Non NW Flyer Observations Re NW Fleet
Dec 14, 2004, 4:45 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA UA Premier Plat , 1.24MM, AA EXP
Posts: 271
Non NW Flyer Observations Re NW Fleet
Hi all,
I'm not a NW flyer and this is my first post on this forum. I'm a UA 1K based at LAX with substantial flying experience on AA. My only experience on NW was a roundtrip LAX-SEA-NRT-SIN-NRT-LAX about 11 years ago. All but one of those segments was on 747-200 aircraft. Anyways, last weekend I flew UA out of AMS to ORD and then LAX. The elite lounge in AMS where I waited for my UA flight was between terminals E and F. I was struck with the number of NW aircraft in terminal E. I counted five DC-10's and one Airbus..a 330, I think. Then, it occurred to me that except for the AB330, the DC-10's were about 70's vintage. I also note that when I fly in and out of NRT, I tend to see a high number of older 747-200's and DC-10's compared to newer 744's. Do NW flyers on FT have a problem with NW's older fleet? Have the interiors been updated. I don't mean any offense to anyone here and the trip I did take with NW those years ago had very competent service. But does NW have any plans to update its fleet?
I'm not a NW flyer and this is my first post on this forum. I'm a UA 1K based at LAX with substantial flying experience on AA. My only experience on NW was a roundtrip LAX-SEA-NRT-SIN-NRT-LAX about 11 years ago. All but one of those segments was on 747-200 aircraft. Anyways, last weekend I flew UA out of AMS to ORD and then LAX. The elite lounge in AMS where I waited for my UA flight was between terminals E and F. I was struck with the number of NW aircraft in terminal E. I counted five DC-10's and one Airbus..a 330, I think. Then, it occurred to me that except for the AB330, the DC-10's were about 70's vintage. I also note that when I fly in and out of NRT, I tend to see a high number of older 747-200's and DC-10's compared to newer 744's. Do NW flyers on FT have a problem with NW's older fleet? Have the interiors been updated. I don't mean any offense to anyone here and the trip I did take with NW those years ago had very competent service. But does NW have any plans to update its fleet?
Dec 14, 2004, 4:51 pm
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Honolulu, Hawaiʻi [+MKK4 EBBER R577 EDSEL R577 ELKEY EXERT]
Posts: 15,826
They sure do. Plans are to get rid of all the DC-10s, replacing them with A333s and A332s. As for whether or not I'm comfortable flying older jets... it actually doesn't bother me, seeing how I've been flying on their DC-10s about twice a month now.
aloha
aloha
Dec 14, 2004, 5:25 pm
#3
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,660
The DC-10s that are flying are the -30 versions, which were mostly built in the 80's. The youngest DC-10 was built around 1988 or 1989 I believe.
Most of the 742s are being parked in the desert. There are currently about 6 that are flying pax routes. Those routes will eventually be covered by a mix of 744s, A332s, and DC-10s. The airline was looking at acquiring some UAL 744s, but there is a layout difference in the pax cabin that is apparently a major expense to fix. Those aircraft will probably get a lot cheaper in the coming months.....
Expect an announcement in the next couple of months for either the 7E7 or A350.....although those won't be coming online for 3-5 years.
Still taking delivery of new 319s, 320s, 330s. Acquired a mix of around 25-30 brand new 752s and 753s these past three years.
DC-9s? Yup, their old, but they are great little runners, well maintained and upgraded interiors in the late 90's. (and paid for ^ )
Most of the 742s are being parked in the desert. There are currently about 6 that are flying pax routes. Those routes will eventually be covered by a mix of 744s, A332s, and DC-10s. The airline was looking at acquiring some UAL 744s, but there is a layout difference in the pax cabin that is apparently a major expense to fix. Those aircraft will probably get a lot cheaper in the coming months.....
Expect an announcement in the next couple of months for either the 7E7 or A350.....although those won't be coming online for 3-5 years.
Still taking delivery of new 319s, 320s, 330s. Acquired a mix of around 25-30 brand new 752s and 753s these past three years.
DC-9s? Yup, their old, but they are great little runners, well maintained and upgraded interiors in the late 90's. (and paid for ^ )
Dec 14, 2004, 5:39 pm
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Programs: FB Silver going for Gold
Posts: 21,801
Some prefer older planes......
