Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5647295/

Topic: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: VC10er
Posted 2012-12-30 10:33:20 and read 16482 times.

Moderators: Please feel free to delete this as I can imagine its been discussed before! I did try and look for a thread.

So, I have never flown Sothwest, but from a distance I do admire it very much. Their business model has been a marvel to watch (although today doesn't seem as rosy as yesterday) so perhaps some innovation is in order?

How come Southwest never decided to move beyond its impressive fleet of 737's and get into the international game? An LCC with a current huge following that would easily find passengers to London, Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam or Tokyo or deep South America. I would imagine Boeing (given their loyalty) would have given them a good deal on some LAN- like new 767's or a 787 order. They seem to like new planes, but their must be some good leasing deals out their too.

Besides their livery looking great on a big bird, Southwest would offer the Southwest experience, a mostly Y configuration and perhaps 10 rows of premium seating, (not beds, but perhaps a comfy recliner) I'd think that high traffic big city destinations with amazing connectivity in the USA, it could work. Sort of The People Express of the new millienium - advanced fuel efficent ac with great IFE, WiFi etc. I would think that seeing a 767 or even a 772 Southwest aircraft in Europe would make a huge splash. Naturally it would work only if they did cost less and if they could fill those planes. It just could not be cost neutral with AA, DL, UA or AF/KLM etc.

I am not an armchair CEO, they must have given thought consideration many times. My question is how come they never tried?

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: type-rated
Posted 2012-12-30 10:48:20 and read 16405 times.

Southewest's business model called for:

One type of aircraft to keep training and parts inventory expenses down.
Stay domestic with their service.
Keep it all Y class with unassigned seating to speed up boarding.
Keep expansion at a controlled pace going to destinations where they know they can make money.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Southwest has always had pride in the fact that they are just not the same as everyone else is in the business. I think that if Southwest did all the things you questioned in your post they'd be the same as any other airline and having the same problem with cost control that the other airlines have experienced.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: QANTAS747-438
Posted 2012-12-30 11:08:22 and read 16229 times.

I can totally see WN getting 787s by 2020 or 2025. A short range 787 would get them deep into South America, as they have said they wanted, as well as West Coast to Caribbean or even Europe. In my mind the future WN will be 737MAXs and 787s.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-30 11:10:41 and read 16199 times.

Southwest also maximizes the utilization of their airframes by flying multiple short missions. An international service would not allow this both because of the stage lengths and because long-haul flights tend to operate within departure and arrival blocks.



Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 2):
A short range 787 would get them deep into South America, as they have said they wanted, as well as West Coast to Caribbean...

The 737-7 and 737-8 should be able to perform those missions, as well, and stay within WN's single-family model.

[Edited 2012-12-30 11:11:53]

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: luv2fly
Posted 2012-12-30 11:14:52 and read 16133 times.

If the business model is not broke why change it. Why is it everyone thinks it is the end all of end all's to fly either International and or Hawaii.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: srbmod
Posted 2012-12-30 12:11:30 and read 15822 times.

Quoting luv2fly (Reply 4):
If the business model is not broke why change it. Why is it everyone thinks it is the end all of end all's to fly either International and or Hawaii.

Exactly. Their business model has been tweaked over the years, but to make to jump to widebody a/c is a pretty sizable one, even for an airline like Southwest. Bigger planes means bigger costs for an airline.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: steeler83
Posted 2012-12-30 12:28:46 and read 15706 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
The 737-7 and 737-8 should be able to perform those missions, as well, and stay within WN's single-family model.

Doesn't CO (well, UA now) fly 738s out of IAH to places like Lima, Peru or Bogota? I suppose they'd have the range to fly out of FLL or MCO to BOG or Lima...

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: strfyr51
Posted 2012-12-30 12:33:27 and read 15674 times.

UAL is now shifting Airbus Aircraft to IAH to fly south America,

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: VC10er
Posted 2012-12-30 12:39:46 and read 15628 times.

Well this must have been discussed by WN and probably for the exact reasons mentioned above. However times change and what worked well for decades may not work in the future. I agree with all the points about cost issues but their product and marketing can differentiate them from the majors easily. But if one additional aircraft type and the complex issues associated with international flying makes it prohibitive to lower fares than UA, AA or DL etc, then I guess end of story.

