Jump to content

Talk:Northwest Airlines

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Eclaw (talk | contribs) at 13:44, 19 November 2006 (→‎JFK-NRT). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hubs/Focus Cities

I know Northwest likes to think of AMS as a hub, but they are really beyond delusional about that and their poor classification should be corrected here. Six destinations, with the only possible connection being BOM, is not a hub (and shouldn't even be called a focus city). And yes, I realize that they have their enormous codesharing possibilities with KLM, but codeshare connections do not count as hub connections. AMS is a SkyTeam Hub, a KLM hub, or perhaps a NW-KLM hub, but not an NW hub. Hubs have to have multiple connections on their own metal with orchestrated banks and probably more than SIX FLIGHTS. NW can barely call NRT a hub - it's really pushing it, but since they have multiple flights designed for connections on their own metal...that might be fine.

And also, Milwaukee is down to a shockingly low six destinations. That should be downgraded from focus city status. Someone poopooed me for calling FLL a DL focus city, and look at that compared to NW at MKE! MKE, really?

HNL is tough. Probably not a focus city, but I'm impressed with Japan and the traffic they bring through there, so that may slide for now.


Oldest Fleet?

I'm pretty sure the claim "operates the oldest airline fleet in the world" isn't accurate. I'm pretty sure that Midwest Airlines planes (prior to their 717s they had almost entirely a fleet of 20+ year old planes) has older planes, and if we look at foreign carriers I'm positive there are some old planes flying (having myself flown on DC-3s in the third world...). We should fix this, but some hard numbers would be nice... Kaszeta 13:49, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

"Oldest fleet of any major international airline" is probably a better way to put it. Sekicho 00:35, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

Northwest Airlines fleet age average is 18 years ONLY because of it's VERY SMART move in keeping it's DC-9s. Otherwise it's fleet is only 9.7, one of the YOUNGEST in the WORLD! People who like to constantly harp about how OLD NWA's fleet is should note that NWA is also the MOST financially stable of the U.S. carriers.

It is 9.9 years. Since you have twice added misinformation to this article, I've tagged it for review. Just so nobody forgets (including me), we need to re-add the drunk flying information which blueflyer removed. Rhobite 07:10, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

Rhobite,read the article and much to your (If the DC9s are not counted, Northwest's average age would be 9.7 years. The average age of the DC9s was about 33 years.) disapointment the age is 9.7. Furthermore, your drunk flying information is clear vandelism and far from neutral, you have attempted to place NWA in a negative light. Unless you have definitive sources for the statement on the drunk flying I would be very careful about placing erroneous information about a corporation. You have placed MISINFORMATION on this article numerous times.Your biased attempt to place NWA in a negative light will not go un challenged. Use facts, stop the misinformation.

As I have provided a reference for the drunk flying incident, please stop removing it from the article. What you are doing is simply whitewashing information which you don't like. According to NWAC's 2004 annual report, the average age would be 9.9 years, not 9.7 years. Many of your additions (such as putting the takeover year at 1987) have been wrong. Rhobite 07:47, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
And on another note, the "most financially stable" is a ludicrous thing to say considering Southwest's history of profitability. Superlatives like this are not allowed under our neutral point of view policy, anyway. Rhobite 07:49, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
Blueflyer, you are the one who is refusing to cite sources. Please cite a source for the 9.7 years, and one for the "43 quarters" statement. Particularly, please tell me how a 20-year period only contains 43 quarters. And please tell me why you are continuing to remove the verified paragraph about the pilots flying while drunk. Rhobite 07:56, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

Is there a reason why you need to point out the percentage of traffic at MSP and not any other hub. Furthermore, Tokyo is a HUB for Northwest. The article noted in the run states 9.7. It is clear that you choose to point out selective negatives about NWA (sounds personal) I will continue to point out the positive.

