I love the MD-80/90 A/C. The long and lean look is something that is becoming unique as the newer aircraft are pretty much all wing mounted twin engine aircraft.
I have flown the MD-80s AA has numerous times and it feels and sounds great. If you are an enthusiast, fly in the back, if you like quiet, sit in the front. If you like window or aisle seats, no problem.
I dont know this for fact but the MD-90 was a newer MD-80 with greater power, range and capacity. When Boeing tookover, the MD-90 project went down more or less while the MD-95 (717) was being developed and sold for a few years after. Why did this happen? Why didnt Boeing keep the MD-95/MD-90 style ac in production.
Please comment on the capabilities, improvements & downfall of this line.
MD-80/90 lovers please comment
Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
-
- deltal1011man
- Posts: 5378
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
It is too bad. If MD were still around today, I think the MD-90 would have been improved.... winglets or something.
-
- elmothehobo
- Posts: 985
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
Douglas took the easy way out and kept virtually the same wing as the DC-9 (by way of the MD-80 series) and slapped new engines on it. Great concept, but had they improved the wing and not been sold to Boeing (and be replaced by Boeing's own competing product), the MD-90 might have lasted a bit longer, though it wouldn't have been a great success IMO.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
The MD-90 was *ALMOST* a success: Delta's original order called for 120+ airframes. Alaska at one time even had something like 40 of them on order. Had those orders actually been fulfilled, it's highly likely that others (such as American, SAS, etc) would've followed suit.
But when it entered service, the "Mighty Dog" turned out to be a junkyard mutt. It was plagued with all kinds of problems that apparently MDD either refused or was too slow to fix. Alas, Delta 86'd it order. It was a pretty quick death from that point on.
It's fascinating to speculate where the M90 and 717 might be today had MDD tried to offer a quality competitive product as opposed to the half-baked, half-hearted mess that it was. The Northwest and their DC-9 topics ad-nauseum would likely have never transpired; NW would have 150 of them MD-95's...I mean 717's in service today.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MD-Spend a dollar to save a dime
[Edited 2007-10-07 19:05:26]
But when it entered service, the "Mighty Dog" turned out to be a junkyard mutt. It was plagued with all kinds of problems that apparently MDD either refused or was too slow to fix. Alas, Delta 86'd it order. It was a pretty quick death from that point on.
It's fascinating to speculate where the M90 and 717 might be today had MDD tried to offer a quality competitive product as opposed to the half-baked, half-hearted mess that it was. The Northwest and their DC-9 topics ad-nauseum would likely have never transpired; NW would have 150 of them MD-95's...I mean 717's in service today.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MD-Spend a dollar to save a dime
[Edited 2007-10-07 19:05:26]
-
- 1337Delta764
- Posts: 5920
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
Delta initially had a large order for MD-90s. They were supposed to be Delta's 727 replacement. Early mechanical issues and lack of range prevented that from becoming a reality. After McDonnell Douglas was bought out by Boeing, Boeing urged Delta to cancel their remaining MD-90 orders and order the 737-800 instead, and Delta agreed with them. Boeing was more interested in selling the 737-800 instead of the MD-90 as the MD-90 was internal competition offering inferior performance.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
MD90= at least a 90 minute delay due to mechanical issues before take-off.
When I was in CLE, we had a SLC-CLE MD90 each day. It mechanicalled at least 4 times a week and cancelled at least once a week.
What a shitty plane. I can't wait for the MD90 to be jettisoned and recycled immediately...I'll happily pull out my Milwaukee sawzall for that job.
-o-
When I was in CLE, we had a SLC-CLE MD90 each day. It mechanicalled at least 4 times a week and cancelled at least once a week.
What a shitty plane. I can't wait for the MD90 to be jettisoned and recycled immediately...I'll happily pull out my Milwaukee sawzall for that job.
-o-
What you believe is what you see.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
I'll take a M90 anyday over a 737 or A320. Why. It has only one row of middle seats.
When I flew DL a ton, I never had a M90 mechanical. Also very few L10 mechanicals. I did have a few M11 mechanicals. I've had more 738 mechanicals than M90s. Maybe because they have more of them.
I now fly UA a ton, and have had a bunch of A320, and 757 mechanicals.
It is really too bad MD didn't do better with the MD90. If I remember right AS was going to be the launch customer while DL was going to buy a bunch.
Oh well, guess I am going to be stuck in middle seats a lot more.
