Back to Squawk list
  • 22

Aircraft heading the to the boneyard at the seven year mark?

I'd be interested to know if anyone has access to the PwC "research" that is mentioned . Are the airlines really parting out 7-8 year old airframes or are they just parking them earlier? ( 更多...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Someone should tell Delta......
DC9-50's flying 10 trips a day still.....I am not a top flight economist but I know in my house my 1998 paid for clunker STATE that gets merely reasonable gas mileage still way way cheaper than new car payments.
Mark Duell 2
Yes, mostly Airbus A32S due to the lower wing skin AD but a few Boeing 737-600 and others too.

The A32S lower wing skin AD hits at 25,000 cycles (which is 7-8 years at 9-10 cycles/day) and the cost is in the millions - more than the gap between the value of the airframe and the scrap value of the parts.
linbb 1
Again where did you find the AD as I went to the FAA web site and could find nothing. What is the number for it????????
linbb 1
Checked ADs couldnt come across the one you talk about. Which AC is it for? One type of A20 only? Is it under wing? Like I said went to the AD list that the FAA has, and for those who dont know where just type in FAA AD notes and it will take you to the propper web site then just follow the directions as to what you want to search for. Also explains what they are too takes care of that.
JetMech24 1
I don't think it is an AD, I believe that it is just life limited by Airbus
linbb 0
Would be nice of he had posted the info so one could read it rather than something pulled out of the air.
John Berry 1
Sorry I'm not an aircraft techie. What's AD?
AccessAir 2
It means Airworthiness Directive.....
You have a link on that AD?? Not familiar with it.
Time to rewrite the life span protocols perhaps? I am aware of L1011's and Vicker VC-10's still in passenger carrying service albeit military and it seems that provided correct maintenance is observed any aircraft can still be operated.

These are long paid for and the only cost is repair, crew and fuel and if Delta choose to continue with aging DC9's then let them so long as remains safe to do so.

Is it possible thouigh that the modern airframes from Airbus and Boeing are simply not built sturdy enough compared to the classics i.e. thinner skins and lighter components with limited stress levels?
Airworthiness Directive--in the United States, mandatory repair required by the FAA which is enforceable
Theres no way the 320's At United and US AIR are being sent to storage,
None of them are even that young ........
sparkie624 1
Looks like a lot of Airbuses will hit retirement early...
The vast majority of these aircraft types being parted out young are unpopular "ophan" types with more popular relatives that the parts can be used on such as A318, A350-500, 777-200A, 777-300 (non-ER), and A330-300 low gross weight versions.
A350? I am guessing u mean 340, also, of all 777 ever built I think there has only been 1 scrapped, not sure how many stored, guessing not many, desert seems to be full of 727's dc10's and a ton of 747's 100, 200, and 400 models
Yes, I meant A340-500.

These "new" models aren't sitting in the boneyard for long as their scrap value is so high. Most times they only sit in storage for a few months before heading to a recycler to be dismantled. Usually they're owned by leasing companies who can't find a lessee, not the airlines themselves.
Maybe that explains why the only planes I have seen sunbathing in the desert are the 'totally' obsolete ones like the L1011 and 727's.
Still Delta seems to buck the trend, not only with the DC 9 but they have been buying every MD80 and 717 on the used market they can find, I think they have the right idea.


還沒有帳戶嗎? 現在就註冊(免費),設置諸多客制化功能、航班提醒等等!