Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4897829/

Topic: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: tpa36r
Posted 2010-08-13 07:23:56 and read 25953 times.

Fair use http://www.blogsouthwest.com/blog/so...valuate-addition-737-800-our-fleet

Quote:
Earlier today, I shared with our Employees that Southwest has been evaluating the opportunity to introduce the Boeing 737-800 into our fleet as part of our domestic network, but we have not yet finalized our decision. While the aircraft introduces additional complexities to our operation, we believe our existing network could be enhanced by converting some of our future 737-700 deliveries to 737-800s. Introducing the -800, which has more seating capacity than the -700, would be a complementary fit to our current fleet by supplementing opportunities for longer-haul flying, while also potentially improving our unit costs. The -800 can also give Southwest scheduling flexibility by allowing for additional capacity in high-demand, slot-controlled, or gate-restricted markets—in other words, we can carry more passengers to some of our most popular destinations.

Since the decision to add the -800 has not been finalized, any details regarding configuration, timing, and quantity of deliveries are still to be determined. Given the long Boeing lead time from order to delivery, Southwest would need to make a final decision by December 1 to begin accepting deliveries by early 2012. We are proud to continue our strong history of being the largest Boeing 737 operator in the world, and excited for the potential opportunities that lie ahead for Southwest Airlines which would come with introducing the -800 into our fleet.

This almost sounds like a done deal!

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: travelavnut
Posted 2010-08-13 07:26:09 and read 25935 times.

Quoting tpa36r (Thread starter):
introduce the Boeing 737-800 into our fleet as part of our domestic network

Forgive me for the potential stupid question, but does Southwest have international destinations?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: yellowtail
Posted 2010-08-13 07:28:54 and read 25906 times.

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 1):
Forgive me for the potential stupid question, but does Southwest have international destinations?

If you consider PHX to be part of Mexico and SEA part of Canada
 

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: tpa36r
Posted 2010-08-13 07:29:25 and read 25901 times.

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 1):
Forgive me for the potential stupid question, but does Southwest have international destinations?

No they don't serve any international destinations. It's been rumor for years for them to start Mexico service and this might be the next move to make that happen.

As the article states though, this is more of a "more seats" kinda move into airports with slot restrictions such as LGA which SWA started serving last year.

[Edited 2010-08-13 07:30:00]

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Avconsultant
Posted 2010-08-13 07:47:18 and read 25684 times.

Quoting tpa36r (Reply 3):
No they don't serve any international destinations. It's been rumor for years for them to start Mexico service and this might be the next move to make that happen.

WN largest constraint for International service and code share is their IT systems. There is a lot of internal contention regarding the legacy IT systems. As mentioned above, WN next move would be International service.
The WestJet code-shared failure was due to WN IT infrastructure. WestJet is a very IT savvy company.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: WNCrew
Posted 2010-08-13 07:51:23 and read 25648 times.

Quoting Avconsultant (Reply 4):
The WestJet code-shared failure was due to WN IT infrastructure.

I think ti also had a lot to do with the whole DCA and Delta deal.....that seemed like the last straw, though the DELAY in implementation was likely due to IT.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: icebird757
Posted 2010-08-13 07:57:55 and read 25563 times.

SNA would also be a potential market since it's slot controlled.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: thegreatRDU
Posted 2010-08-13 08:05:57 and read 25469 times.

Quoting Avconsultant (Reply 4):

WN largest constraint for International service and code share is their IT systems. There is a lot of internal contention regarding the legacy IT systems. As mentioned above, WN next move would be International service.
The WestJet code-shared failure was due to WN IT infrastructure. WestJet is a very IT savvy company.

Yep that's true the IT upgrades are now taken care of...look for WN to go through with the Volaris codeshare by the end of the year

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: tjwgrr
Posted 2010-08-13 08:13:51 and read 25367 times.

Will be a nice addition:


Aviation-Designs.Net:
Click here for bigger photo!
Design © Andy Jung
Template © Jason Whitebird

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Jetfixr757
Posted 2010-08-13 08:30:23 and read 25156 times.

Well now, you didn't have to be "Einstein" to call this one!!! I would love to see us get away from the flying bowling shoe paint scheme. I think we are due for a refresh....The -800 has been bouncing around for couple of years now, just go flying in some of the hi density markets and you will see why we NEED the -800. Funny just recently it was mentioned that they can fit at all but 6 gates in MDW,
Jet

[Edited 2010-08-13 08:50:40]

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Lumberton
Posted 2010-08-13 08:38:18 and read 25058 times.

Not the best news for C-series proponents at WN, is it?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: fun2fly
Posted 2010-08-13 08:43:07 and read 25012 times.

With other LCC's using this model, I never understood how WN could ignore it.

However, 737 to 738 is about a 36 pax difference so it is significant (and requires an extra f/a).

I wonder why they would not have more of a variance and look at the 739 which would have about 48-50 pax difference.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2010-08-13 08:43:29 and read 25010 times.

Good deal. I think such a move was long time overdue actually. Yes it adds a bit of operational complexity, but the upside is also quite substantial.

Quoting icebird757 (Reply 6):
SNA would also be a potential market since it's slot controlled.

SWA has continued to grow its SNA slot portfolio virtually every year. Also the carrier does not have a very high LF at SNA, so the airport is not as constrained as one might think.

Instead I can see a -800 be much more useful in a place like LAX, where due to gate limitations, SWA has been stuck at ~110 departures for a decade now without ability to add flying without replacing something else.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: connies4ever
Posted 2010-08-13 08:49:09 and read 24922 times.

Quoting Avconsultant (Reply 4):
WestJet is a very IT savvy company.

Not the failed roll-out of their previous reservation system, I wouldn't think.
Apparently things are in much better shape now.

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 10):
Not the best news for C-series proponents at WN, is it?

But the 738 and the CS100/300 are surely targeted at different markets.

As far as WN mixing different types of 737NGs in their fleet, WS seems to be doing this
fairly OK, as they have 736s, 73Gs, and 738s in their fleet (I think 15, 61, and 13 respectively)

In any event, a loooong time ago WN had a very small clutch of 727s, so conceptually this is not new.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: frmrcapcadet
Posted 2010-08-13 09:01:04 and read 24747 times.

Curious, are 738s, 739s available for short term lease? If so could WN try them and see?

Res international. I see the most likely for a new LCC which does only international, and out of 2nd/3rd tier airports whose home cities would describe them as underserved. WN has a lot of flights to Spokane and Portland OR and would be a great feeder to such an international airline. It could be a fairly uncomplicated system. I think both cities would be delighted to add a few non-stops to Asia and Europe even if only two or three a week.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: BNAtraveler
Posted 2010-08-13 09:03:21 and read 24706 times.

Quoting thegreatRDU (Reply 7):
Yep that's true the IT upgrades are now taken care of...look for WN to go through with the Volaris codeshare by the end of the year

Unfortunately now that Mexico has been downgraded by the FAA, US carriers can not initate a codeshare. So, for now, the Volaris-WN code share is on hold.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: STT757
Posted 2010-08-13 09:07:57 and read 24672 times.

The 737-800 would also be better suited for West Coast-Hawaii flights.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: oflanigan
Posted 2010-08-13 09:21:57 and read 24528 times.

Will they come from Boeing ETOPS certified. That is an additional cost for WN to take on correct, and would they take it on initially?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: 93Sierra
Posted 2010-08-13 09:55:27 and read 24246 times.

Thats is a bummer for the CS . While I always thought the 800 would be a perfect fit into a majority of WNs top routes and their recent move into LGA, I really thought they would be considering the CS series. While it would be a gigantic step away from Boeing, it would allow them to continue flying roughly the same size aircraft for a cheaper initial price tag and impressive lower operating costs ( yet to be proven).

Great news for WN and sounds like the deal is when not if! With WN being such a loyal Boeing customer over the years, could they somehow take delivery sooner than 2012 or is that the amount of time needed for WN to get an 800 operation up and running?

