Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2374
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Sun Dec 21, 2014 6:48 pm

At NW we used to refer to it as "The Trash Ten." We had a couple of -15RC's for a while but the former EA aircraft were what we wanted to see at the gate when you were trying to jumpseat. They had 4 f/a jumpseats instead of the normal three.

It was an easy airplane to work but I don't think anyone was sorry to see them go. But they had given many years of good service to a number of airlines and had earned an honorable retirement.

I regret that the first DC-9-10 was scrapped and not kept by a museum. A lot of airliner enthusiasts worked hard to make this happen but to no avail. Same thing with the first DC-8. It was scrapped still painted in Aero Mexico colors despite its history.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Sun Dec 21, 2014 8:01 pm

Quoting DTWPurserBoy (Reply 50):
It was an easy airplane to work but I don't think anyone was sorry to see them go. But they had given many years of good service to a number of airlines and had earned an honorable retirement.

As I recall, most if not all of the NW DC -9s, including the series -10, had just two lavs - both in back, so that pax in F had to make a pilgrimage to the tail. This is not a big deal, but I've heard that Prince (traveling in F of course) insisted on being escorted to the rear lavs.
 
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Sun Dec 21, 2014 8:05 pm

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 45):
When the engines were at full power they would release the brakes and the DC-9 would shoot down the runway like a rocket and take off at the highest rate climb that was allowed.

Were they just having fun, or was there an operational requirement involved? The -10 did not have leading edge devices, and I suppose at high weights, altitude or limited runway, they would want to firewall it.
 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1386
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Sun Dec 21, 2014 10:03 pm

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 52):

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 45):
When the engines were at full power they would release the brakes and the DC-9 would shoot down the runway like a rocket and take off at the highest rate climb that was allowed.

Were they just having fun, or was there an operational requirement involved? The -10 did not have leading edge devices, and I suppose at high weights, altitude or limited runway, they would want to firewall it.

It more than likely was both. The crew was having fun, but the DC-9-10 did not have any leading edge devices or slats and thus required a higher take off speed and also landing speed. The Fokker 70 and 100 both did not have leading edge devices and also had both a higher take off and landing speed requirement.
At the request of SAS Douglas built the DC-9-20 which had the DC-9-10 fuselage and the DC-9-30 main wing with leading edge devices or slats which allowed lower take off and landing speeds. SAS bought about 20 of them and loved them. Their pilots at SAS loved them and called them the "SPORT" as they were the real hot rods of the DC-9s. A couple are still flying..   

[Edited 2014-12-21 14:29:15]
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6488
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Sun Dec 21, 2014 10:33 pm

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 51):
As I recall, most if not all of the NW DC -9s, including the series -10, had just two lavs - both in back, so that pax in F had to make a pilgrimage to the tail. This is not a big deal, but I've heard that Prince (traveling in F of course) insisted on being escorted to the rear lavs.

Oddly enough, AC's first DC-9-14s had three lavs. One for 12 F in the front, and two for 60Y in the aft!

There were no galley facilities in the back though, so the 60Y passengers had to be served hot meals and bar service through F.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 7054
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Sun Dec 21, 2014 10:42 pm

 
DTWPurserBoy
Posts: 2374
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 10:33 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 2:38 am

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 51):

As I recall, most if not all of the NW DC -9s, including the series -10, had just two lavs - both in back, so that pax in F had to make a pilgrimage to the tail. This is not a big deal, but I've heard that Prince (traveling in F of course) insisted on being escorted to the rear lavs.

When NW redid the cabin interiors on the DC-9 fleet in the early 90's, a third lav was added in the FC compartment on the -30, -40 and -50 aircraft. On the -15RC's there was a lav in front and one in back. But the -10's were already on the way out so they were not given the third lav and the -15RC's were the first to go.
Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7151
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 3:19 am

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 53):
At the request of SAS Douglas built the DC-9-20 which had the DC-9-10 fuselage and the DC-9-30 main wing with leading edge devices or slats which allowed lower take off and landing speeds.

It had the ordinary DC-9-30 wing, which also had 4 feet greater span. In addoition the -20 was equipped with the more powerful JT8D-11 (JT8D-5 or -7 on the DC-9-10).

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 53):
SAS bought about 20 of them and loved them.

They only bought 10 - the only 10 ever produced. All of them delivered in 1968-69.

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 53):
Their pilots at SAS loved them and called them the "SPORT" as they were the real hot rods of the DC-9s. A couple are still flying..

