Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 19762
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sat Oct 26, 2019 8:08 pm

I was looking at DL 717s here:
https://av-info.faa.gov/sdrx/Query.aspx

I pulled the registration numbers from here:
https://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Del ... e-b717.htm


I put in dates for 2029 01/01/19 until 10/29/29, most data ending by April (there is a lag).

What I notices us the most used DL 717s were st just over 52,000 FH and 36,000 FC in April.

I also noticed they seemed to be flying about 4FC per day and 6FH per day. One intense example, put in 960AT was being flown at a rate of 2,200FC, but only 1,820 FH per year in 2018 (6FC per day, but only 5 FH per day).

With the 717 certified for 110,000 FC and 150,000 FH, corrosion will be the limit.

I didn't realize DL parked the 717s as much as they do. I expect the 717s to be flown for 20+ years. At that time, used A220, NEOs, or MAXs will be too cheap to ignore.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
WeatherPilot
Posts: 557
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 1:51 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sat Oct 26, 2019 8:12 pm

Isn’t DL redoing the interior of the 717s? If so, then they probably expect to get another 10 years out of them.
 
WN732
Posts: 760
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:49 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sat Oct 26, 2019 8:30 pm

The plan at least for now (from what I've seen Here) is that they will go through refurb and stay at least until 2025+. If fuel stays cheap I'm sure they'll stick around.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sat Oct 26, 2019 8:38 pm

They will fly them until the wings fall off.
 
ilovelamp
Posts: 343
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2017 12:45 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sat Oct 26, 2019 8:40 pm

10-15 years easily. They keep the 88/90s running on life support it seems, no reason to think they won’t do that for the Angry Puppy.


ILL
 
pnut
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:16 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sat Oct 26, 2019 8:41 pm

Did DL take control of some of the overhaul issues regarding the BR700 engines? IIRC, they had an overhaul interval of ~8500 cycles? Something significantly less than the CFMs and V2500s. I'd imagine HA did some type of rectification with cycling the engines of their 717s to achieve max time on aircraft. I wonder if DLs are less prone to stress, as they seem to be used on flights ranging from 45mins->2.5hrs mark?
Do DL have the 18,500lb plug or 20,000lb plug on their BR700s?
"Illegitmi non carborundum"
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 7791
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sat Oct 26, 2019 9:03 pm

I expect economics will kill them before time and cycles do. If not by fuel or maintenance costs, then mainline operating costs. I can't see 18-20 more years in DL service. Maybe some number will still be flying at the end of 2030.
 
User avatar
ElroyJetson
Posts: 816
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 5:04 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sat Oct 26, 2019 9:13 pm

lightsaber wrote:
I was looking at DL 717s here:
https://av-info.faa.gov/sdrx/Query.aspx

I pulled the registration numbers from here:
https://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Del ... e-b717.htm


I put in dates for 2029 01/01/19 until 10/29/29, most data ending by April (there is a lag).

What I notices us the most used DL 717s were st just over 52,000 FH and 36,000 FC in April.

I also noticed they seemed to be flying about 4FC per day and 6FH per day. One intense example, put in 960AT was being flown at a rate of 2,200FC, but only 1,820 FH per year in 2018 (6FC per day, but only 5 FH per day).

With the 717 certified for 110,000 FC and 150,000 FH, corrosion will be the limit.

I didn't realize DL parked the 717s as much as they do. I expect the 717s to be flown for 20+ years. At that time, used A220, NEOs, or MAXs will be too cheap to ignore.

Lightsaber



I hope DL keeps them for many more years. One of my favorite aircraft to fly on.
707 717 727 72S 737 733 737-700 747 757 753 767-300 764 A319 A320 DC-9-10 DC-9-30 DC-9-50, MD-82 MD-88 MD-90 DC-10-10 DC-10-40 F-100
 
ilovelamp
Posts: 343
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2017 12:45 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sat Oct 26, 2019 9:37 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
I expect economics will kill them before time and cycles do. If not by fuel or maintenance costs, then mainline operating costs. I can't see 18-20 more years in DL service. Maybe some number will still be flying at the end of 2030.


Have you been paying attention closely enough to see Delta is investing in more 100 seat aircraft? If mainline operating costs were an issue, they wouldn’t be making such capital-intensive investments.


ILL
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13234
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sat Oct 26, 2019 9:43 pm

WeatherPilot wrote:
Isn’t DL redoing the interior of the 717s? If so, then they probably expect to get another 10 years out of them.

Probably, though circumstances can change.

Heck, they refurbed the 744s very shortly before getting rid of them.... though to be fair: that decision was further hastened by regulatory requirements.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 19762
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sat Oct 26, 2019 9:43 pm

I agree that economics will be the limit. When the A220 and NEO are available cheap used, poo

pnut wrote:
Did DL take control of some of the overhaul issues regarding the BR700 engines? IIRC, they had an overhaul interval of ~8500 cycles? Something significantly less than the CFMs and V2500s. I'd imagine HA did some type of rectification with cycling the engines of their 717s to achieve max time on aircraft. I wonder if DLs are less prone to stress, as they seem to be used on flights ranging from 45mins->2.5hrs mark?
Do DL have the 18,500lb plug or 20,000lb plug on their BR700s?

The BRs are not currently certified for more cycles. 8500, IIRC, was the certied between overhaul cyc all e life. Before DL would take up the type, RR had to promise an extension. It is unlikely a 20,000 cycle life could be achieved on the BR family, but a PiP was in work. I do not know the goal. At a minimum, new coatings on the combustor and turbine should extend to 12,000 cycles alone. A material change (higher temperature nickles) and a new materials for the sump regulator and TCCV might get towards 20,000.

RR always planned improvements, they just didn't sell enough to develop.

DL reduced engine overhaul costs by setting up a shop. The next step is to reduce how often engines visit the shop. I just haven't heard about the PiP status.

Lightsaber

Late edit: I see no way, for the low utilization of the 717s, that DL won't fly them until at least 2030. Only when a quantity of 10+ year old A220, NEO, or MAX are available will the angry puppy meet a demise. Just as AA retired MD-80s early on economics, so will go the 717s, just not for a long time.

I wonder if when Volotea retires their remaining 17, if DL will pick up a fraction?
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
WidebodyPTV
Posts: 264
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2019 9:06 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sun Oct 27, 2019 9:41 am

lightsaber wrote:
I didn't realize DL parked the 717s as much as they do. I expect the 717s to be flown for 20+ years. At that time, used A220, NEOs, or MAXs will be too cheap to ignore.


I'd bet that DL's 717 fleet will begin shrinking in the near future. While most of the 717 are owned by Boeing's leasing arm, some are owned by DL and some are owned by WN. Since the 717 isn't worth much more than scrap, I'd expect that WN will sell them to DL for such, rather than having to take on the task of disposing them itself. Alas, I expect that some of the DL-owned aircraft to be used for parts. But I don't expect the 717 to be around for 20+ years. The cost of maintaining the fleet will make this prohibitive; I believe the only reason the type received a reprieve from DL is because of the large number of aircraft aging in the next 10 years. But if DL remains super profitable, I'd bet the 717 will be gone sooner than later...

LAX772LR wrote:
Heck, they refurbed the 744s very shortly before getting rid of them.... though to be fair: that decision was further hastened by regulatory requirements.


It's unlikely DL would've refurbished the 744 had it known it the type would be retired as soon as it was. The fact that it took a one-time accounting charge (to w/o the capitalized costs) supports this...
 
WA707atMSP
Posts: 1892
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:16 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sun Oct 27, 2019 11:30 am

For many years, once every month or two, there would be a new "when will NW retire their DC-9s" thread on this website.

After DL retired the ex-NW DC-9s, the next thread that appeared every month or two was "When will AA's last MD-80 be retired".

Now that AA's MD-80s are gone, there will probably be a thread every month or two about "when will DL retire their 717s".
 
User avatar
exFWAOONW
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:32 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sun Oct 27, 2019 12:04 pm

It may not be economics. I wonder what happens when all the mechanics who grew up with DC9s retire and that ‘institutional knowledge’ goes away. With the corporate push for faster, cheaper, was there any time set aside to pass on this knowledge before it disappears? Lack of faith in/knowledge of the airframe might cause early retirements.
Is just me, or is flying not as much fun anymore?
 
B757Forever
Posts: 879
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 3:23 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sun Oct 27, 2019 12:17 pm

exFWAOONW wrote:
It may not be economics. I wonder what happens when all the mechanics who grew up with DC9s retire and that ‘institutional knowledge’ goes away. With the corporate push for faster, cheaper, was there any time set aside to pass on this knowledge before it disappears? Lack of faith in/knowledge of the airframe might cause early retirements.


The DC-9 knowledge has been passed down via the MD-88 as most of the systems and structure are similar. DL has tons of AMTs who are capable of maintaining the 717 until it's retirement.
The Rolls Royce Dart. Noise = Shaft Horsepower.
 
User avatar
cathay747
Posts: 1478
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 8:47 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:24 pm

I'm cracking up at the moniker "Angry Puppy"...this thread is the first time I've heard this. LOL

Given the seemingly universal love of the A220, and that DL's 717's and 220's are only 1-seat different in total capacity (109 and 110), it would seem to me that given the better-everything of the 220 that the 717's may not last as long as some are thinking, and certainly not any additional acquisitions if any become avail. I mean, we all know DL's penchant for picking up good 2nd-hand frames at low acquisition costs to reduce capital outlay, but there would also be economies realized by eliminating a fleet type (717) once enough 220's are on property to replace them. The 220 is so much more versatile and I should think much more economical to operate. Bombardier really hit a home run with the CSeries; too bad they couldn't have kept it, but Airbus seems to have a real winner on their hands having bought the program.
Try a Little VC-10derness
 
bennett123
Posts: 9631
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:27 pm

IMO, the key will be spares availability.

Only 156 built with the last in 2006.

How long will engines/undercarriage parts continue be built and serviced?.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 19762
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sun Oct 27, 2019 5:56 pm

bennett123 wrote:
IMO, the key will be spares availability.

Only 156 built with the last in 2006.

How long will engines/undercarriage parts continue be built and serviced?.

There are 4,000+ BR business jet engines helping keep up economies of scale. I worry about overhaul costs due to the frequency of overhauls. DL reduced risk by bringing engine maintenance in house. It will be parts. So far the 717 has ridden on MD-80 demand for everything from window seals to brakes. With G4, AA, and soon DL retiring the type, the economy of scale is gone.

For gear, vendors do rebuilds in minimum batches if 25. All 717 operators has better buy compatible used gear as the fleet isn't large enough for annual batches of rebuilds. As long as DL owns a few dozen spares, they'll do fine. For pretty much everything, the quantity of backup spare that must be held is huge. For an airline that has coasted on MD-80 spares/harvesting for 5+ years, I think DL knows the drill.

The utilization of the 717s is low enough they won't wear out. The parts you noted will make maintenance a bit more expensive. Eventually used newer types will replace. Since that is well over a decade away, yawn.


Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2167
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sun Oct 27, 2019 6:25 pm

I would expect HA to pick up a number for parts, or lower cycle ones that can serve interisland.
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 494
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sun Oct 27, 2019 6:31 pm

WidebodyPTV wrote:

I'd bet that DL's 717 fleet will begin shrinking in the near future. While most of the 717 are owned by Boeing's leasing arm, some are owned by DL and some are owned by WN. Since the 717 isn't worth much more than scrap, I'd expect that WN will sell them to DL for such, rather than having to take on the task of disposing them itself...


Why do you say that the 717 isn’t worth much more than scrap? 717 airplane values have tracked very similar values as similar vintage CRJ-700s. They aren’t near scrap value. MD80s and MD90s are at scrap value.

The only 717s that have been scrapped were from Turkmenistan airlines. Those airplanes had some maintenance issues viewtopic.php?t=1404639
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1426
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Sun Oct 27, 2019 6:33 pm

Ironic, just a few months ago, people on this site were arguing that the 717 would be gone in the next 2-3 years. I argued then that 2027-2030 seems most likely. I still think that time frame seems most likely. The youngest will be over 20 years old by then, and the GTF and LEAP will be well fleshed out by then.

The 717s are capable of flying 20+ years, but then again, the DC8s could still be flying this very day.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5616
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 12:39 am

Two things affect how long an airline keeps a type; how much it costs to fly it and how much it would cost to replace it. And the financial shape of the airline is a big part of the latter. While overall it may cost less to buy new planes if the airline is not strong enough financially to take on the debt required, and have no choice but to keep flying the old ones. We cannot predict what DL’s financial shape will be X number of years from now, and hence cannot predict when they will replace the 717s with A220s. The only safe prediction at this point is that that will be their replacement, and even that is not 100% certain.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
USAirKid
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 5:42 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:05 am

WidebodyPTV wrote:

I'd bet that DL's 717 fleet will begin shrinking in the near future. While most of the 717 are owned by Boeing's leasing arm, some are owned by DL and some are owned by WN. Since the 717 isn't worth much more than scrap, I'd expect that WN will sell them to DL for such, rather than having to take on the task of disposing them itself.


I’ve researched the ownership status of DL’s 717s on previous threads. As I recall, DL essentially can purchase all of the frames. For the frames that were owned by WN: DL purchased them outright. For the frames owned by Boeing capital and leased to WN: WN subleased them to DL. DL also got an option to lease the frames directly from Boeing capital after the WN lease is up. AFAIK, DL has a purchase option to buy the frames at a predetermined price at the end of the leases from Boeing Capital.

Besides a few transactions in the accounting department, WN no longer has anything to do with DL’s 717s
 
WidebodyPTV
Posts: 264
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2019 9:06 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 4:14 am

Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
WidebodyPTV wrote:

I'd bet that DL's 717 fleet will begin shrinking in the near future. While most of the 717 are owned by Boeing's leasing arm, some are owned by DL and some are owned by WN. Since the 717 isn't worth much more than scrap, I'd expect that WN will sell them to DL for such, rather than having to take on the task of disposing them itself...


Why do you say that the 717 isn’t worth much more than scrap? 717 airplane values have tracked very similar values as similar vintage CRJ-700s. They aren’t near scrap value. MD80s and MD90s are at scrap value.

The only 717s that have been scrapped were from Turkmenistan airlines. Those airplanes had some maintenance issues viewtopic.php?t=1404639


Aircraft values are determined by what the market's willing to pay for them. If DL were to have phased out the 717, what do you think would REALISTICALLY happen to the aircraft? Most likely, most of them would be scrapped. Let's not forget that despite the 717 being leased at favorable rates, WN had to pay DL several hundred million dollars to assume the leases after it found no other takers; do not be deceived by the short-term interest Delta, Hawaiian and QantasLink (Cobham) had in chasing the few remaining frames. Volotea is phasing theirs out, and QantasLink is likely to follow soon.

So yes, the 717 isn't worth much more than scrap.

USAirKid wrote:
I’ve researched the ownership status of DL’s 717s on previous threads. As I recall, DL essentially can purchase all of the frames. For the frames that were owned by WN: DL purchased them outright. For the frames owned by Boeing capital and leased to WN: WN subleased them to DL. DL also got an option to lease the frames directly from Boeing capital after the WN lease is up. AFAIK, DL has a purchase option to buy the frames at a predetermined price at the end of the leases from Boeing Capital.

Besides a few transactions in the accounting department, WN no longer has anything to do with DL’s 717s


That's incorrect; please refer to WN's latest annual filing: most of the 717 are subleased from WN with the leasing maturing over the next several years (they're not maturing at once), but some of the aircraft are still owned by WN and leased directly to DL. DL had the option to purchase the 717 at the conclusion of their lease from Boeing Capital at prevailing market rates, but early reports indicate they reached an agreement with Boeing Capital to extend the leases instead. No word on what's been agreed upon with WN. That said, it's possible the reports are inaccurate and DL is purchasing the aircraft outright...
 
User avatar
September11
Posts: 3649
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 4:58 am

Cointrin330 wrote:
They will fly them until the wings fall off.


Last 717 flight will be DL Flight #717 from ATL to DTW on July 17?
Airliners.net of the Future
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 494
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 12:21 pm

WidebodyPTV wrote:

Aircraft values are determined by what the market's willing to pay for them. If DL were to have phased out the 717, what do you think would REALISTICALLY happen to the aircraft? Most likely, most of them would be scrapped. Let's not forget that despite the 717 being leased at favorable rates, WN had to pay DL several hundred million dollars to assume the leases after it found no other takers; do not be deceived by the short-term interest Delta, Hawaiian and QantasLink (Cobham) had in chasing the few remaining frames. Volotea is phasing theirs out, and QantasLink is likely to follow soon.

So yes, the 717 isn't worth much more than scrap.


Where are you getting your information that Qantas Link is likely soon to follow phasing 717s out? They are under contract to fly the 717s for Qantas Link until 2026.
 
bkflyguy
Posts: 230
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 1:30 pm

What is the parts commonality between the 717 and the DC-9/MD-80 family? Can DL use harvested landing gear and other parts from the retired fleet as parts inventory? If so, that may help extend the 717s for quite some time.
 
User avatar
BN727227Ultra
Posts: 693
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 7:15 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:00 pm

ilovelamp wrote:
Angry Puppy.




I like it! :-)
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1707
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:21 pm

bkflyguy wrote:
What is the parts commonality between the 717 and the DC-9/MD-80 family? Can DL use harvested landing gear and other parts from the retired fleet as parts inventory? If so, that may help extend the 717s for quite some time.

I believe a lot of the structure is the same.
Also, as far as landing gear, from memory, the nose gear is the same as the MD-90 and the main gear is the same as the MD-88; or vice-versa. I do not believe the landing gear is unique to the 717.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 7791
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:34 pm

SteelChair wrote:
The 717s are capable of flying 20+ years, but then again, the DC8s could still be flying this very day.


That they may be capable of flying 20 years doesn't mean they'll be flying with Delta.

Sheik Ahmed Zaki Yamani:The Stone Age didn’t end because we ran out of stones.

'It ended because we invented bronze tools, which were more productive.' Thomas Friedman, NYT

717s in ~2032 are going to look awfully inadequate against what may be next-gen narrowbodies from Boeing and Airbus, and used A220-300s. How much effort did AA put into MD-80s when it had MAXs on order? Two generation-outdated aircraft may have a life with cargo carriers with low utilization (or inadequate capital budgets, flying on speed tape and prayers), but not so much in passenger service.
 
User avatar
FlyingJhawk
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:26 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:42 pm

I fly DL's 717 quite a but none that have been refurbished, but the ones I have been on definitely need it. Seats 21A and 21F are is great but for the rest some sort of IFE is a must.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 1426
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:56 pm

MIflyer12 wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
The 717s are capable of flying 20+ years, but then again, the DC8s could still be flying this very day.


That they may be capable of flying 20 years doesn't mean they'll be flying with Delta.

Sheik Ahmed Zaki Yamani:The Stone Age didn’t end because we ran out of stones.

'It ended because we invented bronze tools, which were more productive.' Thomas Friedman, NYT

717s in ~2032 are going to look awfully inadequate against what may be next-gen narrowbodies from Boeing and Airbus, and used A220-300s. How much effort did AA put into MD-80s when it had MAXs on order? Two generation-outdated aircraft may have a life with cargo carriers with low utilization (or inadequate capital budgets, flying on speed tape and prayers), but not so much in passenger service.


I agree, perhaps I didn't make that clear. I can't see them flying much past 2030.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 19762
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 3:29 pm

WidebodyPTV wrote:
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
WidebodyPTV wrote:

I'd bet that DL's 717 fleet will begin shrinking in the near future. While most of the 717 are owned by Boeing's leasing arm, some are owned by DL and some are owned by WN. Since the 717 isn't worth much more than scrap, I'd expect that WN will sell them to DL for such, rather than having to take on the task of disposing them itself...


Why do you say that the 717 isn’t worth much more than scrap? 717 airplane values have tracked very similar values as similar vintage CRJ-700s. They aren’t near scrap value. MD80s and MD90s are at scrap value.

The only 717s that have been scrapped were from Turkmenistan airlines. Those airplanes had some maintenance issues viewtopic.php?t=1404639


Aircraft values are determined by what the market's willing to pay for them. If DL were to have phased out the 717, what do you think would REALISTICALLY happen to the aircraft? Most likely, most of them would be scrapped. Let's not forget that despite the 717 being leased at favorable rates, WN had to pay DL several hundred million dollars to assume the leases after it found no other takers; do not be deceived by the short-term interest Delta, Hawaiian and QantasLink (Cobham) had in chasing the few remaining frames. Volotea is phasing theirs out, and QantasLink is likely to follow soon.

So yes, the 717 isn't worth much more than scrap.

USAirKid wrote:
I’ve researched the ownership status of DL’s 717s on previous threads. As I recall, DL essentially can purchase all of the frames. For the frames that were owned by WN: DL purchased them outright. For the frames owned by Boeing capital and leased to WN: WN subleased them to DL. DL also got an option to lease the frames directly from Boeing capital after the WN lease is up. AFAIK, DL has a purchase option to buy the frames at a predetermined price at the end of the leases from Boeing Capital.

Besides a few transactions in the accounting department, WN no longer has anything to do with DL’s 717s


That's incorrect; please refer to WN's latest annual filing: most of the 717 are subleased from WN with the leasing maturing over the next several years (they're not maturing at once), but some of the aircraft are still owned by WN and leased directly to DL. DL had the option to purchase the 717 at the conclusion of their lease from Boeing Capital at prevailing market rates, but early reports indicate they reached an agreement with Boeing Capital to extend the leases instead. No word on what's been agreed upon with WN. That said, it's possible the reports are inaccurate and DL is purchasing the aircraft outright...

As 717s are relatively cheap, I would expect an arrangement to be arrived at. The 717 scrap value will not drop much as the main value is the parts of the engines usable in business jets, or more for a 717.


I like the above Freedman quote that tools are replaced with more efficient tools

717, per my prior review (perhaps call it analysis) was 5 to 6 hours per day. Those costs are fuel, maintenance, crew, and lease costs/financing costs/opportunity. New aircraft save on maintenance (predictive maintenance, better dispatch reliability) and fuel. Due to new aircraft having a $205k+/month lease payment, this level of utilization, flying only when passengers pay a premium, is not satisfied by new aircraft.

Lease payment from:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1422705

The A220 probably saves about $300/hr in fuel and $250/hr in maintenance (mostly on the engines due to short BR700 overhaul intervals). Or the A220-100 should save about $100k per month. As time progresses, PiPs will favor the A220. A 4 year old A220 will have similar costs. A 7 year old A220-100 enough lower costs to displace 717s for this duty (I use estimated resale value for ownership cost estimates).

If fuel becomes pricier, the timeframe to break even shifts earlier.

Now JetBlue flies high utilization. At 10 hours per day, it saves $165k/month. Lowest value 717 is $5.7 million I estimate if engines are used for business jet parts, a low of $5 million. That is worth $50k/month. So for high utilization, an A220-100 is worth $10k more a month plus something for reliability and range.

From the above link to the lease and vslue thread, a 717 is worth;
B717 - $5.7 - 8.8M, $80-115,000

So if I assume DL pays $100k/month for a 717, an A220-100 only costs about $5k more a month... hmmm... At 7+ hours a day utilization, advantage A220-100. Normally it takes 8+ hours a day utilization to justify buying new. Not so with the A220.

Delta from summer 2020 will fly longer A220 routes:
https://simpleflying.com/delta-airbus-a ... ntinental/

Per this link, DL keeping 717s through 2020:
https://onemileatatime.com/delta-717/


Starting in 2024 or so, DL could replace or augment 717s with A220-100s in low utilization duty. I do not expect replacement. This means the last non-parts 717 purchase or lease will be the Volotea 717s, due to be retired over the next 2 years.

Note on other 717 operators:
Volotea is another low utilization operator. However, they have found leasing 12+ year old A319s a better deal. What utilization does Quantas Link use their 717s? The only high utilization 717 operator is HA. That is due to the aircraft's ability to take cycles, even if there is a high engine overhaul cost.

So I expect DL and HA to operate the type to 2030. Rumors are Quantas Link might replace with either E2-195 or the A220 (probably -300, but I don't know and only speculate). The reality is DL determines when the 717 is retired as they provide the volume.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 7952
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 3:54 pm

As others have said, based on all the above factors to consider, the realistic timeframe for the end of the 717 in DL's fleet is likely 2027-2030.
Some frames may go earlier, particularly as parts donors are needed and/or economic conditions.

717s make the most sense for low utilization / short-haul flying in the near-term.

DL has much higher priority, and higher ROI fleet renewal needs over the next 5-7 years before having to address the 717.
In particular, the 767 which is going to eat-up a significant amount of cap-ex, as well as 757 and older A320s. (not to mention the balance of the MD88/90s).
 
PennPal
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed May 26, 2004 12:35 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 4:16 pm

I hope they do stay active well into the 2020's. The ability to fly on a 717 is one of the reasons Delta is my airline of preference...
 
United857
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:37 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 4:26 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
bkflyguy wrote:
What is the parts commonality between the 717 and the DC-9/MD-80 family? Can DL use harvested landing gear and other parts from the retired fleet as parts inventory? If so, that may help extend the 717s for quite some time.

I believe a lot of the structure is the same.
Also, as far as landing gear, from memory, the nose gear is the same as the MD-90 and the main gear is the same as the MD-88; or vice-versa. I do not believe the landing gear is unique to the 717.

Actually, the 717 has more in common structurally with the DC-9 than the MD-80/90.

When the DC-9 was stretched to the MD-80, a wing root extension and horizontal stabilizer root extension was added, the latter being needed to maintain pitch authority from the significant weight increase. Due to the change to the wing root, a new longer landing gear was fitted. These modifications were kept unchanged for the MD-90. Two small modifications the MD-90 did make was a tip extension on the vertical stabilizer above where it connects to the horizontal stabilizer, and hydraulically powered elevators.

When the 717 was developed (actually originally called the MD-95), due to its size and weight being closer to the DC-9s, it actually used the original DC-9 wing, landing gear, and horizontal stabilizer. Interestingly though, it kept the MD-90 vertical stabilizer.

On the systems side of things, things are a little bit more complicated. While some systems are direct holdovers from the DC-9 and MD-80/90, others were heavily modified after the Boeing merger.
A319 A320 A321 A333 A343 A346 A388 B712 B733 B737 B738 B739 B744 B748 B752 B764 B772 B77L B77W B788 B789 CRJ2 E145 E75S E75L E190 MD88 MD90
AA AC B6 CA CX CZ DL EK FM HU JL KA LH LX MU NH NK TK UA US
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5664
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 4:30 pm

Sorry for an off-topic...

The relatively short overhaul cycle points out the difference between airliner engines and bizjet ones. 8500 cycles is a long time in a Global (excepting the BAKN fleet which accumulate hours more than cycles but lead the fleet) but a very short period in airline ops. The BAKN planes just went over 100,000 hours which at 25,000 per plane on average is surely a corporate design record. Knowing the mission, I doubt they’ve exceeded 5,000 cycles per engine.

GF
 
User avatar
smithbs
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 5:05 pm

United857 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
bkflyguy wrote:
What is the parts commonality between the 717 and the DC-9/MD-80 family? Can DL use harvested landing gear and other parts from the retired fleet as parts inventory? If so, that may help extend the 717s for quite some time.

I believe a lot of the structure is the same.
Also, as far as landing gear, from memory, the nose gear is the same as the MD-90 and the main gear is the same as the MD-88; or vice-versa. I do not believe the landing gear is unique to the 717.

Actually, the 717 has more in common structurally with the DC-9 than the MD-80/90.

When the DC-9 was stretched to the MD-80, a wing root extension and horizontal stabilizer root extension was added, the latter being needed to maintain pitch authority from the significant weight increase. Due to the change to the wing root, a new longer landing gear was fitted. These modifications were kept unchanged for the MD-90. Two small modifications the MD-90 did make was a tip extension on the vertical stabilizer above where it connects to the horizontal stabilizer, and hydraulically powered elevators.

When the 717 was developed (actually originally called the MD-95), due to its size and weight being closer to the DC-9s, it actually used the original DC-9 wing, landing gear, and horizontal stabilizer. Interestingly though, it kept the MD-90 vertical stabilizer.

On the systems side of things, things are a little bit more complicated. While some systems are direct holdovers from the DC-9 and MD-80/90, others were heavily modified after the Boeing merger.


Interesting info - thanks for sharing!
 
JAMBOJET
Posts: 277
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2018 6:23 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 5:56 pm

Where did Delta end up on PTVs on the 717? There was a thread that seemed to be:
“They’ll get PTVs. It’s on the Delta intranet.”
That intranet note then got removed, apparently, and there’s never been an official announcement or anything public about PTVs on the Delta 717, right?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 19762
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 5:56 pm

I did more if a realistic dive. I also found Boeing fuel use missions, I found the numbers previously on a Boeing page, but I cannot now:
https://www.flyradius.com/boeing-717/20 ... onsumption

I found a link noting on longer flights A220 burns 70% of the fuel of a 717. Using that 70% (A220 is optimized for climb), and assuming 1 300nm mission per day, 1 500nm and one 1,000nm, plus maintenance assumptions, I find that that flying, a little less than DL's average at today's spit price of $1.87 gallons:
The 717 saves $310 per flight in low utilization duty ($100k/month lease vs. $205).
In high utilization duty, which I use as 2 of the above flights (300, 500, 1000nm, 2 each per day) or 9.5 hours per day, the 717 costs an extra $274 per flight.

When the difference in monthly lease or monthly ownership cost is $77,100, even limited flying vs it is always cheaper to fly the A220 if more flying per day.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
nycbjr
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:45 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 6:28 pm

lightsaber wrote:
I did more if a realistic dive. I also found Boeing fuel use missions, I found the numbers previously on a Boeing page, but I cannot now:
https://www.flyradius.com/boeing-717/20 ... onsumption

I found a link noting on longer flights A220 burns 70% of the fuel of a 717. Using that 70% (A220 is optimized for climb), and assuming 1 300nm mission per day, 1 500nm and one 1,000nm, plus maintenance assumptions, I find that that flying, a little less than DL's average at today's spit price of $1.87 gallons:
The 717 saves $310 per flight in low utilization duty ($100k/month lease vs. $205).
In high utilization duty, which I use as 2 of the above flights (300, 500, 1000nm, 2 each per day) or 9.5 hours per day, the 717 costs an extra $274 per flight.

When the difference in monthly lease or monthly ownership cost is $77,100, even limited flying vs it is always cheaper to fly the A220 if more flying per day.

Lightsaber


Not sure I follow you here.

So you are saying its cheaper to fly the 717 on low utilization missions but cheaper to fly the 220 on higher utilization??
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 5664
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 7:09 pm

Yes, there’s a crossover between fuel costs and capital costs of the respective lease payments.
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 5701
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:37 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
I would expect HA to pick up a number for parts, or lower cycle ones that can serve interisland.


If HA can find low cycle 717's on the market, with excellent maintenance records & at a fair price, then it makes sense for HA to at least kick the tires on it right?

As of now, I am under the understanding that HA already has about a few extra 717's that provide slack & make it extremely easy for HA, should one go tech, or for scheduling regular maintenance, or back fill routes on heavy holidays to add seats where needed, or for any expansion to stave off aggressive competition, should that happen. I am to understand, it also helps spread out the cycles allowing each member of the 717 fleet to last a bit longer.

That said, I assure you HA does NOT want to seek out, purchase, store, just to bust out in 7 years a new fleet of 717's.

By that time, even if they are owned outright, the costs of reviving it out of the desert, the expense of storing it for 5-7 years for each frame, plus by then they would be considered fuel pigs vs the 220's & E-195 (2) & would always be uneconomical vs WN's 7M8's, A-220's or whatever may be going by then. Just my two cents
707 717 720 727-1/2 737-1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9 747-1/2/3/4 757-2/3 767-2/3/4 777-2/3 DC8 DC9 MD80/2/7/8 D10-1/3/4 M11 L10-1/2/5 A300/310/320
AA AC AQ AS BA BD BN CO CS DL EA EZ HA HG HP KL KN MP MW NK NW OZ PA PS QX RC RH RW SA TG TW UA US VS WA WC WN WP YS 8M
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 19762
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:52 pm

nycbjr wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
I did more if a realistic dive. I also found Boeing fuel use missions, I found the numbers previously on a Boeing page, but I cannot now:
https://www.flyradius.com/boeing-717/20 ... onsumption

I found a link noting on longer flights A220 burns 70% of the fuel of a 717. Using that 70% (A220 is optimized for climb), and assuming 1 300nm mission per day, 1 500nm and one 1,000nm, plus maintenance assumptions, I find that that flying, a little less than DL's average at today's spit price of $1.87 gallons:
The 717 saves $310 per flight in low utilization duty ($100k/month lease vs. $205).
In high utilization duty, which I use as 2 of the above flights (300, 500, 1000nm, 2 each per day) or 9.5 hours per day, the 717 costs an extra $274 per flight.

When the difference in monthly lease or monthly ownership cost is $77,100, even limited flying vs it is always cheaper to fly the A220 if more flying per day.

Lightsaber


Not sure I follow you here.

So you are saying its cheaper to fly the 717 on low utilization missions but cheaper to fly the 220 on higher utilization??

Yes! If a plane is flown only a little, as DL averages on the 717 (spot checking I saw 5 or 6 hours per day). At that level of use, the 717 is cheaper only because of low fixed costs.

Break even is at about 7 hours 15 minutes per day. Fly significantly more, and the A220 is less costly to fly as it saves fuel and maintenance (mostly engine overhaul, but also it benefits from predictive maintenance) that pay for the higher ownership costs.

This is why airlines that surge during prime sales times have old subfleets. A fully owned frame always has ownership costs. For example, selling a flyable 717 is worth a minimum of $5.7 million. The rule of thumb is that new airframes must be flown 8.5 hours per day, on average, to pay back the purchase versus buying used.

DL uses some narrowbody aircraft intensely. Those lines will see A220s, A321NEOs, or other newer aircraft than the 717.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 2366
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 9:24 pm

lightsaber wrote:
There are 4,000+ BR business jet engines helping keep up economies of scale.
Lightsaber


Not only that, but the leading candidate for a B-52 re-engine project happens to use a BR core ... that adds even more possible scale, plus domestic manufacture.
 
ethernal
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 12:09 pm

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 9:54 pm

nycbjr wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
I did more if a realistic dive. I also found Boeing fuel use missions, I found the numbers previously on a Boeing page, but I cannot now:
https://www.flyradius.com/boeing-717/20 ... onsumption

I found a link noting on longer flights A220 burns 70% of the fuel of a 717. Using that 70% (A220 is optimized for climb), and assuming 1 300nm mission per day, 1 500nm and one 1,000nm, plus maintenance assumptions, I find that that flying, a little less than DL's average at today's spit price of $1.87 gallons:
The 717 saves $310 per flight in low utilization duty ($100k/month lease vs. $205).
In high utilization duty, which I use as 2 of the above flights (300, 500, 1000nm, 2 each per day) or 9.5 hours per day, the 717 costs an extra $274 per flight.

When the difference in monthly lease or monthly ownership cost is $77,100, even limited flying vs it is always cheaper to fly the A220 if more flying per day.

Lightsaber


Not sure I follow you here.

So you are saying its cheaper to fly the 717 on low utilization missions but cheaper to fly the 220 on higher utilization??


Low utilization planes are super useful for flexing capacity during peak periods (summer, holidays, etc). Fly the fuel efficient A220s, A321neos (when they come), even 739s at max utilization all year round and then flex capacity to meet demand with less fuel efficient planes. Obviously that's an oversimplification (717s fly even during low periods) but that is the rationale and why it is always (generally) good to have a mix of high utilization planes with high fixed capital costs and low operating costs and a fleet of lower utilization planes with low capital costs but high operating costs.

It is for this reason I see the 717 sticking around for a long time. The A320s will stick around for a long time too - especially given that there is no pilot pool issue (can fly both A320 and A321neos) and wide availability of parts. They'll just slowly be flown less and less - and eventually be retired when they hit up against a heavy check where it just stops making sense even at low utilization.
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8275
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:27 pm

RWA380 wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
I would expect HA to pick up a number for parts, or lower cycle ones that can serve interisland.


If HA can find low cycle 717's on the market, with excellent maintenance records & at a fair price, then it makes sense for HA to at least kick the tires on it right?

As of now, I am under the understanding that HA already has about a few extra 717's that provide slack & make it extremely easy for HA, should one go tech, or for scheduling regular maintenance, or back fill routes on heavy holidays to add seats where needed, or for any expansion to stave off aggressive competition, should that happen. I am to understand, it also helps spread out the cycles allowing each member of the 717 fleet to last a bit longer.

That said, I assure you HA does NOT want to seek out, purchase, store, just to bust out in 7 years a new fleet of 717's.

By that time, even if they are owned outright, the costs of reviving it out of the desert, the expense of storing it for 5-7 years for each frame, plus by then they would be considered fuel pigs vs the 220's & E-195 (2) & would always be uneconomical vs WN's 7M8's, A-220's or whatever may be going by then. Just my two cents


If Hawaiian do decide in 7 years that the 717 is still best suited for the inter-island market then they actually already have a replacement pipeline: Qantas' 717s come off contract in 2026. They are low cycle aircraft as Qantas have used them on relatively long stage lengths, and the former Mexicana and Midwest frames spent several years in storage to boot.

Hawaiian are going to have to work out at what point appreciating maintenance costs for the 717 reach a point that it is more cost effective to use A220s (or whatever) with low utilisation to allow the engines to cool.

Theoretically though they can keep the 717s going through 2040.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
HunterATL
Posts: 64
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 3:15 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:20 pm

Ed Bastian apparently confirmed today that Delta is evaluating adding IFE to the 717 fleet. That could very likely indicate an intent to keep the planes for a significant amount of time.

Rumors have been flying around for months that Delta Air Lines is considering installing seatback screens on its fleet of Boeing 717s.

During the opening ceremonies for the airline’s new concourse at LaGuardia Airport on Tuesday, Delta CEO Ed Bastian said that it might well be true.

“We’re considering it,” Bastian said, when asked if the airline had any such plans.


https://thepointsguy.com/news/delta-ceo ... eing-717s/
 
User avatar
zululima
Posts: 476
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:21 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:17 pm

United857 wrote:
Actually, the 717 has more in common structurally with the DC-9 than the MD-80/90.

When the DC-9 was stretched to the MD-80, a wing root extension and horizontal stabilizer root extension was added, the latter being needed to maintain pitch authority from the significant weight increase. Due to the change to the wing root, a new longer landing gear was fitted. These modifications were kept unchanged for the MD-90. Two small modifications the MD-90 did make was a tip extension on the vertical stabilizer above where it connects to the horizontal stabilizer, and hydraulically powered elevators.

When the 717 was developed (actually originally called the MD-95), due to its size and weight being closer to the DC-9s, it actually used the original DC-9 wing, landing gear, and horizontal stabilizer. Interestingly though, it kept the MD-90 vertical stabilizer.

On the systems side of things, things are a little bit more complicated. While some systems are direct holdovers from the DC-9 and MD-80/90, others were heavily modified after the Boeing merger.


Where does the MD-87 fit into that? I always thought of the 717 as a newer generation -87. They both have that pointy MD-90 tail and a short(er) fuselage. Most DC-9s seemed significantly stubbier.
I didn't get a 'Harumph' outta that guy!
 
highflier92660
Posts: 720
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 2:16 am

Re: Thoughts on DL 717 longetivity

Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:42 pm

FlyingJhawk wrote:
I fly DL's 717 quite a but none that have been refurbished, but the ones I have been on definitely need it. Seats 21A and 21F are is great but for the rest some sort of IFE is a must.


I agree. My last trip aboard a DL 717 was from TPA to JFK sitting in seat 2A. As a Delta fanboy it was great nostalgia to fly aboard the last airliner type manufactured on Lakewood Blvd. in Long Beach. But crawling north along the eastern seaboard at FL-310 and Mach .76, it was loud and boring without some IFE.

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