Lufthansa
Topic Author
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:43 pm

Guy's check this out

http://www1.airliners.net/open.file?...4&sok=&photo_nr=&prev_id=&next_id=

Okay now i can add up and i know about the value of parting out some a/c but this is just crazy. NWA continue to fly the DC-9 on into oblivion and beyond yet a relatively efficient and new technology A320 has gone to scrap. WTF? WTF? god WTF?
 
kaitak
Posts: 8969
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:47 pm

I know, it's amazing; I saw that photo today and I wondered, what the hell is happening! And then there's the old BA 777s being scrapped as well.

I'll tell you, those DC9s will outlast everything else; they'll probably be sending them out to Marana to collect A330 crews who have just dropped those aircraft off to be cut up!
 
Cadet57
Posts: 7174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 2:02 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:49 pm

Quoting Lufthansa (Thread starter):

Ok calm down. First of all Its an ORIGINAL build aircraft. Meaning it has a ton of cycles. Secondly. This a/c may have been on a lease therefor the LEASING COMPANY decided to scrap it. NW owns all their dc-9's thats why you see them not being scrapped. Finally, its just an aircraft. Calm down...
Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
 
eugdog
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2001 11:32 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:53 pm

I am sure the accountants at NWA know what they are doing - but I am surprised as well
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:54 pm

Yep. We arn't joking when we say "when NW retires (incert modern a/c here or new plane not even built yet) the crew will be ferried back on a DC-9."
I guess simple economics keep the DC-9 running and decide an A320 needs to be scrapped.
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4472
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:57 pm

Quoting Lufthansa (Thread starter):
WTF? WTF? god WTF?

Before you get all ballistic, Northwest did not own that aircraft. They decided to not renew the lease and the owner (not Northwest) decided to junk it. Your dismay is directed at the wrong party. Suggest more research on your part.
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:01 am

If it helps lower the blood pressure a bit, there is a DC-9 series aircraft being broken up in the background.

Accorging to the FAA, this aircraft was manufactured in 1989. Certainly a young aircraft to meet it's end. It's parts must be pretty valuable.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
GSPITNL
Posts: 342
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:10 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:37 am

Wow dude. You really need to calm the freak down. As stated before, the DC-9's are paid for and the A320's are not. The a/c was pretty old on top of it. Take a blood pressure pill and chill it bro
Fly Delta - The Only Way To Fly! Silver Medallion Baby :)
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 6118
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:42 am

With the availability of new aircraft rolling off the line, the 2nd-hand market for an old A320 was very low. As part of the Ch. 11 filing, NW rejected leases on a number of aircraft that they either no longer needed, or to which the leasing company would not agree to a lower rate. NW rejected the lease - a common occurance for all airlines to no longer renew leases at some point.

The leasing company decided that it had gotten 16 years of service out of the aircraft, and decided it was easier/better financially to write off the remaining value of the aircraft and scrap it for parts. In this case the parts would probably bring in more money than the aircraft itself over the next few years.
 
skyhawk62507
Posts: 78
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 12:03 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:52 am

Quoting Eugdog (Reply 3):
I am sure the accountants at NWA know what they are doing - but I am surprised as well

Would these be the same accountants NW had prior to September 14, 2005? I'm not sure I'd be so quick to trust their skills...
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 6118
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:09 am

Don't take your anger out on Northwest.....

Blame the leasing company that decided to scrap the aircraft:
Garybail, G.I.E
Societe Generale Leasing International of France.
 
jorge1812
Posts: 2911
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 9:11 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:30 am

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 10):
Blame the leasing company that decided to scrap the aircraft:

Why blaming one for scrapping an owned plane?

Georg
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:42 am

Quoting Skyhawk62507 (Reply 9):
Would these be the same accountants NW had prior to September 14, 2005?

What exactly does that mean...
 
User avatar
northwestEWR
Posts: 1966
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:45 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:47 am

While we are on the subject of NWA's old aircraft. What is the oldest DC-9 right now ? I think it's N8921E and I think it's going to turn 40 in March.
Northwest Airlines - Now You're Flying Smart
 
freedom747
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 10:31 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:51 am

Retiring an A-330 and then ferrying the crew on a DC-9 coming back from the desert.
J U S T H I L L A R I O U S
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4472
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:10 am

Quoting Skyhawk62507 (Reply 9):
Would these be the same accountants NW had prior to September 14, 2005? I'm not sure I'd be so quick to trust their skills...
Are you suggesting that the accountants at Northwest did not know they were losing money prior to the bankruptcy? What is it you think accountants do? They can't make negative numbers turn positive can they? I'm sure the accountants at Northwest who just announced a October profit are the same ones who were there in Sept 2005.

