Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A-318 Vs. B-737-600  
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12150 posts, RR: 51
Posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 6826 times:

It looks like Airbus has sold 4 A-318s so far this year. But, I don't believe Boeing has sold any B-737-600s this year, or for the last few years, for that fact.

Why is that?

36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11382 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 6764 times:

E190, CRJ-700.

A318 and 736 are simply too fat for their roles.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineVfw614 From Germany, joined Dec 2001, 4005 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6719 times:

It is interesting, however, that the A318 is a two times shrink of the original A320 design (so a less than ideal result should be expected), while the mother of all B737, the -100, was shorter than today's -600 (although the -600 sized model has become fatter and fatter over the decades when it matured from the -200 to the -500 and finally the -600).

User currently offlineYOW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6710 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Thread starter):
But, I don't believe Boeing has sold any B-737-600s this year, or for the last few years, for that fact.

WestJet is taking delivery of a bunch of 736s this year. The options were firmed up late last year if I remember correctly.


User currently offlineAvConsultant From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1360 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6691 times:

The 737-600 is an expensive airplane for its size.

User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6654 times:

Despite being smaller than the -700, the 737-600 is that much cheaper to operate. So most operators go for the additional revenue that the -700 can earn.

User currently offlineAviator27 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6586 times:

Length of the Guppy (B737):

B737-100: 27.61 meters
B737-200: 29.54 meters
B737-300: 32.18 meters
B737-400: 35.23 meters
B737-500: 29.79 meters
B737-600: 29.79 meters
B737-700: 32.18 meters
B737-800: 38.02 meters
B737-900: 40.67 meters

All from Boeing Technical Documents.

B737 Airplane Characteristics for Airport Planning


User currently offlineAviator27 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6565 times:

Just for kicks, the length of the 'Bus (A32x):

A318: 31.45 meters
A319: 33.83 meters
A320: 37.57 meters
A321: 44.51 meters

All from Airbus Product Viewer.


User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8677 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 6565 times:

I would love to see Canjet get 736's. I think instead we will see the 73G. But as Aviator27 said the 500 and 600 are the same length, so you never know.

MCOflyer



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlineAvConsultant From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1360 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 6367 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 5):
Despite being smaller than the -700, the 737-600 is that much cheaper to operate. So most operators go for the additional revenue that the -700 can earn.

The 737-6 operating cost are almost identical to the 737-7. With the exception of WestJet, SAS has to use these aircraft on high yielding routes with limited demand.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12150 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 6265 times:

Since AirTran was a big B-717 customer, why didn't they opt for the B-737-600, instead of the B-737-700, when the B-717 went out of production?

User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4853 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 6181 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Thread starter):
Why is that?

Weren't those sold A318 Elites? That might explain the gap, as Boeing had publicly stated last January that they were no longer actively promoting the 736 as a business jet. Another factor could be the imminent certification of the A318 by Spring 2007 for operation into LCY. The only jet competition here are the smaller E170 due to be certified this year, and the 146 but with BAE Systems just shrugging off the threat. The 190 is about to begin its campaign.
http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...nies+plan+for+larger+Airbuses.html

The A318 could have more range than the single ACT provides, if a large, built-in aft storage tank is feasible in the sloping area starting at the cargo door and as far backwards as it could go, if there are no structures, equipment or hydraulic lines that are in the way. This change could add significant fuel volume but can only happen if more operators would be interested.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 10):
Since AirTran was a big B-717 customer, why didn't they opt for the B-737-600, instead of the B-737-700, when the B-717 went out of production?

The last went off the line just recently, and theirs are still fairly new. Besides, the 736 (as the A318) is reputed to have worse economics than the 717. And for a small increase in operating costs, they gain a substantial number of seats with the -700.

[Edited 2006-07-24 22:04:49]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineFlyDreamliner From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2759 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 6157 times:

Quoting Vfw614 (Reply 2):
while the mother of all B737, the -100, was shorter than today's -600 (although the -600 sized model has become fatter and fatter over the decades when it matured from the -200 to the -500 and finally the -600).

The fuselage cross section has not gotten any wider over the course of the 737 production line, from -100 to -900.

Quoting AvConsultant (Reply 4):
The 737-600 is an expensive airplane for its size.

Extremely expensive. It only appeals to airlines with large 737 fleets looking for a small jet and fleet commonality.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 10):
Since AirTran was a big B-717 customer, why didn't they opt for the B-737-600, instead of the B-737-700, when the B-717 went out of production?

