Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will AS Order The 739ER?  
User currently offlineIloveboeing From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 794 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3527 times:

Will AS order 739ERs to replace their 739s? The 739ER has greater capacity and range and has virtually made the 739 obsolete. They have 30 orders for 738s, but couldn't they convert some of them into 739ERs?

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRobK From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 3946 posts, RR: 18
Reply 1, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3489 times:

This topic comes up every month. No, they won't be getting any 739ERs.

R


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 2, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3478 times:

No, they shifted more towards the 738 instead, which has better range. I'm pretty sure they will be keeping the 739's for awhile.


A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 3, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3473 times:



Quoting Iloveboeing (Thread starter):
The 739ER has greater capacity and range and has virtually made the 739 obsolete.

Well, it literally made the 737-900 obsolete in the sense that you can't buy it anymore...only 737-900ER's.

That said, Alaska doesn't really need the extra features that the 737-900ER offers.

Tom.


User currently offlineAS739X From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6098 posts, RR: 23
Reply 4, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3427 times:

Alaska has never really liked the -900 as a whole. But some at Alaska wanted to be the launch customer for an airplane and the -900 was that plane. The plane could hardly do transcons, which AS was starting at the same time, with a full load. MIA regularly has 12-15 seats blocked westbound. The -800 fills any mission in the Alaska system from short field SNA/LIH/BUR-SEA flights to 6.5 hours fighting headwinds from MIA-SEA. The 900ER would not really be needed anywhere in our system. Though,you could possibly make an argument for east coast to Seattle, but I think we are happy with the -800. I am!

ASSFO



"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 5, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3403 times:



Quoting AS739X (Reply 4):
LIH

Since when did AS fly to LIH?  Confused



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 6, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3381 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Iloveboeing (Thread starter):
Will AS order 739ERs to replace their 739s?

No. Most of the 739 fleet is being fitted with winglets to improve range on longer missions (a handful of the first model's have wings lacking the structure to take them).

AS has found that the trip costs between a 73G/73W and a 738/73H are essentially identical, so they have decided to go with the 738/73H moving forward since it offers better RASM (more F and Y seats). The 739s will continue to be used on the most highest-density routes, where the extra Y seats can generate additional income.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 5):
Since when did AS fly to LIH? {Confused}

They launched SEA-LIH and SEA/ANC-HNL in October of 2007.


User currently offlineSXDFC From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 2298 posts, RR: 19
Reply 7, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3323 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
No. Most of the 739 fleet is being fitted with winglets to improve range on longer missions (a handful of the first model's have wings lacking the structure to take them).

If you or anyone else doesn't mind going into why they cant be fitted with Winglets? WN has some of the first -700s flying around and they have winglets, so why would the -900s wing be any different?



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineSeabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5325 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3307 times:



Quoting AS739X (Reply 4):
The 900ER would not really be needed anywhere in our system.

Ironically, the two routes that could probably best use the extra seats -- DCA-SEA and DCA-LAX -- can't use either a -900 or a -900ER because of DCA runway length.  boggled 

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
AS has found that the trip costs between a 73G/73W and a 738/73H are essentially identical, so they have decided to go with the 738/73H moving forward since it offers better RASM (more F and Y seats).

Sorry to nitpick, but I feel like I have to because Zvezda's not here.  Wink This isn't better RASM, it's better CASM combined with more total revenue and more profit per trip. The extra seats depress RASM rather than increasing it, because they'll go to lower-yielding passengers, but the CASM drops further.


User currently offlineGmcc From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 190 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3297 times:



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 5):
Since when did AS fly to LIH? Confused

Since Oct. 28, 2007 according to company website.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 10, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3178 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting SXDFC (Reply 7):
If you or anyone else doesn't mind going into why they cant be fitted with Winglets?

I'm not sure why, but the wingtip on AS' first few 737-900s are weaker then those on later builds. So the additional stresses winglets put on the wingtips would require the wingtips to be reinforced to the point that they'd cancel out the benefits of the winglets.

Quoting Seabosdca (Reply 8):
Sorry to nitpick, but I feel like I have to because Zvezda's not here.  Wink This isn't better RASM, it's better CASM combined with more total revenue and more profit per trip. The extra seats depress RASM rather than increasing it, because they'll go to lower-yielding passengers, but the CASM drops further.