From a ground ops standpoint, how much longer would it take to turn an 800?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: SirOmega
Posted 2010-08-13 10:09:06 and read 24122 times.

Will the 300s be gone by then?

Considering every WN flight I've been on the past year has been 100% full, it makes sense to me to upgrade to the 800. Certainly there are routes, both for slot restricted, gate restriced and long haul (Hawaii and transcon) where putting more bodies on a plane would be great.

Hopefully this will include new interiors too - southwest could really cram a lot of people on an 800 if they went with the slimline seats.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: ItalianFlyer
Posted 2010-08-13 10:13:19 and read 24092 times.

Well it looks like all the -800 chatter on a.net has come to fruition! lol

Anyone know what the turn time is on Ryanair and WestJet's -800s? What is WN's current turn skd like in LGA and BOS...given the traffic and gate constraints. Building single F/A -800 'chaser' patterns is not really that big of a deal, so I would assume the only true cost built into the equation would be on the ground ops side.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: planemaker
Posted 2010-08-13 10:35:27 and read 23876 times.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 13):
But the 738 and the CS100/300 are surely targeted at different markets.

Yes, that is correct. However, with the probable introduction of the 738, commonality becomes a much larger issue and, for an airline that tries to avoid complexity to their ops, having a different type would be avoided.

Quoting 93Sierra (Reply 18):
a cheaper initial price tag

It doesn't have a cheaper initial price tag.

Boeing would not let anyone undercut them with WN.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: KELPkid
Posted 2010-08-13 10:46:25 and read 23615 times.

There are a few -800s parked currently, and I'm sure WN could strike a deal with one of their leasing companies to try 'n buy...  

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: DariusBieber
Posted 2010-08-13 10:50:55 and read 23510 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 2):
Quoting travelavnut (Reply 1):
Forgive me for the potential stupid question, but does Southwest have international destinations?

If you consider PHX to be part of Mexico and SEA part of Canada

More like SAT is part of Mexico....   

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: PHLBOS
Posted 2010-08-13 10:55:32 and read 23413 times.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 11):
With other LCC's using this model, I never understood how WN could ignore it.

Out of curiosity, just what other LCCs (or more accurately phrased LFCs) IN THE UNITED STATES are currently flying 738s? Yes, TZ flew many of them in their final years but they soon realized that on some routes it was too just big of an aircraft; which is why they later opted for a few second-hand 733s. Since TZ is sadly no longer around any more; who else is left outside of WN among US LCCs:

FL - While their 737 order does have an option for 738s (and their 737 safety cards include a listing and section for 738s); to this day, they have yet to either exercise such option and fly the 738.

B6 - No Boeings in their fleet although their A320s are a direct rival to the 738 sizewise.

F9 - While they did fly 732s and 733s in their early years, they've been strictly Airbus in their mainline fleet for some time; with their backbone plane being the A319 which is a direct rival to the 73G.

Ultra-LCC NK - Never had a Boeing in their fleet and like F9 the majority of their fleet are A319s.

LCC but not LFC US - While it still flies the 733 and 734 (which is about the same size as the 738); it never flew any variant of the 737NG.

While the 738 has been a favorite among network/legacy carriers like AA, CO and DL; it really hasn't seen much action among LFCs in the States since TZ's demise.


Quoting connies4ever (Reply 13):
In any event, a loooong time ago WN had a very small clutch of 727s, so conceptually this is not new.

WN's flying of 727s occured in the early years of their expanding beyond TX (courtesy of deregulation), predated the debut of the larger (than the 732) 733 and was well before any 737 having transcontinental range existed.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 22):
There are a few -800s parked currently, and I'm sure WN could strike a deal with one of their leasing companies to try 'n buy...

Out of curiosity, are there any former-TZ 738s still parked in the desert? That would be one way for a carrier to get fairly new 738s without waiting for new builds.

[Edited 2010-08-13 11:04:52]

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: 777fan
Posted 2010-08-13 10:57:31 and read 24048 times.

Funny, some people thought I was crazy when I created this thread about three weeks ago:

WN: Why Not The 738 And/or 739? (by 777fan Jul 21 2010 in Civil Aviation)

777fan

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: clickhappy
Posted 2010-08-13 11:01:35 and read 23997 times.

How about the 738 new build at RNT that doesn't have a customer  

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: EA772LR
Posted 2010-08-13 11:09:18 and read 24267 times.

The WN 738 will look good, and will be a really nice change from the 733/73Gs.


Aviation-Designs.Net:
Click here for bigger photo!
Design © Andy Jung
Template © Jason Whitebird

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: IMissPiedmont
Posted 2010-08-13 11:10:37 and read 24103 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 2):
If you consider PHX to be part of Mexico

Well Phoenix is just an eastern suburb of Los Angeles and Los Angeles pretty much is Mexico so..........

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: 777fan
Posted 2010-08-13 11:10:53 and read 24103 times.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 16):
The 737-800 would also be better suited for West Coast-Hawaii flights.

No doubt - they'd essentially re-take the ATA routes.

777fan

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: EA772LR
Posted 2010-08-13 11:21:49 and read 23876 times.

Quoting 777fan (Reply 29):
Quoting STT757 (Reply 16):
The 737-800 would also be better suited for West Coast-Hawaii flights.

No doubt - they'd essentially re-take the ATA routes.

WN doesn't fly to Hawaii. Are they planning on starting ops to Hawaii?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: cessna2
Posted 2010-08-13 11:22:52 and read 23882 times.

Here's another article I found about the seating capacity...Fair use
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9HINH6G0.htm

Southwest estimates that it would hold 175 passengers, 38 more than the 737-700 and 737-300, which can carry 137, spokeswoman Katie Coldwell said.

Southwest has 116 orders and 37 options to order pending with Boeing Co. through 2017. The airline's entire 544-jet fleet is made up of 737s.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: luvfa
Posted 2010-08-13 11:23:01 and read 23936 times.

We just got a message from our Union President for re-opening our contract, (there is a provision which calls for this in the event we fly any AC beside a 3-5 or 700 series ). The Company and the Union hope to have a deal by the end of the year, should the company pursue this. They contacted the union requesting this!

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: 1GR8AIRLINE
Posted 2010-08-13 11:39:13 and read 23545 times.

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 24):
Out of curiosity, just what other LCCs (or more accurately phrased LFCs) IN THE UNITED STATES

I think every carrier in the United States is a low-fare carrier these days, whether they want to be one or not. Low-cost is another story, though!

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: PHLBOS
Posted 2010-08-13 11:43:01 and read 23461 times.

Quoting 1GR8AIRLINE (Reply 33):
I think every carrier in the United States is a low-fare carrier these days, whether they want to be one or not.

Price an itinerary that has no LFC (B6, FL, F9 and/or WN) competition and you will see otherwise.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: bjorn14
Posted 2010-08-13 11:47:25 and read 23378 times.

Quoting DariusBieber (Reply 23):
More like SAT is part of Mexico....

or as Willie Nelson said, "I don't live in Texas, I live in Austin"

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: BD338
Posted 2010-08-13 11:53:32 and read 23299 times.

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 27):
The WN 738 will look good, and will be a really nice change from the 733/73Gs.

yep, it will be a real nice change to look at a slightly longer 737  

Got to imagine this has a high probability of occuring. Makes a lot of sense for Transcons and busy key routes. Adds an extra ripple of complexity to the planning and scheduling but by no means a showstopper. I don't see how this kills any C Series talk as the two aircraft aren't anywhere close to performing the same missions. There is an argument to say that if WN adds a different (i.e larger) type into the fleet then they may be inclined to add a smaller type into the fleet for the other end of the spectrum.

Quoting cessna2 (Reply 31):
Southwest estimates that it would hold 175 passengers

Excellent, sounds like they are maintaining that little extra spacing on the seat pitch and not cramming in the max.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: AADC10
Posted 2010-08-13 12:36:33 and read 22414 times.