[Edited 2006-12-02 18:13:27]
 
tootallsd
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:02 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:15 am

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 15):
Are you suggesting that the accountants at Northwest did not know they were losing money prior to the bankruptcy? What is it you think accountants do? They can't make negative numbers turn positive can they?

Accountants are the messengers. The poeple that run companies into the ground are management. Sometimes they get some or a lot of help from market and other external variables.

In my experience, we accountants are usually shouting fire while the rest of the organization is in collective denial about the current state of the business.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11516
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:16 am

As has been explained numerous times on here, the design life of the 320 family is significantly shorter than most Douglas aircraft. The plane has evidently reached the end of its useful life, and as a passenger, I'd take a -9 any day.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
nitrohelper
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 5:32 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:21 am

Is there any value left in DC-9 parts, or once they are wfu, are they truly just scrap? There can't be much resale value to 3rd world airlines. Is there any number of higher value parts that could be used on MD-80s?
I assume (!) that a high cycle A320 airframe has a large amount of parts that could re-used. Also, I read on Anet that the 320 wasn't designed to have the high cycles like a DC-9. Any facts available for design cycles for current airframes?
 
CX747
Posts: 5580
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:06 am

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 17):
As has been explained numerous times on here, the design life of the 320 family is significantly shorter than most Douglas aircraft.

This statement should answer any and all questions about why there is an A320 sitting in the desert and DC-9s still flying.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
flydreamliner
Posts: 1928
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 7:05 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:09 am

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 1):

I'll tell you, those DC9s will outlast everything else; they'll probably be sending them out to Marana to collect A330 crews who have just dropped those aircraft off to be cut up!

They build them to a higher standard in long beach.

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 4):
I guess simple economics keep the DC-9 running and decide an A320 needs to be scrapped.

Pretty sad when keeping the DC-9 running is cheaper than keeping its newer, more modern replacement going.

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 6):
It's parts must be pretty valuable.

There you go.... Old A320 = worth something, old DC-9 = worth nothing.
"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
 
stirling
Posts: 3897
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 2:00 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:18 am

The DC-9 is like a cockroach.

There could be a thermal nuclear meltdown of the entire planet, and there, sitting amidst the rubble of Minneapolis and Detroit....are the shining hulks of the surviving genus Douglas Cockroaches, or known by their bilogical name: Periplanetaamericanametallicusdouglai.
Delete this User
 
User avatar
jetjack74
Posts: 6585
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 6:35 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:21 am

Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 10):
Don't take your anger out on Northwest.....

Blame the leasing company that decided to scrap the aircraft:
Garybail, G.I.E
Societe Generale Leasing International of France.

Believe me, A.netters are the only ones shedding any tears over this. This is one less aircraft Airbus and Boeing will have to compete with to sell new aircraft on the market. There was a Cyprus Airways A320 that was scrapped in Opaloka, FL about 8 months ago, and a BA A320-211 G-BUSG is next on the chopping block. You're going to see alot of 1st generation Airbus' being scrapped in the coming months
Made from jets!
 
scalebuilder
Posts: 605
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 10:32 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:24 am

Quoting Nitrohelper (Reply 18):
Is there any value left in DC-9 parts, or once they are wfu, are they truly just scrap?

There will be limited resale value of parts from any DC-9 due to the ever dwindling number of aircraft being operated today.

Quoting Cadet57 (Reply 2):
Ok calm down. First of all Its an ORIGINAL build aircraft. Meaning it has a ton of cycles. Secondly. This a/c may have been on a lease therefor the LEASING COMPANY decided to scrap it. NW owns all their dc-9's thats why you see them not being scrapped. Finally, its just an aircraft. Calm down...

This response answers it all!  Wink . You're spot on in my opinion.
Go the extra mile......and avoid the traffic!!!
 
captaink
Posts: 3987
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 10:43 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:29 am

Even with all the facts, it is pretty weird to see an A320 in NW colours being srcapped when they fly DC9s. Gotta love though niners..  Big grin
There is something special about planes....
 
Adam727
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 3:56 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:32 am

Douglas knew what they were doing when they built those DC-9's. They are good planes. When a Dc-9 outlast a A320 or a A330 not only that is funny, but it is a good aircraft to have in there fleet. I believe that planes that old and good will out last alot of these modern jets.
 
warren747sp
Posts: 981
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 7:51 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:34 am

If Airbus built a better plane with strong wings perhaps it can last but the A320 is really a throw away plane. Look at all the DC-9, B732 still flying strong.!
W
747SP
 
stirling
Posts: 3897
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 2:00 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:37 am

Back to being serious.

