Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why No Follow-up Orders For 737-900ER?  
User currently offlineLemurs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1439 posts, RR: 4
Posted (9 years 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6824 times:

Outside of the Lion Air order (30 firm, 30 options) there haven't been any announcements for this aircraft since the original release mid-July. I kind of figured it'd get more serious attention from some of the legacy cariers who already operate 737NG fleets.

CO and AA in particular, since it gives them an aircraft that approaches (if not exactly matches) capacity parity with the 752, and true intercon range. I'd figure either one would love to have a plane they could plug into their fleet that would allow them to focus their 752's for longer international legs where they can really earn some money.

CO is the real stumper here too, since they already operate the 739, and are pushing the revenue potential envelope of the 752 every month. The 739ER seems like a great fit for them. The -900 is a bit of a black sheep at the moment since they only have 12 in the fleet, and it can't do intercon where that extra capacity over the 738 would be valuable.


There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2205 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (9 years 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6712 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think orders will come in when the 739ER is rolled out next year and airlines have the opportunity of seeing the aircraft in person. I believe that AA and CO are being briefed and enticed regularly by Boeing...  Smile


Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlineGARPD From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6706 times:

The 739ER strikes me as another 753 or 764. A product with limited development costs designed and built for a customer at request. So, it may not have the widest appeal to all airlines.

Having said that, if all the figures add up correctly, it looks to be a good A321 competitor and bottom end of usage 757 replacement. By that, I mean airlines that don't use their 757s to the fullest extent of range or payload.



arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently onlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3872 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6683 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

I'm convinced Continental is very intersted in it, they already have the basic 900 variant and every time a new Boeing twin, new model or new variant of an existing model, they seriously consider buying it. The 900ER would suit Continental's transcon flights out of EWR to the West Coast and some destinations in Latin America. The 757-200's would be rescheduled to fly on routes transatlantic and transpacific to Hawaii where ETOPS certification is required. The 757 is ETOPS certified, the NG737 variants are not.

American may consider that one as well, to complement their 737-800 fleet and replace their oldest 757's dating from the late 80's, also to be flown on thin transcon routes (for example JFK-SAN, JFK-SJC and JFK-SEA), but they are not ready to invest in new airplanes.

Alaska would also be interersted in it, if they need a long range aircraft to fly from Anchorage nonstop to destinations in the mainland United States where a non ER 900 wouldn't be able to fly nonstop with full payload. Alaska also operates the basic 900 variant.

Ben Soriano
Brussels Belgium



Ben Soriano
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5873 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6657 times:

Sorry, Soriano, but that's not correct.
The NG 737 IS, in fact, ETOPS capable. Several of Continental's 738s are ETOPS, I believe.
But I agree- several more airlines should be interested in this aircraft.


User currently offlinePanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4186 posts, RR: 89
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6653 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
COMMUNITY MANAGER

Don't forget that Boeing stated that most orders placed in the year prior to the launch of the 739ER allow the buyer the right to convert to the 739ER, if they so choose, among those mentioned were JAL and S.A.L.E. A recent report also stated that Spicejet were looking to aquire 5 739ER and this is in addition to the 10 738 options that they intend to firm.

Given the rate at which the 737 has sold this year it shouldn't be too long before we see some conversions take place.

Regards, PanAm_DC10



Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 6, posted (9 years 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6542 times:

The 739ER will see additional orders from several carriers, give it some time. Also, there are many 737 commitments out there whereby the customer has the option to select among the various 737NG variants.....some will go for the 739ER. A good number of 739ER orders will come from airlines in Asia and European charter carriers in the future due to its versatility.

I dont expect AA or CO to become 739ER customers, however, atleast in the near term future.....both airlines are using the 757 fleets in new and innovative ways and are happy to cut capacity in US domestic markets. In most cases, 738s have taken over routes once flown by the 757s......neither CO or AA really want or need the extra seats offered by the 739ER....the 738s are more than adequate for most services. Yes, CO does have a number of 739s that mainly fly shorter-haul high-demand routes, but which CO routes require a 739ER?