One ex-SAS DC-9-21 is operated as a skydiving jump platform at Perris Valley Airport in Perris, California. With the steps on the ventral stairs removed, it is the only airline transport class jet certified to date by the FAA for skydiving.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
User avatar
MD80
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 3:33 am

Quoting DeltaMD95 (Reply 42):
Later, Wardair had a firm order for 12 MD88s before their demise. Do you recall what routes/missions these were planned for? Surely not long-haul.

Wardair Canada ordered twelve MD-88s as well as eight Fokker 100s to develop their short haul network. The Airbus A310s were generally simply too big for the routes and slots allocated and loss-making. The MD-88s and Fokker 100 would have enabled Wardair to adjust their network with more appropriate aircraft.



Quoting DeltaMD95 (Reply 42):
Interesting bit of history, thanks for sharing! I didn't know that CO was the largest customer of the DC9-10. Were CO generally pleased with their DC9 and MD80 fleets?

I think so (due to the long time of operating these types). There was also a short saga with the "DC-9 Diplomat" at Continental Airlines but sadly I have only very little information:

CO operated at least one DC-9-10 with a 6-abreast seating. This arrangement was possible due to the ability of the rows to be converted from 5-abreast to 6-abreast. Only one flight was conducted and passengers got their money back due to too many complaints. Maybe the seats were comparable to the ones found in CRJ100/200s? Seating capacity was around 100 seats but I would be very pleased to get more information including a seat map with a DC-9 with 6-abreast seating!

It is probably not known whether the FAA tested the evacuation of such a DC-9 but it could also be the case that this was a DC-9-10 with four overwing exits.

Nevertheless, IMO the DC-9/MD-80 and DC-10 allowed Continental Airlines to do business - even during very harsh times with financial difficulties in the 1980s and 1990s.

Quoting factsonly (Reply 34):
Sorry forgot to mention that Finnair also operated the DC9-14 during the 1970s and 80s:

The agreement to take eight used DC-9-10s was a fundamental decision which shaped Finnair for decades. Finnair were very pleased with their original DC-9-10s and later ordered the DC-9-50. The airline also purchased used DC-9-40s and selected the MD-82 to replace their last three remaining Caravelle-aircraft. Finnair also became co-launch customers for the MD-83 and MD-87. The last DC-9-10-passenger flight was on the last day of January 1986.

Another very interesting European DC-9-10-operator was British Midland. This airline was very pleased with their used DC-9s (including the DC-9-32 from 1984 onwards) and the then CEO was quoted in 1999:

"Bishop says it would have retained (the DC-9) were it not for noise regulations. Bishop says the 717 would be even
more attractive if Boeing was to confirm plans for the proposed 80-seat, short fuselage 717-100." Quote from FLIGHT INTERNATIONAL 21 - 27 April 1999
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com
 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1386
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 3:34 am

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 57):

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 53):
At the request of SAS Douglas built the DC-9-20 which had the DC-9-10 fuselage and the DC-9-30 main wing with leading edge devices or slats which allowed lower take off and landing speeds.

It had the ordinary DC-9-30 wing, which also had 4 feet greater span. In addoition the -20 was equipped with the more powerful JT8D-11 (JT8D-5 or -7 on the DC-9-10).

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 53):
SAS bought about 20 of them and loved them.

They only bought 10 - the only 10 ever produced. All of them delivered in 1968-69.

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 53):
Their pilots at SAS loved them and called them the "SPORT" as they were the real hot rods of the DC-9s. A couple are still flying..

One ex-SAS DC-9-21 is operated as a skydiving jump platform at Perris Valley Airport in Perris, California. With the steps on the ventral stairs removed, it is the only airline transport class jet certified to date by the FAA for skydiving.

You are correct. I will eat crow. Thanks.   
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
jetjeanes
Posts: 911
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 6:42 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:19 am

texas international had some, not sure where they were gobbled up at
i can see for 80 miles
 
rugger
Posts: 394
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2014 9:03 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:33 am

Quoting jetjeanes (Reply 60):
texas international had some, not sure where they were gobbled up at

I believe they migrated over to Continental during the TI/CO merger.

North Central had some early on, but when the DC-9-30-2 series started being delivered the returned most of the -14 models. NC bought 1 DC-9-32 from CO in the 70's.
 
User avatar
Scooter01
Posts: 1187
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:06 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 8:03 am

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 53):
Their pilots at SAS loved them and called them the "SPORT" as they were the real hot rods of the DC-9s.
True!




Scooter01
There is always a good reason to watch airplanes
 
User avatar
knope2001
Posts: 3075
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 12:59 pm

Quoting Rugger (Reply 61):
North Central had some early on, but when the DC-9-30-2 series started being delivered the returned most of the -14 models. NC bought 1 DC-9-32 from CO in the 70's.

