Fly Away Simulation
SearchSearch 

Northwest Airlines

Should NW sell their dc-9's right away to get more fuel efficent ERJ's?
Yes
71%
 71%  [ 15 ]
No
28%
 28%  [ 6 ]
     
Total Votes : 21
    
Pro Member Trainee
united11 Trainee

An idea for northwest airlines and to help cutting cost and stuff is sell all the DC-9's! Yes, i know, i love the DC-9, it is my most favorite aircraft, but this is for NW's own good. They need to sell the Dc-9's and get this Compass Airline moving that i will operate the ERJ-170's. They should also get rid of their avros and replace them with the ERJ-170. They should get rid of the Dc-9 and replace it with the ERJ-190, but then have more routes on the ERJ-170 and less airport time and use them at smaller airports like Rapid City, South Dakota or Fargo, North Dakota. What do u guys think?

Pro Member Chief Captain
Jonathan (99jolegg) Chief Captain

I don't particularly like DC-9s so voted yes Wink

Jamie4590 Guest

I'm not a big fan of T-tail aircraft. Do I have to be a full member to vote?

Pro Member Chief Captain
Jonathan (99jolegg) Chief Captain

Jamie4590 wrote:

I'm not a big fan of T-tail aircraft. Do I have to be a full member to vote?

I believe so, yes. Wink

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

I am going to get yelled at for this, but I voted no. US carriers should suppoort US manufacturers.

Pro Member Chief Captain
CRJCapt Chief Captain

The airline industry is full of politics and misinformation. On the straight question of DC-9 transition to ERJ 170, yes they should. All DC-9 pilots should retain pay and position and aircraft should be flown under the Northwest name and work contract. But I'm sure that pilots are expected to take a pay cut and maybe other contract concessions to get the new aircraft/company of the ground. Airlines don't do anything unless it involves money. Hundreds of pilots will have to go from Northwest to a new commuter company for less money and worse work rules.

Pro Member Trainee
united11 Trainee

Yes Crash,
I agree with you but i do think since what nw is goin through right now, they maybe should make the switch earlier. Dont you think so?

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

I think all NW executives and management should take a pay cut instead of the employees. I have nothing but contempt for any company that expects its employees to pay for the stupidity of its management and executives.

I'd say a bit more, but it would probably violate forum rules on being political. Mad

Pro Member Chief Captain
Solotwo Chief Captain

CrashGordon wrote:

I am going to get yelled at for this, but I voted no. US carriers should suppoort US manufacturers.

Well if maybe if a US Manufacture would make a decent small jet like the E-Series of jets then maybe so, but thats not the case.

I love all the E Jets so I voted yes. Smile If this will prevent northwest from going completely away then more power to them.

Pro Member Trainee
united11 Trainee

Good,
I agree too, or maybe even NW should just not start this "Compass Airlines" and replace the DC9-30 with the 170 and the DC-9-40-50 with the ERJ-190, so they dont lose any more money by starting this new Compass thing

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

It isn't the cost of flying DC-9s that has brought NW to this point. The simple truth is that the whole system has been broken for too long and no one has fixed it.

While chanting the mantra of competition is good, airlines flew too many redundant flights, too many times per day to too many destinations that were not economical.

Now to cure this, you would have them buy planes from a foreign source at the expense of domestic manufacturers, reducing the employed labor force and thus reducing the number of people who can afford to fly.

You have also forgotten that it costs money to buy planes. They don't have it, and any financial institution that would loan them money at this point...well, let me know which bank it is so I can sell any stock I might have. Rolling Eyes

Pro Member Chief Captain
Solotwo Chief Captain

Well they are selling the DC9's, not throwing them away. Wink

And the E-Jets are pretty cheap. Smile

Not to mention that the last DC-9 made was in 1982, they are old, time to move on.



Last edited by Solotwo on Wed Aug 16, 2006 5:46 pm, edited 1 time in total
Pro Member Chief Captain
Jonathan (99jolegg) Chief Captain

I don't think that something of this scale (US companies buying US aircraft) would impact macro-economic variables (employment levels) too much. Aircraft manufacturers are by enlarge, hugely profitable businesses that are very sustainable. Buying a fleet from another company would hardly lead to massive profit loss and forced redundancies. Nor do I think that a slightly reduced labour force of an aircraft company would lead to the majority of Americans having less disposable income leading to detrimental affects on airlines. If it was such a strain on the economy of that country, I'm sure airlines wouldn't opt for importing because in the end, it affects themselves.

Just my thoughts on the matter Wink

Pro Member Chief Captain
Solotwo Chief Captain

BTW Crash, Northwest has 177 Airbus' in there fleet already so you might wanna go talk to them about that.

Also I'm sure money isn't a concern since they have ordered 18 787's already.