Quoting tpa36r (Thread starter):
The -800 can also give Southwest scheduling flexibility by allowing for additional capacity in high-demand, slot-controlled, or gate-restricted markets

That sounds scary. If they start doing that, then they are becoming more like a legacy carrier. The legacy carriers had done a lot to become more like WN but this is WN moving yet another step toward the legacies. The first one was moving into congested, relatively high cost airports such as LGA and SFO. If it keeps going like this we will have a difficult time telling the difference between WN and UA.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Boeing1970
Posted 2010-08-13 12:40:52 and read 22385 times.

Quoting DariusBieber (Reply 23):
Quoting yellowtail (Reply 2):
Quoting travelavnut (Reply 1):
Forgive me for the potential stupid question, but does Southwest have international destinations?

If you consider PHX to be part of Mexico and SEA part of Canada


More like SAT is part of Mexico....

Common... You aren't even close.... EL PASO!!!   

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: einsteinboricua
Posted 2010-08-13 12:43:32 and read 22320 times.

I wondered why WN never took the 738 seriously until recently. And I also wonder whether the 739ER would be a better fit.

Also, if WN orders the 738, will it be to replace older variants?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Boeing1970
Posted 2010-08-13 12:51:22 and read 22136 times.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 39):
I wondered why WN never took the 738 seriously until recently. And I also wonder whether the 739ER would be a better fit.

Also, if WN orders the 738, will it be to replace older variants?

I think it will have more to do with cross country routes or getting pax to low yield destinations with better ecoomics (like Orlando) than anything else. Replacements, in lieu of replacing a -300 with a -700 for sure, but the use is what will be different.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Bluewave 707
Posted 2010-08-13 13:27:59 and read 21543 times.

I've seen reports that with the -800, WN would have to add an extra f/a to carry 4, with the -900ER, it looks like they'd have to fly with 5 or 6.

Flight deck wise, the -700 pilots would probably have a seamless transition, though they are dealing with a longer fuselage.

The extra seats would be a boon for WN on their high-density routes.

Having new build ETOPS -800s in their fleet would allow them to serve the Hawaiian market if they ever chose to. Of course, the -700s they have on order could fitted for ETOPS as well, instead of retro-fitting existing -700s.

CO, AS, and WS have shown trans-Pacific 737NG flights do work. AQ did as well.

The questions WN would have to ask if they were to serve Hawaii:
a] would WN be willing to spend the money for infrastructure in Hawaii? Just HNL? OGG? KOA?
b] if so, could that allow them a foot in the inter-island markets too?
c] will WN outsource their ground support in HI?

The only thing for inter-island (if they did) ... will WN keep turn times long enough for the CFMs to cool down? AQ had issues with that when they had -300s and -400s.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: QANTAS747-438
Posted 2010-08-13 13:37:02 and read 21338 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 12):
Instead I can see a -800 be much more useful in a place like LAX, where due to gate limitations, SWA has been stuck at ~110 departures for a decade now without ability to add flying without replacing something else.

Right. I'd be interested to see how the -800 would fit at gate 3 or 5 if there's a plane already at gate 1.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 16):
The 737-800 would also be better suited for West Coast-Hawaii flights.
Quoting EA772LR (Reply 30):
WN doesn't fly to Hawaii. Are they planning on starting ops to Hawaii?

I agree that the -800 would be awesome at LGA and DCA, etc... but I say ALOHA to this news of the -800. I can think of every financial reason NOT to go to Hawaii, but I really feel WN will do it... and soon.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: bobnwa
Posted 2010-08-13 13:41:47 and read 21276 times.

Quoting oflanigan (Reply 17):
Will they come from Boeing ETOPS certified. That is an additional cost for WN to take on correct, and would they take it on initially?




Both the aircraft and the airline have to be ETOPS qualified. For the airline it would involved changing maintenance procedures , re-writing manuals new radios, then being certified by the government.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: aerobalance
Posted 2010-08-13 13:42:36 and read 21245 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 12):
Quoting icebird757 (Reply 6):
SNA would also be a potential market since it's slot controlled.

SWA has continued to grow its SNA slot portfolio virtually every year. Also the carrier does not have a very high LF at SNA, so the airport is not as constrained as one might think.

Apparantly, you haven't tried getting seats on the prime weekend SNA-LAS flights - need more seats, always full.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: ScottB
Posted 2010-08-13 13:51:08 and read 21156 times.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 11):
SWA has continued to grow its SNA slot portfolio virtually every year. Also the carrier does not have a very high LF at SNA, so the airport is not as constrained as one might think.

The big issue for SWA using the 737-800 at SNA would be their share of the annual passenger allocations.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: aerobalance
Posted 2010-08-13 13:53:36 and read 21079 times.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 45):
annual passenger allocations.

I didn't know they had that, thanks for the info.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: ScottB
Posted 2010-08-13 14:14:26 and read 20797 times.

Quoting Bluewave 707 (Reply 41):
The only thing for inter-island (if they did) ... will WN keep turn times long enough for the CFMs to cool down? AQ had issues with that when they had -300s and -400s.

They seem to manage in Florida, Texas, Phoenix, Albuquerque, etc.

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 43):
Both the aircraft and the airline have to be ETOPS qualified. For the airline it would involved changing maintenance procedures , re-writing manuals new radios, then being certified by the government.

True, but Aloha, Alaska, ATA, America West, and Sun Country have all managed to do so in recent years.

Quoting Bluewave 707 (Reply 41):
with the -900ER, it looks like they'd have to fly with 5 or 6.

Not more than 5, since the maximum certified passenger capacity is 220. In practice, I'd expect they'd configure it with four extra rows to reach 199 seats and thus only require four cabin crew.

Quoting Boeing1970 (Reply 40):
getting pax to low yield destinations with better ecoomics (like Orlando) than anything else.

They'd be the perfect equipment for picking a fight with B6 on BOS-Florida routes...

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: 777fan
Posted 2010-08-13 14:32:29 and read 20501 times.

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 30):
WN doesn't fly to Hawaii. Are they planning on starting ops to Hawaii?

I know WN doesn't fly there but they did maintain a codeshare with ATA when they flew there circa 2003-2005 (?). IIRC, they operated in the 4XXX flight number range. Don't know if WN has any plans to fly to Hawaii (it'd not doubt cost a lot to establish a base, get ETOPS certs, etc.) but adding the 738 would at least give them that option although it's worth pointing out the ATA birds often faced weight restrictions during the wintertime (or so I've heard).

777fan

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: hannahpa
Posted 2010-08-13 14:33:47 and read 20518 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 2):
If you consider PHX to be part of Mexico and SEA part of Canada

LOL!!! Thanks for the laugh. I needed it.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: tguman
Posted 2010-08-13 14:34:36 and read 20537 times.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 13):
WS seems to be doing this
fairly OK, as they have 736s, 73Gs, and 738s in their fleet (I think 15, 61, and 13 respectively)

I believe it is:
15 -600's - Tail # 601-615
71 -700's - Tail #001-011, 201-260
13 -800's - Tail #801-813 (812 is the special colours jet)

This is as far as I can tell working as a fueller in YYJ, I am almost certain in 8 months I have fuelled the entire fleet. Even getting tail 813 only a few days into service.

tguman

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: par13del
Posted 2010-08-13 15:33:28 and read 19779 times.

Quoting Avconsultant (Reply 4):
The WestJet code-shared failure was due to WN IT infrastructure.

Not saying you are wrong but if that is / was the cause it would be a disappointment. WN has always known the features it's systems lack / need for international traffic - codeshare or not - so if they announce so far in advance a service but are still not ready at implementation which cause the project to fail, something is drastically wrong.

Quoting fun2fly (Reply 11):
With other LCC's using this model, I never understood how WN could ignore it.

Probably the reason why WN is still around and being profitable. I think the days of looking at WN as a startup LCC are long over, they are one of or the largest carrier of domestic pax in the US, better question now would be why other LCC's do not follow the master  
Quoting fun2fly (Reply 11):
However, 737 to 738 is about a 36 pax difference so it is significant (and requires an extra f/a).