User currently offlineHUYfan From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 1410 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6499 times:

Have to say, I agree with GARPD, I don't think the 739ER is anything more than a 764 or 753 and will sell accordingly.

Regards

Mike


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5790 posts, RR: 47
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 days ago) and read 6471 times:

I believe SpiceJet is in talks for about 5 of them and I won't be surprised if Jet Airways decides to pick them up along the way.


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineGARPD From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2686 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 days ago) and read 6407 times:

Quoting HUYfan (Reply 7):
Have to say, I agree with GARPD, I don't think the 739ER is anything more than a 764 or 753 and will sell accordingly.

Regards

Mike

In what way do you agree?

That it is a custom job for a select few airlines?
Or that it won't sell in vast numbers?

In either scenario, I'm confident it'll make back its money quickly.


Modified Airliner Photos:
Click here for bigger photo!
Design © Alexander Richardson/ arp design
Template © Alexander Richardson/ arp design




arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineBomber996 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 393 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6342 times:

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 6):
Yes, CO does have a number of 739s that mainly fly shorter-haul high-demand routes, but which CO routes require a 739ER?

Maybe some of the high density, low yield markets from the northeast to Southern Florida where 757s are currently used beside the 737's. This could free up some 757's to help ease the schedule on the Atlantic.

Peace  box 



AVIATION - A Vacation In Any Town, I Own Nothing
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 11, posted (9 years 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6300 times:

Quoting Bomber996 (Reply 10):

Maybe some of the high density, low yield markets from the northeast to Southern Florida where 757s are currently used beside the 737's. This could free up some 757's to help ease the schedule on the Atlantic.

Peace

True - but the EWR-Florida routes are just fine with the 739, the ER variant is not necessary. Also note that many 752s flying EWR-Florida routes are the same aircraft that fly to Europe (lots of winglet 752s show up on the EWR-FLL segment for example, and most of the 752s on the EWR-FLorida routes are international standard with 16 seat BF interiors) and are being rotated through the CO flight system.

With the additional 753s coming on-line to cover high demand routes, my guess is CO will stay focused on the 738 for any further 737NG orders - it seems to be the right compromise (atleast for CO) of capacity and range.


User currently offlineHEGAN From Spain, joined Feb 2005, 211 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (9 years 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6297 times:

Quoting Lemurs (Thread starter):
it gives them an aircraft that approaches (if not exactly matches) capacity parity with the 752,

The thing is that the B757 is not available any more because airlines had no interest on it. I think future orders will come for sure, but it won't be a best seller as the B738, for example.

The B737-900ER can be compared to the A321, that is not the best seller neither of the A320 family.

Agur,
HEGAN



HEGAN: Euskadiko Aeronautikako eta Espazioko Clusterra
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21544 posts, RR: 59
Reply 13, posted (9 years 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6261 times:

Quoting Lemurs (Thread starter):
CO is the real stumper here too, since they already operate the 739,

I think the 18/149 config on the 739 is a bit lopsided. The 739ER at 16/158 would be more suitable, but the 739 could have been outfit as 16/155 and they didn't do it, so I'm not sure what CO would do. But the 752 at 24(16)/159 is relatively close, and the 739ER would be a good way of freeing up 752s for Europe/South America.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineHoya From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 412 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 years 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6223 times:

Whenever someone orders a 739 from now on, it will be a 739ER. Boeing has stated that the 739ER will replace the regular 739 in its offerings and on the production line. There will be no choice between 739 and 739ER, just a number of options on the 739ER.


Hoya Saxa!!
User currently offlineWhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (9 years 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6217 times:

As usual everyone seems to think the aircraft can only be related to US routes and markets.

The 739ER could well sell into asian and other regions due to longer stage length. However many of the operators have substantial orders already out there, and again if this variant had come to market earlier then Boeing could have potentially shifted more.