Pro Member Trainee
united11 Trainee

If they are ordering so many of these, why not get rid of 2 A330's. They do the same range, even a bit better. So r u saying that if nw did this that they would go down and bankrupt ? NW will be around for a very long time.

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Solotwo wrote:

BTW Crash, Northwest has 177 Airbus' in there fleet already so you might wanna go talk to them about that.

Also I'm sure money isn't a concern since they have ordered 18 787's already.

If they have so much money, why worry , then?

I used to have a bumper stiker on my Dodge (a US company then) Pickup that read: Out of work? Hungry? Eat your foreign car!

Pro Member Chief Captain
RadarMan Chief Captain

Did they used to call, themselves Northwest Orient, or am I showing my age.

Radar

Pro Member Chief Captain
Jonathan (99jolegg) Chief Captain

RadarMan wrote:

Did they used to call, themselves Northwest Orient, or am I showing my age.

Radar

Yes, I believe that was in 1949 Laughing

Pro Member Chief Captain
RadarMan Chief Captain

99jolegg wrote:

RadarMan wrote:

Did they used to call, themselves Northwest Orient, or am I showing my age.

Radar

Yes, I believe that was in 1949 Laughing

Another wise guy! Doh!

Radar

Pro Member Chief Captain
Solotwo Chief Captain

CrashGordon wrote:

If they have so much money, why worry , then?

I used to have a bumper stiker on my Dodge (a US company then) Pickup that read: Out of work? Hungry? Eat your foreign car!

You're just showing your ignorance now.

Yes, they should keep there old, out of date, inefficent DC-9's just because they are American. That makes total sense.

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

I will have to back out of this because my answer would be far too political for these forums, and RM already has too much work to do. Wink

Pro Member Trainee
united11 Trainee

Northwest Doesnt have the money they need. Either they should slow down on ordering the 787's or they need to get rid of 753's or A330's! About the Dc-9's, were u joking or were u serious? i dont know! lol, but still, i am going with my idea, quit this compass airlines and go for the DC-9-30= ERJ-170, DC-9-40,50= ERJ-190

Pro Member Trainee
united11 Trainee

If anyone else wants to talk about this subject i will give u my im

Pro Member Captain
Sam (SamIntel) Captain

I voted NO because I don't like the ERJs, the seats are smaller, there less less leg room, and the windows are too low (you have to bend over to see out the thing).

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

SamIntel wrote:

I voted NO because I don't like the ERJs, the seats are smaller, there less less leg room, and the windows are too low (you have to bend over to see out the thing).

Yes, when strapped into a seat in a metal tube loaded with highly flammable liquid and controlled by either electronic equipment provided by the low bidder or a pilot who is angry about having his pay cut, you should at least be able to see the world while you still can. ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL

Pro Member Chief Captain
CRJCapt Chief Captain

SamIntel wrote:

I voted NO because I don't like the ERJs, the seats are smaller, there less less leg room, and the windows are too low (you have to bend over to see out the thing).

Actually, the seats in the ERJ and the CRJ are wider than the United Boeing 737-500 coach seats. The seat pitch(distance between the seats is generally the same. Windows are lower but much of the impressions are psychological. Smile

United EMB170
First Class: 37.0" 20.0" 6 seats
Economy Plus: 34.0" 18.25" 16 seats
Economy Class: 31.0" 18.25" 48 seats

United Boeing 737-500
First Class: 38.0" 20.5" 8 seats
Economy Plus: 34.0" 17.0" 40 seats
Economy Class: 31.0" 17.0" 62 seats
Pitch, width, number of seats

Arrow www.seatguru.com/

Pro Member Chief Captain
VegasFlyer Chief Captain

I don't know of any Eropean airline that still flies DC-9's. They should sell them Exclamation

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Aha! NW should sell the DC-9s. Buy 737s fly slightly fewer flights with a larger passenger load. They save money and make me happy at the same time. Laughing Laughing Laughing Life is good. Very Happy

Pro Member Trainee
united11 Trainee

I dont even think they should but the ERJ-170's, just replace the DC-9's with the ERj-190. Less cost for maintence, better fuel efficentness. They shouldnt sell their dc-9's for 737's. 737's sometimes are that comfortable to ride on. The ERJ rides smoothly although the disadvantage is a little lower window. But the ERJ windows are the the CRJ windows, you kinda have to look down a bit to look out. No big though.

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

VegasFlyer wrote:

I don't know of any Eropean airline that still flies DC-9's. They should sell them Exclamation

I don't think that is relavent. The only meaningful equation is what is the projected useful life of the DC-9s and how much will it cost to fly and maintain them for that period of time. Then compare those costs with that of flying and maintaining replacements, including the cost of financing their purchase.

