Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
B717 Or A318  
User currently offlineLamyl_hhlco From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 621 posts, RR: 2
Posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2126 times:

If you had to manage an airline fleet to get it more efficient, what will you likely to choose if you had the choice between the 717 and the A319 for a 100 seats range? and why?

Lamyl

[Edited 2003-05-15 13:44:33]

21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTriStar500 From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 4693 posts, RR: 42
Reply 1, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2107 times:

The A319 is not in the 100 seat range, it is in the 130-150 seat range. A direct competitor to the 717 would be the A318.



Homer: Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
User currently offlineLamyl_hhlco From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 621 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2074 times:

let's say the A318 , that's correct !

User currently offlineCanadianPylon From Canada, joined May 2003, 310 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1975 times:

If you had to manage an airline fleet to get it more efficient, what will you likely to choose if you had the choice between the 717 and the A319 for a 100 seats range? and why?

Lamyl



It all depends on the route requirements. If you need a plane to do 10 to 12 short hops a day (CPH-OSL, LHR-AMS, FRA-MUC, YYZ-YUL) a light-weight 717 would be more efficient.

A High Gross Weight 717's range tops out at about 1400nm, so any routes beyond that would be better served by a A318/B737-600. Also, I imagine that the cargo capabilities of a A318/B737-600 are much better than the 717.

You'll have to qualify your statement a little better.

CanadianPylon
"Get it? Got it? Good...."



Always looking for the longest route with the most transfers.
User currently offlineL1011Fan From United States of America, joined May 2003, 271 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1954 times:

The 717 of course!!! It's more fuel efficient, cheaper, and simpler/easier to maintain.



User currently offlineWestern737 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 489 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1946 times:

I flew both and I was extremely impressed with 717 so I am going for 717.



User currently offlineBeltwayBandit From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 495 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1930 times:

Airbus, because they're pretty much give you the aircraft if you agree to buy peanuts and refreshments.

User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7122 posts, RR: 57
Reply 7, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1907 times:

Tell me Western 737 - where did you fly the A318?


The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineDIA From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3273 posts, RR: 28
Reply 8, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1907 times:

"I flew both and I was extremely impressed with 717 so I am going for 717." Instead of cracking a joke here, I'll just clarify. . .Lamyl_hhlco meant to say "If you had to manage an airline fleet to get it more efficient, what will you likely to choose if you had the choice between the 717 and the A318 for a 100 seats range? and why? He did not mean the A319. So Western737, you probably haven't been in the A318, unless you are a Project Manager with Airbus.

Let us not forget the A318 has much more range than the 717. That might warrent a decision against the 717. Personally, I like both a/c.

In the meantime, we are getting anxious to see the first Frontier A318. . .which will be the first A318 in revenue service in the world!

DIA



Ding! You are now free to keep supporting Frontier.
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25142 posts, RR: 85
Reply 9, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1890 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

DIA:

Not so long to wait for the first A318 - July. And we already know what the tail is - it's the brown bear checking his thong in the first Frontier commercial.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

The question is, will it be ready in time for the Paris Air Show, and, if it is, will be make an appearance? The prototype was at Farnborough last year.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineDIA From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3273 posts, RR: 28
Reply 10, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1878 times:

F9 livery at Farnborough. . .wow. That's great hype for Frontier. Who would have guessed that the "second" Frontier, who was flying a couple of 732s just a few years ago, would have come this far, this quick, and become one of a handful of airlines to actually operate a "first revenue flight" of a major new jetliner?!?! Great story for a great airline.

DIA



Ding! You are now free to keep supporting Frontier.
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25142 posts, RR: 85
Reply 11, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1868 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Paris, DIA, not Farnborough. The one at Farnborough last year was in Airbus colors.

But yes, I agree - li'l ol' Frontier as a launch airline? Who'd a thunk it?

 Smile/happy/getting dizzy

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineElwood64151 From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1772 times:

To answer the original question:

It would depend on route structure, as stated above. If we're talking about n/s flights JFK-LGB, then the A318 would definetely be your choice (if you wanted to go that small). More likely, the A318 would be suited for JFK-RNO or LGB-PNS.

If you're talking about short hops like PHF-ATL-MCO, then you're more inclined to go with the 717. If you have several of them, you could even fly LGA-ATL-GPT rather efficiently.

(You'll notice I'm using examples of real airlines, though some of the routes are made-up)

The operational characteristics of the A318 are a long-range, low-density route system similar to JetBlue's cross-country routes, with a modicum of frequency.

The characterisitcs of the 717 are for short-medium hops directly varying density and frequency (more density=more flights, less density=fewer flights).