They bought the two model concurrently. The 737 was meant for higher demand segments. Plus the 737-700 costs in essence the same to opperate as 737-600, and both cost well more to opperate than 717. They figured so long as they were moving to 737, the extra capacity of 737-7 over -6 is basically free.



"Let the world change you, and you can change the world"
User currently offlineThering From Brazil, joined Jun 2006, 530 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 6137 times:

Quoting Aviator27 (Reply 6):
B737-600: 29.79 meters
B737-700: 32.18 meters



Quoting Aviator27 (Reply 6):
A318: 31.45 meters

So A318 has almost the same lenght that the 737-700!!

The lack of sales for the 736 is simple, the 737-700 has almost the same flying cost, operates on the same runways, and carries 20 more pax in avarege.
I think that the certification to operate in London City may help the A318 sales, to Air France, and maybe even BA.



146 319 320 321 332 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 742 743 744 762 763 772 773 CRJ ER4 100 F50 F27 M11 D10
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 6055 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 10):
Since AirTran was a big B-717 customer, why didn't they opt for the B-737-600, instead of the B-737-700, when the B-717 went out of production?

The cost model only works on the low weight, low thrust, shorter range version. You start carrying people beyond 1,500 miles in a 100 seater of this weight, you're simply wasting money. You really have to command a premium at that point which drives the -700 beyond that distance.


User currently offlineThering From Brazil, joined Jun 2006, 530 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 6022 times:

So I would say that the big question is... Why SAS got 737-600s istead of gettingh just -700s and -800s???


146 319 320 321 332 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 742 743 744 762 763 772 773 CRJ ER4 100 F50 F27 M11 D10
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 6017 times:

Quoting Thering (Reply 15):
So I would say that the big question is... Why SAS got 737-600s istead of gettingh just -700s and -800s???

Short haul use.


User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9661 posts, RR: 52
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5991 times:

Quoting Vfw614 (Reply 2):
It is interesting, however, that the A318 is a two times shrink of the original A320 design (so a less than ideal result should be expected), while the mother of all B737, the -100, was shorter than today's -600 (although the -600 sized model has become fatter and fatter over the decades when it matured from the -200 to the -500 and finally the -600).

Well there is a big difference between the 737s and A320 series. The 737NGs have a totally new wing, which is much larger than the original wing. This is what gives the plane the additional range to be able to fly transcons. However with a larger wing comes more weight. The 737-500 is more economical to operate on the same route than a 737-600 is. This is why Continental cancelled its 737-600 order. The 737-500 was a lot more successful since it was a better combination for the wing. The 737-600 has a wing that is more ideal for the 737-700 or 800 and transcon routes. There is little in common with the 737-100 or 737-200 other than crossection. The 737 grew and no longer efficiently covers the 100 seat market that it was originally designed for.

The current generation of 737s occupy the same market that the 727 and 720 were filling when the 737 was first designed. Boeing took over the MD-95 and renamed it the 717 so it could have a plane in that market segment that the 737 initially pioneered. It is interesting that Boeing originally had the 720 and later 727 to fill the 140-150 seat market with a range of almost 2000 miles and the 737 to fill the 100-120 seat market with a range a little shorter. The 737 moved up to fill the 727 market, the 727 disappeared, and the 717 came, and then it disappeared. There is a trend of Boeing not being that committed or succesful with the 100 seat market.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4853 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 5847 times:

Quoting Thering (Reply 13):
Quoting Aviator27 (Reply 6):
B737-600: 29.79 meters
B737-700: 32.18 meters

Quoting Aviator27 (Reply 6):
A318: 31.45 meters

So A318 has almost the same lenght that the 737-700!!

The 737-7 is 33.63 meters long. I doubt it would be that easy to fit 20 more seats on the -700 if it was only 2.39 meters longer than the -600. The difference in lenght between the A318 and B736 is a mere 8 inches! Source: A.net A/C Stats.



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineFL370 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 252 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5833 times:

im not a big airbus fan, but i think the a-318 is nicer and has more room. im not sure about the performance and all, but i like the look of the A-318 over the 737-600.

User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5800 times:

Maybe if Boeing hadn't inherited the MD95/717, they should have kept a modified 737 classic wing for the 736? Doesn't the MD95/717 have a modified DC9 wing rather than a MD80 or MD90 one, as it's a lot smaller and more appropriate for it's short haul role?


it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineAvConsultant From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1360 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5771 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 20):
Doesn't the MD95/717 have a modified DC9 wing rather than a MD80 or MD90 one, as it's a lot smaller and more appropriate for it's short haul role?

The wing is not modified; old design; it's the DC-9-30 wing. Had the MD-95/717 had the MD-80/90 wing it would have been a competitor of the 737-600. There would have been more US operators ordering the aircraft. The increase in range would not have been the same as the 737-600, but a significant increase from it's current range.


User currently offlineTangowhisky From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 930 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5745 times:

When Airbus launched the A318, they initially were planning to offer this model only with the PW6000 engine. Airlines however still wantd the CFM-56, so Airbus offers both engines. Does anyone know if the PW6000 have been more successful, or will be now that they are certified?


Only the paranoid survive
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4853 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5679 times:

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 22):
Does anyone know if the PW6000 have been more successful, or will be now that they are certified?

If I'm not mistaken, PW6000A will power LAN Chile's A318s. Pretty much all the other airlines (only a handful including premium carriers) which (will) operate the A318 have opted for CFM56s. This was discussed in Why No PW 6000 737NG? (by 747400sp Jun 24 2006 in Tech Ops)



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineAviator27 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 5611 times:

Quoting FlyDreamliner

They bought the two model concurrently. The 737 was meant for higher demand segments. Plus the 737-700 costs in essence the same to operate as 737-600, and both cost well more to operate than 717. They figured so long as they were moving to 737, the extra capacity of 737-7 over -6 is basically free.


I beg to differ on this one. AirTran found that a B717 was cheaper to operate than a CRJ-200. That was why they ended their RJ experiment with Air Wisconsin quite fast. They also found the B737-700 was a lot cheaper to operate than the B717. That is why AirTran switched the to B737 and why the B717 died off.


25 Mariner : Do you have any figures on that? Theoretically, the 717 should have a cost roughly similar to its family, the DC9 series aircraft, so it is tough to
26 Aviator27 : Quoting DEVILFISH The 737-7 is 33.63 meters long. I doubt it would be that easy to fit 20 more seats on the -700 if it was only 2.39 meters longer tha
27 Post contains images DEVILFISH : A.net data was based on the same measuring system. The difference is 2.39 meters even if measured from nose to fuselage end, meaning we're still 2 sh
28 Vfw614 : I know. I did not mean to imply that. I was referring to the weight (and the early nickname for the Boeing 737, "Fat Albert" - although in all honest
29 Molykote : Not necessarily - Using this logic we'd expect the 747-100 to have costs similar to the 747-400 (or even 747-8).
30 Mariner : I find it difficult to imagine that McDonnell Douglas developed an aircraft - a variant on a known, efficient aircraft family - that had very much hi
31 KC135TopBoom : I agree, the B-717-200 is cheaper to operate than it's DC-9-30 cousin. Yes, the same applies to the B-747 models. The -400 is cheaper to operate than
32 Post contains links Aviator27 : Mariner: The following document is a presentation from Merril Lynch Global Transportation Conference 2006. If you look at slide 10, it says, B737-700
33 Aviator27 : I also forgot to add that one of the reasons the B737-700 CASM was "much better" than the B717 for AirTran was the fact that they opted to not install
34 KC135TopBoom : Since most of their flights are less than 3 hours, they could get away with this configueration. But, what will they do if they ever decide to fly th
35 Aviator27 : Quoting KC135TopBoom Since most of their flights are less than 3 hours, they could get away with this configuration. But, what will they do if they ev
36 Post contains links Mariner : Aviator: Thanks for that, it is a very interesting presentation. And yes, I would expect the 737 to be somewhat cheaper to operate if only because it
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...
MD-87, B-717, B-737-600 A-318 Vs. B-737-500 posted Wed Aug 17 2005 16:47:54 by KC135TopBoom
717 Vs 737-600 posted Thu Jan 20 2005 19:28:57 by Trex8
717-300 Vs. 737-600 posted Sun Jul 18 2004 21:25:48 by Cumulonimbus
Boeing 737-500 Vs. 737-600 posted Thu Apr 22 2004 00:55:55 by TradewindL1011
717 Vs. 737-600 posted Sun Nov 11 2001 05:26:23 by Jkarry
Avro RJ Vs 737-500/600 posted Wed Mar 28 2001 00:10:25 by Lahaina
Leasing E190 Vs CRJ900 Vs B737-600 posted Thu Nov 23 2006 05:27:52 by Nseljac77
Status Of Air Algerie 737-600 7T-VJQ? posted Thu Oct 5 2006 14:39:20 by NA
WestJet 737-600 Routes posted Wed Sep 27 2006 16:27:17 by JBLUA320
E195 Vs 737 posted Mon Sep 4 2006 22:57:59 by KSUpilot