In any event, if replacements are necessary, I would go with the 737 except if there are airports involved that can't handle 737s. If that were the case, they should determine if they are makeing money serving those locations. If not, drop the service.

Pro Member Trainee
united11 Trainee

I don't think that is relavent. The only meaningful equation is what is the projected useful life of the DC-9s and how much will it cost to fly and maintain them for that period of time. Then compare those costs with that of flying and maintaining replacements, including the cost of financing their purchase.

In any event, if replacements are necessary, I would go with the 737 except if there are airports involved that can't handle 737s. If that were the case, they should determine if they are makeing money serving those locations. If not, drop the service.-----------------------------------------

That is a good idea. Do they still make the 717's? If they dont, instead of using the 737. They could get more A319's. But yet arent the A319s a little spendy?

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

The last of the 717s rolled off the assembly line earlier this summer. A319s might make them happy, but I sure wouldn't fly on them.

Pro Member Trainee
united11 Trainee

Why wouldnt you fly on the A319's?
What if they instead of did the ERJ-190 with the A318. Those are really smooth.

Pro Member Chief Captain
Solotwo Chief Captain

Your showing a bit of bigotry there crash.

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Solotwo wrote:

Your showing a bit of bigotry there crash.

I don't think so. I have nothing against Airbus and will fly on them if I am on an airline in a different country and they happen to use Airbus. My objection is when US carriers purchase non-US aircraft. It isn't bigotry, but economics. If I'm going to spend money, then it is going to be with those who provide economic well-being locally. Helping someone be employed next door benefits me more than someone half a world away.

I am sure that there are some who feel that is somehow, evil. Sorry, but I just feel it is right to support the economy of the country in which I live in any small way I can.

Pro Member Chief Captain
Solotwo Chief Captain

How is using now defunct, out of date, inefficent, out of production, 20 year old aircraft going to help the US economy? If switching to newer, more efficent airplanes will help pull northwest out of bankruptcy then more power to them. But there current situation with there damn flight attendents that are about to start there chaos strikes, they have much larger issues.

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

If the want to replace the DC-9s with 737s, I would fly with them. If they want to go with ERJs or Airbus, I'll fly with a carrier that more closely fits my view of things. As far as the flight attendants, more power to them. Someone has got to draw a line somewhere that executives and management can not keep penalizing the employees for executive/managerial incompetence. If it means shutting NW down for good in order to send a message to the rest of the industry, so be it. I am really tired of hearing corporations tell bankruptcy judges that cutting employee wages and stealing their pensions is necessary while they themselves have to keep their big bucks so that they won't lose the same incompetent bozos that got them into trouble in the first place.

Guest

Now why would you do that. AIrlines are a mode of transportation. The only thing that they do is transport people. Who cares if they are using foreign aircraft just like toyota sometimes comes from Japan. All you are doing is being transported quickly! Why does the aircraft matter. I just put this forum up here to see if people thought this would be great for NW.

Pro Member Chief Captain
VegasFlyer Chief Captain

Maybe they should just replace the DC-9s with CRJs Question

Pro Member Trainee
united11 Trainee

They Could, but replacing the DC-9-40 and 50 would need a larger aircraft such as the CR7 or CR9. But if NW did that, that would mean they would need to buy more CRJ's. I dont think that would work. Besides, NW has DC-9's doing 2-3 hour flights. I would get bored on the CRJ after a while. What about the new C-Series from Bombardier? 100 seats

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Anonymous wrote:

Now why would you do that. AIrlines are a mode of transportation. The only thing that they do is transport people. Who cares if they are using foreign aircraft just like toyota sometimes comes from Japan. All you are doing is being transported quickly! Why does the aircraft matter. I just put this forum up here to see if people thought this would be great for NW.

Alright, let's look at it this way. Two airlines fly from City A to City B. One of them buys aircraft from a firm that employs thousand of people in your homeland. The other buys aircraft from another source. Both charge the same and have similar schedules. Which one would you fly, the one that provides and added benefit to people in your own country or the one that doesn't?

There is nothing wrong with with asking if an airline should replace old aircraft. It is just that life isn't a simple as that. By the way, an airline is more than a means of transportation. It is a corporte citizen of its home country. If it chooses to do something that may be harmful to the workers of that country, why should it be surprising that some people wpuld prefer to fly on a different carrier?

Pro Member Trainee
united11 Trainee

You should run for local government. you sound very political. In a good way. I just think NW is a better airline then everyone thinks they are. Even though the FAs are going on strike. They are very nice.

Pro Member Chief Captain
Solotwo Chief Captain

McDonnell douglas doesn't even exist anymore. Who do they employ to make a now defunct aircraft?

Bigotry, pure and simple.

Heaven forbid some other nation besides the one you reside in shall make a decent product.