I think the primary reason why they never purchased any, plus the added benefit of having a/c flow thru their system without worrying about seat counts, a/c were not "confined" to any particular route, even if done, they could always be re-reouted within the network without much effort.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 39):
And I also wonder whether the 739ER would be a better fit.

WN was not too successful when they attempted to beef up their transcons, they have gone back to their roots of shorter segments and higher a/c utilization. The main reason the 739ER exist is for range, any additional pax is already covered by their 738 phobia.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: homsar
Posted 2010-08-13 15:38:58 and read 19514 times.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 13):
As far as WN mixing different types of 737NGs in their fleet, WS seems to be doing this
fairly OK, as they have 736s, 73Gs, and 738s in their fleet (I think 15, 61, and 13 respectively)

In any event, a loooong time ago WN had a very small clutch of 727s, so conceptually this is not new.

WN has operated different-sized 737s since the 737-300 was introduced.

The 737-200s and -500s had/have 122 seats, while the -300s/700s have 137 seats. They both require the same number of FAs, which simplifies crew scheduling, but for reservations and dispatching equipment, they still have to keep the two capacities separate.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: mtnwest1979
Posted 2010-08-13 15:44:29 and read 19374 times.

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 24):
Out of curiosity, just what other LCCs (or more accurately phrased LFCs) IN THE UNITED STATES are currently flying 738s?

Sun Country flies some IIRC

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: BMI727
Posted 2010-08-13 15:53:20 and read 19267 times.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 39):
I wondered why WN never took the 738 seriously until recently.

Maybe they have and it just never was made public. I'm sure that they and Boeing carefully considered sizes when designing the NG, but of course, a lot has changed since then.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: KELPkid
Posted 2010-08-13 16:27:36 and read 18984 times.

Quoting Boeing1970 (Reply 38):
Common... You aren't even close.... EL PASO!!!

Dude...there are forum members from there, you know...   

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: thegreatRDU
Posted 2010-08-13 16:29:06 and read 18896 times.

Quoting BNAtraveler (Reply 15):

Unfortunately now that Mexico has been downgraded by the FAA, US carriers can not initate a codeshare. So, for now, the Volaris-WN code share is on hold.

Forgot all about that had this not happened it would have...

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Antoniemey
Posted 2010-08-13 16:34:43 and read 18806 times.

Quoting SirOmega (Reply 19):
Hopefully this will include new interiors too - southwest could really cram a lot of people on an 800 if they went with the slimline seats.

You'd be the only person I've met who wants MORE people crammed into the plane with you...

Quoting Boeing1970 (Reply 38):
Common... You aren't even close.... EL PASO!!!

Down in the west Texas town of El Paso I fell in love with a Mexican girl...

Quoting Bluewave 707 (Reply 41):
I've seen reports that with the -800, WN would have to add an extra f/a to carry 4, with the -900ER, it looks like they'd have to fly with 5 or 6.

Doubtful. They don't have to fly the aircraft with the number of seats it's certified for, after all, and the F/A count is determined by how many seats are installed in the aircraft.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 47):
Not more than 5, since the maximum certified passenger capacity is 220. In practice, I'd expect they'd configure it with four extra rows to reach 199 seats and thus only require four cabin crew.

That would seem the most likely scenario to me as well.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: WNCrew
Posted 2010-08-13 16:38:35 and read 18778 times.

Quoting Bluewave 707 (Reply 41):
The only thing for inter-island (if they did) ... will WN keep turn times long enough for the CFMs to cool down? AQ had issues with that when they had -300s and -400s.

Can someone elaborate on this? I don't understand how AQ couldn't do it, yet WN does multiple short legs per day with very short turns. Was it because AQ's flights were even shorter than WNs? I mean, sometimes the planes will fly MDW-STL-MDW-IND-MDW-CLE-MDW.... those are all around :40, some under that.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: tpa36r
Posted 2010-08-13 16:58:07 and read 18571 times.

Quoting WNCrew (Reply 58):
Quoting Bluewave 707 (Reply 41):
The only thing for inter-island (if they did) ... will WN keep turn times long enough for the CFMs to cool down? AQ had issues with that when they had -300s and -400s.

Can someone elaborate on this? I don't understand how AQ couldn't do it, yet WN does multiple short legs per day with very short turns. Was it because AQ's flights were even shorter than WNs? I mean, sometimes the planes will fly MDW-STL-MDW-IND-MDW-CLE-MDW.... those are all around :40, some under that.

Shouldn't be a issue.Boeing issues a cool down time from thrust reverse to idle. You have to give something to the effect of 3 minutes before shutting the engine down to cool everything internally off.

Now where there might be a issue is brakes. I know most of the time that is accomplished within 30 minutes for a complete cool down. And if temps are still a little high they can drag the gear a couple miles upon departure.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: sunking737
Posted 2010-08-13 17:10:59 and read 18405 times.

Quoting mtnwest1979 (Reply 53):
Sun Country flies some IIRC

Yes SY has 6 737-800 and 3 737-700. The -800 has been their work horse A/C. They get several from Transavia every winter. They are a great plane to cater. I could get front galley catered in 8 to 10 min. Aft galley in 10 to 12. Groomers clean full A/C in 8 min. SY when I worked there a turn was done in 45 min to 60 min.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2010-08-13 18:16:44 and read 17709 times.

Quoting WNCrew (Reply 58):
Can someone elaborate on this? I don't understand how AQ couldn't do it, yet WN does multiple short legs per day with very short turns. Was it because AQ's flights were even shorter than WNs?

AQ and WN are hardly valid comparisons.

WN's average stage length is 650miles, AQ's inter-island average was mere 142 miles per its DOT numbers. (the longest inter-island segment was HNL-ITO at only 216mi)

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: planemaker
Posted 2010-08-13 18:58:20 and read 17209 times.

Quoting BD338 (Reply 36):
I don't see how this kills any C Series talk as the two aircraft aren't anywhere close to performing the same missions. There is an argument to say that if WN adds a different (i.e larger) type into the fleet then they may be inclined to add a smaller type into the fleet for the other end of the spectrum.

Considering that simplified ops is quite central to WN's success, the complexity of bringing a small fleet of a different type does not fit in with WN's model. That is not to say that down the road they may change their model but for the next while they won't be bringing on another manufacturer's product.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Silver1SWA
Posted 2010-08-13 19:00:52 and read 17215 times.

Quoting Jetfixr757 (Reply 9):
I would love to see us get away from the flying bowling shoe paint scheme. I think we are due for a refresh

They just completed the transition to the current scheme. I think they are good for a while...

Quoting 777fan (Reply 25):
Funny, some people thought I was crazy when I created this thread about three weeks ago:

Well, you weren't the first to bring it up. It's been debated to death for at least 6 years. So excuse some for shrugging it off as just another empty rumor.  

I just hope WN is ready to adjust ramp staffing accordingly. I don't think I want to be offloading those large cargo bins by myself!  scared 

[Edited 2010-08-13 19:01:49]

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Bluewave 707
Posted 2010-08-13 19:24:45 and read 16927 times.

I was told by former AQ mx folks that the CFM56s required a certain amount of minutes to cool down before the next re-start. I think it was at least 30 minutes. The shorter segments (100-200 miles) probably didn't help much either. Which is why the -300s and -400s were replaced by more -200s.

I also heard that extra care had to be taken if -700s were used as fleet subs on inter-island runs, or connections to mainland runs.

AQ showed that with the -700, trans-Pac ops were profitable on most of the flights.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: JBAirwaysFan
Posted 2010-08-13 19:58:59 and read 16502 times.

Adding the 738 to their fleet would also benefit when Love Field is opened up in 2014 as it will be a gate restricted airport as per the conditions for repeal of Wright and Shelby. I could see these being used heavily at DAL as well as northeast (PHL, LGA, BOS) markets and intra-west coast markets as well.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: SXDFC
Posted 2010-08-13 20:00:07 and read 16491 times.