When I flew DL a ton, I never had a M90 mechanical. Also very few L10 mechanicals. I did have a few M11 mechanicals. I've had more 738 mechanicals than M90s. Maybe because they have more of them.
I now fly UA a ton, and have had a bunch of A320, and 757 mechanicals.
It is really too bad MD didn't do better with the MD90. If I remember right AS was going to be the launch customer while DL was going to buy a bunch.
Oh well, guess I am going to be stuck in middle seats a lot more.
-
- TrijetsRMissed
- Posts: 1983
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
From a passenger's standpoint, the MD-90 is far from a Sh*tty plane. I can say it is the quietest airliner I have flown. The problem with the MD-90 starts with the MD-11's troubles, which prevented McDonnell management from funding Douglas engineers the proper R&D needed. McDonnell was also complacent as the MD-80 generally was a better aircraft family than the 737 classics, they assumed the MD-90 would be a shoe in. But the Boeing leapfrogged MDC and the 737 NG is far more capable.
Just some other additions, the DL order was cancelled before the merger, not after. The cancellation had more to do with the MX nightmares that were occurring, not the range. Higher range variants of the MD-90 were either on the table or in production, DL opted for the standard -30 series. The MX problems were largely in part with the electrical system, which was different from the MD-88.
No, the MD-95 was a different aircraft. Different engines, flightdeck, FBW, etc... The improved versions would have been the MD-90-50 and -55. The -30ER would have been upgraded likely as well.
SAS did order the MD-90 I believe, but I agree with your point. It's been said that the electrical system and autobrakes of the MD-90 were the designers own worst enemy.
Probably not without a new wing.
Just some other additions, the DL order was cancelled before the merger, not after. The cancellation had more to do with the MX nightmares that were occurring, not the range. Higher range variants of the MD-90 were either on the table or in production, DL opted for the standard -30 series. The MX problems were largely in part with the electrical system, which was different from the MD-88.
| Quoting Flight152 (Reply 3): Quoting Flighty (Reply 2): If MD were still around today, I think the MD-90 would have been improved.... winglets or something. It was improved. The MD-95 aka Boeing 717. |
No, the MD-95 was a different aircraft. Different engines, flightdeck, FBW, etc... The improved versions would have been the MD-90-50 and -55. The -30ER would have been upgraded likely as well.
| Quoting Matt D (Reply 5): The MD-90 was *ALMOST* a success: Delta's original order called for 120+ airframes. Alaska at one time even had something like 40 of them on order. Had those orders actually been fulfilled, it's highly likely that others (such as American, SAS, etc) would've followed suit. |
SAS did order the MD-90 I believe, but I agree with your point. It's been said that the electrical system and autobrakes of the MD-90 were the designers own worst enemy.
| Quoting ElmoTheHobo (Reply 4): the MD-90 might have lasted a bit longer, though it wouldn't have been a great success IMO. |
Probably not without a new wing.There's nothing quite like a trijet.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 9): Probably not without a new wing. |
Right but with that, the 5-abreast airliner enjoys better efficiency than the 6-abreast in certain cases. The MD-90 actually could beat the 73G and 738 on efficiency, in theory, due to a smaller diameter fuselage carrying an equal number of people. Also, First Class is less wasteful on a 5-abreast airliner.
It's a shame, a real missed opportunity to dominate the 120-150 pax / transcon class. That fell to the 73G and A319, which are not perfect airliners, although they are very good.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 9): SAS did order the MD-90 I believe, |
They did, and flew them. I was lucky to fly on one of their MD-90's in 2001 before they got rid of them.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
Ding! You are now free to keep supporting Frontier.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Matt D (Reply 5): The MD-90 was *ALMOST* a success: Delta's original order called for 120+ airframes. |
DL's original order was for 31 M90's. With something like 124 on option.
| Quoting Matt D (Reply 5): Alaska at one time even had something like 40 of them on order. |
AS ordered 20 M90's, then the order was reduced to 10, then cancelled.
I dumped at the gybe mark in strong winds when I looked up at a Porter Q400 on finals. Can't stop spotting.
-
- Viscount724
- Posts: 19316
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Jkudall (Reply 11): Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 9): SAS did order the MD-90 I believe, They did, and flew them. I was lucky to fly on one of their MD-90's in 2001 before they got rid of them. |
SK took delivery of 8 MD-90s.
Nobody has mentioned the biggest MD-90 customer of all, Saudi Arabian Airlines. SV took delivery of 29 and I think they still have all of them.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
there is a reason that you can't sell a MD-90.