Actually NC never operated anything in the DC9-10 series. Their initial order (made in mid-1965) was -10 but the order was upgraded to -30 in mid-1966. All of North Central's deliveries were 30's and 50's. When NC merged in Southern and then Hughes Airwest to form Republic then 10-series joined the new fleet.

Quoting MD80 (Reply 58):
CO operated at least one DC-9-10 with a 6-abreast seating. This arrangement was possible due to the ability of the rows to be converted from 5-abreast to 6-abreast. Only one flight was conducted and passengers got their money back due to too many complaints. Maybe the seats were comparable to the ones found in CRJ100/200s? Seating capacity was around 100 seats but I would be very pleased to get more information including a seat map with a DC-9 with 6-abreast seating!

It is probably not known whether the FAA tested the evacuation of such a DC-9 but it could also be the case that this was a DC-9-10 with four overwing exits.

Wow...gotta say that seems hard to not be a legend. CRJ-size seats would not be close making that work. CRJ seat widths are not much narrower than what's used in M80 today, and to fit a 6th one in would mean they would have been a few inches narrower than anything existing today. Even more problematic considering the technology, engineering and chutzpah which goes into today's ultraslim design didn't exist. Continental would have been absolutely raked over the coals for operating a revenue flight with such a seating configuration, and the idea than an extra pair of emergency exits were thrown in seems like a complete nonstarter. Maybe this is an idea that Continental seriously investigated and even created a mock-up? I just can't imagine that this got so far as a single passenger flight.
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 3:01 pm

Quoting MD80 (Reply 58):
CO operated at least one DC-9-10 with a 6-abreast seating. This arrangement was possible due to the ability of the rows to be converted from 5-abreast to 6-abreast. Only one flight was conducted and passengers got their money back due to too many complaints. Maybe the seats were comparable to the ones found in CRJ100/200s? Seating capacity was around 100 seats but I would be very pleased to get more information including a seat map with a DC-9 with 6-abreast seating!


I actually saw a Douglas sales brochure showing 6-abreast in a DC-9, so it is something they were promoting early on. For all I know, it was a pic of this CO bird, but who knows. Until right now, I had no idea anyone had actually implemented it. Just call it the Bob Six-Across! Continental's Viscounts were at some stage fitted with some very basic looking economy seats, so maybe the DC-9 experiment was based on that.

It must have been tight. PSA tried 6-across on the BAE 146, but got so much flak from customers that they reverted to five-across. At five across, the 146 basically has Boeing 767 seats (not bad), the pair of two is 42" wide. At five across, the pair of two in a 2-3 DC-9 is 41" , so slightly less even.

I am pleased that Spirit does not fly MD-80s, as someone might read about the 6-across DC9 experiment, and try to implement it. Oh well, there is always Allegiant.  Wow!
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1332
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 3:32 pm

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 64):
It must have been tight. PSA tried 6-across on the BAE 146,

My one and only 146 ride was on AirUK with 6-across seating. It sucked.

I rode the van in with a NWA -9 crew one morning. The FO and I were talking about the -10s and how much fun they were to fly compared to the -30/40/50's. It always looked like a fun ride.
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 4:37 pm

Quoting longhauler (Reply 54):
Oddly enough, AC's first DC-9-14s had three lavs. One for 12 F in the front, and two for 60Y in the aft!

There were no galley facilities in the back though, so the 60Y passengers had to be served hot meals and bar service through F.

That was a nice gesture on the part of fleet planning! Somewhere I have an AC brochure from the start of DC9 service, but can't recall if a seat chart was included (this was a real AC brochure and not the Douglas pamphlet which they reprinted for each airline). Delta's -30s featured one lave up front and one in the rear, with a galley unit installed were the second rear lav would be. It helped with the meals, but cut economy down to one lav.

Offhand, do you know if the AC -30s were configured for both F and Y? By the late 70s they were all Y, but featured very retro 60s turquoise seat covers and of course gold laminated maple leafs on the bulkhead.

Braniff operated its 111s, with 24F and ~34Y and included a lav up front right behind the entrance door. Allegheny/USAir acquired a bunch of them in 1972 and flew them alongside the Mohawk 111s, which only had rear lavs. Both versions went to all economy under AL.

There you have it, a history of forward lavs in early North American twinjets.
 