Quoting SirOmega (Reply 19):
Will the 300s be gone by then?

The -300s ( ala the ones with the Winglets ) will most likely be in the fleet until they have served the traditional 25 years of service with Southwest, the ones that leaving now are either the older -3H4's or the leased birds that traditionally numbered between 657 to 699.


IMHO I can only picture WN with anywhere from 10 to 25 -800's much like it is with the -500's fleet and like others have said will significantly help on those slot restricted routes.


As for ETOPS, why would they need it? Most of their planes that fly from the NE to Florida typically hug the coastline, and I don't believe WN plans to serve HNL or SJU yet.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: ElBandGeek
Posted 2010-08-13 21:35:09 and read 15511 times.

With their entrance into more restricted markets like LGA as well as the potential for getting back into the Hawaii routes that TZ was on, the 738 makes perfect sense for WN. If they would need a subfleet for ETOPS anyway they might as well have it be one that'll be more economical to operate. Assuming this comes to fruition I'll be happy to see something a bit bigger coming into MDW in the future (now I can hope they go one better and get 900ERs)

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Pohakuloa
Posted 2010-08-13 22:07:21 and read 15256 times.

Quoting Bluewave 707 (Reply 64):
I was told by former AQ mx folks that the CFM56s required a certain amount of minutes to cool down before the next re-start. I think it was at least 30 minutes. The shorter segments (100-200 miles) probably didn't help much either. Which is why the -300s and -400s were replaced by more -200s.

I've also heard from former AQ mechs that not only the turnaround times on cooling the engines, but also the lacxk of cooling time at altitude had an effect on this as well. While many routes in the WN route structure allow for cruising at altitude where the air temperature can help cool and keep the engines at a lower average temperature, Hawaii inter-island routes as you stated are so short that it is start up- take-off - ascend - level - descend - land - shut down all in an average of 20-ish minutes. AQ's turns were really short as well. I remember getting severely delayed in LIH 3 times because of this issue. Twice on the 733 and one time on the then brand new to AQ 734.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: KELPkid
Posted 2010-08-13 22:11:52 and read 15198 times.

Quoting Bluewave 707 (Reply 64):

I was told by former AQ mx folks that the CFM56s required a certain amount of minutes to cool down before the next re-start. I think it was at least 30 minutes. The shorter segments (100-200 miles) probably didn't help much either. Which is why the -300s and -400s were replaced by more -200s.

I also heard that extra care had to be taken if -700s were used as fleet subs on inter-island runs, or connections to mainland runs.


I think what AQ did to CFM's on inter-island runs was actually not allowing the engines to cool down during cruise. AQ's flight segments were pretty much up-and-down, and IIRC, the CFM-56 likes to have a cool down period after climb thrust is used, which it gets by cruising at altitude (lower power settings, nice cold high altitude air into the engines). This is more what AQ was doing to the engines...that plus the quick turns on the ground didn't really treat the engines how they liked it, and TBO (time between overhaul) suffered as a result.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Fiedman
Posted 2010-08-13 23:33:18 and read 14604 times.

Quoting tpa36r (Thread starter):
any details regarding configuration, timing, and quantity of deliveries are still to be determined.


I wonder if they would go with the Westjet lay out of 166 seats



as apposed to the cattle-car aka Ryanair layout of 189 seats

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: BMI727
Posted 2010-08-13 23:58:12 and read 14426 times.

Quoting Fiedman (Reply 70):
I wonder if they would go with the Westjet lay out of 166 seats

I doubt that they will go with the Ryanair configuration because they use a bigger seat pitch than Ryanair, and presumably, Southwest will get the entryway they have been rumored to have wanted for some time.

Just doing some back of the envelope calculations based on the FR configuration, with 33 inch pitch, the 737-800 would hold about 174-177 seats depending on galleys and such. If they take out 1.5 rows for their entryway, that leaves them with 165-168 seats, or 162-165 if they take out two rows. Of course, that is just some very rough calculations, and does not account for things like if Southwest wants to add more lavs, galleys, closets, etc.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: TedEx
Posted 2010-08-14 01:12:36 and read 13987 times.

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 24):
Out of curiosity, just what other LCCs (or more accurately phrased LFCs) IN THE UNITED STATES are currently flying 738s? Yes, TZ flew many of them in their final years but they soon realized that on some routes it was too just big of an aircraft; which is why they later opted for a few second-hand 733s. Since TZ is sadly no longer around any more; who else is left outside of WN among US LCCs:

I guess it depends on how you define LCC... AS and WN go head-to-head on quite a few routes and has taken over much of the void left by TZ with their West Coast-Hawaii service. Despite some similarities, it's difficult to define AS as traditional "network" carrier... In any event, they've got 738s!

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: DesertAir
Posted 2010-08-14 04:14:19 and read 13130 times.

Quoting BNAtraveler (Reply 15):
Unfortunately now that Mexico has been downgraded by the FAA, US carriers can not initate a codeshare. So, for now, the Volaris-WN code share is on hold.

This causes me great distress since I fly Volaris, actually 5 flights since October and would love to receive WN credits for these flights.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: 777fan
Posted 2010-08-14 04:54:10 and read 12900 times.

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 63):
Well, you weren't the first to bring it up. It's been debated to death for at least 6 years. So excuse some for shrugging it off as just another empty rumor

No doubt (note the disclaimer in my OP in that thread), but I couldn't help but bring it up again given that my last few WN flights have been jam-packed and with an eventual business/leisure travel industry rebound expected, it'd make sense for them to add some capacity without necessarily adding frequencies. WN practically 'owns' several of its routes that other carriers don't serve with non-stop service (or don't serve at all) which enables WN to determine the price point.

If they already dominate a particular route, and that route is continually operating at or near capacity with some room to grow, it'd only make sense to add or adjust capacity by dropping frequencies and swapping with higher capacity a/c as was mentioned in the OP blog.

I'm not a huge WN fan, but from a business and operations standpoint, this makes a ton of sense. As an added bonus, it might also purge some of the crusty 733s from the fleet!

777fan

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Braniff727Ultra
Posted 2010-08-14 07:36:14 and read 11884 times.

I can see them introducing the -800 for several of their longer routes but my thoughts were more along the line of the -900 for LGA, SNA & LAX service because of the increased load factor in passengers over that gained with the -800.

LAXInt'l;

I thought they were negotiating more slots with LAWA as part of the new lease/fees agreement being negotiated with all the carriers serving the mighty LAX. If they introduce the -900 instead of the -800 for LAX service wouldn't that give them a bit of leverage in trying to get additional slots? (btw; LAX is my "Happiest place on earth"!) I can hardly wait to see how she looks after all the retrofits being implemented.

As for LGA; well I would cetainly think that the -900 would be the preferred way to go as any significant increase in slots is probably not forth coming any time soon.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: travelavnut
Posted 2010-08-14 09:45:58 and read 11596 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 2):
Quoting tpa36r (Reply 3):

Thanks guys!

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2010-08-14 09:53:45 and read 11628 times.

Quoting Braniff727Ultra (Reply 75):
I thought they were negotiating more slots with LAWA as part of the new lease/fees agreement being negotiated with all the carriers serving the mighty LAX. If they introduce the -900 instead of the -800 for LAX service wouldn't that give them a bit of leverage in trying to get additional slots?

LAX has no slots.

SWA can run a 500 flights if they wish, only problem is they (SWA) have no room(gates) to park such flights. As result SWA schedule has been stuck at ~110 or so flights for the last decade.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: AirNovaBAe146
Posted 2010-08-14 10:08:46 and read 11572 times.

Quoting JBAirwaysFan (Reply 65):
Adding the 738 to their fleet would also benefit when Love Field is opened up in 2014 as it will be a gate restricted airport as per the conditions for repeal of Wright and Shelby. I could see these being used heavily at DAL as well as northeast (PHL, LGA, BOS) markets and intra-west coast markets as well.