There is a reason there was examples only a couple years old that went to the scrappers.
Unrelaible, tiny numbers, poor economics for its time.
There is a reason there was examples only a couple years old that went to the scrappers.
Unrelaible, tiny numbers, poor economics for its time.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting KochamLOT (Thread starter): Why didnt Boeing keep the MD-95/MD-90 style ac in production. |
Direct competitor to 737 series.
| Quoting KochamLOT (Thread starter): ...downfall of this line. |
Lack of investment by McDonnell management in Douglas products.
| Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 9): The MX problems were largely in part with the electrical system, which was different from the MD-88. |
Is there another airliner with the VSCF electrical system? Must be a reason.
| Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 9): It's been said that the electrical system and autobrakes of the MD-90 were the designers own worst enemy. |
Autobrakes? Where were the autobrakes in the -90? That was our favorite game to play with the AA checkairmen (all MD80 folks).
| Quoting Flighty (Reply 10): The MD-90 actually could beat the 73G and 738 on efficiency, in theory, due to a smaller diameter fuselage carrying an equal number of people. |
Only on shorter stage lengths (less than about 75 minutes). The 737NG was designed to "sip" fuel and does that quite well. The slightly higher cruise speed of the MD90 can not make up the slightly higher fuel burn rate on longer stages.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
-
- TrijetsRMissed
- Posts: 1983
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 14): Nobody has mentioned the biggest MD-90 customer of all, Saudi Arabian Airlines. SV took delivery of 29 and I think they still have all of them. |
Legend has it that this lost 737 order to the MD-90 is what convinced Boeing that MDC needed to be eliminated from the industry. They had been mulling over the takeover idea for a couple years until then. Boeing was also not very happy about SV choosing the MD-11F over the 744F. In hindsight, this was the last hurrah for MDC.
There's nothing quite like a trijet.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 14): Nobody has mentioned the biggest MD-90 customer of all, Saudi Arabian Airlines. SV took delivery of 29 and I think they still have all of them. |
I loved flying the MD90. It's a beautiful and comfortable aircraft. I loved the idea of embarking at the front or up the rear stairs.
However, I have to pont out that SV never wanted the MD90. Apparently there was some trade off for maintenance of their military aircraft if they took them. They had their arm twisted, shall we say.
and with that..cabin crew, seats for landing please.
-
- Viscount724
- Posts: 19316
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Babybus (Reply 18): However, I have to pont out that SV never wanted the MD90. Apparently there was some trade off for maintenance of their military aircraft if they took them. They had their arm twisted, shall we say. |
Yes, lots of politics involved in that SV deal which also included a few MD-11s.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
How on earth does the thread-starting post quote reply 11 and the second post reply 18?
Anyway, I am fortunate enough to fly on Saudi Arabian Airlines MD-90s once a week or so, if not more. Most of the RUH-DMM flights are MD-90, most of the RUH-YNB/JED-YNB flights and some of the JED-RUH flights, which are routes that I typically travel. Plus I usually take the Abu Dhabi-Riyadh service which is exclusively MD-90.
Interior config is 3-2 and it's a pretty comfortable plane. Last week I got stuck right next to the engine (row 64). It was definitely very loud but you get used to it.
I like the windows in the lavs and the window shades.
Anyway, I am fortunate enough to fly on Saudi Arabian Airlines MD-90s once a week or so, if not more. Most of the RUH-DMM flights are MD-90, most of the RUH-YNB/JED-YNB flights and some of the JED-RUH flights, which are routes that I typically travel. Plus I usually take the Abu Dhabi-Riyadh service which is exclusively MD-90.
Interior config is 3-2 and it's a pretty comfortable plane. Last week I got stuck right next to the engine (row 64). It was definitely very loud but you get used to it.
I like the windows in the lavs and the window shades.
PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Airxliban (Reply 20): How on earth does the thread-starting post quote reply 11 and the second post reply 18? |
Not exactly sure what you mean here, but anyhow here's a pic of the SV MD90. Gorgeous, isn't she?
 Photo © M. Azizul Islam |  Photo © Bernhard Dallner - Salzburg Spotters |
Apparently, MD90's are popular with pilots because an engine out situation doesn't involve a lot of retrimming. That's what a pilot (non-MD90) told me.
and with that..cabin crew, seats for landing please.