User avatar
knope2001
Posts: 3075
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 4:42 pm

The BAe 146 was designed to be 6-across and all the United Express birds flew 3x3 (ACA, AirWis, Aspen, WestAir) except for the 146-300 birds which Air Wisconsin operated with 2x3 at 100 seats.

I'd love to see info on the 3x3 DC9 series to get an idea how awful it would have been. Seems out of character a bit to have such a thing proposed in the mid 60s when average loads were on the 40s and 50s but seemingly not on the table these days when airlines all but put extra seats on the wings. The 9s are gone in the US but M80s are not considered obsolete.
 
planespotting
Posts: 3026
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 5:20 pm

Quoting knope2001 (Reply 67):
The BAe 146 was designed to be 6-across and all the United Express birds flew 3x3 (ACA, AirWis, Aspen, WestAir) except for the 146-300 birds which Air Wisconsin operated with 2x3 at 100 seats.

Yeah, all of my Air Whisky Bae-146 flights that I can recall were 3x3.
Do you like movies about gladiators?
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 6:01 pm

OK here are some numbers, with allowances made for exact interpretation of widths, though these appear to be internal:

BAE 146 Cabin width = 134 inches
Six abreast advertised with 16 inch aisle. Leaves 118 inches for two banks of 3 seats, therefore 59" triples. Boeings have 60" triples and 17" aisles, so yes the BAE 146 was tight at 6-across.

DC-9 cabin width = 10 ft 3.7 inches = 123.7 inches,
Six abreast at 10 inches smaller than the 146. Then 54" triples with a 16-inch aisle.

Suitable only for children and munchkins!   
 
xdlx
Posts: 975
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 7:55 pm

Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 9):

No Slats.... Rocket ship!
 
User avatar
MD80
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Mon Dec 22, 2014 9:51 pm

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 66):
Offhand, do you know if the AC -30s were configured for both F and Y?

I have seat maps for the Air Canada DC-9-32 with F12Y80 and F16Y75.

Quoting knope2001 (Reply 67):


The BAe 146 was designed to be 6-across

That's correct. Lufthansa later changed from 5-abreast to 6-abreast and one official told that the seating-comfort would be similar to the CRJ100s operated at that time.

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 64):
I actually saw a Douglas sales brochure showing 6-abreast in a DC-9, so it is something they were promoting early on.

Good to know, thank you!

Quoting knope2001 (Reply 67):
I'd love to see info on the 3x3 DC9 series to get an idea how awful it would have been.

Same with me. Any additional information or even scanned pictures are welcomed!
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com
 
DDR
Posts: 1738
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:09 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Tue Dec 23, 2014 12:56 am

ASA flew their 5 BAe-146 aircraft 5 across (2x3) but I believe that was because of scope. They seated 88 total.
 
User avatar
DL_Mech
Posts: 2638
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 7:48 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:33 am

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 66):
Delta's -30s featured one lave up front and one in the rear, with a galley unit installed were the second rear lav would be. It helped with the meals, but cut economy down to one lav.

See my profile for galley pics of N1290L.
This plane is built to withstand anything... except a bad pilot.

Former AMT on A220,A310,A319/20/21,A330,A350,B707,B717,B727,B737,B747,B757,B767,B777,DC-9,DC-10,L-1011,
MD-80/90,MD-11
 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1386
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:43 am

Quoting DL_Mech (Reply 73):
This plane is built to withstand anything... except a bad pilot.

I like your signature.............NWAROOSTER   
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
User avatar
MD80
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Tue Dec 23, 2014 2:02 am

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 66):
By the late 70s they were all Y, but featured very retro 60s turquoise seat covers and of course gold laminated maple leafs on the bulkhead.

IIRC, Air Canada were one of a number of DC-9-operators, who modified their DC-9s with kits from "Heath Tecna" to adjust the cabins of their DC-9s to MD-80-standard. Air Canada operated their modified DC-9-32s with 100 seats until the airline changed their product again to provide a First Class.

Btw Turkish Airlines entered the jet-age with a single DC-9-10. Later their added ten DC-9-32s which were operated until 1993/94 and all nine remaining DC-9s were sold to ValuJet.
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6488
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Tue Dec 23, 2014 5:30 am

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 66):
Offhand, do you know if the AC -30s were configured for both F and Y? By the late 70s they were all Y, but featured very retro 60s turquoise seat covers and of course gold laminated maple leafs on the bulkhead.
Quoting MD80 (Reply 71):
I have seat maps for the Air Canada DC-9-32 with F12Y80 and F16Y75.

The DC-9-32s were delivered in 1968 with a 16F 75Y cabin. (Dark orange seats in F, and alternating dark orange and turquoise seats in Y)

In the early 1970s, they were converted to 12F and 80Y. (same colour F seats, but only turquoise in Y).