Well AS specifically referred to trip costs, which seem to be a different animal from pure CASM based on a quick read of the "Fleet Management" section of "Straight and Level: Practical Airline Economics" by Stephen Holloway.

In the end, I imagine it's a bit of a mix. But it essentially costs AS as much to fly 133 people as it does to fly 157, so those 24 extra folks are "gravy", so to speak, whether it be thanks to lower CASM or greater RASM or both. Big grin


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 11, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3122 times:



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 2):
No, they shifted more towards the 738 instead, which has better range.

Not better than the 739ER

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 3):

That said, Alaska doesn't really need the extra features that the 737-900ER offers.

They could use it for the Florida flights

Quoting AS739X (Reply 4):
The 900ER would not really be needed anywhere in our system.

I don't know about that. The larger size would fit well on existing 739 routes and those that grow to the point that a 738 is leaving people on the ground. The range would allow greater flexibility and could operate any 73H route.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
(a handful of the first model's have wings lacking the structure to take them).

That makes no sense at all.

Quoting Seabosdca (Reply 8):

Ironically, the two routes that could probably best use the extra seats -- DCA-SEA and DCA-LAX -- can't use either a -900 or a -900ER because of DCA runway length.

I really doubt the 739ER would have a problem



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineSxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1257 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3101 times:



Quoting N1120A (Reply 11):
That makes no sense at all.

Why not? The first few frames off the line almost always have significant differences. Sometimes they're retrofitted, sometimes they're not.


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 13, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3071 times:



Quoting Sxf24 (Reply 12):

Why not? The first few frames off the line almost always have significant differences.

Because the 739 shares a wing with the others in the series.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 14, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3067 times:



Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
(a handful of the first model's have wings lacking the structure to take them).

Actually, the first two (maybe the third one..) don't have the strength to have winglets to be installed: 302AS and 305AS for sure. As for why, I don't know, ask Boeing. But to state a 'handful' of their 739's is incorrect.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 11):
They could use it for the Florida flights

They could, but they elected to go with the 738 instead which I think is a wise move.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 11):
The larger size would fit well on existing 739 routes and those that grow to the point that a 738 is leaving people on the ground.

I dunno about that. AS is using the 738 for longer range routes. One example is the Hawaii ops. Put a 739 on that route, it would take much more of a fuel penalty than the 738 would take.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 11):
I really doubt the 739ER would have a problem

You're right, but again....AS does not want the airplane.

Quoting Sxf24 (Reply 12):
The first few frames off the line almost always have significant differences.

 checkmark  That could very well be the case.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 15, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3067 times:



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 14):
Put a 739 on that route, it would take much more of a fuel penalty than the 738 would take.

The 739ER and 73H have practically equal range.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 14):

They could, but they elected to go with the 738 instead which I think is a wise move.

Not if they are leaving people on the ground.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 16, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3054 times:



Quoting N1120A (Reply 15):
The 739ER and 73H have practically equal range.

You may be correct, but when it comes to cargo/pax (which the 738 does better on)....thats a whole 'nother ballgame. Again, AS does not want the 739ER. If they wanted it, we would have seen an order long ago.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 15):
Not if they are leaving people on the ground.

And you know this how? Do you have the AS involuntary denied boarding stats between the 738 vs. 739? Care to share?



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 17, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3043 times:



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 16):

You may be correct, but when it comes to cargo/pax (which the 738 does better on)....

What are you talking about? The 739ER carries more passengers the same distance.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 16):
Again, AS does not want the 739ER.

I didn't say they did

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 16):

And you know this how? Do you have the AS involuntary denied boarding stats between the 738 vs. 739? Care to share?

Where did I say they did? All I said was that it wouldn't be a wise move if they are leaving demand on the ground.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 18, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3029 times:



Quoting N1120A (Reply 17):
The 739ER carries more passengers the same distance.

You sure about that? I thought cargo makes more money... So the 738 is more economical than the 739.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 19, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3002 times:



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 18):

You sure about that?

Of course

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 18):
thought cargo makes more money... So the 738 is more economical than the 739.

What in the world? The 739ER, and 739 for that matter, have a lower CASM than the 738. Further, even with 2 auxiliary tanks, the 739ER holds more cargo than the 738



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineSxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1257 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2998 times:



Quoting N1120A (Reply 13):
Because the 739 shares a wing with the others in the series.

There may be structural differences between frames. Designs and manufacturing processes are fluid.