-
- TrijetsRMissed
- Posts: 1983
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting AAR90 (Reply 16): Autobrakes? |
Yes, I don't know all the specifics, but PGNCS could elaborate more.
| Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 19): Quoting Babybus (Reply 18): However, I have to pont out that SV never wanted the MD90. Apparently there was some trade off for maintenance of their military aircraft if they took them. They had their arm twisted, shall we say. Yes, lots of politics involved in that SV deal which also included a few MD-11s. |
Clinton made sure SV bought American. However, it was SV's decision to go specifically with the MD-90 & MD-11. The flightdeck commonality mod MDC was willing to do was a key factor. But now these MD-90's have little to no second hand value as a result.
There's nothing quite like a trijet.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 9): No, the MD-95 was a different aircraft. Different engines, flightdeck, FBW, etc... The improved versions would have been the MD-90-50 and -55. The -30ER would have been upgraded likely as well. |
Apparently you know more then Boeing does.
| Quote: Based on the Douglas DC-9 and launched as the McDonnell Douglas MD-95, the 100-seater was renamed the Boeing 717 after McDonnell Douglas and Boeing merged in 1997. |
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Babybus (Reply 21): Apparently, MD90's are popular with pilots because an engine out situation doesn't involve a lot of retrimming. That's what a pilot (non-MD90) told me. |
True, they were popular with the pilots that flew them, but not for the specific reason of "retrimming." All fuselage/tail-mounted engined planes have low retrimming requirements during engine-out ops. The real reason was the HUGE INCREASE in available thrust. 50% more thrust than the MD83 (30,000lbs per V2500 vs ~20,000lbs per JT8-219)! Pilots like thrust.
| Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 22): Yes, I don't know all the specifics, but PGNCS could elaborate more. |
The only "specific" I care about is that all 5 ex-QQ planes had NO autobrakes installed. We also didn't "hold the brakes" (per MD80 fleet procedure) for KSNA takeoffs nor did we lower the nose wheel to the ground prior to use of reverse thrust (again, per MD80 fleet procedure). Used to P.O. the checkairmen.... until we explained the differences between an MD80 and MD90 (the 5 plane MD90 "sub-fleet" came under the MD80 kingdom at AA). At that point the checkairmen would (finally) stop trying to tell us how to use the FMS (AA MD80s had no FMS at that time).
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Babybus (Reply 21): Apparently, MD90's are popular with pilots because an engine out situation doesn't involve a lot of retrimming. That's what a pilot (non-MD90) told me. |
i talked to an AA pilot not too long ago and he said he hated the md-80 series a/c bc in an engine out youd be lucky to be able to keep it straight and level and that the md-80 wasnt a real powerful aircraft making an engine out more of an emergency
-
- DfwRevolution
- Posts: 9307
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Matt D (Reply 5): The MD-90 was *ALMOST* a success: Delta's original order called for 120+ airframes. Alaska at one time even had something like 40 of them on order. Had those orders actually been fulfilled, it's highly likely that others (such as American, SAS, etc) would've followed suit. |
AA was never going to order. They were already disgruntled with MD over the performance short-comings of the MD-11, and had 100 737-800 on order before the MD-90 program was closed to new orders.
| Quoting AAR90 (Reply 16): Is there another airliner with the VSCF electrical system? Must be a reason. |
A380 and 787 will be using them. It was way ahead of its time for the MD-90
| Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 9): No, the MD-95 was a different aircraft. Different engines, flightdeck, FBW, etc... |
The MD-95 was not to feature FBW. Nor does the 717. The flight controls are all heritage from the DC-9 except for the throttles (which are FADEC) and the spoilers (which are analog FBW).
| Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 17): Legend has it that this lost 737 order to the MD-90 is what convinced Boeing that MDC needed to be eliminated from the industry. They had been mulling over the takeover idea for a couple years until then. Boeing was also not very happy about SV choosing the MD-11F over the 744F. In hindsight, this was the last hurrah for MDC. |
That's a very interesting bed time story. But not much more.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
-
- bennett123
- Posts: 10389
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
Going back to the BAC 111/Trident, the tail engine config had deep stall issues.
Did the DC9/MD80/MD90 also have them.
David
Did the DC9/MD80/MD90 also have them.