In 1978 the majority were converted to all Y with 102 seats. About 8 or 9 remained in the 12F/80Y configuration for YYZ/YUL-NYC.

In the early 1980s, the Heath-Tecna interiors were installed and the configuration was changed to 100Y. One of the aft lavs was removed and a galley service area/closet was installed in its place.

In the mid 1990s, a new configuration was installed with 12 J (2x2) and 80Y. (still with one lav the front, one in the rear).

Toward the late 1990s, the final configuration was installed with 16J and 75Y. It was in this configuration that they were retired.
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Tue Dec 23, 2014 3:02 pm

Quoting MD80 (Reply 75):
IIRC, Air Canada were one of a number of DC-9-operators, who modified their DC-9s with kits from "Heath Tecna" to adjust the cabins of their DC-9s to MD-80-standard. Air Canada operated their modified DC-9-32s with 100 seats until the airline changed their product again to provide a First Class.
Quoting longhauler (Reply 76):
In 1978 the majority were converted to all Y with 102 seats. About 8 or 9 remained in the 12F/80Y configuration for YYZ/YUL-NYC.

Thanks guys. They really got mileage out of the -9s. The Heath Tecna upgrade seemed to come along at the same time as the 767s and IIRC, the seat covers were identical (sort of a burgundy with a pair of horizontal orange stripes).

My dad had flown CF-TML in the summer of 1981 from YYZ to CLE. He said there was barely enough time to finish his beer. My mother snapped a pic of him in the plane, hence the nice remembrance of the turquoise seats.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 76):
The DC-9-32s were delivered in 1968 with a 16F 75Y cabin. (Dark orange seats in F, and alternating dark orange and turquoise seats in Y)

And those seats had on off-white inset on the back cushion similar to the Vanguard. That design concept seemed to be unique to AC. Great memories.
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Tue Dec 23, 2014 3:11 pm

Quoting DL_Mech (Reply 73):
See my profile for galley pics of N1290L.

Thanks for those .... and bright orange seats as well. That galley is actually pretty spacious, with additional storage in front of the lav. The only drawback would be competing with lav traffic and of course the rumble of the JT8Ds!

Offhand, was that galley serviced through the rear airstairs? Or did they load in front and send all the carts back?
 
User avatar
DL_Mech
Posts: 2638
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2000 7:48 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Tue Dec 23, 2014 11:12 pm

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 78):
Offhand, was that galley serviced through the rear airstairs?


That's a good question. Maybe Mayor will know.

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 78):
Or did they load in front and send all the carts back?

DL did not have any galley carts on narrowbodies until the 757s were updated in the 90s. I think this was CE Woolman policy of hand-carried meals to passengers. So provisioning a DC-9 aft galley would involve carrying a lot of meal tray containers and oven inserts (full of meal casseroles) through the entire cabin.
This plane is built to withstand anything... except a bad pilot.

Former AMT on A220,A310,A319/20/21,A330,A350,B707,B717,B727,B737,B747,B757,B767,B777,DC-9,DC-10,L-1011,
MD-80/90,MD-11
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6218
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 4:41 am

Quoting DL_Mech (Reply 79):

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 78):
Offhand, was that galley serviced through the rear airstairs?


That's a good question. Maybe Mayor will know.

Sorry......never worked, cleaning or loading, a "Baby" 9........I did that on -32s in SHV and when we did an overnight cleaning, if we were cleaning the lavs or back galley, we used the rear airstairs. I would imagine that the caterer used those stairs, also, but I really don't recall.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
User avatar
MD80
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 7:56 am

Quoting mayor (Reply 80):
I would imagine that the caterer used those stairs, also, but I really don't recall.

I know for sure that some European MD-87-operators (no aft service door except the five frames delivered to Austrian Airlines) were serviced mostly via the forward service door and flight attendants "ran" (or walked very fast) up and down the aisle to exchange trolleys etc. in the aft galley.

Not sure about the DC-9 though.  
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 9:59 am

Quoting knope2001 (Reply 67):
The BAe 146 was designed to be 6-across

Only very marginally. I believe most BAe146s/Avro RJs had 5-abreast seating. PSA and Air Call were 5-abreast if memory correct and all Canadian operators (Air BC, Air Atlalntic, Air Nova) were 5-abreast, as are today Swiss and Brussels Airlines. At 5-abreast they're one of the best narrowbodies. At 6-abreast they're by far the worst.

