Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Southwest B 735  
User currently offlineFlightLover From Moldova, joined Mar 2004, 338 posts, RR: 9
Posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4564 times:

I know Southwest has a small number of B 735 planes (29 if I am not mistaken) out of the 430 something total. I was just wondering if any of you know if these planes are used on certain routes like on the West Coast or are they used network-wide. I am more interested to know if WN uses them out of MDW airport.
Any comments would be appreciated.

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAtrude777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5686 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4517 times:

They are being based around Texas now to replace the -200's that left the fleet. You might see an occasional 735 fly through a certain city, i know we have o r at least had a 735 fly through STL...

BWI-SDF-STL-MCI
MCI-STL-MDW-BWI
SMF-PHX-STL-BWI

Those are some of the routes iv seen the 735 fly on but i dont know if they were acheduled or subs.

Alex



Good things come to those who wait, better things come to those who go AFTER it!
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4467 times:

There are 25 737-500s at SWA, out of a total of 439 or 440 aircraft. (We've kept adding them, and I keep losing count of the exact total).

The -500s mainly stay on shorter hops in Texas, Florida, and California, but on occasion, you'll sometimes see one on a longer flight (2-3 hrs).

The above is why we'll be re-painting the two -500 Shamu aircraft (N501SW and N507SW) into Canyon Blue, and have re-painted two -700s (N713SW and N715SW) as Shamu aircraft, so they get nationwide exposure.


User currently offlineChrisjake From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 857 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4407 times:

i've seen quite a few of SW's -500's at CLE lately....


chris



Well nothing's dead down here, just a little tired
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26196 posts, RR: 76
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4361 times:

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 2):
The -500s mainly stay on shorter hops in Texas, Florida, and California, but on occasion, you'll sometimes see one on a longer flight (2-3 hrs).

Didn't you one say that you dispatched a 735 onto a lightly loaded BWI-LAX flight?



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4351 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 4):
Didn't you one say that you dispatched a 735 onto a lightly loaded BWI-LAX flight?

Yeah, I did. Had a PHL-LAS one recently too. They happen so infrequently...


User currently offlineGentFromAlaska From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2926 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4292 times:

I seem to recall reading the SNA airport will only allow WN and AS to fly the 737-500 in and out of their airport. Not sure if its a noise or capacity regulation or both.


Man can be taken from Alaska. Alaska can never be taken from the man.
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9601 posts, RR: 69
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4288 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Seems like we get them flying SEA-GEG, too. I have flown them twice, but it has been a few years.

User currently offlineMidway7 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 147 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4272 times:

I flown STL-MDW quite a bit this summer, and have been on the 735 about half the time. Most of the flights I have been were in the evening.

Ironically, I have not been on a 733 all summer. It's either the 735 or 73G.

Midway 7


User currently offlineWedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5830 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4236 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

AS doesn't fly 735's. They only have 732's, 734's, 73G's, 738's and 739's. I've AS fly 734's, 73G's and 738's at SNA. Are the MD-80's still allowed at SNA?

User currently offlineCORULEZ05 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4206 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 4):
Didn't you one say

Surely you meant to say: "Didn't you ONCE say....."


I have a question, kinda off topic, why doesn't WN operate the 734? It has more capacity than the 733 and 735.


User currently offlineJmc1975 From Israel, joined Sep 2000, 3242 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4194 times:

Quoting CORULEZ05 (Reply 10):
I have a question, kinda off topic, why doesn't WN operate the 734? It has more capacity than the 733 and 735.

And requires an extra flight attendant in their configuration, which drives up CASM and greatly reduces operational flexibility. The 734 is also more prone to weight-restrictions than the 733, which also would limit stage length.



.......
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4179 times:

Quoting CORULEZ05 (Reply 10):



I have a question, kinda off topic, why doesn't WN operate the 734? It has more capacity than the 733 and 735.

WN flies aircraft with 149 pax or less - thus only 3 flight attendants are required.....a 734 in an all Y configuration would likely have more seats and require a fourth F/A, thus no 734s at Southwest. Also remember that Southwest operates most routes with high frequencies and the load factors are reasonable but not sky high, thus the extra seats of the 734 (or now the 738) are not needed for most segments, as a route grows, Southwest simply adds more flights. Thats their business plan, and it works for them.

Back to the 735s - does Southwest plan to eventually move most of the 735s close to home, meaning Texas, to operate high-frequency routes on the Love, Hobby, San Antonio triangle. There were rumors that the 735s would take over the close-in routes that were flown by the last batch of 732s.......is this going to happen, or are the 735s going to keep flying routes throughout the Southwest system? I would think that the 25 (out of 440+) aircraft with the lower seating capacity would be dedicated to certain routes simply to ease operational issues.......any Southwest insider have any info?

[Edited 2005-09-11 20:25:39]

User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 4115 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting GentFromAlaska (Reply 6):
I seem to recall reading the SNA airport will only allow WN and AS to fly the 737-500 in and out of their airport. Not sure if its a noise or capacity regulation or both.

Wrong. WN only flies the 737-700 to SNA. As far as I know, AS flies -400s and -700s and -800s to SNA. They don't have -500s.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 915 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4062 times:

>> WN flies aircraft with 149 pax or less - thus only 3 flight attendants are required.....a 734 in an all Y configuration would likely have more seats and require a fourth F/A, thus no 734s at Southwest.

WN's 733 and 73G are indeed less that 149 seats, all configured at a modest 137 seats. This gives WN passengers a nice 33 inches of seat pitch.


User currently offlineN200WN From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 784 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4054 times:

Quoting GentFromAlaska (Reply 6):
I seem to recall reading the SNA airport will only allow WN and AS to fly the 737-500 in and out of their airport. Not sure if its a noise or capacity regulation or both.



Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 13):
Wrong. WN only flies the 737-700 to SNA. As far as I know, AS flies -400s and -700s and -800s to SNA. They don't have -500s.

Well, actually he's correct in his recollection. There was a time when WN used only -500's to SNA. Thru most of the 90's up until about two years ago that was the case. As critical mass was achieved with the -700's SNA was upgraded to all -700 service and the -500's were moved to the "heartland" routes around TX to replace the -200's. Just FYI, the -200's were pretty much used system wide until Jan '02, when the "-200 reflow" officially went into effect.


User currently offlineB6sea From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4053 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 7):
Seems like we get them flying SEA-GEG, too. I have flown them twice, but it has been a few years.

Yeah, I noticed that too but that was probably 5 years ago for me.

-Chans


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26196 posts, RR: 76
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3960 times:

Quoting GentFromAlaska (Reply 6):
I seem to recall reading the SNA airport will only allow WN and AS to fly the 737-500 in and out of their airport. Not sure if its a noise or capacity regulation or both.

AS doesn't have the -500, and the -500 has the same engines as the -300, so it wouldn't make a difference

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 13):
WN only flies the 737-700 to SNA.

The main reason for that is not noise or capacity, but performance.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3924 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting N1120A (Reply 17):
The main reason for that is not noise or capacity, but performance.

I figured it had a little to do with both. (?)



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26196 posts, RR: 76
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3876 times:

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 18):
Quoting N1120A (Reply 17):
The main reason for that is not noise or capacity, but performance.

I figured it had a little to do with both. (?)

If capacity was an issue, all the 757s that fly in there would not be allowed. As far as noise, the 733 and 735 have the exact same engines and are not so different sizewise that that would be an issue.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3844 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting N1120A (Reply 19):
If capacity was an issue, all the 757s that fly in there would not be allowed. As far as noise, the 733 and 735 have the exact same engines and are not so different sizewise that that would be an issue.

I'm sorry. I meant I thought the decision to use only the -700s was for both noise and performance. I'm trying to remember where I read something that led me to believe it had to do with noise. I think I recall a thread about SNA takeoffs and I think there was something in there about the procedure not being as exaggerated or as dangerous these days because newer generation aircraft are already much quieter. I have had difficulty fully understanding WN's decision to use -700s at SNA. I never know whether to say it is for performance reasons, especially due to the short runway, or noise because the 737NG is quieter than the Classics.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3835 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 19):
If capacity was an issue, all the 757s that fly in there would not be allowed.

"Capacity" in this context is what your own airline has, versus the largest aircraft the airport can handle. IIRC, and don't quote me on this, the airports has some formula it uses for each airline, and an airline's capacity is factor.

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 20):
I'm sorry. I meant I thought the decision to use only the -700s was for both noise and performance.

That was my understanding as well. You get much better MTOWs with a -700 than a -300/-500...


User currently offlineEclipseFlight7 From Somalia, joined Apr 2004, 518 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3655 times:

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 21):
I'm trying to remember where I read something that led me to believe it had to do with noise. I think I recall a thread about SNA takeoffs and I think there was something in there about the procedure not being as exaggerated or as dangerous these days because newer generation aircraft are already much quieter.

The whiney rich people that live around SNA complain a lot, so they have a complex departure so the rich people don't have to turn up the sound on their plasma TV's when an aircraft passes overhead.



Holy sh*ts and burritos.
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3599 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EclipseFlight7 (Reply 22):
The whiney rich people that live around SNA complain a lot, so they have a complex departure so the rich people don't have to turn up the sound on their plasma TV's when an aircraft passes overhead.

I'm aware of the situation at SNA. What I meant was that I recall hearing (or reading...) the takeoff procedure is not as dramatic as it use to be. It has been a long time since I have flown to SNA and departed runway 19R so I don't know what the experience is like these days. Last time I was there, I landed and departed 01L.  

[Edited 2005-09-12 02:05:03]


ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3289 times:

Quoting EclipseFlight7 (Reply 22):
The whiney rich people that live around SNA complain a lot, so they have a complex departure so the rich people don't have to turn up the sound on their plasma TV's when an aircraft passes overhead.

The quote attributed to me in reply #22 wasn't mine, it was from Silver1SWA in reply #20.


25 N1120A : They still do the full power/back to idle like before, it is just that the rate of climb is much improved with the 737NG over the 737Classic. One of
26 WN2CMH : Just an FYI, I have flown both -200 (several years ago) and -500 on WN from CMH-TPA and CMH-MCO. Lately, on flight 491 (MCO-CMH) and flight 2813 (CMH-
27 Silver1SWA : Flight 491's last segments are MDW-SAN-SJC. Not sure what the first segments are, but yeah I deal with this flight often through SAN and it's always
28 N1120A : They don't get the absolute rock bottom deals, but they are able to get some savings. When they got enough into the system, along with enough being f
29 N200WN : Yes it is relatively new...reread post number 15. Up until about two years ago -500 were assigned to all SNA flights. And the capacity restriction wa
30 Silver1SWA : Wow...very interesting. Thanks.
31 OPNLguy : SWA has -never- sent a single -200 into SNA. SNA was never authorized for a -200 in our Ops Specs...
32 Vegasplanes : Did WN "acquire" service to SNA with the Morris Air deal? I seem to recall that for some reason.
33 FlightLover : Has anyone flown OMA-MDW on WN? I am just curious what equipment they use for this route?
34 Joeljack : I quite often fly OMA-MDW: about 50/50 between the -300's and the -700's
35 FlightLover : Thanks Joeljack, I'll be flying the route in mid-November so I was curious about he 737 series used for this route.
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...
Aeroflot To Lease 15 735 To Nord And Don Division posted Tue Dec 5 2006 18:13:22 by Jimyvr
White Southwest Livery? posted Fri Dec 1 2006 05:56:21 by STLGph
Boeing Says No To Southwest! posted Tue Nov 28 2006 05:57:44 by Bringiton
Q & A With Gary Kelly, CEO Of Southwest posted Sat Nov 25 2006 20:03:38 by Laxintl
Flashback: THe Birth Of Southwest At SNA posted Thu Nov 23 2006 02:57:55 by Matt D
Southwest Growing But Chopping posted Wed Nov 22 2006 05:06:16 by Ncflyer
Southwest Jumping On Delta Assets posted Tue Nov 21 2006 05:49:32 by ORDflier
New Southwest Paint Scheme? posted Mon Nov 20 2006 18:37:19 by Ericsan777
Crazy Talk: What If Southwest Bid For USAirways? posted Fri Nov 17 2006 17:37:42 by LawnDart
Southwest NoLimits Internship posted Mon Nov 13 2006 19:04:58 by Iflyswa