David
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting KochamLOT (Reply 25): i talked to an AA pilot not too long ago and he said he hated the md-80 series a/c bc in an engine out youd be lucky to be able to keep it straight and level and that the md-80 wasnt a real powerful aircraft making an engine out more of an emergency |
He's talking about engine power (thrust), not a "retrimming" issue. Very little yawing moment when going single-engine in the MD80 or MD90. But yes, the MD80 is "underpowered" when single-engine.
| Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26): A380 and 787 will be using them. It was way ahead of its time for the MD-90 |
Let's just hope their designs are a whole lot better than what MDC put in the MD90. The VSCF concept is nice, but as implemented in the MD90.... it was a disaster.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26): A380 and 787 will be using them. It was way ahead of its time for the MD-90 |
I would imagine the lessons learned with the MD-90 program have been incorporated into the VSCF system on both. The problem with the system on the MD-90 was it was just to sensitive. It would latch on to the slightest fault, and don't bother hooking up gate power to it during the day.
| Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26): The MD-95 was not to feature FBW. Nor does the 717. The flight controls are all heritage from the DC-9 except for the throttles (which are FADEC) and the spoilers (which are analog FBW). |
Lack of cable runs for the spoilers on the 717 made the wheel wells a bit less cluttered. The trim was electrical as well.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
What I don't undertand is, why has SAS kept it's MD 80's versions and not their MD 90's ? Is the MD 80's better ?
Anyway, I have also flown the SAS MD 90 several times. Great aircraft.
I really mis the MD 11 too. such a shame that the production had to end. I love the triple engines...
Anyway, I have also flown the SAS MD 90 several times. Great aircraft.
I really mis the MD 11 too. such a shame that the production had to end. I love the triple engines...
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Mortyman (Reply 30): What I don't undertand is, why has SAS kept it's MD 80's versions and not their MD 90's ? Is the MD 80's better ? |
SAS at one time inquired about acquiring more MD90's, but waited too long to pull the trigger, and Hello took the three they were looking at. That is interesting since SAS later sold three 90's to Hello, but still retains some through Blue1.
Resting on your laurels is a synonym for flirting with disaster
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting LMP737 (Reply 29): The problem with the system on the MD-90 was it was just to sensitive. |
You still have that talent to UNDERSTATE things.
| Quoting Mortyman (Reply 30): What I don't undertand is, why has SAS kept it's MD 80's versions and not their MD 90's |
$$$... specifically maintainence costs.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting AAR90 (Reply 24): All fuselage/tail-mounted engined planes have low retrimming requirements during engine-out ops. |
| Quoting AAR90 (Reply 28): Very little yawing moment when going single-engine in the MD80 or MD90. |
as a current MD-88 pilot who has also flown the -90 and the 757/767, I have to disagree with the above statements. Of all of them I found the 767 to be the easiest to control if you lost an engine at or after V1.
On either the 75/76, or the 88/90, during initial climb out you are using pretty close to full rudder trim.
On the 88/90 (and DC-9) though the engines are mounted closer in to the fuselage, the rudder is smaller. Take a look at the 767 tail/rudder and then take a look at the 88/90 tail/rudder. The 767 has a huge rudder.
While there may be some debate as to which is easier to control in an engine out situation, I certainly would not say there is very little yawing moment on an 80 or 90.
-
- floridaflyboy
- Posts: 1608
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting 1011 (Reply 8): When I flew DL a ton, I never had a M90 mechanical. |
| Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 9): From a passenger's standpoint, the MD-90 is far from a Sh*tty plane. |
I used to fly on the MD-90 very very frequently on BIL-SLC, as well as a number of other routes. I never once had a delayed flight on the MD90 of any sort. Not that I don't believe that it has its issues, but I never experienced them. I also agree about it being an EXCELLENT plane from the passengers' standpoint. Very comfortable aircraft, extremely quiet. Knew a few pilots and F/A's who worked them, and they always had excellent things to say about it.
Good goes around!
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting AAR90 (Reply 32): You still have that talent to UNDERSTATE things. |
I try.
the MD-90 wasn't that bad. Unless of course you had to work on it or you were the captain having to announce to the passengers the flight was cancelled. On the other hand I did make a lot of money on overtime working on the MD-90.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
-
- TrijetsRMissed
- Posts: 1983
- Joined:
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Flight152 (Reply 23): Apparently you know more then Boeing does. Quote: Based on the Douglas DC-9 and launched as the McDonnell Douglas MD-95, the 100-seater was renamed the Boeing 717 after McDonnell Douglas and Boeing merged in 1997. |
Okay, apparently you are confused. The MD-95 was developed to operate alongside the MD-90, not as an advanced replacement. This is not an opinion. Your Boeing quote about the 717 being the latest version of the DC-9 classic is irreverent.
| Quoting AAR90 (Reply 24): The only "specific" I care about is that all 5 ex-QQ planes had NO autobrakes installed. |
No autobrakes? DL MD-90's have autobrakes... Like I said, PGNCS is knowledgeable in the subject. I think he's flown the MD-90 for a while.
| Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26): The MD-95 was not to feature FBW. Nor does the 717. |
The 717 is not full FBW like the A320 or 777, but it is not a cable car DC-9 either. It does feature some FBW controls, unlike the MD-90, the point of the post. This is not debatable.
http://cf.alpa.org/internet/alp/2000/marb717.htm
| Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26): That's a very interesting bed time story. But not much more. |
It factored in the decision with Boeing board members that were on the fence. It was implied in a Seattle Times article in '97, John Newhouse made mention of it in Boeing Verses Airbus. Yes, those sources are wrong and you, an unknown a.netter are right.
There's nothing quite like a trijet.
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Bucky707 (Reply 33): as a current MD-88 pilot who has also flown the -90 and the 757/767, I have to disagree with the above statements. Of all of them I found the 767 to be the easiest to control if you lost an engine at or after V1. On either the 75/76, or the 88/90, during initial climb out you are using pretty close to full rudder trim. |
Wow, I was never close to full rudder trim in ANY airliner I've flown (DC10, MD82/83,90, 757/767, F100 and 738). In that list, the MD90 was VERY EASY to control single-engine... anytime. DC10 was probably hardest as its spool-up time often varied considerably between engines --more so than CF6-80 engined 762/763, but I don't know why. Most current comparison is MD90 vs 738 and the MD90 is considerably easier to fly single-engine than 738, although neither is overly difficult.
| Quoting LMP737 (Reply 35): ...or you were the captain having to announce to the passengers the flight was cancelled. |
Two things happen when you upgrade to left-seat: 1) you become "the old fart" of the crew (especially noticable when your cabin crew is your daughter's age) and; 2) you're the one who must have "creative ways" to break bad news to your customers (everybody else is staying as far away from the PA as possible). My MD90 time was a great "growing" experience in that regard.
| Quoting TrijetsRMissed (Reply 36): No autobrakes? DL MD-90's have autobrakes... Like I said, PGNCS is knowledgeable in the subject. I think he's flown the MD-90 for a while. |
Very interesting. Wondering if DL's MD90s had carbon-carbon brakes ala the ex-QQ birds. At the time MDC said no autobrake system could handle the carbon-carbon brakes "properly." Excellent system, but one had to learn how to "properly" use them for maximum effectiveness.
*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
as a DL Platinum (lifetime, 4M miler) I can say that the MD-90 is a disappointment in the F cabin. Only 12 seats, not 14 (compared to the MD-88) and have you ever tried to place a normal briefcase under the seat in front of you? The IFE simply will not allow it to fit -- for either passenger.
was it supposed to be the "Delta-150" postulated in the late 70's?
was it supposed to be the "Delta-150" postulated in the late 70's?
I love to fly, and it shows!
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting AAR90 (Reply 37):
I was never close to full rudder trim in ANY airliner I've flown (DC10, MD82/83,90, |
Interesting, because our training manual says initial climbout may take almost full rudder trim, which is exactly what I have found in the sim. Have never lost an engine in the airplane, so can't comment on that vs the sim.
| Quoting AAR90 (Reply 37):
Most current comparison is MD90 vs 738 and the MD90 is considerably easier to fly single-engine than 738, |
Yes, I found the 90 easier. Don't know why, it has more thrust than the 88 so in theory should produce more yaw.
[Edited 2007-10-10 05:25:13]
RE: The Fall Of MD-90 Line
| Quoting Nycbjr (Reply 40): What was the Delta-150? |
The "Delta-150" was a specification for a 150 seat aircraft that was floated by Delta to the manufacturers in the late 1970's I believe. They wanted the performance of a 727-200 with 2 engines, 2 man cockpit crew, etc.
Perhaps some of the veteran DL staff who are on A-net will remember it ...
I love to fly, and it shows!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: alggag, Armadillo1, Baidu [Spider], bennett123, CRJ900, curlowl, Dalavia, davidjohnson6, eastafspot, Eimco, HellenicMyth, Jos227, Legs, LH982, Lukas757, pdxav8r, rukundo, Speedbird96, SwissCanuck, tomaheath, trent768, vhtje and 174 guests