There may be questions in the mind of buyers regarding the radical new pressure bulkhead design which is causing a wait-and-see effect, or just that the figures don't balance quite as well as they expect. For aircraft of the 737 segment operational cost is everything and the 738 seems much more accepted in fleets.

Don't expect to see them doing anything like the job of a 757 over water as they just don't stack up as well. The 752 has plenty of power and capability for that role, and certainly better takeoff performance. The 739ER is much better suited to a role supplanting the 757 as mentioned above for shorter stages.


User currently offlineHEGAN From Spain, joined Feb 2005, 211 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 6194 times:

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 15):
For aircraft of the 737 segment operational cost is everything and the 738 seems much more accepted in fleets.

I agree. New operators of the B737-900ER must operate the 'standard' version (B737-700/800) because it has been designed for the most economical operations.

The family, neither of the B737 nor the A320, can not be so economical because it is a derivate of the original design, and the big benefit of the purchase is the fleet commonality, and not the economy (up to a certain level, of course). All A318's customers use the A320, but they have bought the A318 for this commonality, because if they were looking for economy, they would have ordered Embraers.

Agur,
HEGAN



HEGAN: Euskadiko Aeronautikako eta Espazioko Clusterra
User currently offlineMauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2490 posts, RR: 25
Reply 17, posted (9 years 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 6181 times:

well don't forget is has just been launched... it will be the best 737 build so far, but think the main point here is that airlines wait untill it has flown...

airlines that shown interest in public are :

KLM -might come with a EMB-190 order , in wich KLM is very interrested , as an 737-400/300 F-100 replacement . Also KLM needs an replacement for the AMS-LHR route, wich is now still flown by the 767 1 or 2 times a day (but KLM stated that the 777 and A330 will be a temporary solution untill a good replacement)

JAL - we all know they have shown big interest

SpiceJet - '' ''

other potential airlines:

AA as mentioned above
CO they already operate the 900 , and would be a good 757 replacement
MH maybe when they will replace theire 737-400's?
RyanAir: a good 737 customer
SouthWest: with 190+ pax it can be covered by 4 FA's...


User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (9 years 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 6168 times:

I believe that the big problems facing ANY US legacy carrier have them not ordering any aircraft right now, including AA and CO. They simply cannot afford to order aircraft, period. No matter how good they are. This is the precise reason why they are not ordering 787's in great big batches either.

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 15):
The 739ER could well sell into asian and other regions due to longer stage length. However many of the operators have substantial orders already out there, and again if this variant had come to market earlier then Boeing could have potentially shifted more.

Very true, although I understand JAL is very interested in this aircraft, saw it in an article somewhere a while ago.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineLemurs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1439 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (9 years 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 6108 times:

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 6):
Yes, CO does have a number of 739s that mainly fly shorter-haul high-demand routes, but which CO routes require a 739ER?

The big transcon flights for CO are SEA-EWR, SFO-EWR, LAX-EWR, which depending on the time of the flight and time of the year, are operated by the 738, 752, and 753. I am certain CO would love to be able to use the 739 for more flexibility on those routes, since sometimes the 752 is still too much aircraft, and could be better used elsewhere. Right now they have no options between the 738 at 18F/132Y (new config) and 752 at 24F/159Y, but the 739ER at 18F/149Y would give them lot more operational flexibility. Each destination has 4x or 5x daily to EWR.

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 18):
I believe that the big problems facing ANY US legacy carrier have them not ordering any aircraft right now, including AA and CO. They simply cannot afford to order aircraft, period. No matter how good they are. This is the precise reason why they are not ordering 787's in great big batches either.

While true for most US carriers, CO has been placing conservative orders every year for years now, after the big spurt under Bethune when the economy was booming. Note their 787 orders, additional 737 orders, and the 753 deal they swung with Boeing (even though they're TZ aircraft). I don't think anyone would be surprised by an order or conversion of orders to 739ER.

I have to be honest and admit I didn't consider the order conversion idea. That really does make the most sense for all carriers involved.



There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
User currently offlineAS739X From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6161 posts, RR: 24
Reply 20, posted (9 years 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 6058 times:

Wow, no one mentioned Alaska.

SEA-MCO/BOS/MIA current route possibilities
SEA-ZIH/CUN future route between cities served
LAX-SJO/PTY and possible future Central American cities

ASSFO



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineRedChili From Norway, joined Jul 2005, 2301 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (9 years 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5834 times:

This whole question depends upon when Boeing will launch the next generation narrowbody, or the new 737. If Boeing decides to launch one soon, then the 739ER will not get very many orders before the 737NG goes out of production. But if it will take another 10-15 years, then the 739ER could end up with a lot of orders.


Top 10 airplanes: B737, T154, B747, IL96, T134, IL62, A320, MD80, B757, DC10
User currently offlineLemurs From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1439 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (9 years 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5737 times:

Quoting AS739X (Reply 20):
Wow, no one mentioned Alaska.

My bad! I even had them in mind while I mulled this over, for exactly those routes. I've done SEA-CUN r/t on the regular 900 before, and I HATE the LAX shuffle in there. If that could be non-stop I'd do it more often!

I think AS is a great fit, since they obviously like the -900's already, and have the routes that could use the extra range to boot.



There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary, and those that don't.
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 23, posted (9 years 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5663 times:

Wasn't B739ER a superniche product as one said, at the request of a few customers? It's not like this plane will replace 752/3 variants just because, hence there are many possibilities, but why? If the rumors are true that Boeing may make either a 737-E or a future 797 out of similar engines to 787, they those airplanes might as well wait for that stretch version. Granted it may be longer but with current technology and the price of oil, it may be a better option.

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 4):
But I agree- several more airlines should be interested in this aircraft.

Facinating statement; which airlines and under what circumstances? I hope it wasn't an opinion, for your sake.

[Edited 2005-10-20 00:54:23]


The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineAerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 2736 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (9 years 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5590 times:

I would think that Virgin Blue or Qantas could do with them, especially Virgin Blue, as it currently has nothing larger than the 738 on domestic routes at the moment. They would be excellent for both transcon and the eastern seaboard shuttle.

25 Lightsaber : Not quite. The 764 had the range most customers were asking for. If from the get go the 764 had been available with the same range as the 763ER, it w
26 Stitch : Actually, AS doesn't seem to be overly impressed with the 739, as they converted their remaining orders to 738s. The 739ER strikes me as the plane th
27 2travel2know : Maybe CM is a candidate for the new B737-900?
28 Post contains images GARPD : It made perfect sense to those who pushed Boeing for it and subsequently bought it
29 CRJ900 : I agree. I just looked through an Airliner World mag that I have kept from January 2005 where is says that Virgin Blue and Air Macau are/were possibl
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...
Boeing Gears Up For 737-900ER Assembly Run posted Tue Apr 4 2006 07:27:07 by Leelaw
Why No 748 Pax Orders Yet? posted Fri Dec 2 2005 00:44:35 by AF022
Why No More 747 Orders? posted Thu Feb 17 2005 15:28:17 by Emrecan
Why No A340 Or A320 For KLM? posted Sun Aug 22 2004 14:45:59 by Kl911
Why No 717 Or 757 For AF? posted Sun Apr 25 2004 12:45:24 by Airtrainer
Why No 777s And A380s For PIA? posted Thu Nov 13 2003 23:03:26 by MEA321
Why No Long Range Airbus For BA? posted Sun Nov 9 2003 13:45:40 by EGFFbmi
Why No Southwest Plane Named For Lamar Muse? posted Fri Jul 18 2003 17:30:09 by Tom in NO
Why No SQ/UA Codeshare For LAS/ORD posted Thu Jul 17 2003 19:28:02 by ConcordeBoy
Why No GECAS/ILFC Order For The 772LR? posted Wed Dec 18 2002 18:17:23 by ConcordeBoy