But Southwest is a unique airline and I'd love for them to bring that product and equity to the world. Just a dreamer I am  

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: ouboy79
Posted 2012-12-30 12:44:08 and read 15593 times.

Quoting srbmod (Reply 5):
Exactly. Their business model has been tweaked over the years, but to make to jump to widebody a/c is a pretty sizable one, even for an airline like Southwest. Bigger planes means bigger costs for an airline.

Indeed. As the 737 family continues to evolve, I would expect to see a further expansion internationally that is with in range (and margin goals) of the MAX models. I would almost say it is more likely that WN would go smaller and not larger if it were to add a 2nd fleet type to the family.

I think many are discounting just how many opportunities there will be for the WN network spread throughout the rest of North America and getting deeper into South America.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: PSA53
Posted 2012-12-30 12:47:02 and read 15583 times.

Widebodies?

Rumors have it,(lol) WN will buy two A380's and offer new "train service" coast to coast with 150 stops in between to not just compete with LCC's but with Amtrak and eliminate all 737's.(lol)

But in seriousness,no I don't see that expansion in WN.Maybe create an off shoot independent carrier if they do,but stepping away from a business core system is never a good idea.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: sulley
Posted 2012-12-30 13:00:53 and read 15494 times.

VC10er, a Southwest with widebody international service would hurt your (my) beloved United. Would you really want that?  

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: infiniti329
Posted 2012-12-30 13:10:09 and read 15441 times.

WN can only compete in northern South America ie; Columbia, Venezuela, Ecuador anything further south it will be hard for them to compete even if the 738 MAX has the range.... If the goal is get some of south american market wide bodies will be needed

Take a look at the (north american) airlines whom based themselves off of WN. they have realized rather quickly the while a single aircraft fleet is great there comes a point where you must turn away from it to EFFECTIVELY compete. I may get torched for this but o well...

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: caribb
Posted 2012-12-30 13:17:40 and read 15387 times.

I'm just waiting for them to come to Canada let alone other continents. I believe I've read that the turnaround time on international flights are prohibitive for them to start service to YYZ and YUL... so I gather anything more extensive say to Europe or South America would require a change in their operating model. Then you have to add in foreign languages and new aircraft types.. Canada and Mexico would be a good start before heading overseas but I see no sign of this happening soon.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: SXDFC
Posted 2012-12-30 13:23:27 and read 15331 times.

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 2):
A short range 787 would get them deep into South America

Which would have been a 787-300, I am pretty sure Boeing canclled that project.

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 2):
I can totally see WN getting 787s by 2020 or 2025.

There is a Boeing 787-900 model in WN colors at DAL, but IMHO thats about as close as we will ever see to seeing on wearing WN colors. I think for the foreseable future, we will ONLY operate the 737.. Then again in 2003 no one would have thought we would be flying a 737-800 and flying into DCA,LGA, ATL, EWR and some other places..

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 12):
WN can only compete in northern South America ie; Columbia, Venezuela, Ecuador

I am looking forward to WN serivce to S.America. Hopefully its only a matter of time before it happens..

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: AVENSAB727
Posted 2012-12-30 13:39:21 and read 15225 times.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 7):

Not all routes will go Airbus I think.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: ORDFan
Posted 2012-12-30 13:48:01 and read 15170 times.

Not sure what WN's widebody plans are (if any), but there were more than a few times I thought they could use them on MDW-LGA.  
I don't think I've flown on their 738 on this route yet, either, which always seems completely full. What routes are the 738s currently flying?

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: United727
Posted 2012-12-30 13:57:37 and read 15100 times.

Although not a WB, isn't WN picking up the 737-9??? Thought I heard something about an acquisition of that sort. Wouldn't a -9 be able to handle the longer routing for an International routing for WN???

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: type-rated
Posted 2012-12-30 14:18:57 and read 14953 times.

Only if it was a 737-900ER.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: Wingtips56
Posted 2012-12-30 14:21:02 and read 14938 times.

Quoting ORDFan (Reply 16):
I don't think I've flown on their 738 on this route yet, either, which always seems completely full. What routes are the 738s currently flying?

