OH!the containers need to be customised because the MD-80 fuselage is too narrow to accommodate the standard containers used in 737 freighters and larger aircraft.
Well if it can replace 727s there are a bunch of carriers that still have them. 2 engines would be better on fuel than 3. In theory at least.A little old indeed, I would think that given the high price of fuel and an already old aircraft that a someone looking for a cargo jet would look at something a bit more efficient
Hmmmmm.Ok...I'll fess up. One of my absolute dreams is flying for USA Jet. I am not fooling in the least. I would love to get my medical, and then get a wet commercial/multi and start begging them for a job. I know this is shocking as they do not have any taildraggers, but here's the thing - one of my Grandpa's favorite airplanes ever - including the B-25, 24, 29, Connie's of all types, DC-3's, Martin 202 and 404's, Boeing 707/720 and all that - was the DC-9. He loved that airplane - just loved it. So, I have ALWAYS wanted to fly for USA Jet - get a chance to fly DC-9's with steam gauges - maybe do VOR approaches into Mexico or whatever they do. Seriously - if someone knows anyone with USA Jet please tell them my dream. This would kick ass for me. I'd change my political views and become one of the liberal nerd-fest if it would help.
That's basically what is already going on. Both with the -9's and the 80's. When you can buy an old -9 for not much more than an old lear, with the DOC not substantially higher than a falcon 20, and much more revenue potential, well you can see how it makes sense financially.Allegiant has made a successful business by purchasing older MD-80's. The cost of acquisition is so much less that the increased cost of operation isn't a big deal. I wonder if the same kind of thing could be based around cargo MD-80's?