I didn't write the MSP thing. I don't see how it's negative to mention. Is it wrong? In general, please do not remove information if it's correct and phrased neutrally. Please read the 2004 annual report - it clearly says 9.9 years. Don't accuse me of anything, I'm just trying to keep you from whitewashing this article. I wouldn't say you're "pointing out the positive", more like deleting the negative. Rhobite 08:26, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
It's not about pointing out the negative or positive or anything else -- it's about presenting an encyclopedic, accurate view of an airline. If Northwest's in financial turmoil, then it should be part of the article (don't be offended -- ALL scheduled airlines are besides Southwest, the only airline in the black last year). If some of its pilots flew drunk (they did), it should be included. If its planes are old (they are -- see this Philly Inquirer story [1]), it should be included. The truth hurts sometimes. Katefan0 21:08, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
  • Rhobite, I noted you erased the DC-9 AP ref; I found a Web ref for it and put it back in. Katefan0 21:30, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
  • Here is a ref from the Miami Herald that mentions a Northwest pilot fired in 2001 for flying drunk. [2] Katefan0 21:33, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

Give me a break! Rhobite, every article you ref. about NWA, you worked OVERTIME focusing on the negative. The truth DOES hurt when NWA is the ONLY major airline stable (esp. if you hate'em) SW is NOT a major..the top 6 that fly the globe are considered majors. I like NWA and think it is in a FAR better position than the others. Too bad a bitter ex- employee or passenger needs to spend time trying to place it in a bad light. I didn't take 2 seconds to realize your intentions. You conviently left out the biggest part of the DC-9 article to focus on the OLD. That trash about the pilots flying drunk has NOTHING to do with it's operational stats. EVERY airline / company has a few dumb employees. Every other airline article on wiki is about the airline NOT it's rare dumb employee. Your passion to post that trash is nothing less than SPAM. Furthermore, you had better familiarize yourself with the 3 deletion rule. Lets see: NWA helped establish Japan airlines, Launched the 747-400, has acceted delivery of over 200 new aircraft since 2000, has the longest running history of profits of ANY airline prior to 1987, presently NWA has $2.4 Billion in cash TWICE what other airlines it's size or bigger have, NWA owns more of it's fleet than any other American airline, the "OLD" DC-9's were originally designed as millitary jets (built like tanks). Enjoy Rhobite...so much for the drunk pilot and the old planes.(sniker)But, I am sure you will feel, that we the public, would be more interested in your stupid dribble.

Man, it went from a discussion between people with differing opinions to just plain mudslinging. How disgusting. With regard to the actual disagreement, it seemed to me that blueflyer's additions/deletions almost read like marketing materials for the company. However, I don't see how the drunk pilot thing is really very encyclopedic. If there's a systematic problem within the company, then that's one thing, but a couple isolated incidents just doesn't seem to be worthy of inclusion. kmccoy (talk) 04:19, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Kmcoy :"it seemed to me that blueflyer's additions/deletions almost read like marketing materials for the company" Kmcoy, I am rolling on the floor laughing! Was I a wee bit fed up...yeah. Sorry. I like the outfit. Great history, well run, global reach.

KMccoy -- I can see a case being made for not including the drunk flying info, though I tend to err on the "include" side. However, the rest of the unflattering info is perfectly valid for inclusion. Blueflyer has an obvious and admitted bias toward Northwest and I agree with you that his contributions/deletions seem more in line with a marketing campaign than an effort at presenting an unbiased (and unvarnished) view of the company. Also, Blueflyer, can you please sign your comments? It's easy, just type four tildes in a row. Your personal info will get filled in. Katefan0 16:44, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)

Flattering or Un-flattering that is in the eyes of the beholder. Rhobite preferred to include ONLY negative parts of an article and I preferred to do the opposite. Operational FACTS are hardly BIASED. Clearly, as much as I like NWA...it apears that Rhobite did not. Take ya pick. The information that I attempted to place in the article is the SAME info that is in EVERY OTHER airline article on here. Frankly, there is not that much differenc in 12.5 years and 18.3 when it comes to aircraft.. Most people might "get it". When someone focuses on "drunk pilots" "old planes" it can't be because this is an un biased view could it? As noted later, NWA is not the ONLY carrier this has happened to. Yet when one places the SAME info about NWA such as it's reputation for profits as a well run company...it's biased. Gotcha ya!--Blueflyer 17:37, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