I know the 738's are regulars in SMF (one on the ground at the moment), flying at least SMF-PHX and SMF-MDW. Looking at Flight Aware, they also run through LAS, and AUS-DCA/BWI, MCO, PHX, and others.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: YULWinterSkies
Posted 2012-12-30 15:49:30 and read 14294 times.

Quoting VC10er (Thread starter):
Southwest would offer the Southwest experience, a mostly Y configuration and perhaps 10 rows of premium seating, (not beds, but perhaps a comfy recliner) I'd think that high traffic big city destinations with amazing connectivity in the USA, it could work. Sort of The People Express of the new millienium - advanced fuel efficent ac with great IFE, WiFi etc. I would think that seeing a 767 or even a 772 Southwest aircraft in Europe would make a huge splash. Naturally it would work only if they did cost less and if they could fill those planes. It just could not be cost neutral with AA, DL, UA or AF/KLM etc.

Europe-N Am is already a blood bath for all airlines involved and all what WN needs to do is stay away from it at all costs.
WiFi would not work across the ocean if I'm correct.
10 rows of premium seating is actually a lot of premium seating. Think 60 seats or so. Most US airlines struggle to make money with less than such premium capacity on many routes across the pond.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: ogshelly
Posted 2012-12-30 16:02:05 and read 14073 times.

There is politics as well. For many years, I heard that WN was going to fly to Mexico Cuty, but the routes are negotated at high level, and Continental had evidently much more influence. With Express Jet, Continental conquered Mexico as successful as Hernan Cortez, serving at least 30 cities. From Hobby airport WN's hub), Interjet will fly to Houston from Mexico utilizing either Airbus or Sukkoi. Again, WN behind! My two cents. Happy New Year amigos

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: ouboy79
Posted 2012-12-30 16:05:12 and read 14012 times.

Quoting United727 (Reply 17):

Although not a WB, isn't WN picking up the 737-9??? Thought I heard something about an acquisition of that sort. Wouldn't a -9 be able to handle the longer routing for an International routing for WN???

I believe the -9 is included in the options they are picking up. Which should be more than enough to get to most of the places the company wants to serve.

Quoting type-rated (Reply 18):
Only if it was a 737-900ER.

We'll probably never see those. Will have to wait for the -9.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: ouboy79
Posted 2012-12-30 16:06:37 and read 13968 times.

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 20):
WiFi would not work across the ocean if I'm correct.

Depends where the satellites are.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: KC135TopBoom
Posted 2012-12-30 16:15:15 and read 13798 times.

WN has to keep an eye over their shoulder and stick to the business model that works for them. With the new PeoplExpress coming in 2013 and beginning service along the east coast, WN will have another LCC competitor.

PeoplExpress is going to be flying the B-734, and are rumored to be working a deal for 14 of them from QF.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: incitatus
Posted 2012-12-30 16:29:47 and read 13947 times.

Quoting VC10er (Reply 8):
However times change and what worked well for decades may not work in the future.

Likewise, what works for other companies might not work for Southwest. They have been judicious limiting business risk and complexity, in a way that other large airlines are not.

Look at the opportunities available to Southwest to expand their business in the last 20 years. There was a large number of markets to expand domestic service without adding complexity. They made the right decisions. Why monkey around with wide-bodies, containers, export/import bureaucracy, exchange rates, multiple cabins, meal service, foreign distribution issues, ETOPS, interline and code-share agreements with foreign airlines, international security, etc, etc???

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: qqflyboy
Posted 2012-12-30 16:30:30 and read 13967 times.

Quoting caribb (Reply 13):
Canada and Mexico would be a good start before heading overseas but I see no sign of this happening soon.

Effectively they are serving Mexico now through AirTran. I think one of the biggest benefits of the Airtran merger for Southwest was to get a foot in on international ops. Sure, WN could have done it on their own. But now WN gets to see it with an insider's perspective and make decisions about their future international ops from that knowledge. They can simply terminate the routes if they don't think they'll fit as part of the merger process, or if they like what they see they can continue them, and perhaps even expand them. Airtran had a similar model to WN prior to the merger, yet they were able to make international ops work, so WN should be able to make a go of it and expand.