Quoting MD80 (Reply 58):
CO operated at least one DC-9-10 with a 6-abreast seating.

I don't believe that's possible and have never seen any references to this. What's your source?
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 10:17 am

Quoting longhauler (Reply 54):
Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 51):
As I recall, most if not all of the NW DC -9s, including the series -10, had just two lavs - both in back, so that pax in F had to make a pilgrimage to the tail. This is not a big deal, but I've heard that Prince (traveling in F of course) insisted on being escorted to the rear lavs.

Oddly enough, AC's first DC-9-14s had three lavs. One for 12 F in the front, and two for 60Y in the aft!

NW later installed a lavatory in F class, at least on the -30s, when they replaced the DC-9 interiors in the 1990s. It was a big deal not to have a lav in F class. Very shoddy service for passengers paying the highest fares to have to compete with a full Y class cabin for the lavs at the rear.

I expect the aircraft without the F class lav were those inherited from the regional carriers which didn't have F class. I'm sure the many DC-9s inherited from full-service carriers like Swissair and others had an F class lav.

Re AC's DC-9-14s, it's interesting that the shortest DC-9-10 series is 4 feet longer overall than the 737-200 due to the T-tail configuration. CP's 737-200s with 12 F and 83 Y originally (or 107 all-Y in on some aircraft) also had 3 lavatories, one in F and 2 iin Y, unlike many other 732 operators that only had 2, one at the front and one at the back, and that with often up to 125 or so seats. In later years after all the CP mergers with other 732 operators (Pacific Western, Transair, Nordair, Eastern Provincial) you could always tell an original CP 732 by the 3 lavatories.
 
User avatar
MD80
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 10:44 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 82):
I don't believe that's possible and have never seen any references to this. What's your source?

It´s from a book called "McDonnell Douglas DC-9 by Terry Waddington" and it´s a short chapter called "The DC-9 Diplomat fiasco" or something like that.

Btw: What's behind the original designation "Model 2086" for the DC-9? One earlier concept was designated "Model 2067" and looked like a shortened Douglas DC-8.

[Edited 2014-12-24 02:56:27]
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 11:48 am

Quoting MD80 (Reply 84):
It´s from a book called "McDonnell Douglas DC-9 by Terry Waddington" and it´s a short chapter called "The DC-9 Diplomat fiasco" or something like that.

Thanks - I'll have to check it out. I must say, it takes marketing moxie to take a torture seating arrangement and call it 'Diplomat'!

I will confirm once again that I saw a pic of a DC-9 cabin in 6-across. It was shown to me by a former McDD manager, and was included in a very fancy (leather hardbound) DC-9 multi-volume 'DC-9 Description' document the company published, so yes there were some official Douglas pictures of it.

I am sure this set of books was only sent to serious prospective customers.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 11:54 am

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 85):
I will confirm once again that I saw a pic of a DC-9 cabin in 6-across.

Can't see how 6-across on a DC-9 would fit and still leave room for an aisle that met certification requirements.
 
User avatar
MD80
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 12:09 pm

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 85):
Thanks - I'll have to check it out. I must say, it takes marketing moxie to take a torture seating arrangement and call it 'Diplomat'!

I will confirm once again that I saw a pic of a DC-9 cabin in 6-across. It was shown to me by a former McDD manager, and was included in a very fancy (leather hardbound) DC-9 multi-volume 'DC-9 Description' document the company published, so yes there were some official Douglas pictures of it.

I am sure this set of books was only sent to serious prospective customers.

Thanks! I feel glad that you are able confirm my very vague information about a 6-abreast DC-9-10. It would made my day to see such a diagram with 6-abreast seating.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 86):
Can't see how 6-across on a DC-9 would fit and still leave room for an aisle that met certification requirements.

Sadly, my copy of this book is stowed and I can´t take a look at the moment but I can remember that there was no evidence that the 6-abreast seating was tested or certificated.

Maybe, the seats were similarly to the ones used on the forward cabin-section of the HS Trident 1E-140 which allowed 7-abreast seating:

http://www.shockcone.co.uk/hs121/trident/variants.htm

Thanks!
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 12:24 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 86):
Can't see how 6-across on a DC-9 would fit and still leave room for an aisle that met certification requirements.

It almost defies belief, since the BAE 146 six across had a 16" aisle, and that cabin is about 10" wider than the DC-9. However I did see the pic and was not hallucinating. At the time I wish I had anticipated all this airnutter interest, and I would have remembered it better.

Quoting MD80 (Reply 87):
Sadly, my copy of this book is stowed and I can´t take a look at the moment but I can remember that there was no evidence that the 6-abreast seating was tested or certificated.