I have noticed this is nothing but a cycle in aviation.
On the cusps of technological transitions, many otherwise flyable aircraft meet their end at the cutter's torch.

I remember seeing 15 year old DC-7s torn up in the 60s, while airlines like Delta and American kept on flying their DC-6s.
Then of course there were the also rans of the jet-age, similar aged Convairs, 880s and 990s being withdrawn with more than half their cycles remaining. One I remember distinctly was a TWA bird, less than 12 years old, sat for four (4) years in Kansas City then was scrapped.
The Boeing 720s, most of those lasted at the most 15-20 years.
If this A320 was built in 1989? That is 17 years.....not a bad run, and for a lot of planes, average really....its the long-lasting DC-10s, 737s, DC-9s, that skew the perception, Doesn't mean the A320 fleet is soon to be gone from the skies. Hardly.

It all boils down to one thing, something my grandfather used to say, "They just don't build 'em like they used to."

An airplane is essentially a long metal tube, with a bunch of expense stuff stuck on it....like engines, avionics, seats, hydraulics, etc. The sum of the parts is greater than the whole. Most car thieves, this is their religion, stealing the vehicle not to turn around and sell it, but to strip the frame clean.
Delete this User
 
Squid
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 4:21 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:45 am

Everyone is so intent on seeing NWA get rid of their DC-9's but I don't think they are too bad when you consider that most airlines would fly an RJ into the same city that NWA sends their 9's into. I think NWA did a good job remodeling the insides and giving their 9's a second chance.
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:56 am

Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 26):
If Airbus built a better plane with strong wings

If they did that, Airbus would need to drive their prices up...
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
OB1504
Posts: 3019
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:02 am

Quoting Warren747sp (Reply 26):
If Airbus built a better plane with strong wings perhaps it can last but the A320 is really a throw away plane.

Although I don't agree with this statement, this benefits Airbus if you think about it. There is already the whole "one less plane to compete with" thing mentioned, but it also means that Northwest or any other airlines scrapping A320s will probably have to replace that capacity... with more A320s.
 
cobra27
Posts: 939
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:57 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:46 am

So why couldn't just extend the lease and operate than plane for more time?
Operating DC-9 is not a cheap business
 
ThePRGuy
Posts: 1833
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:07 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:47 am

Well they sure don't build em like they used to, that Airbus is simply FALLING APART!!

The old diesel 9s are marvels of engineering plus NW own them, so go figure...

Also, dude, chill out a bit  Smile

Cheers
Alex
Heathrow has been described as the only building site to have its own airport.
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 5:03 am

My goodness, this is getting out of control:

Lets look at the facts:

1. Most DC9s are out of service and have become Pepsi cans; most A320s are still in revenue service.

2. The NW DC9s were treated to a very expensive update about 7 years ago to prolong their useful lives.....the airplanes were basically re-maufacturered at that time.

3. The A320(s) in question are no longer owned or operated by NW, they are the property of a leasing company.

4. The decision to break-up the early build A320(s) in question is a financial and accounting decision....sometimes airplanes are worth more in parts than they are as a whole. Also consider that the subject A320s were probably due for some very expensive and very intense maintainance and the leasing company did not want to invest the money. These early build A320s would be hard to place in the second hand market....again, this is a financial decision made by the leasing company, not NW.

5. The NW DC9s are paid for and NW will fly them for the near-term future....most expect that the DC9s will be retired one-by-one as they are do for heavy checks and/or until suitable replacements are in service. (Think Compass).

6. Odd things will happen from time to time for a variety of reasons: several US 733s and 734s have been broken up while 732s continue to fly, A320s are being broken up while MD80s continue to fly, etc......sometimes things dont make sense on face value but, when research is done, the decisions can be explained. Why were the US 733s/734s parted out? They were early build models with mechanical cockpits (similiar to the 732) that generated zero interest in the second hand market (storing a plane indefinitely is also an expensive proposition). The subject A320s and a Cyprus A320 are being broken up as a result of financial analysis.


Airliners are assets that are worth hundreds of millions of dollars.....decisions are carefully made, its easy to jump to conclusions but those conclusions can sometimes be wrong.
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7798
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 5:09 am

Quoting Cadet57 (Reply 2):
Ok calm down.

I agree.. take a chill pill...

First, Being a 'new' production aircraft with few scrapped, it is worth far more in parts then it is as a flying aircraft. There is a B777...which is a much newer aircraft being scrapped as we speak for the same reason.