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 20):
WiFi would not work across the ocean if I'm correct.

WN is using Row44, which is a satellite based system. So, technically, it could work anywhere. Does anyone know if Row44 is global yet, or if they have any plans? Or is it North America only?

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: VC10er
Posted 2012-12-30 17:04:29 and read 13622 times.

Quoting sulley (Reply 11):

Yes, of course I did think of that. I was only just curious about what folks thought about a Southwest LCC flying abroad. It seems like its kicked up quite a storm!

No, I would never want "my home away from home airline" hurt in any way. It's enough for me now to just deal with the merger and often feel like I'm not on United. But I was curious about an airline like Southwest expanding there model and on a widebody. As an admitted novice I just put it out there. I do think a Southwest 772 would shout something new at dreary FRA. And while some of the responses seem borderline hostle about it, seems like it's not a good idea (at all) to A.netters!

Quoting PSA53 (Reply 10):

With all due respect...Sometimes, perhaps most often, sticking with a core business system is a good idea, If the core system or model still works. And, sometimes it's not anymore. If there are major shifts in your specific business sector sometimes the book has be thrown out the window, and if not done in time, if the senior team can't let go of what made them great (until now) your competition will devouer you. Many years ago it was my assignment to reinvent Circuit City, but it was already too late to for them to change the fundamentals of their business model. It was an old concept and too big to change fast enough. When I met the CEO and CMO they took me on a nation-wide tour of Circuit City stores, meet customers etc on one of the 11 corp jets - it was too late, the brand was already dead, killed by the Internet and Best Buy. They clung onto their old successful biz model when they should have changed 10 years before I met them. I believe it's true in airlines. I think Bethune taught us all about changing a business model for an airline. I think Southwest caused ripples throughout the aviation world with its new business model. It woke the giants and thus we got Ted and Song from Southwest and JetBlue. I would think Southwest had something to do with the creation of GOL in Brazil: a huge fleet of only shiny new looking 737's in a bright color navagating a hundred airports in a giant country! (although I don't think they are doing well at the moment)

What is forever..is to know "if" or "when" your business model must change, being able to let go of what worked so well for so long or sticking with it even when times change. It is and always will be a tough decision. Trust me, I am NOT saying Southwest needs to change - I was only curious about the future  

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: srbmod
Posted 2012-12-30 17:23:14 and read 13281 times.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 24):
WN has to keep an eye over their shoulder and stick to the business model that works for them. With the new PeoplExpress coming in 2013 and beginning service along the east coast, WN will have another LCC competitor.

PeoplExpress is going to be flying the B-734, and are rumored to be working a deal for 14 of them from QF.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm81LSKJC2k

I don't think WN (or anyone else for that matter) is sweating them.

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 22):
Quoting United727 (Reply 17):

Although not a WB, isn't WN picking up the 737-9??? Thought I heard something about an acquisition of that sort. Wouldn't a -9 be able to handle the longer routing for an International routing for WN???

I believe the -9 is included in the options they are picking up. Which should be more than enough to get to most of the places the company wants to serve.

Quoting type-rated (Reply 18):
Only if it was a 737-900ER.

We'll probably never see those. Will have to wait for the -9.

I don't see them adding anything larger than the 737 MAX 8 since in a WN layout, wouldn't the 739ER and 737 MAX 9 require 5 F/As as the seating capacity would be over 200?

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: morrisond
Posted 2012-12-30 17:36:37 and read 13036 times.

The perfect future aircraft for Southwest would be the NSA that has been discussed here many times before.

The version with a twin aisle Eliptical fuselage's and two different sets of wings/engines - One optimized for short Haul under 2500Nm the LR version with a bigger wing/more thrust (could be the same engine family) with range out to about 4500-5000 NM which would cover a lot of Europe and South America from the states.

Common type rating - crews could fly either - same interiors and systems - many of the same spares (except for engine differences) but all the electrical and avionics would be common.

The SR NSA would have a seating of 180 and 220 the long range (with a bigger center section) maybe 190-230.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: UA787DEN
Posted 2012-12-30 20:29:37 and read 10951 times.

Everything mentioned I agree with.

Also, I think most people buy WN because it is easy, cheap, convenient, and does what it needs to.