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Solotwo wrote:

McDonnell douglas doesn't even exist anymore. Who do they employ to make a now defunct aircraft?

Bigotry, pure and simple.

Heaven forbid some other nation besides the one you reside in shall make a decent product.

I don't recall having said anything about the decency of other products.

Would you feel better had I said I prefer airlines who buy their aircraft form firms I ownd stock in? That would be an obvious economic benefit. So what doesn't provide an economic benefit if my reason is that when people where I live are doing well, economically, it benefits me because the towns and cities around here do better and my life improves.

Bigotry has nothing to do with it. Enlightened sef-interest does. When Airbus announced delays in the A380, my Boeing stock did very well. That's what it is about....money. I assume those who have shares of other aircraft manufacturers profit when Boeing does something dumb.

Pro Member Chief Captain
RadarMan Chief Captain

It's not bigotry (look it up) it's being nationalistic (look that up).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalistic

Radar

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

RadarMan wrote:

It's not bigotry (look it up) it's being nationalistic (look that up).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalistic

Radar

Its grumpy. Nowhere to look that up. Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing

Can't imagine what I will be accused of if I say I prefer motherboards from Taiwan, rather than Mainland China.

Pro Member Chief Captain
RadarMan Chief Captain

CrashGordon wrote:

RadarMan wrote:

It's not bigotry (look it up) it's being nationalistic (look that up).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalistic

Radar

Its grumpy. Nowhere to look that up. Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing

Can't imagine what I will be accused of if I say I prefer motherboards from Taiwan, rather than Mainland China.

Grumpy!

Rolling Eyes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumpy_old_man

Radar

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

That was amusing. Wink

Pro Member Captain
Faucett Captain

Solotwo wrote:

McDonnell douglas doesn't even exist anymore. Who do they employ to make a now defunct aircraft?

Bigotry, pure and simple.

Heaven forbid some other nation besides the one you reside in shall make a decent product.

Crash is not debating the quality of the product, but rather what is in the best interests of his country, whose airline industry needs all the help it can get.

And since you have resorted to calling him a bigot, I will resort to calling you a troll, sir.

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Actually, he didn't call me a bigot. He just inferred that what I said was bigotry. A subtle difference. And he doesn't really fit the definition of a troll. Wink

My view is an economic one. If I support companies here, the idea is that they become more robust, employ a lot of people who pay their taxes so the city I live in can hire more police and prevent some thug from shooting my Ass .

Pro Member Chief Captain
Jonathan (99jolegg) Chief Captain

CrashGordon wrote:

My view is an economic one. If I support companies here, the idea is that they become more robust, employ a lot of people who pay their taxes so the city I live in can hire more police and prevent some thug from shooting my Ass .

A pleasent idea in theory. Wink

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

99jolegg wrote:

CrashGordon wrote:

My view is an economic one. If I support companies here, the idea is that they become more robust, employ a lot of people who pay their taxes so the city I live in can hire more police and prevent some thug from shooting my Ass .

A pleasent idea in theory. Wink

Which part, shooting my Ass? ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL

Pro Member Chief Captain
Jonathan (99jolegg) Chief Captain

ROFL ROFL

No, but come to mention it... Whistle Laughing

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Don't hold your breath. The last time anyone successfully shot me was 1968. Wink

Pro Member Chief Captain
Jonathan (99jolegg) Chief Captain

CrashGordon wrote:

Don't hold your breath. The last time anyone successfully shot me was 1968. Wink

Laughing I'm sure a lot more have tried since Tomato

Guest

Why did you get shot?

Pro Member Chief Captain
Jonathan (99jolegg) Chief Captain

Anonymous wrote:

Why did you get shot?

Read some of his previous posts and you'll see why Laughing

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Anonymous wrote:

Why did you get shot?

Someone didn't like what I did to his boss. Laughing Laughing Laughing Let's just say it was in the middle of a war.

Pro Member Chief Captain
Solotwo Chief Captain

HAHA, I should've said you had stock in boeing. Wink

No need to argue about this anymore, we just prefer different planes from each other. Smile

How about we just shake hands and agree to disagree. Very Happy

Pro Member Chief Captain
CrashGordon Chief Captain

Solotwo wrote:

HAHA, I should've said you had stock in boeing. Wink

No need to argue about this anymore, we just prefer different planes from each other. Smile

How about we just shake hands and agree to disagree. Very Happy

Laughing If you think we were arguing, you don't know me well. Laughing

No problem. I don't require that everyone agree with me. Well, maybe those within 50 ft. are. Laughing

This thread has actually been fairly informative for me.

Pro Member Captain
Faucett Captain

Sorry solotwo and everybody for my previous post, I was having an incredibly bad morning and took it out here, which was uncalled for.
Embarassed

Cool

All times are GMT Page 1 of 1

Related Questions