaced as soon as the Airbuses were being delivered. I wouldn't try and come back saying that the Airbuses were supposed to replace all the Boeing 727's because, as you know, the Advanced 727's stayed until 2003. The Airbus was originally intended to replace the MD-80's and the older 727-251. Airbus isn't suited for all airlines, really.

Quoting Brons2 (Reply 35):
a.net never ceases to amaze me.

Same here, bud! I see a lot of ignorant people on here as well.  

[Edited 2006-08-07 00:55:09]
Not all of us can be heroes, some of us can only stand on the sidewalk and clap as they go by.
 
nitrohelper
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 5:32 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:07 am

I heard from a guy who works in the coffee shop at MSP where the NWA people stop, and give out corporate financial information, that Airbus has a punch card system, if you buy ten 320s at list price you get one free! biggrin 
Northwest got one free after only five buys because they were a launch customer! liar 
Plus free workers from Minnesota for putting the 320 repair shop up there in Duluth,
(known as the Norwegian Riviera)  cool 
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 9:50 am

Quoting Brons2 (Reply 35):
It is fast, with a high degree of sweep and sprint capability to mo .86!!!

Yeah, I miss the old 727's ability to make up for delays once in the air. I suppose the 757 has got some speed left above cruise, but with today's fuel prices, you'd never see them push anything past it's economical cruising speed.

Quoting Brons2 (Reply 37):
The 727, any version, would not be economically competitive against the A320-211 in today's fuel price environment. Period! Even back in the late 80s/early 90s, the A320-211 clearly had lower trip costs. If the A320-211 did not have enough lift to make SAN-DTW with a reasonable load (thereby affecting revenue opportunities), they could always use the 752.

No. The A320's were cheaper than 727s then, and are far far cheaper now to fly. As for take-off performance, you stop and think about the runway in SAN. Also bear in mind that a 734 would have had a 0% chance of making it from SAN-DTW on a hot day with a full load of fuel, passengers, and cargo. Let's compare apples to apples. Saying "My 757 beats your A320, or the 727 has better performance than A320" is like saying "My '78 Ford F250 can tow more weight than your Honda CR-V". The A320 - even the -100s, out performed the 737-400 in terms of performance. The -200s only made it worse. That's why Boeing put so much money and effort into 73G. The A320-100 had restrictions out of SAN in summer to DTW. 737-400 would have restrictions out of SAN in summer to DTW, and however well 727 or 757 or anything else could do on that route is besides the point.

Quoting Brons2 (Reply 37):
Let's not also forget the displaced runway at SAN when it comes to talking about SAN-DTW performance.

Transcons out of SAN, with it's short runway in summer are hard for anything. AA's MD-80s have to limit on SAN-ORD on hot days too.

Quoting Nitrohelper (Reply 40):
I heard from a guy who works in the coffee shop at MSP where the NWA people stop, and give out corporate financial information, that Airbus has a punch card system, if you buy ten 320s at list price you get one free! biggrin
Northwest got one free after only five buys because they were a launch customer! liar
Plus free workers from Minnesota for putting the 320 repair shop up there in Duluth,
(known as the Norwegian Riviera) cool

Hahaha, the norwegian riviera....right. Duluth is gorgeous that one day a year after winter leaves, and before they start road construction. A320s aren't the only things they were fixing up there.

Now, what I heard is that they had 20% coupons for shopping at Airbus.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
nudelhirsch
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:20 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:04 am

With that amazing economics of the 72S, the 737 sure was not needed and was outdated on launch day... Good to know...
Putana da Seatbeltz!
 
MaxQ2351
Posts: 321
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 6:41 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:05 am

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 41):
The A320-100 had restrictions out of SAN in summer to DTW.

NWA has never owned a A-320/100. They have the A-319/113, A-319/114, A-320/211, A-320/212.

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 41):
Transcons out of SAN, with it's short runway in summer are hard for anything.

Granted....however some planes do better than others. All I keep saying is NWA was not happy with the A-320/211's, since the 727-2S7 and 727-2M7 were able to outperform them out of SAN.

-Max
The 777-200LR......2 engines 4 longer haul
 
swissy
Posts: 1481
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:12 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 10:38 am

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 43):
Granted....however some planes do better than others. All I keep saying is NWA was not happy with the A-320/211's, since the 727-2S7 and 727-2M7 were able to outperform them out of SAN.