Their service model doesn't work with Long Haul and International service. Fares on WN transcontinental isn't really much cheaper than Legacies. They start losing the benefits of their business model. Widebody International will also have this and worse service than Legacies. Another notable thing would be the lack of biz class. Add in landing fees, international fees, and gate/airport fees for 4 daily flights.

WN works based off of the philosophy that there is high demand on many short haul markets. Utilizing planes highly on these markets while keeping costs down is how they make money. 788s operating 2-3 daily flights on markets they don't really have an edge on isn't going to help.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: WESTERN737800
Posted 2012-12-31 05:56:04 and read 7288 times.

I don't think WN needs to change their business model. If they want to do any international I think Canada and Mexico is as far as they need to go. I say Canada and Mexico because they can serve those places using their existing fleet. I don't think WN should add a different fleet type. The 737s have worked great for them for years. Adding a fleet type, different maintence, training costs, and different payscales just makes for additional headaches. They should just keep doing what they do. In my mind there is more than enough competition on most international routes. Everyone talks about expansion, I think with the exception of Mexico and Canada they've done almost all the expansion they can do.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: cschleic
Posted 2012-12-31 08:16:43 and read 5686 times.

One of the problems with widebodies is reduced flexibility. They only work on some routes. But smaller planes, such as 320's and 737's work on almost all routes. If the route has more traffic, just add more flights. If you have a widebody for a few routes and they lose traffic, the plane can't economically be moved somewhere else and you have a huge money pit. Many airlines have learned this the hard way. It's not just Southwest's model to have one type, or variations on one type.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: FI642
Posted 2012-12-31 10:37:32 and read 4366 times.

Quoting PSA53 (Reply 10):

Widebodies?

Rumors have it,(lol) WN will buy two A380's and offer new "train service" coast to coast with 150 stops in between to not just compete with LCC's but with Amtrak and eliminate all 737's.(lol)

Thanks, just spit coffee all over my laptop.  

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: luv2fly
Posted 2012-12-31 10:58:33 and read 4292 times.

Let's all pause and reflect on how well the L1011''s worked out for PSA! And airline WN is based on.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: cschleic
Posted 2012-12-31 12:20:59 and read 4171 times.

Quoting luv2fly (Reply 37):
Let's all pause and reflect on how well the L1011''s worked out for PSA! And airline WN is based on.

Exactly! Too few routes for it. Or America West and its 747's to Hawaii.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: flyiguy
Posted 2012-12-31 14:33:12 and read 4019 times.

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 2):

SWA was supposed to be the 787 launch customer when Boeing still had it on the drawing board but when Boeing chose to make it a wide body aircraft, SWA pulled out. There is still a model of the 787 in the aircraft showcase at the SWA training head quarters in Dallas in Boeing colors.

Fly

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: UA787DEN
Posted 2012-12-31 16:03:54 and read 3866 times.

Quoting flyiguy (Reply 39):
Boeing chose to make it a wide body aircraft

Boeing had been considering Narrowbody? That would be one hell of a plane. 242 pax in a 3-class narrowbody. And that's just the -8 model! What about the -9, -10, and -3? (I know the -3 is cancelled, but it wasn't then.)

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: flyiguy
Posted 2012-12-31 18:59:08 and read 3624 times.

Quoting UA787DEN (Reply 40):

Originally it was supposed to be a narrow body single aisle aircraft and then Boeing chose to make it into a wide body.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: Polot
Posted 2012-12-31 19:06:32 and read 3600 times.

Quoting flyiguy (Reply 41):
Originally it was supposed to be a narrow body single aisle aircraft and then Boeing chose to make it into a wide body.

  The 7E7 was always a widebody, it just looked more like a shrunken 777 before getting a makeover. The 737NG only entered service in 1997 and there is no reason why Boeing or WN would want to replace it that quickly.

Edit: Before anyone asks, this was the pre-sharktail 7E7 design I was referring to- there are only one or two renders of it out there:



[Edited 2012-12-31 19:14:20]

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: Stitch
Posted 2012-12-31 19:27:21 and read 3545 times.

