Live Flight Tracking

ya im 17

Sure, they are very quiet from a passenger standpoint. When you are in the gate area, the noise generated as they pull in the gate is awful.

um no im not bull crappin those posts have nothing to do with what your talking about the second link deals with knives u retard and the first one just doesnt fit

The post you're decrying was posted in support of YOUR statement WRT to the mad dog being referred to as a lawn dart and was in response to the post by drdisque. Taking exception to it and calling the poster a "retard" is indicative of your immaturity.

BTW we're all adults here, or at least attempt to act like one, and we don't refer to anyone as a retard.

Oh, the horror of it! another person drinking and posting! When will it end?

The first link - 10th post (last post):


The second one - 12th post:


I reluctanly accept your apology, nerd.

At an airline that has the largest fleet of Super80's, I've long heard them referred to as a "Long Beach Lawn Dart".
Good airplanes, but still a MD, and starting to show their age.
The DC-3 was the best product ever made by Douglas and will long be flying after the MD80s are retired.

That whole entire set (DC9, MD80, MD90, B717, and to an extent the B727)... well, I'll be blunt. They all look rather phallic, in a Glen Quagmire sense. In fact, even the ERJ and CRJ series falls into it too. That whole rear-mounted fuselage just reminds me of .. well.. I'll just say to find the episode of Family Guy where the Griffins head out to Quagmire's cabin for a weekend trip, and get to the point where Meg asks how they know they are at the right place. 'nuff said.

BL.

aircraft in video Eastern Air Lines, Inc., dc-9-31, N8961E, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, May 18, 1972. Flight 346 at approximately 1521 eastern daylight time. The accident occurred following a straight-in localizer approach to Runway 9L
the aircraft touched down hard on the runway, resulting in the failure of the

main landing gear and the separation of the t a i l section from the aircraft. The air
craft was destroyed by subsequent ground fire.
A t the time of the accident, heavy rainshowers, associated with thunderstorm

activity, were occurring at the airport.
six nassemers and a crew of four aboard the aircraft, and injuries
were sustained by the captain, one stewardess, and one passenger. i was waiting for this flight. ntsb AAR72-31

And here is the exact same video saying it is 1982 on a test flight at Edwards AFB.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEiFZMo1duM

are u sayin tht to me or the other guy?

Yeah, I was talkin to the other guy!




I dunno if that's an MD-80. Looks too stubby to be a Mad Dog - looks more like a DC-9 to me.



This has been bugging me all morning. I could find info on basht's DC-9 crash, but nothing on the MD-80 crash test at Edwards (other than the same video all over the place). Finally, I found the report on the Edwards AFB crash. It was in fact a DC-9 as well, and the event happened in 1980 - not '82.

The Eastern crash report says the weather was bad (quote from CVR = "...estimated seven hundred overcast half mile, thunderstorm, heavy rain shower over the airport"). The Edward's AFB crash report says the sky was clear at the time of that event. The sky in the video looks too bright in the beginning to be a thunderstorm - you can see the sun reflect off the fuselage just before touchdown. It's more likely that the video in question is a test flight at Edwards rather than a passenger flight crash caught on camera. Who would be out on the tarmac during a thunderstorm filming a DC-9 landing at FLL in 1972?

Edwards AFB DC-9 Crash Report
Eastern Airlines crash at FLL Report

I don't know the date but during certification they lost a tail during the hard landing test. The airplane was supposed to be Air Cal's first MD80. It was repaired and entered service.
BTW the Edwards crash is a DC9-80 which is the MD-80. I bet this is the same one I am thinking of.

Just had another look at the crash report - the cover says "DC-9-80"... DUH!!
In fact, the registration was N980DC

tehe

In grad school, there as a case studies course when we had the opportunity to learn about the DC-9 Super 80 from some of the wonderful people that developed the plane. Since then, I always have been fond of the MD-80 series burt I keep thinking of them as the Super 80.

One drawback of its age is that the plane was not designed for the size of carry-on luggage that people take on board these days.

Except for the very latest aircraft, I don't think any airliner was designed for the carry-on today. Who could have foreseen the airlines charging for baggage and the resulting increase in carry-on luggage

Also keep in mind that, at least American's MD80's, one side of overhead bins is deeper than the other. I would bet all MD80's are the same, but I sure won't state that as a fact.

Newer aircraft are certainly better, but as long as your not trying to carry a full sized piece of luggage on board, I have never had a problem getting my rollaboard in the overhead bins. Certainly had my fair share of experiences.

Yes, in fact many older build nonrefurbished MD-80's have the small bins on the 2-seat side on BOTH sides.

From an external point of view, I can not find any differences between the MD -81, -82, -83 or the -88. Internally, it is a different story. Each airline has different seating configurations which can make a difference in how you view the aircraft. Unfortunately, many users of the MD-80s try to seat as many passengers as possible (understandably from the point of view of return on investment and operational costs). But the packing people in can make these high density seating uncomfortable. AA got a lot of complaints and they configured some of there aircraft with about 134 seats as opposed to the 148 they use now. Delta puts 142 on there MD-88s and 150 on some and 160 on other MD90-30s.

Some European airlines, especially those charter/holiday/vacation airlines where some MD-80s were configured with 165 seats.

I truly detested flying on the B727-100 series because of the configuration of the galley in the middle and high seating density. the B727-200 series was ok as they put the galley in back.

If you don't mind no "entertainment" at all, I think the plane is fine. Does anybody listen to the music channels, anyway? Most of the flights I've been on an MD have been too short for a movie (assuming they had a screen of some kind) and I can do without the tv stuff they sometimes show on shorter flights. However, without that tv, I never would have watched a single episode of "Everybody Hates Chris"---FWIW. MD 80 is a solid plane, in my opinion.

I've flown Mad Dogs many times, not so much lately. Since i now use carry on and not checked luggage I've found that the two seat side of the plane has a smaller profile and can't take many carry on's. In other words the overhead luggage is weak.Flying from ORD to DFW I found this embarrassing. I did find space across over the three seat overheads. Several people said to me don't be embarrassed, it's happened to them. I connected to a late model 737, on my leg to LAX. What a difference. larger seat and larger overhead space. And that blue mood lighting , nice. MD 80's may be ok for a short flights .

There's no regulation or ethical problem about your carry-on not being in the overhead bin above your seat -- just take whatever is available. Or, try getting carry-on that will fit under the seat.

I always put my carry-ons in the bin across the aisle from me so I can keep an eye on my stuff when the bin is opened