Why no G-REG B717z

[Diabolus]

Question probaly asked many times?
Why no British Airlines operate 717s?
Thanx for good reply

[Caslance]

Because no British airlines wanted to buy them, maybe? :confused:

[WHBM]

1. There aren't many of them on any register, with only 7 aircraft in the whole of Europe.

2. It's reworked early 1960s DC-9 technology.

3. Only eight airlines worldwide have taken them.

4. There are actually more sitting in the weeds in Arizona than the total order backlog.

5. As American Airlines junked all the ones they inherited from TWA, that must say something.

6. Embraer and Canadair are seen as the way forward in this market.

7. It's kept going as Harry Stonecipher's pet product at Boeing, because he supported it when he was at McDD and it keeps his friends at Long Beach in a job.

[Eff Oh]

Don't think a single MD-11 was sold in the UK. Also the MD-80/MD90 series was not popular. I think Airtours was the only operator of MD80s.

[IB4138]

Four of "the magnificent seven", are operated here in Spain, by AeBal.

I'm due to fly in one a week this Sunday, on Spanair's AGP to MAD route.

8 X MD11 were ordered by, but never delivered to Air Europe in the UK.

DC9-83's were operated by BIA and Paramount, as well as Airtours.

[aeulad]

I think the 717 would be the perfect replacement for Flybe's 146 fleet, but i don't think it's going to happen :(

Regards

Mike

[small4]

One of the main reasons for the 717 not being flavour of the month in Europe is its weight.

On the apron, its Aircraft Prepared for Service (APS) weight is some 5 tons greater than the AVRO RJ100 to carry around the same number of passengers.

Since in Europe most of the navigation, takeoff, landing, parking and handling charges are weight related, the extra cost per passenger seat mile would be noticeable particularly if you are operating 8 to 12 sector days.

It is definitely faster than the RJ, but over the sector lengths envisaged (mostly below 1 hour) the impact of this extra speed would be negligible. As to fuel burn, I'm not sure. However, I would expect it to be lower than the RJ.

At one time Boeing were trying to reduce the aircraft basic weight but this seems to have come to nought. Their was also talk of an extra flap setting to allow it in and out of LCY.

I seem to remember reading an article stating that if BAE Systems had not cancelled the RJX programme, the 717 would have been binned by Boeing.

[Caslance]

I think Airtours was the only operator of MD80s. What about Paramount and British Island Airways????

[mmeteesside]

Just heard that SN Brussels have ordered B717s to replace their ARJ fleet

mmeteesside
MME Movements (http://www.mmemovements.tk)

[surely not]

Doesn't it also have severe CG probs if loads are light?

[IB4138]

Caslance

You now owe me €250 +IVA for writing your script, seven hours and a few posts previously!:E

I shall be in MANCHESTER in August and will collect then!

Don't make me row across the Irwell.:ooh:

[Caslance]

Oooh yes!!!!! Sorry.

Row across the Irwell? Most days you could walk across it!!!!! :ooh:

[Algy]

I think this is as close as anyone came, and Bishop later said it wasn't very close...




PARIS: BMA continues search as Boeing drops 717-100
Simon Montlake, Paris (18Jun99, 17:24 GMT, 460 words)


UK independent British Midland (BMA) says it is still interested in acquiring Boeing 717 aircraft despite Boeing's belief that there is no business case for developing the 717-100 shrink that BMA has been eyeing.

BMA is looking to replace its Fokker 100 fleet and held talks with Boeing earlier this year on acquiring the proposed 717-100, a 80-85 seat derivative of the basic 717-200. Airline chairman Michael Bishop said at the time he was trying to persuade Boeing to launch the -100 version with BMA as a possible European launch customer with an order for about ten, although he admitted Boeing would require further solid commitments before proceeding.

A spokesman for BMA says the airline is unfazed by Boeing's bearish comments on the 717-100 at the Paris Air Show this week, adding that the carrier has not set a timetable for renewal of its short-haul fleet. Much will depend on route growth and its short-haul fleet plans may be overshadowed by the hunt for new long-haul aircraft in the event that BMA is able to add more transatlantic services, he says.

However, the spokesman concedes that if Boeing does not go ahead with the 717-100, then "we would look at the -200". BMA is also assessing the competing Airbus Industrie A318 - it already operates A320s and A321s - and also considering regional jets for its short- and medium-haul routes, he adds.

Boeing expects to receive US and European certification for the 717-200 in September, shortly before delivery of the first production aircraft to launch customer US national carrier AirTran. But it admits that competition in the 90-100 seat range of jets is tough and reveals that it may look more closely at plans to build an extended 717-300X aircraft that would seat 125-130 passengers rather than pursue the 717-100 shrink.

Boeing Commercial Airplanes' vice president of product strategy and development, John Roundhill, says the manufacturer has no intentions at present of launching the 717-100 derivative, adding: "it does not have a viable business case so we have no plans to develop it".

A spokesman for the company insists that Boeing has not ruled out a future shrink version and would "wait for the market to speak". The standard configuration on the 717-200 - which flew today at the Paris Air Show - is 106 seats.

BMA, the second largest UK scheduled carrier, will begin evaluating two aircraft types next month for use on long-haul services - the 767-300 and A330-200.

A decision is expected by September, although acquisitions will depend on the airline getting permission outside the scope of the Bermuda II bilateral to operate UK-US scheduled services. It is seeking an exemption from the US Department of Transportation to launch services from London Heathrow to four US destinations.


Source: Air Transport Intelligence news

[MarkD]

QF bought a bunch of 717s, a search of the D&G forum will enlighten. I seem to recall it not being able to carry much payload.

The problem with 717 is it doesn't have much family commonality with smaller/larger versions or have any unique selling point. QF are now operating their LCC with the 717s IIRC (which prob have lower baggage limits per pax perhaps?)

Am surprised BM are not going in on the Star RJ order book (EMB and CRJ)

[kick the tires]

We had lots of problems with the MD-83 with Airtours CG wise. In particular the ski flights, often having to carry 4 tonnes of ballast fuel! Even then skis were sometimes left behind!

[Manchester Exile]

QF got their 717's from the takeover of Impulse Airlines, a bankrupt loco that QF acquired for virtually nothing. The 717's operated for Qantas Link initially (independant airlines that operate QF flights in QF-painted aircraft - somebody correct me if I'm wrong), but have just transferred over to Jet Star, Qantas's own Loco which launched yesterday.

I believe that Jetstar will ditch the 717's next year when they have been replaced by A320's.

The number of seats in the JetStar 717's has increased by 11 compared to the configuration they used to fly in under Qantas. They's done this by reducing the seat pitch by 5 cm's - a fact that Virgin Blue are exploiting to the hilt.

[HZ123]

Some of you may remember that 'Paramount' had a fleet of 6 MD's operating out of various UK airports in the late 80's on the UK register. BA used a couple of them to supplement the shuttle aircraft. I am told that there are two white tailed MD's at SEN that have UK reg at this time having lost there Spainish registration.

[spagiola]

Just heard that SN Brussels have ordered B717s to replace their ARJ fleet

There's nothing on either the Boeing or SN Brussels website to this effect, so I suspect this rumor is incorrect.