At least if seated in WBC, I actually like the 742s and D10s as these a/c use 100% fresh air instead of 50/50 recycled/fresh in newer aircraft. 742s have individual vents but the D10s lost them (these a/c used to have them in seat backs).
Come to think of it, some of NW's 320s must be nearly as old as the youngest D10s.
Come to think of it, some of NW's 320s must be nearly as old as the youngest D10s.
Dec 14, 2004, 6:36 pm
#5
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 8,498
This comes up a fair amount.
See also:
NorthWests OLD raggedy planes-time to retire?!
The Aging of Northwest's Fleet
Personally, the only thing that bothers me about flying old planes is fuel efficiency. I've read that even 744's use significantly more fuel/pax than 777's (to say nothing of 742's), and the environmental and geopolitical consequences of that bug me. In terms of safety and comfort, I have no problems. I've never really found NW's planes to feel raggety at all, and I think the average flyer who doesn't know a DC10 from a 777 would be hard-pressed to tell the difference (except maybe for the IFE).
And speaking of IFE, I actually really like that NW and KL have all these old PTV-less planes running transoceanic flights, b/c I _hate_ all the space encroachments of the IFE equipment (boxes under the seats, overheads filled with equipment, monitors in my face, etc.). Given the choice between a NW DC10 and a CO or UA 777 with personal video, I'll take the old plane any day.
See also:
NorthWests OLD raggedy planes-time to retire?!
The Aging of Northwest's Fleet
Personally, the only thing that bothers me about flying old planes is fuel efficiency. I've read that even 744's use significantly more fuel/pax than 777's (to say nothing of 742's), and the environmental and geopolitical consequences of that bug me. In terms of safety and comfort, I have no problems. I've never really found NW's planes to feel raggety at all, and I think the average flyer who doesn't know a DC10 from a 777 would be hard-pressed to tell the difference (except maybe for the IFE).
And speaking of IFE, I actually really like that NW and KL have all these old PTV-less planes running transoceanic flights, b/c I _hate_ all the space encroachments of the IFE equipment (boxes under the seats, overheads filled with equipment, monitors in my face, etc.). Given the choice between a NW DC10 and a CO or UA 777 with personal video, I'll take the old plane any day.
Dec 14, 2004, 6:58 pm
#6
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Some place in this wonderful world (usually at 39,000 ft in seat 1C)
Programs: CO Gold Elite / NW Gold Elite
Posts: 13,747
Originally Posted by doobierw
DC-9s? Yup, their old, but they are great little runners, well maintained and upgraded interiors in the late 90's. (and paid for ^ )
Dec 14, 2004, 9:35 pm
#7
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Washington, DC, Chapel Hill, NC (RDU)
Programs: DL Plat (won't hit DM again) 2MM (2.5), HH Gold, PC Gold, Hyatt Plat
Posts: 5,626
Over T'giving I flew MSP-AMS on a DC-10 that must have just come through a very heavy maintenance, at least renovation. The exterior had the new paint scheme, and the inside smelled like a new car. The seats had either been recovered or at least cleaned thoroughly and had the filling fluffed or something, the toilets were brand new, no scuffs or anything on the plane. I was too tired in AMS, so didn't look for the tail number, but this plane was a nice as a brand new AirTran 717/MD90 or a new EasyJet 737 that I flew on last year (I know these were new planes because in both cases the captains mentioned it in their welcome announcements).
I returned on an A330 and the IFE was nice, but it wasn't that much better an experience.
And like almost everyone else here -- give me a DC9 over an RJ anyday. I'm flying ONT-MSY next week on DL and ONT-DFW-MEM are on RJs and then a DC9 MEM-MSY.
tom
I returned on an A330 and the IFE was nice, but it wasn't that much better an experience.
And like almost everyone else here -- give me a DC9 over an RJ anyday. I'm flying ONT-MSY next week on DL and ONT-DFW-MEM are on RJs and then a DC9 MEM-MSY.
tom
Dec 15, 2004, 12:03 am
#8
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In the home of the "brave"?
Programs: Whatever will get me out of Y and into C or F!
Posts: 3,748
Originally Posted by Jimbo
Do NW flyers on FT have a problem with NW's older fleet? Have the interiors been updated.