    • Instead of throwing around these sorts of accusations and virtually pouting and stomping your feet, why don't you say what exactly you think should also be included in the article? What, exactly, is not being highlighted that should be, and can you provide a source for the information? Katefan0 18:41, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)

Watch it! "Instead of throwing around these sorts of accusations and virtually pouting and stomping your feet". You wanna get personal" You wanna get personal you might get your feelings hurt. Who made you busy body queen to deciede what is biased and what is not. The article is fine now...as it is. It was NOT...the way it was. The information that I placed in the article was directly from the article that referenced the "old" planes. As well as NWA.com(history), Japan Airlines.com (history), NWA '04/ 10k. The article should be balanced in the SAME manner as all other airline articles...NONE of which rant about isolated employee behavior or how OLD a portion of it's fleet is.--Blueflyer 21:13, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

    • You know, I was encouraging you, Blueflyer, to make an argument for what you felt needed to be changed/added. I was prepared to advocate making those changes if I agreed with them. What was your response? More ad hominem (and this time, disgustingly sexist) attacks. Wikipedia articles are made by consensus. That gives me just as much right to weigh in as anyone else, including -- surprise -- you. And by the way, it takes more than this to hurt my feelings or make me angry. Not so, apparently, for you. Katefan0 21:43, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)

"More ad hominem (and this time, disgustingly sexist) attacks" From a female named Blueflyer..back at ya sister. Keep your little "pouting and stomping your feet" comments out of a decent reply and perhaps you can be taken seriously. I don't care if it is NWA or SW or Continental, who cares about the behavior of a few employees? Should we make this a standard for ALL airlines? I fly many many airlines in this country and NWA by FAR is one of the best. If people don't like my view (backed up by the FACTS of the company's 10k) too bad. The SEC seems to approve of it.--Blueflyer 21:58, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

    • I'll simply point out that sexism isn't the exclusive domain of men (witness Ann Coulter). Other than that I don't have much else to say, except that I still don't understand what you think is inadequate in the article. Katefan0 22:01, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)
  • Blueflyer, please cite your source for the 43 quarters of profit statement. You've repeatedly added it and it is not in the 10K. In case I missed it, please cite a page number. On another note, people really need to calm down. This is getting personal. Rhobite 22:14, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)
    • Considering whom you referenced "Ann Coulter" explains your comment of ""pouting and stomping your feet". That mentality goes hand in hand. I'd use her book to line my trash can. I will post the reference for NWA history of profitability.--Blueflyer 22:21, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
      • Just to be clear: my above statement was intended to be critical of Ann Coulter, who says some horrible things about women. Anyway, I never intended this to get quite to this point so if anything I said personally offended anybody, I extend my apology. I meant the stomping feet comment to describe petulance, but in retrospect that phraseology was maybe a bit too colorful. I stand behind the basic sentiment though. Katefan0 22:28, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)
  • Ditto.--Blueflyer 22:46, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • SWA not a major???!!! The DOT defines SWA as a major (more than $1BB in revenue), and SWA ranks number one in domestic passengers carried. Yes, including regional carriers with the legacies makes some of them larger (Delta becomes No. 1), or including international pax (AA becomes No. 1), but make no mistake, Southwest is a big boy with a very big stick.

Fourth largest

It seems to me like the history Blueflyer is adding is valid for inclusion. It just needs to be paraphrased so it's not a cut and paste job. Katefan0 23:26, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)

  • Done. Also, I think since we are equally split between people who think the drunk flying info should be included and people who do not, maybe it should be removed until a consensus is formed. Katefan0 17:05, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
    • No, it should stay. It's a tiny 3-sentence paragraph which is verifiable and neutral. Please keep it. Rhobite 19:10, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
      • I appreciate your opinion (especially since I agree with it), but we have two others on this talk page who've disagreed. What else would you propose? Katefan0 19:32, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
        • As an outsider, I'd say remove the drunk flying stuff from this article. I see nothing wrong with it in an article on airline safety, but unless anyone has evidence that it was any more likely to happen to this airline than any other, I don't see it has a place here. Just because it's true doesn't mean it should be on this page; it's true that I flew on Northwestern in the 90's and I can prove it, but that fact shouldn't go on this page either. AdamW 19:39, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
          • I guess that's an option. If it's not in here, it should be discussed somewhere. Between British Airways, America West, and Northwest there is enough of a history of news coverage to merit an article about drunk flying incidents. Or it could be worked into air safety but it seems relatively minor when compared to the disasters in that article. We should also have an article about Lyle Prouse, the pilot in the 1990 Northwest incident. Prouse is notable because he quit drinking and returned to flying for Northwest after he got out of jail. Also, President Clinton pardoned him before leaving office. Rhobite 20:06, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)
            • I think that's an excellent option, if someone's willing to take it on. I'm not sure it really rises to the level of having its own article (it's not exactly epidemic), so I would support it as an addition to air safety. Katefan0 16:27, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • Exploding whales are also not epidemic, but that's not a criteria for being encyclopedic. Unfortunately I have no time to write a drunk-flying article but I do support its existence. Rhobite 20:25, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
    • I think scope is certainly a factor in whether something is encyclopedic enough to warrant its own article. Katefan0 04:40, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

Hong Kong Airport

Re: Huaiwei: Format of Chinese airports shld be standardised

Hong Kong maintains its own economic policies, and reserves its capacity to come up with civil aviation agreements with other countries at its own. It is an independent member at aviation organisations.

Hong Kong is independent member at civil aviation organisations and airport council, and maintains its own economic policies. It comes up with bilateral aviation agreements at its own. Hong Kong-mainland China and Macau-mainland China flights are considered non-domestic (i.e. international) and reaches international but not domestic airports, such as Pudong but not Hongqiao at Shanghai. Hong Kong, Macau and mainland China should each have separate listings.

As I have mentioned in the Cathay talk page, the destination listing is a listing of countries, not of aviation councils.

"The solution, then, is to add the drunk flying information to the other articles. Not to remove it from here. Sounds like you have your work cut out for you, once you register for an account. · Katefan0(scribble" Whey is that a solution? When someone singles out entity (airline) to focus on someting NEGATIVE. I also notice that NO OTHER airline has mentioned the AGE of aircraft or "Aviation Incidents". Sure SOUNDS like a HUGE BIAS to me. I think this whole thing should be sent to the board, esp. how it has been handled, seems like pretty poor taste. This gives Wiki a bad name PERIOD!

Request for comment

I saw a request for comment in relation to an incident here. What's up with that? Also, why is the factual and neutrality of the article being disputed? --Spinboy 19:26, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

There was a user editing this article who was adding misinformation and removing negative information about NWA. For instance saying that Northwest has been profitable for 43 straight quarters (or years), claiming that the average fleet age is 8.5 years excluding the DC-9's (it's actually 9.9), praising Northwest for "wise" decisions, etc. See the entries above on this talk page. I think we can probably remove the tag if Blueflyer agrees to stop adding information without citing a source. Rhobite 20:23, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
If they can't cite it, then yeah, remove the tag. --Spinboy 21:24, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The drunken incident needs to be put on the article. I remember that even The Arizona Republic made fun of it by placing a comic with two NWA pilots drinking wine as they asked for permission to take off so it was a big thing. I think that if we can combine the positive and negative facts, as long as they are facts, then the article is neutral. But we have to teach rookie editors to try to be neutral. After all, I was like that once too!

I mean, I love Delta, for example, and , that does not mean that I will remove info about their 1985 crash in Dallas! That was a fact, its part of the company's history. -- "Antonio Wonder Woman Martin" Where do you see that they posted 8.5? Are the issues with drunk pilots at OTHER airlines included in the sections? Rohobert you seem to be hung up on a "I hate NWA" trip. NO OTHER AIRLINE i.e. BA, AWA, UAL has mentioned the episodes of drunken pilots. Sounds personal to me. REMOVE IT!"But we have to teach rookie editors to try to be neutral" Take some of your amaturish advice and place the same info for ALL airlines and perhaps you would grasp the term NEUTRAL.