The idea is, the 717 is a single-type scalable frequency aircraft, while the A318 is a scalable type (A318/19/20) limited frequency aircraft. Each has its own merits.

The real question is not what kind of aircraft you're going to fly as a low-cost/low fare carrier, but rather what kind of LCC are you going to be?

Of course, if you based your system at MCI, OKC, STL, DFW, or other mid-US airport, it'd be pretty tough to choose. That's when Boeing/Airbus really go head-to-head in the 100-seat market.



Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
User currently offlineWestern737 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 489 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1747 times:

Actually I flew A319. I still considered A319 and A318 to be much alike except the length.



User currently offlineElwood64151 From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1746 times:

Also, I forgot to mention that it depends on the airline's forseeable goals. If we're talking about an airline that has designs on significant international travel, the A318 might be a better option. The 717 is not particularly customized for flying accross international borders, though it obviously does, while I imagine the A318 is particularly suited for it, especially in European travel.

So if your focus is on a domestic, short-medium haul airline, I personally would choose the 717. If your focus is on long-haul flights, then the A318 would be a better choice. And if your focus is on international travel, well then it depends once again on length and density of routes rather than much of anything else (i.e. Minneapolis to Mexico City would be better in an A318, but ATL-FPT might be better served by a 717, while STL-CUN could be served by both).



Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1592 times:

The 717 is designed for multiple-frequency short-range flights (2 hours or less flight time), while the A318 is aimed towards longer, thinner domestic routes. The A318 is a heavier a/c than the 717 so the higher landing fees make it a more expensive a/c to operate on shorter flights. If I were to start an airline using one of these two types, I'd go with the 717, in both the standard and the HGW version.

User currently offlineLamyl_hhlco From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 621 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1551 times:

And which one do you think it'd make a better market sell?

User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1505 times:

The A318 is easier to sell because of it being part of a larger a/c family (A319/320/321), while the 717 is basically an orphan in the Boeing stables. The 717 makes sense for airlines that are operators of other members of the family tree (the 717 really shares little to no commonality with it's elder siblings, other than the basic design), but many ex-DC-9 operators replaced it with either A319/320s or 737NGs. Note that three of the airlines that operate (or operated) the 717 ordered them as a DC-9 replacement (AirTran, Hawaiian, and TWA). Several DC-9 operators were among the early candidates for the MD-95, Northwest has kept the DC-9 in service until an unknown date, SAS went with the 737-600 (and are rumored to not be enitrely happy with them).

User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1496 times:

Well, if I was intending on starting a low fare carrier, I would first look at the markets available, and study the need for a new low fare carrier. Then, I would look at the routes, and figure out the mathematical information. I would then look at the aircraft available, and see which one would best be fit for the job at hand. I may go with the MD-95, or the A318, or depending on the destinations, may be both. If I had routes such as GPT-HOU, I would use the MD95, but if I had routes such as GPT-DEN, or GPT-LAS, I would use the A318, or A319

User currently offlinePositive rate From Australia, joined Sep 2001, 2143 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1394 times:

I'd go for the 717 for sure. I think it's a better all round airplane than the A318. Btw isn't the A318 the business variant kinda like the BBJ? I didn't think it was even in airline service.

User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1323 times:

The Airbus Corporate Jet (ACJ) is based on the A319; the A318 is a shrink of the A319, but I won't be surprised if Airbus developed a version of the ACJ using the A318 (I suggest they call it the Airbus Corporate Express).

User currently offlineFly707 From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 350 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1301 times:

If Airbus 318 was powered by GE engines I'll choose it . But if not I'll go for the Boeing 717 .


Without mistakes we will never learn
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
B717-200 V. A318 posted Mon Oct 13 2003 16:27:28 by Asianguy767
B717 Or A318 posted Thu May 15 2003 13:19:04 by Lamyl_hhlco
How Much Runway Needed For B717 & A318...? posted Sat Apr 6 2002 06:12:49 by Baec777
Aeromexico To Upgrade DC9's For B717 Or B737-600 posted Fri Sep 29 2000 21:51:38 by JAVOMD88
B717 Vs. A318 posted Mon Sep 27 1999 02:38:51 by Dazed767
B717 vs A318 commonality a key? posted Mon Mar 1 1999 00:35:52 by CX747
TAM Order (20 Planes) In June: A318 Or E190? posted Tue May 23 2006 13:20:48 by Maperrin
Is This A UA A318? Or Am I Seeing Things Too Small posted Sun Sep 29 2002 22:05:33 by GotAirbus
A318-B717-736-Can They Compete With RJ's? posted Wed Jan 16 2002 21:28:48 by F4N
A318/B717 posted Wed May 2 2001 00:15:44 by A330/B777