Second, take a deep breath here Airbus fans.... the A320 is an 'expendable' airframe. To even put it into the same ballpark as a DC-9 is ludicrist. The DC-9 is built like a tank and will take one heck of a beating. The A320... as with most modern aircraft are not built to the same standards.
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
scalebuilder
Posts: 605
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 10:32 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 5:33 am

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 35):
The DC-9 is built like a tank and will take one heck of a beating. The A320... as with most modern aircraft are not built to the same standards.

Can you prove this with fact?

Maybe the A-320 pictured in this thread simply had exceeded the maximum number of cycles and was simply due to be broken up. To say that modern aircraft is not built to the standards of "whatever", is a very misleading statement to the forum.

Please qualify your statement.

Thanks!

Scalebuilder
Go the extra mile......and avoid the traffic!!!
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7798
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 5:40 am

Quoting Scalebuilder (Reply 37):
Please qualify your statement

Older aircraft are much better built.. period. In the 80'-90' when fuel cost savings came into play weights and types of materials used was reduced to save weight and save fuel. In the old days the DC-9 would use say, .032 sheet metal for the skin.... today the A320 might have .025. Stringers and floorbeams on the DC-9 might be .070, today on the A320 they might be .050. Sorry.. that is just the facts of life. Let any 'old' school mechanic here on A.net comment, and they'll say the same thing.

Just look at a car built in the 1960's to a car built in the 1990's... do you really think planes are any different...?? No, they are not.

[Edited 2006-12-02 21:51:50]
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
757ANP
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 9:23 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 5:59 am

Guy's check this out

http://www1.airliners.net/open.file?...4&sok=&photo_nr=&prev_id=&next_id=

Okay now i can add up and i know about the value of parting out some a/c but this is just crazy. NWA continue to fly the DC-9 on into oblivion and beyond yet a relatively efficient and new technology A320 has gone to scrap. WTF? WTF? god WTF?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Was out there a while back. If you're that easily upset by that photo, don't go out there and look across the runway. It's wing tip to wing tip NWA aircraft. I think they're the chief resident out there. The whole place is distressing. 747-400's, 777's, and on and on........
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:22 am




Quoting EMBQA (Reply 39):
Older aircraft are much better built.. period.

I don't think I'd describe them as "better" built. They were built utilizing different capabilities and with different priorities as compared to modern aircraft.

In certain respects, they are indeed better built....but in others, the reverse is true.

Example: The frame and chassis of a 1972 Ford LTD will probably take more abuse and last longer than, say, an Acura TSX.......but that, in and of itself, does not make the LTD a "better" car.



2H4


Intentionally Left Blank
 
iflyswa
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:09 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:29 am

Hmm...NW 777's. Guess those must be pretty low-time/low-cycle, too. They managed to make it to the desert before I even got to see one in service!

iflyswa
Opinions expressed by "iflyswa" are not those of Southwest Airlines Officers, Directors, or Employees.
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:46 am

Quoting Iflyswa (Reply 39):
They managed to make it to the desert before I even got to see one in service!

Before they even entered service no less.

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 38):
They were built utilizing different capabilities and with different priorities as compared to modern aircraft.

Another way to look at it is that older aircraft were built stronger to provide for a larger margin of error on the part of the people doing the designing. They didn't have fancy computers running all sorts of theoretical stress tests, so they added some "cushion".
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
CF188A
Posts: 680
Joined: Sun May 07, 2006 12:27 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:47 am

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 5):
Before you get all ballistic, Northwest did not own that aircraft. They decided to not renew the lease and the owner (not Northwest) decided to junk it. Your dismay is directed at the wrong party. Suggest more research on your part.

Owned or not.... just its one of those things which DO NOT MAKE SENSE when you think of it bluntly! Thats like Air Canada getting rid of their 330s and purchasing more 67s.... Could Northwest just renew the leases? All in all woud that not save more money then to operate a plane which is 40+ years old?
Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die tomorrow~ RIP ... LJFM
 
DCrawley
Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 3:18 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:50 am

I'm sorry for your loss, but it's not the first time an aircraft has been scrapped and definitely not the last.

I've rented a Cherokee and passed through MZJ on my way to TUS. It's a truly somber sight at first, but then reality kicks in and you realize it's the progression of aviation. Those aircraft will be scrapped and parted, with some parts sold off and some parts recycled/melted down to eventually turn into a new airframe. Just because an airplane is physically gone doesn't mean you can't remember it  Wink.
"Weather at our destination is 50 degrees with some broken clouds, but they'll try to have them fixed before we arrive."
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5042
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:07 am

Quoting Iflyswa (Reply 39):
Hmm...NW 777's. Guess those must be pretty low-time/low-cycle, too. They managed to make it to the desert before I even got to see one in service!

iflyswa

Huh? You mean the 777's that NW never had nor ordered?
 