Thats exactly it. They could do any number of tactics to keep the 4th FA with the aircraft....from isolating the -800 on certain routes like MDW LGA, to entire pairings with it.

Quoting Fiedman (Reply 70):

I wonder if they would go with the Westjet lay out of 166 seats

If they're going to go with the -800 with approx 166 seats, why not go with the -900. What would the cost difference, an -800 versus a -900 be?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Barney Captain
Posted 2010-08-14 10:53:39 and read 11494 times.

From Gary Kelly...

"......The 800 has in an all coach configuration, 175 seats which is 38 more seats than the 700. And it would require a fourth Flight Attendant, probably an additional lav, a different galley layout....."

Sounds like 175 will be the magic number.



"If they're going to go with the -800 with approx 166 seats, why not go with the -900. What would the cost difference, an -800 versus a -900 be?"

Increased fuel burn and decreased range. -900's would make no sense configured as a -800.

[Edited 2010-08-14 10:56:46]

[Edited 2010-08-14 10:58:09]

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: atrude777
Posted 2010-08-14 11:17:16 and read 11364 times.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 77):


SWA can run a 500 flights if they wish, only problem is they (SWA) have no room(gates) to park such flights. As result SWA schedule has been stuck at ~110 or so flights for the last decade.

As of March 2010 (the employee site has not updated this summer's schedule at LAX)

WN is operating 116 Daily Flights out of 11 gates to 20 Cities.

Alex

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: einsteinboricua
Posted 2010-08-14 11:22:14 and read 11327 times.

Quoting Barney Captain (Reply 79):
"If they're going to go with the -800 with approx 166 seats, why not go with the -900. What would the cost difference, an -800 versus a -900 be?"

Increased fuel burn and decreased range. -900's would make no sense configured as a -800.

And the fact that the -900 is no longer in production; instead, the -900ER is in production.  

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: dadoftyler
Posted 2010-08-14 12:28:04 and read 11198 times.

Quoting atrude777 (Reply 80):
As of March 2010 (the employee site has not updated this summer's schedule at LAX)

Huh? What Employee site? SWALife is updated...where are you looking? ("....looking for skeds, in all the wrong places....")

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: WesternA318
Posted 2010-08-14 12:45:53 and read 11148 times.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 2):
If you consider PHX to be part of Mexico and SEA part of Canada
Quoting DariusBieber (Reply 23):
More like SAT is part of Mexico....

Dont forget SAN OR Tucson!

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: QANTAS747-438
Posted 2010-08-14 13:00:45 and read 11136 times.

Quoting atrude777 (Reply 80):
WN is operating 116 Daily Flights out of 11 gates to 20 Cities.

Well, sort of. We actually use 9 gates. Gate 4A cannot handle a plane with winglets and it's rare that we get a non-wingletted plane, so we don't use that gate. Gate 4B is a shared gate with US which we have to shut down at 630p every night. Then on Saturdays, we cannot use gates 2, 4A or 4B. This is why LAX has one of the highest gate utilizations in the system.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: WesternA318
Posted 2010-08-14 13:15:22 and read 11096 times.

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 84):
Gate 4B is a shared gate with US which we have to shut down at 630p every night.

Why on earth do you have to clse it at 630?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: AirNovaBAe146
Posted 2010-08-14 13:38:28 and read 11049 times.

Quoting Barney Captain (Reply 79):

Increased fuel burn and decreased range. -900's would make no sense configured as a -800.

How many pax would a -900ER have in SWA configuration?

I'd guess somewhere between 190-199.

As the 4th FA is required whether it is an -800 or -900, would the extra 20-25 seats be offset by the extra fuel burn?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: AA43E
Posted 2010-08-14 13:46:52 and read 11028 times.

Quoting SirOmega (Reply 19):
Hopefully this will include new interiors too - southwest could really cram a lot of people on an 800 if they went with the slimline seats.

I hope not! I'd hate for WN to start behaving like Ryan. Making a decent profit is one thing but casting aside any concept of passenger comfort would not be in keeping with the caring character I've come to expect from Southwest.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Braniff727Ultra
Posted 2010-08-14 14:30:26 and read 10928 times.

LAXintl;

LAX has no slots.

SWA can run a 500 flights if they wish, only problem is they (SWA) have no room(gates) to park such flights. As result SWA schedule has been stuck at ~110 or so flights for the last decade.


If I have read things correctly on the LAWA site regarding the renovations to LAX as well as the expasion this will avail; certainly the vast majority of the expansion is for Bradley. But the over all scheme plays for the rest of LAX too. Thus aren't the other terminals (1-8) also going to see some modifications that aren't strictly cosmetic that would allow for additional gates? I realize that the footprint isn't going to afford much in the way of expansion but instead of just expanding TBIT why not build a whole new Int'l terminal on the footprint of the expansion too TBIT and then make TBIT T9 instead. It could then be reconfigured for several additonal gates as all that space required for the big girls won't be needed at each gate. Maybe even allowing SWA too move into a reconfigured TBIT as T9 allowing more slots to increase their capacity at this major facility in their route structure. This would also have the consequences of (if they use the 900) to open up Hawaii & Mexico City to their schedules instead of code sharing with others. I know from reading in couple of articles that they have in fact studied the idea of adding Hawaii around the time when Aloha went belly up.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: JHCRJ700
Posted 2010-08-14 15:06:28 and read 10837 times.

Quoting tpa36r (Thread starter):
This almost sounds like a done deal!

I didn't get that impression at all. It seems to me like they are just considering the type and seeing how it fits in to their plans.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2010-08-14 16:33:52 and read 10754 times.

Quoting Braniff727Ultra (Reply 88):
hus aren't the other terminals (1-8) also going to see some modifications that aren't strictly cosmetic that would allow for additional gates?

Keep in mind LAWA is a landlord, not really a terminal operator. If an airline wants to step forward to expand or modernize or even built from scratch facilities it has under long term lease LAWA would surely go along as it has prior for AA, Delta, United, Virgin America and just last week for Alaska plans to rework T-6. (see LAX Approves Alaska Air Terminal Move (by LAXintl Aug 9 2010 in Civil Aviation) )

But no, nothing is really planned for the leasehold terminals.

Quoting Braniff727Ultra (Reply 88):
n but instead of just expanding TBIT why not build a whole new Int'l terminal on the footprint of the expansion too TBIT and then make TBIT T9 instead.

In essence when all the TBIT remodel is done with new west concourses and all it will be virtually an all new terminal anyhow.

But no, none of the masterplans or court settlements call for any additional terminals. Matter of the airline lobby has never called for whole sale added gates at LAX.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: QANTAS747-438
Posted 2010-08-14 17:03:22 and read 10671 times.

Quoting WesternA318 (Reply 85):
Why on earth do you have to clse it at 630?

It's a shared gate with US and we have to give it up to them from 630p-1030p for their ONE flight. Once they get their flight out, we can then park a terminator at 4B.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: pink77W
Posted 2010-08-14 17:33:02 and read 10629 times.

i hope they pick 737-900ER, more seats less flights more efficent

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: QANTAS747-438
Posted 2010-08-14 22:14:44 and read 10334 times.

Quoting pink77W (Reply 92):
i hope they pick 737-900ER, more seats less flights more efficent

If more seats means less flights and more efficiency, then WN should get a 747-8H4. I don't think it quite works out that way.

The 737-900ER is too much plane for WN. It wouldn't make much sense to get a -900ER over an -800 for WN operations. A one-class 175 seat -800 would suffice for WN.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Braniff727Ultra
Posted 2010-08-14 23:16:58 and read 10227 times.

quoting LAXint'l:

But no, none of the masterplans or court settlements call for any additional terminals. Matter of the airline lobby has never called for whole sale added gates at LAX.