Looking at United's fleet, we see some pretty long in the tooth 767-200's from as early as 1981 (N-601 thru 603-UA). These have had perhaps twice as many cycles per day in their lives.
(My jp airline-fleets book is from 2001/02 so I am looking at the just-prior to 11 September, 2001 listings)
Remember, we know that a properly maintained DC-9, DC-10 or 747-200 can fly for a long time. NW is not the only airline flying older versions of these aircraft.
What we cannot predict with certainty is how Fly By Wire aircraft, specifically those of the Airbus variety, will behave after many moons; we can model and test and simulate, but we have no actual experience with 40-year-old FBW passenger airliners.
P.S. Old A300's, the oldest Airbus product out there, are crap...just ask CO.
Dec 15, 2004, 5:20 am
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: SAN
Programs: Nothing, nowhere!
Posts: 23,300
I did the transatlantic on the DC10-30 earlier this year and A330 3 weeks ago and yes there is a difference. The DC-10 does it quicker!! I have no problem flying old, well maintained a/c however.
Dec 15, 2004, 7:21 am
#10
Join Date: May 2003
Location: MSP - NW Gold - PC Plat - Hertz Presidents Circle
Posts: 2,478
Originally Posted by USA_flyer
I did the transatlantic on the DC10-30 earlier this year and A330 3 weeks ago and yes there is a difference. The DC-10 does it quicker!! I have no problem flying old, well maintained a/c however.
Dec 15, 2004, 7:45 am
#11
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: IAH, NWA Gold
Posts: 747
Originally Posted by USA_flyer
...... The DC-10 does it quicker!! .....
A330-300/200: Cruising Speed 545 mph
Dec 15, 2004, 7:58 am
#12
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Washington, D.C.
Programs: UA Premier 1K: PlAAtinum; DL SM, MM; Marriott Gold; CO Plat Emeritus; NW Plat Emeritus
Posts: 4,776
We love our experienced fleet...
Dec 15, 2004, 8:37 am
#13
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: BDL
Programs: NWA Platinum, HHonors Diamond, SPG, YX, AA
Posts: 5,351
I think most NW flyers agree that a "paid for fleet" that helps NW keeps cost down is a good thing for us. I for one feel a lot more comfortable with my hoard of NW miles than my piles of UA and US miles
Dec 15, 2004, 9:07 am
#14
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: LAN
Programs: Worldperks, Friends of Spinzels
Posts: 57
These planes are obviously safe, since they are still around, and have survived many takeoffs and landings.
Dec 15, 2004, 9:41 am
#15
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: HH Gold, AA Gold
Posts: 10,458
Originally Posted by HeHateY
I'd rather fly on a low-cycle NW DC-10-30 (oldest from December 1972, youngest from 1988) or 747-200 (oldest, if it is still in the fleet was N612US from May of 1971; youngest is N638US built July of '86) because at most these aircraft have been used twice per calendar day.
Looking at United's fleet, we see some pretty long in the tooth 767-200's from as early as 1981 (N-601 thru 603-UA). These have had perhaps twice as many cycles per day in their lives.
(My jp airline-fleets book is from 2001/02 so I am looking at the just-prior to 11 September, 2001 listings)
Remember, we know that a properly maintained DC-9, DC-10 or 747-200 can fly for a long time. NW is not the only airline flying older versions of these aircraft.
What we cannot predict with certainty is how Fly By Wire aircraft, specifically those of the Airbus variety, will behave after many moons; we can model and test and simulate, but we have no actual experience with 40-year-old FBW passenger airliners.
P.S. Old A300's, the oldest Airbus product out there, are crap...just ask CO.
Looking at United's fleet, we see some pretty long in the tooth 767-200's from as early as 1981 (N-601 thru 603-UA). These have had perhaps twice as many cycles per day in their lives.
(My jp airline-fleets book is from 2001/02 so I am looking at the just-prior to 11 September, 2001 listings)
Remember, we know that a properly maintained DC-9, DC-10 or 747-200 can fly for a long time. NW is not the only airline flying older versions of these aircraft.
What we cannot predict with certainty is how Fly By Wire aircraft, specifically those of the Airbus variety, will behave after many moons; we can model and test and simulate, but we have no actual experience with 40-year-old FBW passenger airliners.
P.S. Old A300's, the oldest Airbus product out there, are crap...just ask CO.