So you are talking about SAN only?? There are many restriction for aircrafts at any given time with certain airports, NW was looking at whole picture and there is no aircraft in the world which can do it all............ not even the 37NG.......... There are always issues with a new designed aircraft, heck look at our cars... was no biggie for NW.

Cheers,
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Mon Aug 07, 2006 11:01 am

Quoting JetBlueAUS (Reply 39):
Brons2, MaxQ2351 is right. The A320 was not as stellar as NW first thought when they ordered them. Infact, the A319/320 was supposed to replace the replace the oldest of the 727's. Soon after the MD-80 (Northwest had eight of them) faded away as more Airbus aircraft were being introduced and added to the fleet. Airbus was not quite ordered as a direct replacement for the MD-80, but it just sort of ended up doing that anyways. The first 727's (The Boeing 727-251) were replaced as soon as the Airbuses were being delivered. I wouldn't try and come back saying that the Airbuses were supposed to replace all the Boeing 727's because, as you know, the Advanced 727's stayed until 2003. The Airbus was originally intended to replace the MD-80's and the older 727-251. Airbus isn't suited for all airlines, really.

Thanks for the info man! very informative

Quoting JetBlueAUS (Reply 39):
Same here, bud! I see a lot of ignorant people on here as well.

No argument from this corner!!
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
nitrohelper
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 5:32 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:58 am

Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 41):
Duluth is gorgeous that one day a year after winter leaves

When I lived in Eagan the saying was ,"Duluth has two seasons,Winter & 4th of July"
Where do they work on the DC-9s? I heard NW might replace them ?  duck 
Did NWA get extra coupons for buying 330s? Maybe after buying 20 , they will get a free WhaleJet as a sample !
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:20 pm

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 43):
Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 41):
The A320-100 had restrictions out of SAN in summer to DTW.

NWA has never owned a A-320/100. They have the A-319/113, A-319/114, A-320/211, A-320/212.

My mistake, I was thinking the 211's. Sorry.

Quoting MaxQ2351 (Reply 43):
Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 41):
Transcons out of SAN, with it's short runway in summer are hard for anything.

Granted....however some planes do better than others. All I keep saying is NWA was not happy with the A-320/211's, since the 727-2S7 and 727-2M7 were able to outperform them out of SAN.

There is a reason 757s are popular planes to fly into SAN on transcons. My point was, the 737-400 was not any better, and 727-200 wasn't economical. The simple answer for NW was to use 757s for SAN-MSP and SAN-DTW, though the newer A320s and 73G's don't seem to have any trouble.

Quoting Nitrohelper (Reply 46):
Quoting FlyDreamliner (Reply 41):
Duluth is gorgeous that one day a year after winter leaves

When I lived in Eagan the saying was ,"Duluth has two seasons,Winter & 4th of July"
Where do they work on the DC-9s? I heard NW might replace them ? duck
Did NWA get extra coupons for buying 330s? Maybe after buying 20 , they will get a free WhaleJet as a sample !

What would they do with a whalejet. Obviously not park it at MSP, since it woudln't so much fit any of the gates they use on the DC-10s, A330s, and 744s.

I think they were offered the free whalejet after you buy 20 A330s deal, but they had nowhere to put the whalejet, so they passed on it, in exchange for a free upgrade from an A332 to an A333, lol.

Yes folks, airbus marketing, works just like eating at McDonalds.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
mspguy
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 11:49 pm

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:31 pm

thanks everyone I apperciate the info!!!!

Brian
If it ain't broke, DON'T touch it!!!!
 
MSYtristar
Posts: 7543
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2005 12:52 am

RE: Why Did NW Choose The A319 & 320?

Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:32 pm

Quoting Glareskin (Reply 18):
sales figures seems to tell us the A320 is still the better narrowbody over the 737NG.

Better in what way? Because the last time I checked, a 73G can outperform an A32X in terms of cruising altitude, cruising speed, and range. Oh yeah, better overall dispatch reliability too, at least with the airlines that i've worked with.

Don't let sales numbers fool you. It's all about which aircraft is the right fit for each airline.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos