DIA From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3273 posts, RR: 30 Posted (8 years 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7547 times:
(edited) I should state, SALE is interested in the 739X as it says here:
Interesting portion: As quoted, "The 737-800 is the baseline model SALE has specified. However, the agreement provides for conversions to the 737-700 or the proposed higher-capacity 737-900X. The Next-Generation 737 family is powered by CFM56-7B turbofans from CFM International." -Boeing
B742 From UK - England, joined Mar 2005, 3760 posts, RR: 21 Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7353 times:
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 2): As long as the proposed 739X has the payload/range capabilities that have been discussed, expect Alaska Airlines to be VERY interested in it.
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7207 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 1): Ok so who are the ones actively pursuing the 737-900X
who else?
There are many customers interested in the 739X, but there hasn't been enough demand to push the project to critical mass. Virgin Blue was interested in 2003, as was numerous others. Since the 739X has been mentioned in the most frequent 737NG order options, I think it's likely to be launched soon, perhaps before years end.
Trent900 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 419 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7122 times:
The thing I really want to know is why Boeing didn't do all this at the beginning? They should have made the base-line model a 900X. Didn't they think the 321 was a threat?
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 7004 times:
Quoting Trent900 (Reply 5): The thing I really want to know is why Boeing didn't do all this at the beginning? They should have made the base-line model a 900X.
To some extent the 752, but OTOH the 739 was perfectly suitable for what early customers wanted capability and expense wise. Unless your flying long-range and LCC configuration, the 739 is a fine airplane.
Quoting Trent900 (Reply 5): Didn't they think the 321 was a threat?
The A321 hasn't been that much of a runaway seller by any measure. Approx. 450 sales since 1990 is marginal at best, so the "threat" is minimal considering the 738 is already 1-2 rows longer than the A320 in LCC configuration.
JAM747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 550 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 6982 times:
Would this 900x replace the 757 ? If so how does it compare? I have heard alot of good things about the 757 and its advantages over the A321 such as range and take off performance. Would this 900X retain those advantages of the 757 plus offering more?
Hamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2657 posts, RR: 59 Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 6963 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 1): Ok so who are the ones actively pursuing the 737-900X
SALE
JAL
From memory, those companies that have been publically linked to 737-900X campaigns are:
JAL
SALE
Malaysia
Qantas
Virgin Blue
TUI group
More are probably following it's development, but those are the only ones I can remember.
Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 4): I think it's likely to be launched soon, perhaps before years end
A go/no-go decision on the 747Adv isn't expected before July, and the 777 Freighter was just launched. IMO, the -900X will get launched at Paris, assuming the orders are there.
Lemurs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1439 posts, RR: 4 Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6730 times:
I imagine CO would be interested as well, wouldn't they? They have a number of orders on the books they could convert over if needed. This gives them more opportunity to move their 752's into international long-thin routes, and gives them domestic capacity to replace them 1:1 instead of having to resort to multiple 738 and 73G flights. Just an idea
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
AKelley728 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2101 posts, RR: 6 Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6674 times:
Quoting Lemurs (Reply 13): I imagine CO would be interested as well, wouldn't they? They have a number of orders on the books they could convert over if needed.
CO already has a number of 739s in the fleet. As DfwRevolution said:
Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 7): the 739 was perfectly suitable for what early customers wanted capability and expense wise. Unless your flying long-range and LCC configuration, the 739 is a fine airplane.
The main advantage of the 739x over the regular 739 is because of the extra emergency exit, you can fit more rows of seats in the aircraft. However, only airlines flying all coach configurations (charter, LCCs), need this capability. The extra range is nice, but I believe that CO's 739s can fly most, if not all of their 737 missions.
Lemurs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1439 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6593 times:
Quoting DIA (Reply 16): I don't think CO can regularly schedule them (739s) on coast to coast flights, can they (range w/ load)?
That was exactly my point. As it is now, EWR to anywhere on the west coast is operated by 738's for the most part. I can't imagine there aren't places where they'd like to have some more cargo and passenger capacity on those same routes. Though who knows, maybe they see their growth as maxed out to the west...I doubt it though.
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
BoeingFever777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 409 posts, RR: 56 Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5729 times:
So is this a new order for Boeing? or was this a already recorded in the books and just now finalized?
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
25 Lemurs: That's true. But that's one of the few transcon -900 routes I'm aware of. Know of others? I imagine that there must be some weight restrictions on th
26 PANAM_DC10: This was a previously announced order which is now finalised. It should appear on the Boeing order list today or tomorrow. Regards
27 PyroGX41487: Doesn't CO fly 738s and 9s on insanely long routes, IAD - ANC for example?
28 Prebennorholm: It is not with the same fuel capacity. It is with two extra, optional 520 gallon wing tanks in a modified and strengthened wing. In total 7915 gal. i
29 BOS2LAF: I sincerely hope they don't do that... They would really be half-assing it. Boeing needs to either make the plane sit higher, or pull an ace out of t
30 MD80Nut: Alaska also flies the 739 SEA-MIA which is a bit longer. Cheers, Ralph
31 Flyibaby: No one has noted of yet that they also go out weight restricted on the return trip FL-SEA by a couple thousand pounds. They are able to fly full from
32 Swaluvfa: AirTran has the option of converting any part of their 737NG orders into the -800 or -900 so maybe AirTran would be interested in taking about 12 or s
33 Theredbaron: Easy fix for this problem..bring back the 757!!! A classy airplane with a magnificent wing and great looks. Also enough range and huge cargo capacity.
34 DfwRevolution: Probably wouldn't be too favorable for the 752... the 739X would be 30,000 lbs lighter than the 752, so on a typical 1,000-2,000 nm trip with nearly
35 Asteriskceo: Definatly worth noting! The article mentions Southwest as a potential 739X customer.
36 MIASkies: Quoting a post from above... I could definetly see GOL converting some of their options for 739X! It would be perfect for them, considering their have
37 DAYflyer: Plus they got $21 Million more for each 757 than the 737. And the 737 was not originally thought about as a High and Hot design, whereas the 757 was