CX747
Posts: 5580
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:08 am

One thing that I do find remarkable is that their is a 747-200 in the background. Yes, unusual things do happen (Like DC-9s soldiering on and A320s retiring.) One would never expect a 747-200 to be retired and parted out at the same time as a A320!
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
Yellowstone
Posts: 2821
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:32 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:38 am

Does anyone know about how much airliners are worth, as scrap value? I would guess that newer models would probably be worth more.
Hydrogen is an odorless, colorless gas which, given enough time, turns into people.
 
iflyswa
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:09 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:57 am

Quoting 757ANP (Reply 37):
Was out there a while back. If you're that easily upset by that photo, don't go out there and look across the runway. It's wing tip to wing tip NWA aircraft. I think they're the chief resident out there. The whole place is distressing. 747-400's, 777's, and on and on...



Quoting Burnsie28 (Reply 43):
Huh? You mean the 777's that NW never had nor ordered?

That's exactly what I meant, Burnsie. Yes, thanks for clarifying the obvious!

iflyswa
Opinions expressed by "iflyswa" are not those of Southwest Airlines Officers, Directors, or Employees.
 
bobnwa
Posts: 4472
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:10 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:00 am

Quoting CF188A (Reply 41):
All in all woud that not save more money then to operate a plane which is 40+ years old?

If they could have saved money by keeping the A320 then they would have. What do you think, they did it just to tick off A.netters?
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 6118
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:26 am

Quoting CF188A (Reply 41):
Owned or not.... just its one of those things which DO NOT MAKE SENSE when you think of it bluntly! Thats like Air Canada getting rid of their 330s and purchasing more 67s.... Could Northwest just renew the leases? All in all woud that not save more money then to operate a plane which is 40+ years old?

Apparently this concept makes a lot of sense to airline planners and from a financial standpoint.

First of all the A320 and the DC-9 serve completely different purposes in Northwest's fleet. The A320 is a 150 seat aircraft that is the most economical on medium haul routes between 800-2500 miles. The DC-9 is a 100-125 seat aircraft that is most economical on short haul routes between 200-800 miles.

All of the DC-9's went through through extensive upgrades/rebuild in the late 90's getting all new wiring, interiors, avionics upgrades, other systems, and not to mention new paint jobs when the new livery was introduced in 2003. The DC-9's were inherited through various mergers in the 1980's and are from an era when airlines purchased and owned their aircraft. Since these aircraft are all between 27-40 years old, they are all fully paid for and are fully depreciated. That also have almost zero resale value and there is limited value for their parts due to the shrinking DC-9 fleet. In fact, NW canabilizes their own DC-9's since they are the world's largest operator of the type. Thus they can obtain parts relatively cheap. If NW wants to park the DC-9, they don't have to continue to make payments on the aircraft. Thus, a DC-9 only have operating costs, and no ownership costs.

This particular A320 on the other hand, was leased and has monthly payments of somewhere around $250,000-$300,000. When NW filed for bankruptcy, they wanted to shed excess capacity and unneeded aircraft. Plus, they wanted to lower lease payments to more favorable terms. NW felt that they were paying too much for this older A320. The leasing company (from France) and NW could not reach a deal, so the leasing company took back the aircraft. Thus the leasing company felt that they would not agree to what NW wanted to pay and felt that could make better money by attempting to re-lease the aircraft or part it out. NW may have wanted to get rid of the aircraft since they knew it was pending heavy maintenance. They felt they had to much capacity of 150 seaters, and that they would not the aircraft. A DC-9 & A320 are generally not substituable. Why would NW fly an A320, which costs significantly more per hour to fly than an DC-9 into markets where they cannot generate sufficient revenue to fill the aircraft profitabily?

So in short, there is plenty rationale behind why this happened. They had to cut costs and capacity. Parking aircraft with expensive lease payments is not smart. They had the ability to get out of the lease - a wise move to part with an older, expensive aircraft. The DC-9's are NW's safety value as NW can store, park, or return aircraft to service as market conditions warrent for the near-term.
 
azjubilee
Posts: 3402
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2000 5:26 am

RE: NWA, This Is Too Much!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 10:28 am

PSU - as usual, well said. Too bad it only falls on deaf ears here.


AZJ