QANTAS747-438 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1800 posts, RR: 2 Reply 2, posted (9 years 2 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3737 times:
I don't think that WN would ever get a 737NG unless they revamp their fleet. They can't (as of now) get a 737-900, for example, because that would require a 4th crew member. All of Southwest's flights have 3 crewmembers which allows them to easily replace crews or implant them on other planes. If two or three flights were on a 739 and then the crew were to go on a 735, then there would be one extra crew person. Same thing goes for the 752. If Southwest wants to keep costs down, then they will still with 733, 735, and 737s.
My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
BoingGoingGone From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (9 years 2 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3683 times:
Much of WN's efficiency is based on the 20-25 minute turn. The 737-700 is the biggest bird that can be turned in 20-25 minutes. Anything larger and efificencies are lost on short haul routes which dominate their system.
Artsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4741 posts, RR: 43 Reply 4, posted (9 years 2 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3667 times:
SEAPete From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 67 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (9 years 2 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3591 times:
With the heavy investment they have in 737's now I doubt they will use something else in the next 20 years. After that Boeing or another company might be producing a completely new 140 seat aircraft that fits in a the cost structure for them. At that point who knows what will happen. Change is inevitable. Ironically you're probably better off asking that question to an accountant before you ask an aviation expert.
Of course, they did try the 727 once, but for some reason it didn't stick.
Drerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4905 posts, RR: 9 Reply 6, posted (9 years 2 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3408 times:
They do have the option to convert their 737-700 orders to -800s and -900s; however, like it was said--I doubt it due to the added crew member requirements. They wouldn't add the -900 anyway-unless Boeing creates one with more emergency exits, so capacity could be increased in an all coach config. The only rumor is that Southwest has been evaluating the possibility of the ERJ170s or 190s.
OPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (9 years 2 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3373 times:
>>>Of course, they did try the 727 once, but for some reason it didn't stick.
SWA's first experience with the 727 was in the late 1970s as an experiment of sorts to see if the aircraft was adaptable to the operation, and was made available to SWA (from Braniff-1) as a result of a legal verdict.
SWA's second experience with the 727 was mainly as a stop-gap measure to provide capacity until the (then) new 737-300s first started arriving in early 1985. SWA started major westward expansions in 1982, and by 1983-1984 was "connecting the dots" with new service from HOU/AUS/SAT to the some of the new western cities. The aircraft themselves were leased from PEX, and stayed around a couple of years until enough new -300s had been delivered to relace them.
Cloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3030 times:
They wouldn't add the -900 anyway-unless Boeing creates one with more emergency exits, so capacity could be increased in an all coach config.
-----
It is true that the -800 and -900 currently have the same maximum capacity in the most dense all coach arrangement(189 pax) because the -900 does not have enough emergency exits for a higher capacity. But Southwest does not use anything close to the most dense configuration possible(It uses 137 seats rather than 149 seats on the -700), so it would indeed be possible for it to fully utilize the space on the current -900 assuming they use the same seat pitch that they use now.
One other problem with the -900, besides the extra flight attendent, is range. Alaska and other airlines that use it have found that payload can be heavily restricted on long transcons with the -900. Sometimes a fuel stop is required on the "upwind" leg of the journey. This would be a problem for Southwest since the main job of its NG's is to do longhauls. Most of the shorthauls are still done by -300's.
I believe Boeing is working on a 737-900X to counter these two problems. It will have enough emergency exits to be able to use the bone-jarring seat pitch some charter carriers (not Southwest) use, since it will have extra emergency exits. The structure and engine thrust will be beefed up to handle increased takeoff weight and range. Eventually, this could be of interest to Southwest. But my guess is that they stick with the -700's.
InnocuousFox From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 16 Reply 9, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2853 times:
"The only rumor is that Southwest has been evaluating the possibility of the ERJ170s or 190s."
They will probably let Nelemann test drive the ERJs for them.
Dave Mark - Intrinsic Algorithm - Reducing the world to mathematical equations!
United4ever From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 291 posts, RR: 2 Reply 10, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2806 times:
Ramerinianair From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1486 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2720 times:
United4ever,
Yes I'm sure if the 739 doesn't fit in WN's cost sturucture, the A320 series will, considering there is no greater commonality than that with in a single model. And Airbus is far more superior(Yea right).
-S.R.
094147 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 58 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2614 times:
All airbus lovers, take a hike. Boeing is the bird of choice. It was there for SWA from the beginning and stood by us during the hard times. Boeing is a major part of the success story and continued profits of SWA. Cut them off would be like cutting off your b---s, no more life.
Greg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2522 times:
The pres. of WN has already announced that the current offerings of regional jets (inlcuding the 170/190, etc) have been investigated after the JetBlue purchase and do not posses the correct economics or flexibility to be part of their fleet.
This should end the speculation that they would deviated from a single fleet type.
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 12556 posts, RR: 64 Reply 15, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2405 times:
It would benefit WN taking a page out of SAA's book by replacing all their 737's with a320's
ROFLMAO!!!!
Are you sure you don't want to be a nightclub comic? You're a funny guy.
[Edited 2004-03-18 17:02:55]
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
Aa777jr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2288 times:
I agree in regard to replacing all Boeings with Airbus. I could have sworn I read an article that said SWA was gonna buy two 757's for non stop service from IAH to LAX. I could be wrong, but I think I read that as a post on this website.
Greg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2241 times:
For operations in the last quarter..AVITAS has shown the 73G as being slightly more economical to operate than the A319---so WN would have no incentive to change to a very similiar product.
PVD757 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3374 posts, RR: 18 Reply 19, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1996 times:
I was under the impression that WN could not operate a 738 because of the extra FA as well. I had asked around to some WN employees about their "normal" turntimes. They had stated that the normal is about 20-25 minutes and that the 15 is only when they are running late on a turn. WN will be a major driver in design for whatever comes after the 737. It will have to do what they want or Boeing will lose out big-time.
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7438 posts, RR: 5 Reply 20, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1831 times:
The next plane I think WN would look would be a 150 pax 7E7 if one came out. A 20% cost reduction (especially if oil prices stay high) would be the one thing that catches their eye.
The closer it was to a 737 the better chance it has as WN likes the fact that flight & cabin crew can move from any plane to another. That is the key to their being able to balance crews so well.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 89 Reply 21, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1729 times:
WN could operate a 738 with 149 passengers just fine.
Brons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2969 posts, RR: 5 Reply 22, posted (9 years 2 months 2 days ago) and read 1629 times:
WN could operate a 738 with 149 passengers just fine.
They could technically do it, but would it be profitable with the larger airframe? And the fleet inefficiencies introduced by an additional subtype? My gut instinct says no.
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