  • The solution, then, is to add the drunk flying information to the other articles. Not to remove it from here. Sounds like you have your work cut out for you, once you register for an account. · Katefan0(scribble) 04:46, May 22, 2005 (UTC)I see...sounds like "neutral" input. This stuff has NO baring on one company or the other. Unless the "pros" are willing to place it in British Airways, Delta, America West, Air France, and the list goes on. This is trivial garbage. The solution is to remove it from the post. For the record NORTHEST was NOT the FIRST airline to report it. Other than that it is great information that is interesting to read.

Rhobite, I have read many other articles on many other airlines on Wiki...THIS ONE by far smacks of an unbiased slant to negative. I think you ought to leave your personal issues out of the profile. I say Robite is a disgruntled passenger or crybaby ex employee. I AGREE with BLUEFLYER! It DOESN'T belong on here!!!!! There NEEDS to be a standard as to what catagories is included for ALL airlines, or industries. Peoples pesonal bias should not be used. Most of us could care less about the BS that Robite has put in here. It is not like Northwest is the ONLY airline that this has happened to. Northwest is not the ONLY airline that flies old airplanes. Wiki is losing it's appeal if this stuff starts to creep in.

I realize I'm responding to a very old, unsigned comment... but come on. I have nothing against NWA. I think I've flown Northwest one time and my only complaint would be about the food at DTW. I just think accurate, verified information should be included in all articles. If an airline has been involved in notable drunk-flying incidents, we should mention it. Likewise, mentioning the age of their fleet is not POV. It is a fact that they operate an old fleet. They discuss it in their SEC filings. Rhobite 04:54, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
Oh, don't worry, the article hasn't even begun to get negative. There's the whole matter of labor disputes left to go [3]Mulad (talk) July 3, 2005 15:35 (UTC)
  • Obviously, the whole issue of NWA's financial status was verified by their bankruptcy filing last year, so Rhobite was right on with that. NWA's fleet is old; that's an undisputible fact. Whether it's a good or bad thing is a matter of conjecture. NWA's public image, and hence their bottom line, was tarnished by their drunk pilot episode, so I find the inclusion of the incident relavent. No other airline is as associated with the issue as is NWA.--Bravenav 05:21, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When did they drop the "Orient" from their name?

When did Northwest drop the "Orient" from their name and revert back just to Northwest? I'd guess it was sometime in the late 1980s. If anyone knows, it would be useful information to have in this article. Moncrief 02:28, July 12, 2005 (UTC)


It followed the merger with Republic Airlines. It's already mentioned in the article: In 1985, Northwest purchased Republic Airlines and adopted its three-hub network centered around Minneapolis, Detroit, and Memphis. Northwest returned to its original name with the merger. --Alexwcovington (talk) 02:46, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify the date, it was 1 October 1986. The article now has the correct info, and I think it would answer the questions about when Orient started and ended as part of the trade name -- never was more than that. Reward 08:18, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Worldperks

Template:Worldperks has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Worldperks. Thank you.

WorldClubs and WorldPerks articles

These should be merged into the Northwest Airlines article. They aren't noteworthy enough to merit their own articles. Every major carrier has airport lounges and FF programs, but they don't have their own articles. The only reason the Admirals Club (AA) and AAdvantage have separate articles is because they were the first lounge and FFP, respectively. Likewise, Asia Miles and Aeroplan have articles because they evolved into more than simple frequent flyer programs. Dbinder 14:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:OTA

Template:OTA has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:OTA the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.

Las Vegas Focus City?

Can we consider Las Vegas to be a Northwest focus city? I know they fly non-stop flights there from a number of non-hub cities, such as Des Moines, Madison, Fargo, Flint, Grand Rapids, Los Angeles, and Madison.

Detroit-Beijing & Shanghai-Pudong nonstop

Why does Northwest no longer have nonstop flights between Detroit and Beijing/Shanghai? Bucs2004 16:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe because of two reasons: Their 747's can't fly farther or high jet fuel prices

Compass Airlines Service??

Does anyone know when will NW's new subsdiary Compass Airlines will begin service? It keeps saying that it will begin service between Minneapolis/St. Paul and Washington-Dulles in June 2006 but I don't see anything in those airport articles. Bucs2004 18:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank goodness for replacing the DC-10!