My copy of the book is not stored, but it is here in my condo with hundreds of other books. I will try to pass along any comments. In the meantime, I must say that certification may truly have been an issue, as Viscount suggested. Potential air rage is another!
 
User avatar
MD80
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 12:28 pm

All I can remember is that research showed that potential operators wanted flexible seating on one aircraft to adjust the capacity from flight to flight. I looked at some personal documents/notifications and can only write:

One proposal was made in approx. 1966 with a 34-inch pitch and a maximum seating of 102 passengers compared to the maximum standard of 90 seats.

Seat width was believed to be reduced from 17.9 inches to 15.8 inches. The aisle width was reduced from 19 inches to 15 inches.

One Douglas DC-9-15RC of Continental Airlines was used for passenger acceptance and flew one revenue-flight. After this flight, passengers complained to harshly that they got their money back and the idea was dropped.

Please correct my information if necessary!

Thank you.
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com
 
User avatar
knope2001
Posts: 3075
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 5:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 1:16 pm

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 82):
Quoting knope2001 (Reply 67):The BAe 146 was designed to be 6-across
Only very marginally. I believe most BAe146s/Avro RJs had 5-abreast seating. PSA and Air Call were 5-abreast if memory correct and all Canadian operators (Air BC, Air Atlalntic, Air Nova) were 5-abreast, as are today Swiss and Brussels Airlines. At 5-abreast they're one of the best narrowbodies. At 6-abreast they're by far the worst.

The 146 was designed and marketed at 6-abreast, and all the initial operators including DanAir, Air Wisconsin, WestAir, PSA, Aspen and Atlantic Coast operated them 3x3. PSA faced such a backlash in the highly-competitive LA Basin - SF Bay market that they converted to 2x3 by late 1985, followed by AirCal (who primarily got the 146 to meet SNA noise limits). Later operators, mostly went with 2x3 in part because of the missions the 146 (later Avro RJ) were/are used for. In the US they ran into scope clause issues. In several other markets including Europe the aircraft was used for thin markets where mainline-standards were expected,

Ultimately the airframe in later years was mostly 2x3 in coach, but that's not how it was designed, marketed, nor operated in the first few years by initial customers.
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8923
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 1:25 pm

Great seven page article about flying on DC-9-10 line number 19 in Kenya (and flying there from DXB via Mogadishu on an MD-80 and a 1968-build DC-9-30) in the current (Jan) issue of Airliner World.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
User avatar
saleya22r
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 2:13 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 2:19 pm

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 91):
Great seven page article about flying on DC-9-10 line number 19 in Kenya (and flying there from DXB via Mogadishu on an MD-80 and a 1968-build DC-9-30) in the current (Jan) issue of Airliner World.

There's also a great trip report from June this year posted by N178UA "Flying The Oldest Passenger Jet (FLY-SAX DC9-14)". The article is about the same DC-9 I suppose? First flight 12/1965 delivered 1/1966. 49 years this month and still in pax service. With AY between 1971-83. By comparison, how old might the oldest 727 or 737 be? (in regular service)
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 7054
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Wed Dec 24, 2014 2:37 pm

Quoting MD80 (Reply 84):
It´s from a book called "McDonnell Douglas DC-9 by Terry Waddington" and it´s a short chapter called "The DC-9 Diplomat fiasco" or something like that.

It's n page 44, first page of chapter VIII the paragraph is titled "The Diplomat Fiasco".

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 86):
Can't see how 6-across on a DC-9 would fit and still leave room for an aisle that met certification requirements.

"Whether the aircraft could have been evacuated in the then required 120 seconds with the narrow aisles was never tested."

Quoting MD80 (Reply 89):
Seat width was believed to be reduced from 17.9 inches to 15.8 inches. The aisle width was reduced from 19 inches to 15 inches.

Almost correct. The aisle was reduced from 19 inches to 16.

"Low-backed, vinyl-covered bench seats were used, with folding arm rests which could convert each unit to a twin or triple arrangement. The idea was to increase capacity during peak hours by simply manipulating the different combinations of arm rests."
 
ABQopsHP
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 10:47 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Fri Dec 26, 2014 2:56 am

Quoting iahcsr (Reply 3):
CO still had a few in '88/89. Don't know if they were the original deliveries or from the mergers
Quoting northstardc4m (Reply 8):
CO's last original short 9 left in 75, though some of the same ones came back via the TI merger later.
Quoting Rugger (Reply 61):

Quoting jetjeanes (Reply 60):
texas international had some, not sure where they were gobbled up at

I believe they migrated over to Continental during the TI/CO merger.

