Field performance or lack of!

I was told that Delta want to re activate all their Delta Connection 737-200s

Delta own the 737s outright, thus any profit made with them is 100% theirs… no leases etc to pay.

This is exactly the same situation as NWA and their DC-9’s.

The latest announcement from Delta regarding their cost cutting was to shutdown their DFW hub and eliminate 4 fleet types. Included in that list of 4 fleet types was the 732 (as well as 762, MD-11 and MD-90 as far as I can tell). Unless something more recent has come out since then the 732’s probably going away.

I agree about aircraft ownership. Even with their poor fuel efficiency, NWA is better of running their old DC-9’s since they own those outright rather than lease new more efficient aircraft. In tough times though it seems that even that small advantage is undone by maintaining parts stores and training for such a model.

The point was not entirely without some merit.

In the “old days” small airports did have jet service to some nice destinations. In this day and age, it often no longer happens.

For those airports with short runways, the lack of STOL on new aircraft is a real issue. Even CRJ’s and ERJ’s struggle into IOM, and yet in the 70’s a 732 or 1-11 was a routine sight. Nowadays the best we can expect is a 146.

Places like Jersey, Guernsey are in a similar position.

Loss of service is market driven not equipment driven.

Talking of Boeing 732’s while waiting at Gatwick for a monarch flight from Alicante,which was running 5hrs late,i went for a drive around the airport perimeter road trying to find a nice spot for landing aircraft..i saw the Ryanair “Hertz” 732 in real life,looks absolutly terrible

Danairboy – your lack of understanding has caused you to miss the most vital part of the whole debate…you have absolutely no idea which of the aircraft you have observed were derating their take off thrust. You also have no idea how close to their limiting take off weight they are.

By all means have an opinion but PLEASE try a different tactic than ramming it down our throats. I don’t blame Kev for wondering if you have troll-like tendencies as your netiquette does not tally with the maturity you sometimes claim to possess. Child pretending to be an adult perhaps?

sorry posted when i hadent refreshed after alot of hours so last post i saw was earlier on when people where questioning danairboy. View hasent changed

banning time?

cough banning time uncough

I was told that Delta want to re activate all their Delta Connection 737-200s

Delta own the 737s outright, thus any profit made with them is 100% theirs… no leases etc to pay.

This is exactly the same situation as NWA and their DC-9’s.

The point was not entirely without some merit.

In the “old days” small airports did have jet service to some nice destinations. In this day and age, it often no longer happens.

For those airports with short runways, the lack of STOL on new aircraft is a real issue. Even CRJ’s and ERJ’s struggle into IOM, and yet in the 70’s a 732 or 1-11 was a routine sight. Nowadays the best we can expect is a 146.

Places like Jersey, Guernsey are in a similar position.

That is right ! I was amazed by the amount of RJs in JFK 2 weeks ago. Uspecially with Delta and Continental..

Even though there are sill some in the US. When I flew through ATL last april, I saw some 732s taking off, leaving lot of smoke, and of course, you still have those old NWA DC9s hanging around…

Not too many of the 732’s left. Southwest is retiring theirs and Delta announced their 732’s are going to be phased out not leaving any other operators State-side, at lease by major airlines. We still get a daily Delta 732 here.

The DC-9’s are still around but not nearly as noticable among the sea of ERJ’s and CRJ’s that now litter most ramps. Even with sound proofing found in airport terminals you can still tell when a NWA DC-9 is departing without even looking out the window. In fact, the NWA DC-9 is the only aircraft loud enough to be noticed from within the terminal upon takeoff. 🙂

Over the last 10 years the reduced presence of the Jurassic Jets sure has been noticable.

I like the sound of a noisy jet. Aircraft are meant to be noisy, give me a couple of Speys or Tays over the CFMs of today!

Yes, and I would love to see some Connies landing at an airport close to home, but again that would today be called a WARBIRD AIRSHOW.

Don’t worry boy, one day you’ll understand that earning money is useful in life, and that everyone has that goal… :rolleyes: It permits you to eat, and sleep under a roof instead of a bridge. Oh, and maybe also to use this forum, and to take a plane.

Very true. 🙂 It’s a sign of the times when it’s a rarity for a DC-9 or 732 to be heard taking off.

Even though there are sill some in the US. When I flew through ATL last april, I saw some 732s taking off, leaving lot of smoke, and of course, you still have those old NWA DC9s hanging around…

I guess you didn’t hear any in a long time 😀

Very true. 🙂 It’s a sign of the times when it’s a rarity for a DC-9 or 732 to be heard taking off.

I like the sound of a noisy jet. Aircraft are meant to be noisy, give me a couple of Speys or Tays over the CFMs of today!

Well remind me never to book a flight on Air Danairboy – you won’t have it long before the banks take your train set away.

Andy

I like the sound of a noisy jet. Aircraft are meant to be noisy, give me a couple of Speys or Tays over the CFMs of today!

It amazes me how a few folk who post here (not all by any means, of course), the “arm chair fleet planners” I call them, think they know more about aircraft selection than the airline staff who do this job on a regular basis and actually get paid to do it.

Airlines exist for one reason, and one reason alone – to make money; to make money for their owners or share holders. Now I accept that not all airlines are particularly good at that at the moment, but if the professionals in an airline believe and can justify that an A321 can make them more money than a 757, then I assure you they’ll take some A321s. And that’s whether or not they’ll take off from Gibralter or Zakinthos with a full load – all such factors are taken into consideration (except in a failry widely rumoured case of a UK airline that bought a couple of A300s – I’ll say no more!) before the make money / won’t make money decisions over a specific type are finally taken.

Anything else is mere sentimentality – we may prefer to see tricked up 737-200s or 757s over Airbus narrow bodies or next-gen 737s, but if the bottom line says that the latter make more money than the former, I assure you that emotions will play no part in it.

Andy

Quite right, I forgot about the whole noise regulation issue. 🙂

I guess you didn’t hear any in a long time 😀

By the way, the noisiest I ever heard was an IL76 at CGN (closdely followed by a Yak 40 at the same airport who did 2 360° turns on the apron before taxying :confused: )

The +Il had already taken off and retracted the wheels, but the noise kept covering the one made by a 734 starting its engines in front of me…

Spot on…Most of the old aircraft end up in Africa because of cost and they don’t have the noise regulations of say Europe and North America.

Quite right, I forgot about the whole noise regulation issue. 🙂

Exactly. The fact you see old planes in Africa is because there are nearly no regulations, and because African operators mostly lack the money for the latest super high tech airliners. If rough field performance in all safety was so important there, I guess they would only be operating AN-72s, Dash 7s, and maybe, at some extent, BAC.1-11, as some were concieved for such use.

Instead, you see African operators converting 727 in flying bombs, aka flying tankers to bring some needed petrol to remote mining facilities, Caravelles that look as if they would be falling apart, or 741s and 742s that noone else wants anymore.

A 732 might be a “classic”, I’m happy not to see it around anymore. Smoky, noisy, old. It was a good plane when it entered service, but now it belongs in museums, or scrapyards.