I'm glad they're replacing the DC-10, but then again, they need to replace those planes earlier. One of the plastic panelings inside the cabin of the DC-10 fell to the floor while taking off to increase altitude on the Flight 98 from Honolulu to MSP on July 2, 2006. There's alot of ducktape inside of the paneling and foam. It shows a sign of really old age. Spongefan 03:07, July 8 2006 (UTC)

Embraer 190?

Nothing is certain that the Embraers will replace the DC-9s - this simply is note know yet. It should be removed from the fleet chart.

I agree. Furthermore, where are the Avro jets and the Saab turboprops in the fleet list?Mattaudio 16:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

4th/5th largest airline in terms of what?

"It is the fourth largest US airline by domestic and international plus domestic kilometers flown." is cited, but the latter part of "Northwest is the world's fifth largest airline[1] in terms of RPK (revenue-passenger-kilometers)." remains uncited, due to the discrepancy. "Northwest Airlines is the world's fifth largest airline." "Northwest Airlines is the world's fourth largest airline" Without saying by what measure they're the xth largest airline. TransUtopian 14:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced the SVG version of the logo with the previous PNG version. The SVG logo contains inaccuracies, and frankly looks too much different than the official logo. Notice the spacing of the "nwa", the different font in both lines of the text (you can see this clearly with the "a"), the thinner lines in the text of the SVG logo (clearly in the "w"), and the position of the "w" in relation to the circle. I don't know if SVG logos are supposed to exactly emulate the official logo, and I don't know if this version qualifies for fair use if it is an imitation of the official. But the two versions have major differences. Tinlinkin 20:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated it to the latest offical logo, which no longer includes the lower text. It is straight from the NWA website. --Keeleysam 07:04, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delta/Northwest?

I'm hearing a couple of rumors from insiders that Delta Air Lines could soon merge with Northwest Airlines. If the merger happens, it will work since Delta doesn't really have an Asia network, Boeing 747s, or a hub outside of the US while NWA will have a New York hub, routes to Africa, and routes to South America. Both are in bankruptcy and combined forces would lead to a very powerful US airline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.163.100.69 (talkcontribs)

It's an interesting idea, but we'll will have to wait for a press release to mention anything in the article. --AlexWCovington (talk) 17:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't ever let such a merger happen! Different fleets and different corporate structure would create one disaster of an airline! Andros 1337 18:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Once more; this is just rumour -- no need to put it in the article at this point. --AlexWCovington (talk) 19:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Norman Mineta started this talk, and while he was DOT sec., he's hardly an airline insider. Both DAL and NWA have flatly denied this rumor and most all airline consultants reject the notion as fanciful. The two fleets are incompatible, and NWA's stubborn unions would be a poor match for union-free Delta (exc. their pilots).--Bravenav 05:40, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fleet age

<< Northwest Airlines fleet age average is 18 years ONLY because of it's VERY SMART move in keeping it's DC-9s. >>

But the fleet includes the DC-9s, so the average should come from the full sample size. The article gives a tricky way of saying it: the average age is 10 years excluding the DC-9s. I think someone needs to add the full average and give an objective statement, i.e.:

The fleet age is 10 years if NWA's X number of DC-9s are excluded. If one includes them, the fleet age is X.

747-8?

Did Northwest really order the 747-8? The 747-8 page doesn't seem to reflect this. Starcity ai 02:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No but it's a rumor they might purchase it.

EclawEclaw 23:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DC-9's replacement?

They should purchase Airbus 318 as their 100 seat requirement to replace worn out DC-9.


Eclaw 02:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)Eugene Law[reply]

JFK-NRT

Is it true that NWA will resume its JFK-NRT route? I couldn't any press releases from Northwest confirming this. Bucs2004 03:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw a press release last year after they suspended their JFK-NRT route, on the NWA website. That the start route of their 787s would be the JFK-NRT-JFK route sometime in August 2008. But I'm not sure if this is still their plan. -chris^_^ 11:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have deleted the sentence from the article since it is a rumor. I did not find it on the NWA website. Bucs2004 05:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It could be true that they could restore it since the price of jet fuel has gone down than the year the service was suspended.Eclaw 13:44, 19 November 2006 (UTC)Eclaw[reply]