Yes CO had an original order for the DC-9-14 which they returned in the mid 70s. Then after the merger with TI (Texas International) in 1982 the baby nines came back, which TI had a number of. The baby nines stayed with the fleet until the late 80s, 1989 I believe. The 30s held on till almost Y2K. At HP in the 90s we had the CO contract in western cities, the 2 stations I worked in ELP and ABQ CO would send the 30s in, and in Summer they were a pain, with weight restrictions gallore. But when I worked for CO in the early/mid 80s I was thrilled to have a baby 9 in SLC and DEN, a rocket. As a non-rev I knew I would not have any problem getting on one.

JD
ABQ ops, Cactus 202 requesting you order 5 Green Chile Chicken stew for us to p/u on arrival. ;)
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 7054
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Fri Dec 26, 2014 2:06 pm

Quoting ABQopsHP (Reply 94):
The baby nines stayed with the fleet until the late 80s, 1989 I believe.

The last one (below) was retired in May 1991 and four others were retired earlier that year in January.


http://www.planespotters.net/Product...5,N654TX-Continental-Air-Lines.php
 
CF-CPI
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2000 12:54 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Fri Dec 26, 2014 2:54 pm

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 93):
"Whether the aircraft could have been evacuated in the then required 120 seconds with the narrow aisles was never tested."

This makes me wonder if passengers ever were actually carried. CO would have risked some major fines if they needed cert and did not obtain it.

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 93):

"Low-backed, vinyl-covered bench seats were used, with folding arm rests which could convert each unit to a twin or triple arrangement. The idea was to increase capacity during peak hours by simply manipulating the different combinations of arm rests."

Sounds more like a city bus than an aircraft. Even when converted back to 'normal' 5-across, the backs would have been low (bench style). If there was a real revenue flight I can imagine wanting a refund, especially back in the swinging 60s.
 
SpaceshipDC10
Posts: 7054
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:44 am

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Fri Dec 26, 2014 8:29 pm

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 96):
This makes me wonder if passengers ever were actually carried. CO would have risked some major fines if they needed cert and did not obtain it.

In the book it is said that just one revenue sector was operated. The sentence before clearly states that it was for passenger acceptance testing. That was in 1966 and since it was a test, it was probably granted a special authorization. I suspect that the passengers taking part to it knew what they were there for.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Sat Dec 27, 2014 10:33 am

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 91):
Great seven page article about flying on DC-9-10 line number 19 in Kenya (and flying there from DXB via Mogadishu on an MD-80 and a 1968-build DC-9-30) in the current (Jan) issue of Airliner World.

Line number 19 was one of AC's 6 original DC-9-14s, operated briefly while waiting for their -32s.
 
User avatar
MD80
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:29 pm

RE: DC-9 Series 10 Early Operators Question

Sat Dec 27, 2014 11:05 am

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 93):
Almost correct. The aisle was reduced from 19 inches to 16.

Thanks for correction and additional information!

Quoting CF-CPI (Reply 96):
Even when converted back to 'normal' 5-across, the backs would have been low (bench style).

IIRC, the alternative configuration would have been a First Class with 2-abreast seating, not 2+3. Please correct me.

This arrangement was adjusted...

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 93):
...with folding arm rests which could convert each unit to a twin or triple arrangement. The idea was to increase capacity during peak hours by simply manipulating the different combinations of arm rests."

It appears that the idea was to have a 3+3 seating during peak hours and 2+2 during off peak?

Quoting knope2001 (Reply 90):
The 146 was designed and marketed at 6-abreast, and all the initial operators including DanAir, Air Wisconsin, WestAir, PSA, Aspen and Atlantic Coast operated them 3x3.

I also have this information. The BAe 146 was designed for 3+3. The 5-abreast arrangement became popular at a later stage (due to too much complaints by passengers and other factors) and I remember that BAe later advertised this arrangement as a "Spaceliner Cabin" to promote the modernized Avro RJ.

Quoting northstardc4m (Reply 8):
So that leaves Ozark...66-86, longest under one name?

What about KLM? KLM retired their last DC-9-30s in 1989 but IIRC, at least one DC-9-15 was part of the bigger DC-9-30-fleet up through the 1980s, possibly until 1988/89?. I have a brochure of seating-charts from approx. 1985/86 and the DC-9-15 was shown with an all 80Y-configuration alongside their 105-seat "Long Body" DC-9.

Regards
Dedicated to the MD-80, MD-90, MD-95, and DC-9: www.MD-80.com

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