Quoting flyiguy (Reply 39):
SWA was supposed to be the 787 launch customer when Boeing still had it on the drawing board but when Boeing chose to make it a wide body aircraft, SWA pulled out. There is still a model of the 787 in the aircraft showcase at the SWA training head quarters in Dallas in Boeing colors.
Quoting flyiguy (Reply 41):
Originally it was supposed to be a narrow body single aisle aircraft and then Boeing chose to make it into a wide body.

What WN might have is a model of Yellowstone 1, which was designed to be a 737 replacement. Since 787 was the next number in the sequence, Boeing could very well have applied it to this, though it would have been as a concept and not a real model number.

The 777 moniker, for example, was first used for a wide-body tri-engine T-tail widebody concept that was to be part of a family with the 757 and 767:

Early Boeing 777 Design (Circa 1977). Would have been part of the 757 and 767 families.


The 7E7 / 787 was developed from Yellowstone 2, which was designed to be a 767 replacement (and was later scaled to also cover the 777-200/777-200ER).

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: SXDFC
Posted 2012-12-31 22:36:15 and read 3337 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 43):
What WN might have is a model of Yellowstone 1
http://i1208.photobucket.com/albums/cc368/737-8H4/Misc02289.jpg

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: UA787DEN
Posted 2012-12-31 22:55:22 and read 3318 times.

Honestly, canyon blue looks a lot better on a 737. But that is indeed a 787 model. Look at the nose and wings. I still don't think though that WN will pick up widebodies.

The Y1 is the perfect chance for Boeing to create a true 757 replacement. Short haul aircraft size is going up. I wouldn't be surprised (and I in fact expect it) if the Y1 came in 150, 185, and 22). seat sizes, with great performance. WN could get a lot of these and have the option to start good Caribbean service or Europe if needed. Launch customer? At least for one of the sizes?
I don't think WN will start this anytime soon, or even for years after receiving the Y1. But they will have the option.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: LoneStarMike
Posted 2012-12-31 23:17:08 and read 3255 times.

Quoting VC10er (Thread starter):
How come Southwest never decided to move beyond its impressive fleet of 737's and get into the international game?

In addition to all the other reasons given, they would have also had to update their reservations systems to be able to handle international flights - something that it has taken them 40 years to do (and they're still not done, yet, but hopefully will be in the future.)

LoneStarMike

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: TWA772LR
Posted 2012-12-31 23:47:26 and read 3225 times.

If Bombardier's claims of TATL range are true on the CSeries, could WN order them and launch EWR or BOS to Ireland and UK? And then get ambitious even start hubs from there and invade FR's turf?

PS, ths is my first post of 2013. HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!        

[Edited 2012-12-31 23:51:57]

[Edited 2012-12-31 23:53:41]

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: aztrainer
Posted 2013-01-01 09:47:24 and read 2924 times.

They only way I could see WN doing a bigger aircraft would be if they plan to transition most of its fleet to that type of aircraft, Commonality and crew usage is what allows WN to be so successful. As has been stated unless Boeing has a frame that can be a transformer where the wing and engine is/are the only different between a shorter hop and longer hop aircraft, I do not think it will happen.

Someone stated that they may be getting the 900, but do they not require another FA as well as they require specific gates at airports due to their length? Would the 900 not also give them the longer lift capability that the 800 would not have?

Lastly, could WN keep AirTrans as a subsidiary of its system where they fly the international routes? This would allow them to have the different turn times and the system is already set-up for AirTrans.

Topic: RE: Southwest Widebodies?
Username: srbmod
Posted 2013-01-01 11:07:29 and read 2829 times.

Quoting aztrainer (Reply 45):
Lastly, could WN keep AirTrans as a subsidiary of its system where they fly the international routes? This would allow them to have the different turn times and the system is already set-up for AirTrans.

The AirTran brand is slated to disappear by 2015 once all employee groups are integrated into Southwest. So to keep the AirTran brand and operation around after the employee groups are fully integrated makes no sense at all. There's a reason why WN is getting rid of the AirTran 717 fleet starting this year, as they have decided to stick with being an all-737 airline and the 717s don't fit in those plans. By the time FL is integrated into WN, the systems will be in place that will allow WN to operate internationally, thus no need for the AirTran brand to be used.


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/