Ex-AC machines in the desert

linecrew · Post by **linecrew** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 2:31 pm

Just thought it was an interesting photo. The old AC DC-9's, some recenlty stored 767-200's and even a former Zip 737 of in the background.

Potato Chips · Post by **Potato Chips** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 2:39 pm

Theres talk about pulling these out of the desert, the 767's.

tincanflyer · Post by **tincanflyer** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:01 pm

are the 767-200's in storage or have they been retired?

Potato Chips · Post by **Potato Chips** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:23 pm

DC-9's and 737's, retired, 767's in sotrage.

We sometimes send some 762's or 3's down there when the winter season hits and travelling is less than that of summer.

ywg9 · Post by **ywg9** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:37 pm

I have a stupid question why do they paint over the titles if is just being stored, i mean doesnt that cost money for nothing having to paint over the titles then paint them bakc on in a couple months or so when it comes out of storage. i understans the retired ones but eh just curious

Jaques Strappe · Post by **Jaques Strappe** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:44 pm

ywg9 wrote:I have a stupid question why do they paint over the titles if is just being stored, i mean doesnt that cost money for nothing having to paint over the titles then paint them bakc on in a couple months or so when it comes out of storage. i understans the retired ones but eh just curious

Looks like most of them are like that with the exception of the old US Airways Fokkers.

tincanflyer · Post by **tincanflyer** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:45 pm

ywg9 wrote:I have a stupid question why do they paint over the titles if is just being stored, i mean doesnt that cost money for nothing having to paint over the titles then paint them bakc on in a couple months or so when it comes out of storage. i understans the retired ones but eh just curious

Good call....that is why I think they are retired

ywg9 · Post by **ywg9** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:56 pm

Some are retired but some go back into service and are just stored for a period of time so why spend the money if your just going to put it back in service and have to repaint it seems to be a waste of money to me so i assume there is a purpose to it

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:05 pm

I've always wanted to hop on the Hog, and head down there and see that!

ywg9 · Post by **ywg9** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:10 pm

didnt you used to be able to take tours it would be a site to see if you still can

Potato Chips · Post by **Potato Chips** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:17 pm

Ill contact my friend at SOC for AC and see what fins those are and what there doing there ahhaha.

CLguy · Post by **CLguy** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 5:30 pm

I don't think it is paint they use to cover up the logos. If memory serves me correctly I think it is a protective layer they spray over the paint that protects it from the UV rays and I think it can just be removed without repainting the aircraft.

Jaques Strappe · Post by **Jaques Strappe** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 5:34 pm

Doc wrote:I've always wanted to hop on the Hog, and head down there and see that!

Lemme know when........I'll join you.

fmrc3ame · Post by **fmrc3ame** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 5:41 pm

You are corect it is a protective cover. This is an extract from the AMM giving a slight description of it: BARRIER MATERIAL REF THERMOWELDABLE THERMOWELDABLE F1375
WATER VAPOR PROOF C-303 FABRIC
USA MIL-B-131
TYPE I
C Z-11.409

Main use to protect from Bird droppings and prevent nesting.

Rowdy · Post by **Rowdy** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 9:16 pm

IIRC the AC titles/roundel and the maple leaf on the tail are just giant 3M decals.

Easier than paint

sidestick stirrer · Post by **sidestick stirrer** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 10:36 pm

In years past I think they used to spray the airframes' exteriors with a product called, "Spraylat" which looked like a really-bad fibreglassing job, but actually was as pliable, and peeled off like, a thick rubbery coating.
Might be something next-generation in use now.

ywg9 · Post by **ywg9** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 3:54 am

wow thanks for all the info my curiousity is now put to rest

CAL · Post by **CAL** » Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:56 am

one more question.....the DC9's appear to be in pretty good shape...not that I know much about DC9's?....but just wondering if once retired they can ever be brought back into service...say in Africa?....otherwise why dont they just scrap them or destroy them....taking up alot of space!

N2 · Post by N2 » Thu Apr 20, 2006 5:18 am

Retracted....good ole foot in mouth disease!

Jaques Strappe · Post by **Jaques Strappe** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 6:20 am

N2

What is your problem these days? Not your usual standard of posts.

N2 · Post by N2 » Thu Apr 20, 2006 7:07 am

AHhh sorry Jaques Strappe bad day or months I guess! The few I was talking about are not representative of the pilot group as a whole.

Hedley · Post by **Hedley** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 7:23 am

Dunno if it's maintenance pig or not, but a DC-9 would make a pretty neat business jet.

I'm sure Air Canada' main concern with selling them off, is that they don't end up in Canada, being used by a (new) discount carrier. That, and liability, if they were ever in an accident in the future.

Flightlevels · Post by **Flightlevels** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 8:44 am

I know that the rudders are usually never painted because they are "balanced" when painted...that's why the old nines are left with the little bit of colour left. Same with our old 37's from here at westjet when they left last month.

boeingboy · Post by **boeingboy** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:53 am

I'm sure Air Canada' main concern with selling them off, is that they don't end up in Canada, being used by a (new) discount carrier.

Yea - God forbid someone else comes along and steals some of Air Canada's monopoly!

Jaques Strappe · Post by **Jaques Strappe** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 6:35 pm

AC got rid of these when fuel was less than 20 bucks a barrel citing the bad fuel economy. I doubt they will ever fly again.