Is this a result of the "agreement" hammered out by the Mayor and the groups that had lawsuits pending to stop any modifcation/expansion of LAX? If so, very short sighted indeed.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: atrude777
Posted 2010-08-14 23:27:14 and read 10220 times.

Quoting dadoftyler (Reply 82):

Huh? What Employee site? SWALife is updated...where are you looking? ("....looking for skeds, in all the wrong places....")

swalife--about swa-company information-facts

Scroll a bit and you'll see WN's top Ten cities, showing the info I stated about LAX.

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 84):

Well, sort of. We actually use 9 gates.

So, 116 flights or so out of 9 gates? Holy Mackerel LOL

Alex

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: LAXintl
Posted 2010-08-15 01:21:48 and read 10131 times.

Quoting Braniff727Ultra (Reply 94):
Is this a result of the "agreement" hammered out by the Mayor and the groups that had lawsuits pending to stop any modifcation/expansion of LAX? If so, very short sighted indeed.

Why short sited?

No carrier was crying for additional domestic terminal. Matter of fact one of the possible Masterplan options actually called for what would be a reduction in gates in all northside terminals (T1-3) as part of a redesign.
The primary interest of airlines was for better and expanded international facilities, which they will get.

What Southwest experiences at LAX, is not due to lack of overall gates, as new entrants keep coming and get plenty of space (Virgin America, JetBlue etc), but the due to hemmed in position SWA finds itself with no other competitor carrier is smartly willing to cede any room. Why vacate gates or other facilities which you know will likely be used on flights against you?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: odwyerpw
Posted 2010-08-15 07:18:08 and read 9955 times.

there are some flights where a 739ER makes sense.....but it would have an impact on turn around times. Except for the few stations that have a double bridge way (Albany NY has it...but I haven't seen it used recently when traveling here), it is very difficult to board & deplane 199 people in a single isle plane. That would play havoc with gate availability.

I flew a 752 recently....I was shocked at how long it took to get everyone on and off the plane.

Going from 137 to 175 with the same isle is going to be challenging enough for SWA.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: GlobalCabotage
Posted 2010-08-15 14:47:54 and read 9578 times.

Would be great if the unions approve it! BWI and MDW to the left coast would have better economics! Also, could be the prelude to Hawaii, Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean! If WN will invest in the 738, it's only a matter of time before they invest in outside the US! If WN wants to grow, they will need to look at other areas, and the 738 would do it! SJU to BWI and MDW, bring it on!

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: 777fan
Posted 2010-08-15 18:58:27 and read 9356 times.

Quoting odwyerpw (Reply 97):
I flew a 752 recently....I was shocked at how long it took to get everyone on and off the plane.

Going from 137 to 175 with the same isle is going to be challenging enough for SWA.
Quoting GlobalCabotage (Reply 98):
BWI and MDW to the left coast would have better economics!

Sure, it might be challenging to get some additional pax onboard (ala a 752) but if WN were to use the a/c on a longer range flight, they'd have the luxury of building that extra ground time into the scheduled block-to-block time and/or making it up in the air if it were that much of an issue. Somehow I think they'll find a way to make it work.

777fan

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: SurfandSnow
Posted 2010-08-15 19:09:16 and read 9326 times.

If this aircraft type works well for a much loved carrier across the pond, I'm sure it would do just fine at WN. Though, something tells me these planes will have seatback pockets and free access to the bathroom!

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: hnl-jack
Posted 2010-08-15 19:43:52 and read 9276 times.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 16):
The 737-800 would also be better suited for West Coast-Hawaii flights.
Quoting EA772LR (Reply 30):

WN doesn't fly to Hawaii. Are they planning on starting ops to Hawaii?
Quoting 777fan (Reply 48):
know WN doesn't fly there but they did maintain a codeshare with ATA when they flew there circa 2003-2005 (?). IIRC, they operated in the 4XXX flight number range. Don't know if WN has any plans to fly to Hawaii (it'd not doubt cost a lot to establish a base, get ETOPS certs, etc.) but adding the 738 would at least give them that option although it's worth pointing out the ATA birds often faced weight restrictions during the wintertime (or so I've heard).

With Allegiant entering the Hawaii market and the successful expansion of AS flying 800's in several western market to Hawaii, WN has to be watching carefully. It wouldn't surprise me if they were to challenge both carriers in secondary mainland markets with the 738 and would fill the void left when the code share with ATA ended. The first clue will come if these aircraft, assuming they order them, are ordered to ETOPS spec.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: mrskyguy
Posted 2010-08-15 23:45:29 and read 9142 times.

Quoting odwyerpw (Reply 97):
Going from 137 to 175 with the same isle is going to be challenging enough for SWA.

I don't recall the source, but I do remember reading that a typical SWA 737-700 *completely* deplanes in a bout 17 minutes or less (with the exception of oddball issues), and less than 8 minutes at KBUR with the double-door. That's about 7.45 second per passenger on average for the standard 1-door-jetway deplaning option. Using the same rough average on a 738 pushes it up to 21.7 minutes, which seems high. I've been on -900's that deplaned much quicker right to the last row.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Silver1SWA
Posted 2010-08-15 23:59:12 and read 9097 times.

Quoting mrskyguy (Reply 102):
I don't recall the source, but I do remember reading that a typical SWA 737-700 *completely* deplanes in a bout 17 minutes

That doesn't sound right. Maybe boarding takes 17 minutes, but deplaning has to be much shorter than that.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: QANTAS747-438
Posted 2010-08-16 00:16:25 and read 9091 times.

Quoting mrskyguy (Reply 102):
I don't recall the source, but I do remember reading that a typical SWA 737-700 *completely* deplanes in a bout 17 minutes or less (with the exception of oddball issues),

Without the normal drama of deplaning, a full flt with 137 on board can deplane anywhere in the 8-10min range. Boarding a full flight is in the 10-15 min range. The turn time that is the most efficient is roughly 30mins. We can turn a full flight off and on in 30mins.

However, with an -800, WN will have to increase turn times. We have some flights that arrive from MDW and turn out HOU, or arrive from SAT turning out to HOU... those will need 45mins-55mins for an -800 what with all the strollers and the wheelchair hell those flights are.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: mrskyguy
Posted 2010-08-16 00:17:53 and read 9085 times.

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 103):
That doesn't sound right. Maybe boarding takes 17 minutes, but deplaning has to be much shorter than that.

Hard to tell.. I don't have the source, but it would help to remember that it's the high point of the scale. I've been aboard SWA 737s (nearly all I fly) that took longer to deplane, much to the passenger's chagrin.

Even at half that time (which isn't unheard of by any stretch), that's roughly 3.75 seconds which would deplane a 137-seat 737 in 9 minutes, and a 175-seat 738 in 11 minutes.. and that's pushing PAX out the door.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Lumberton
Posted 2010-08-16 02:26:40 and read 8991 times.

Here's a good look at the (possible) implications.
http://www.fleetbuzzeditorial.com/2010/08/16/southwest-boeing-737/

Quote:
Southwest Airlines’ evaluation of the 737-800 comes as little surprise. If the airline decides to convert its options or places new orders, the significance for Boeing’s evaluation of either an updated 737 or a completely new successor takes on a whole new meaning.

If the airline manages to successfully negotiate staffing requirements with its unions on the bigger jet, what does that mean for Boeing in the long run?

More importantly, if Southwest Airlines can come to an agreement with unions before December 1st, it allows the airline to buy any replacement 737 which has more seats than its current 737-700 fleet with virtually no headaches and thats the prize the airline wants, not least because it has been wanting a new airplane for a number of years now.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: PHLBOS
Posted 2010-08-16 07:22:47 and read 8754 times.

Quoting mtnwest1979 (Reply 53):
Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 24):
Out of curiosity, just what other LCCs (or more accurately phrased LFCs) IN THE UNITED STATES are currently flying 738s?

Sun Country flies some IIRC

You are right, I did indeed forgot about SY; however...

Quoting sunking737 (Reply 60):
Yes SY has 6 737-800 and 3 737-700.

