Fjnovak1 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 600 posts, RR: 2 Posted (13 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4322 times:
I know that Alaska Airlines is ordering the 737-900, and I was wondering if Southwest is a potential customer. One would have to assume they were, being that they operate an all 737 fleet. The -900 would open up many new posibilities for them. They could get clear across the country (BDL-LAX, BWI-SFO, MCO-SJC, MHT-LAS) and also would give them trans-continental type capacity without deviating from their concept of al all 737 fleet. In Southwest one-class configuration, they would seat somewhere in the neighborhood of 185 passengers, around the same number as the 757 which is so common on cross-country routes. The -800 may also be a good fit for SWA; it would seat around 165 passengers.
In addition, they could possibly start flights from the US mainland to Hawaii. I think there is stil lots of money to make in that market. Say they bought Aloha Air, which operates 737-200s on interisland flights, and 737-700s on flights from Maui and Honolulu to Oakland. Say WN buys them and transfers their -700 aircraft to the mainland and replaces them with 737-800 or -900s, and expanding mainland-Hawaii flights to SJC, PDX, SAN, and LAS, and PHX, all cities with lots of possible domestic connections on Southwest. With the -800 and -900 deliveries, WN could use some of the smaller capacity 737s (-500s) to expand into Canada (Montreal, Calgary, Winnepeg, Vancouver, Toronto) because with Canadian and Air Canada merging, fares are sure to rise. Of course they also continue to expand their Domestic network with new destinations, more frequencies, and additional routes. Mexico and the Carribean could be explored, but I think Canada is more likely.
With around 310 B737 aircraft and continuous profits, they must have the capital to make a big push into new territory!
Rotate777 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 400 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (13 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4225 times:
I doubt they will get the -800/-900. I also doubt that they start flying out of the mainland soon. Maybe in a couple of more years, but not yet.
And the -800 and -900 and pretty long aircrafts. The longer the aircraft, the longer the boarding time. And you know Southwest hates that. They are known for their 15 minute or so turnarounds. How are they going to turn a 737-800/900 around in 15 minutes? It would be quite hard.
Matt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 48
Reply 2, posted (13 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4221 times:
This discussion came up recently and someone reported that the reason that WN won't buy the -900 is because it will require an additional f/a due to the number of pax it can carry. Can someone else elaborate?
Woxof From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (13 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4194 times:
Greater than 9 pax requires 1 F/A (for AC with greater than 7500# max PL) or 19 for less than 7500#. For Greater than 50 but less than 101 pax requires 2 F/A's. For AC with seating capacity of more than 100, each "block" of 50 seats requires an additional F/A. This is for seating capacity, not for actual people on the aircraft.
One exception: If the airline demonstrated the safety evacuation with more than the required amount of F/A's, they must always have that many on board.
OPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (13 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4171 times:
Woxof, (Gad, how I miss that old wx coding)
Leave it to a dispatcher to quote a FAR...
IMHO, I think the -800 is a theoretical possibility, even though it would take a 4th F/A. It's tougher to envision the -900 here, as the 4th F/A issue aside, the work I hear is that there are more pronounced flight differences than the other types. Not a pilot, so I can't attest to that personally, but just what the jungle drums are saying. Like the -400 (versus the shorter -300 and -500) I can imagine that the NG version (-800) and new -900 will be more suseptible to tailstrikes, so maybe that's a factor. BTSOOM.
Don't think we'll see any NG variant here doing HNL or other overwater anytime soon, since there are still several years worth of domestic opportunities abounding..
Say hello to Keeler for me from his ex-QH buddy.... Later...
D L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 10992 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (13 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4143 times:
The 737-900 will not be flown in Southwest colors because it is limited in 1 class seating. The reason is that they can carry a max of 189 passengers by law. That would be a pretty sparse seating in one class. For reference note that a 737-800 in one class also holds 189. So, unless Southwest decides to significantly increase personal space, they would not benefit at all from having -900s over -800s.
Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
Goingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 17
Reply 11, posted (13 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4086 times:
A 757 will impact their OPERATING effieciency. Right now, a pilot and crew flying BWI-ISP and be shifted to fly BWI-LAS with no hitches. Try that if the crew for the 757 was trying to deadhead in from BNA but couldn't because of storms in Nashville. Who's gonna fly the 757? I wouldn't want to see them deviate from one of their main cost saving strategies. Someone who will pick a transcon on a carrier that serves only peanuts is not going to get persnickity about the aircraft type.
AC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (13 years 11 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4080 times:
SW expanding into Canadian markets? I doubt it. For one thing, it's a lot messier in customs formalities. Not only does it cost around $60 a passenger (I believe that's the figure quoted by Mr. Smith from WestJet) to clear customs, but the costs with crewing would be higher. And charter airlines like Canada3000, Royal, and Air Transat are pretty low-cost competitors in leisure markets to the US. I doubt SW would manage to make it in Canadian markets. For that matter I think SW would lose if it was to try to compete with WestJet if WJ decided to go into transborder markets, because SW is focused on high-frequency, but WJ can generate traffic and make money on a single daily flight. There is some speculation, however, that when WJ has expanded itself sufficiently in eastern Canada, and takes delivery of it's 737NG's, that it may be interested in transborder expansion and a possible partnership with SW. It seemed likely, however, from analysts perspectives and those from both companies that SW metal would never cross the border, and that WJ would be the one doing the flying with SW's network getting the feed.
William From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (13 years 11 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4074 times:
When I meant transcon,I mean TRANSCON. Not Nashville to LAX or MDW to OAK,but coast to coast. Your point is valid. I was commenting on a rumor that was floating around. And if SWA is going to do it. That would be the best way,coast to coast with 757s. The crews bases would be limited to roughly two cites. The 737 could handle the coast to mid america routes. Thus no operational hurdles to handle.
Remember,we are talking pure transcon. And with that distance,the 757 would be able to stretch its legs,and let its legendary efficiency and low costs rack up profits for SWA.
Fjnovak1 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 600 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (13 years 11 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4043 times:
Actually, CO in Cleveland is an interesting place. They fly 737-500 aircraft from Cleveland to San Diego, they used to fly 737-300s to San Francisco (Now they use the -700) and they fly 757-200ER aircraft to London Gatwick! It seems that CO gets longer range from all of their planes, or something..
As for Southwest doing coast to coast, they are literally one state away. With the introduction of ALB service, they are flying Albany to Las Vegas nonstop (continuing service to LAX) which has a flight time on a 737-700 of 5 hours and 15 minutes!! If they wanted to, they could take that 737-700 to LAX nonstop with no problem. Southwest need not order any more aircraft (except maybe additional 737NGs) to go trans-con, because keep in mind that Aloha flies 737-700 aircraft over the Pacific Ocean to go from Kahului, Maui to Oakland, California. Can anyone imagine flying a single-aisle plane to Hawaii?? When I see a 757 on an airline schedule to HNL or OGG, I do a double-take because I think of the DC-10 as the Hawaii aircraft (times are changin). But wouldn't Southwest in HNL be awesome??