User currently offlineAirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 24
Reply 21, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2999 times:



Quoting N1120A (Reply 19):

I think AS knows what they are doing and came to a conclusion that the 738 is more economical than the 739ER, and I agree with them.



A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26376 posts, RR: 76
Reply 22, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2976 times:



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 21):

I think AS knows what they are doing and came to a conclusion that the 738 is more economical than the 739ER

Facially, the 739ER is more economical. Other factors, I am sure, came into play. The 739ER wasn't flying until very recently, while AS was able to get their hands on the 738 much sooner. Further, the 738 is cheaper and probably offers lower trip costs, posing less risk, but also less profit potential. Finally, AS may well have chosen for an eventual shift to all 73Hs, which allows complete interchangeability



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30623 posts, RR: 84
Reply 23, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2968 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting N1120A (Reply 11):
That makes no sense at all.

That's what Boeing said and they built the bloody thing, so... *shrug*

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 14):
Actually, the first two (maybe the third one..) don't have the strength to have winglets to be installed: 302AS and 305AS for sure. As for why, I don't know, ask Boeing. But to state a 'handful' of their 739's is incorrect.

I knew it was either two or three, hence I used the term "handful" to represent that, so it's perfectly correct from a semantic point of view in the way I meant it to be interpreted.  Smile


User currently offlineBayAreaBlue From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 260 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2922 times:

The first three 737-900's (N302AS, N303AS & N305AS) will not be fitted with winglets. The wing structure at the wing tips could not withstand the installation of winglets without a major modification to the structure. The cost of this modification outweighed the benefits AS would have recieved if they went ahead and made the mod and then installed the winglets.

25 FlagshipAZ : Alaska has 12 739s, and 10 of them will be wingletted. The 2 that won't be, N302AS & N303AS were at first, testbeds for Boeing for a time before being
26 AirframeAS : Just out of curiousity, who has the protype 739 right now? Didn't Boeing keep the very first one built?
27 FlagshipAZ : I believe that N302AS is the prototype -900. However, I'm not 100% certain of this. N305AS has recently been determined to be a candidate for winglet
28 AirframeAS : IIRC, 305AS was the first to join the fleet.
29 Post contains links SeaBosDca : Nope, AS has it (it's one of the birds that can't take winglets). Boeing hasn't kept a prototype since the first 757-200, to my knowledge. Unlike Air
30 FlagshipAZ : That's correct...N305AS was the first to join AS' fleet. But 302 & 303 were the first -900s built, thus being testbeds for Boeing before joining AS.
31 AirframeAS : Oh, I know for a fact thats how the numerals went. First 305, then 302 then 303 then I think....307??
32 BayAreaBlue : Here is the breakdown for -900 deliveries to AS: N305AS N306AS N307AS N303AS N309AS N315AS N317AS N302AS N320AS N323AS
33 FlagshipAZ : BayAreaBlue...I hate to nit-pick, but you forgot 318 & 319. They should be inserted between 302 & 320. AS has 12 739s. Regards.
34 BayAreaBlue : Your right, my apologies. I skipped over them on my list. As a side note, I can confirm that N305AS will not be retrofitted with winglets.
35 Tdscanuck : Sure it does. Winglets require that the wing have excess structural margin. The original 737-900 had the same wing as the 737-800. Since the 737-900
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...
Which Will NW Order The 190, 195, Or Both? posted Sat Oct 7 2006 00:31:55 by Af773atmsp
Will LH Order The B-747-800I This Year? posted Tue Sep 5 2006 15:43:13 by KC135TopBoom
Will VS Order The 748I? posted Tue Aug 1 2006 20:09:30 by NYC777
Will LCC's Order The A380? posted Thu Feb 2 2006 23:51:11 by Alberchico
When Will BA Order The B-787-800, B-747-ADV? posted Tue Oct 11 2005 04:43:03 by KC135TopBoom
Will U.S. Airways Order The 7E7? posted Sat Sep 13 2003 22:35:05 by CX747
When Will AS Retire The MD-80 posted Fri Apr 18 2003 06:40:58 by United777
When Will Sas Order The Replacement For Md80? posted Sun Mar 17 2002 21:47:26 by Legolars
Will AA Order The 747 If DL Does? What Do U Think? posted Wed Aug 2 2000 02:26:33 by Blink182
Who Else Will Order The 787-3 posted Fri Aug 3 2007 21:06:31 by DL767captain