While the 738 is SY's workhorse plane (mind you, I mean no disrepect towards SY); I would hardly call a carrier with that only operates 6 of the particular plane size-type a benchmark model to follow. My earlier question/comment was in response to an earlier poster's comment alluding to every other LCC using the type. While that might be true in Europe (FR in particular); it's certainly wasn't/isn't true in the U.S., even when TZ (which at one time had 30 to 35 738s at its peak) was still around.

OTHO, many carriers in the U.S. (AA, AS, CO & DL) openly embraced the 738 and used them to ultimately replace their older 727s.

Quoting TedEx (Reply 72):
I guess it depends on how you define LCC... AS and WN go head-to-head on quite a few routes and has taken over much of the void left by TZ with their West Coast-Hawaii service. Despite some similarities, it's difficult to define AS as traditional "network" carrier... In any event, they've got 738s!

I forgot about AS having 738s until your post, good catch.

To be clear, LCC means a carrier w/a low COST structure which is NOT to be confused with a carrier that offers low FARES across the board. I don't believe that AS has ever been considered a LCC. Just because a carrier may go head-to-head w/a LFC w/matching fares doesn't mean that they're a true LFC. That would be like saying that DL is a LFC because it competes w/FL on many routes to/from ATL.

IIRC, the assumed definition of a 'legacy' carrier is one that's been around prior to deregulation (1978) that offered scheduled interstate service. AS as well as HA would conceivably fall in that description athough they are certainly smaller in overall size with respect to the likes of AA, CO, DL, UA & US. Their (AS & HA) smaller size is probably one reason why they're not usually grouped/associated w/the so-called Big-5 in terms of legacy/network carrier definition.

The reason WHY WN is not considered a legacy carrier was because WN was originally an INTRA-state carrier up until that time and was NOT subject to CAB regs.

As far as TZ (whose history dates back to 1973) is concerned; IIRC TZ was still a strictly charter-only carrier prior to deregulation.

[Edited 2010-08-16 07:23:30]

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: 777fan
Posted 2010-08-16 18:38:29 and read 8394 times.

Quoting hnl-jack (Reply 101):
. It wouldn't surprise me if they were to challenge both carriers in secondary mainland markets with the 738 and would fill the void left when the code share with ATA ended.

Sure, or they could play it safe and funnel O&D and connecting traffic through LAX which would likely enable them to fill the a/c with ease, regardless of competition from UA, HA, etc.

777fan

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: dxing
Posted 2010-08-16 20:21:39 and read 8270 times.

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 43):
Quoting oflanigan (Reply 17):
Will they come from Boeing ETOPS certified. That is an additional cost for WN to take on correct, and would they take it on initially?




Both the aircraft and the airline have to be ETOPS qualified. For the airline it would involved changing maintenance procedures , re-writing manuals new radios, then being certified by the government.

Which they could do with their -700's if they wished too.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: 1337Delta764
Posted 2010-08-16 20:33:02 and read 8258 times.

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 107):
OTHO, many carriers in the U.S. (AA, AS, CO & DL) openly embraced the 738 and used them to ultimately replace their older 727s.

Actually, AS ordered the 738 to replace their MD-80s. AS retired their 727 fleet in 1993, with the 737-400 being their replacement.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: seabosdca
Posted 2010-08-16 20:41:49 and read 8245 times.

One thing to remember about the -900ER is that it has substantially worse field performance than the -800, which could be an issue at some important WN stations (cough... MDW... cough).

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Silver1SWA
Posted 2010-08-17 13:08:01 and read 7859 times.

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 104):
We can turn a full flight off and on in 30mins.

This makes me laugh a little. You know how many times I work a flight that comes in twenty minutes early so it's on the ground for almost an hour, and it STILL pushes ten minutes late due to whatever shenanigans are going on up there with the boarding process?

I say we can barely turn a full off/full on flight in 30 minutes some of the time.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: chrisair
Posted 2010-08-17 13:26:27 and read 7810 times.

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 112):
You know how many times I work a flight that comes in twenty minutes early so it's on the ground for almost an hour, and it STILL pushes ten minutes late due to whatever shenanigans are going on up there with the boarding process?

It's your airport.   That doesn't happen often in Tucson....

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: LAXDESI
Posted 2010-08-17 13:39:31 and read 7776 times.

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 106):
More importantly, if Southwest Airlines can come to an agreement with unions before December 1st, it allows the airline to buy any replacement 737 which has more seats than its current 737-700 fleet with virtually no headaches and thats the prize the airline wants, not least because it has been wanting a new airplane for a number of years now.

Interesting point. I think WN could easily add 6 more seats to B73G, raising its capacity to 143 seats from the current 137 seats.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: EA772LR
Posted 2010-08-17 13:42:12 and read 7770 times.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 111):
One thing to remember about the -900ER is that it has substantially worse field performance than the -800, which could be an issue at some important WN stations (cough... MDW... cough).

I think you mean the original 739, not the 739ER. IIRC, Boeing enhanced the 739ER's takeoff abilities to where they match the 738.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: speedygonzales
Posted 2010-08-17 14:31:12 and read 7673 times.

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 115):
IIRC, Boeing enhanced the 739ER's takeoff abilities to where they match the 738.

I don't see how that's possible with same thrust, higher TOW and lower rotation angle.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: Revelation
Posted 2010-08-17 16:29:37 and read 7564 times.

Quoting speedygonzales (Reply 116):
I don't see how that's possible with same thrust, higher TOW and lower rotation angle.

The Short-field Performance Enhancement Program is standard on the 737-900ER.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: United_fan
Posted 2010-08-17 16:40:10 and read 7540 times.

Quoting Jetfixr757 (Reply 9):
Funny just recently it was mentioned that they can fit at all but 6 gates in MDW,

What about BUR,would they be too long when parked at the gate?

Also,my take on airlines flying 737's to Hawaii is this;yes , the planes can make it (Aloha and Alaska),but will the fares justify the fuel burn and flight times? Isn't that why airlines like to send planes like the 753 and 764 and domestic 777's to Hawaii? More people/lower fuel burn per pax?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: dxing
Posted 2010-08-17 18:09:39 and read 7452 times.

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 104):
However, with an -800, WN will have to increase turn times. We have some flights that arrive from MDW and turn out HOU, or arrive from SAT turning out to HOU... those will need 45mins-55mins for an -800 what with all the strollers and the wheelchair hell those flights are.

Figure 40-45 minutes to turn it. Gonna have to add at least one ramper to the mix. Those bins are considerably longer than the -700 and only a gorilla can toss a bag from the door to the bulkhead in back.

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 115):
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 111):
One thing to remember about the -900ER is that it has substantially worse field performance than the -800, which could be an issue at some important WN stations (cough... MDW... cough).

I think you mean the original 739, not the 739ER. IIRC, Boeing enhanced the 739ER's takeoff abilities to where they match the 738

It also suffers from anemic terrain clearance.

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: SPREE34
Posted 2010-08-17 19:41:55 and read 7349 times.

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 114):
Interesting point. I think WN could easily add 6 more seats to B73G, raising its capacity to 143 seats from the current 137 seats.

They they could have that same lousy cramped Y product the Legacies offer?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: 1337Delta764
Posted 2010-08-17 19:45:32 and read 7343 times.

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 120):

They they could have that same lousy cramped Y product the Legacies offer?

What about with Weber 5751 slimline seats (the ones where the seat bottom moves forward while reclining that DL and AA use)?

Topic: RE: Southwest To "evaluate" 737-800!
Username: SSTsomeday
Posted 2010-08-17 19:52:42 and read 7325 times.

Does WN have the option (or would they want to) revert to two-door, outdoor boarding/deplaning for the larger 737 at a lot of their destinations, in order to help with turn-around times?

Or would they consider investing in two-door jet bridges, something like what KL does at AMS (but with wide-bodies?) Could two-door bridges be a prudent investment where they want to fly the -800?


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/