Originally Posted by Bucking Bar

... and that is what I think most of this MD90 talk is. Playing Boeing off a paper airplane.

There is considerable frustration in the marketplace on a 100 to 130 seat solution. I don't know why Airlines had no problem shifting half their domestic flying to a Bombardier / Embraer platform, but they now seem hesitant to give them the next 30%.

My very strong suspicion remains that the long term solution hinges on scope negotiations and the current uncertainty results in paralysis when making a 25 year commitment to the trunk of an airline's fleet.

IMHO, ALPA simply needs to make it clear that more scope sales are not not on the table and will never be on the table. The FACT ALPA will not make this statement is just as telling as their denials that they are not CURRENTLY talking about scope.

With the uncertainty about who's operating the C Series cleared up, airlines would be able to better evaluate the product's real operational costs.

Originally Posted by acl65pilot

Win and get a 73N with a gtf that will produce saving to make the CapEx logical.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

Okay, so lets say the 29 Saudi MD90s came on the market at a heck of a good price. I'm just wondering if the airframe, seating and parts are similiar enough to the current 90s and the only difference is the cockpit then why not get them and put them somewhere? Make the a DTW, DFW , MEM**** or MSP only aircraft. Or ATL***

We've had smaller subfleets before, the 16 MD-90s in SLC, 21 767-400s in ATL and 16 744s in DTW come to mind. A differences course of 5 sim sessions would be enough and I wonder if you could do that using the 3 717 sims in Atlanta? If that would fly... not literally, just fake it, like normal.

29 MD90s x $9M (what are the current MD90s again, $8M?) = $261M. For a fleet of 29 airplanes seating built from 1998-2000* that will soon seat the same number of passengers, 160, as a 738 with a fuel burn of only 3% higher** on a 500 nm trip? I'd think differences training would be no different then the way we handle the 764 today, you complete 756 then you complete 764 differences.

I mean there is value in playing a game with B&A concerning the MD90s but for the price and given B&As recent failures of concept to market aircraft, I don't think its a negotiating tactic at all.

I've talked myself into it. Which means absolutely nothing. Thanks for reading.

*According to McDonnell Douglas MD-90 Production List - Planespotters.net Just Aviation

**Similar Aircraft Comparisons Chart

*** where the players play and the parties don't stop til 8 in the morning

**** Why not just replace the Airbus and DC9 fleet in MEM with the Saudi MD90s? Could it go to both coasts? There is what, 230 pilots in MEM now so if you put 29 MD90s in there you'd have 8 pilots to a plane, isn't that the norm DAL staffing for a narrow body?