Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Is The Story Behind SK Taking UX 738?  
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2673 posts, RR: 4
Posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5449 times:

Good evening!

I recently had a wonderful trip onboard this beautiful SK 737-800.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sebastian Fernandez Bielkiewicz AirTeamImages



Now to my surprise the seats did not at all look like SK. They where leather seats, with a different shade of blue.

They looked like this:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dario Crusafon - Iberian Spotters





After researching this I found out my 737-800 was not the usual 737-883, but a 737-85P. This is the customer number for Air Europa. From further research it seems like SAS got 3 737-85P delivered brand new from Boeing. They never went to Air Europa. This made me wonder about a lot of things, I hope to get help solving here on Airlienrs.net.  

From what I have found out Air Europa has about 30 737-800 on order. Why did they not take these three birds? Did SAS get these three birds any cheaper since they have a different interior? It cost money for SAS to have different kinds of seat. They need spareparts, in case something cracks. Not very expensive, but still.

This brings me to some other questions. Does anybody know if SAS will replace them with the seats they have onboard the 737-883 airplanes? And how common is it for for airlines to accept planes destined for other airlines? Do you have similar examples to show when airlines have ended up flying with the "wrong" interior for a while?

As an aviation geek, I really wanted to start a thread about this to see if it is possible to find out how common this is, and if what kind of deal SAS and Air Europa made in this transaction.


Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinebx737 From Ireland, joined Sep 2001, 669 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5380 times:

There has been a previous lease deal between Air Europa and SAS, a number of 737-600s went the other way.

My own airline has done that on a few occasions. Two A320s were leased in that had previously been operated by Swissair. They had the Swissair interiors and were a different configuration from the company's existing fleet. Around the same time my company were increasiing the seating capacity of their own A320s from 159 to 174 pax. Thus they had three different interiors at the one time, the former Swissair A320s with 150 seats and our own 159 and 174 capacity aircraft. This led to the nightmare scenario of a tech snag and a deputising aircraft.

Lately we have two A320s which were destined for Iberia and were delivered to us with the Iberia interior and seating capacity of 171.


User currently offlineshamrock321 From Ireland, joined May 2008, 1587 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5361 times:

Easy to tell what airline you work for bx737! Arnt the seat on EI-DVE/DVF different to all the other A320s aswell?

User currently offlinebx737 From Ireland, joined Sep 2001, 669 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5319 times:

If you didn't know by now who I work for you havent been paying attention to the Irish threads   , but the seats on EDP and EDS are different, I don't know about DVE/F though, they are two I have only worked on once each and that was quite a while ago. I usually work on the A330s

User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2673 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4928 times:

Quoting bx737 (Reply 1):
There has been a previous lease deal between Air Europa and SAS, a number of 737-600s went the other way

I was not aware that Air Europa flew the 737-600. How many did they fly. Wouldnt this affect Spanair, that has been owned by SAS up until recently? Do you know if these airplanes are just leased out to SAS, and will eventually return Air Europa? They were delivered factory fresh to SAS.

Quoting bx737 (Reply 1):
My own airline has done that on a few occasions. Two A320s were leased in that had previously been operated by Swissair. They had the Swissair interiors and were a different configuration from the company's existing fleet. Around the same time my company were increasiing the seating capacity of their own A320s from 159 to 174 pax.

I know this is common when an airline is either leasing out planes or in the need of more. But in this case these planes were a part of an original order for 737. SAS even announced they would be taking more 737-800 back in 2008.



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineshamrock321 From Ireland, joined May 2008, 1587 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4816 times:

Your right bx737 sorry its EDS and EDP always mix them up on account of the odd regs.

User currently offlinevv701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7258 posts, RR: 17
Reply 6, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4640 times:

There certainly have been other examples of aircraft being ordered and built for one airline and then actually bought and delivered to another. On two occasions one of the airlines involved was BA.

The first was back in the economic downturn in the early to mid 1980s. It impacted deliveries of the 752 to BA. Instead of being delivered to BA a couple of aircraft were delivered by Boeing to Air Europe that was then, coincidentally, a sister airline to Air Europa (both then being owned by ILG - International Leisure Group). The impact of this transfer was not on the cabins. Instead all of the 757s subsequently delivered to Air Europe, Air Europa and British Airways were designated 'Boeing 757 236' even though Air Europe / Air Europa already has its own designator 'S3' that had been used on the 732s it had ordered and had had delivered.

The other example were two A 320s ordered for and built for Aer Lingus. They were Type 214s and had been constructed and fitted with the appropriate CFM engines. They were originally rolled out at TLS in partial Aer Lingus livery. They were then parked up at TLS for several months before they were taken back into the factory and modified to A 320 232s. The modifications included being refitted with IAE engines and, I assume, BA style cabin and seats. They were also painted up in BA livery before being delivered to them,as G-EUUH and 'UL.


User currently offlinebx737 From Ireland, joined Sep 2001, 669 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 4590 times:

Quoting vv701 (Reply 6):
The first was back in the economic downturn in the early to mid 1980s. It impacted deliveries of the 752 to BA. Instead of being delivered to BA a couple of aircraft were delivered by Boeing to Air Europe that was then, coincidentally, a sister airline to Air Europa (both then being owned by ILG - International Leisure Group). The impact of this transfer was not on the cabins. Instead all of the 757s subsequently delivered to Air Europe, Air Europa and British Airways were designated 'Boeing 757 236' even though Air Europe / Air Europa already has its own designator 'S3' that had been used on the 732s it had ordered and had had delivered.

I hate to disagree, but I read somewhere that the -236 designation was used on the Air Europe 757s due to the fact that the British government regarded the 757-2S3 as being a different version of the 757 to the -236, so rather than having to get a separate CoA for their aircraft, Air Europe went with the -236 designation. The same happened more recently in the Netherlands with the 737-800s ordered by KLM. Transavia got the 737-8K2 certified and in order not to have to go through the certification process again KLM opted for the -K2 version instead of their normal -06 version.


User currently offlinevv701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7258 posts, RR: 17
Reply 8, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4483 times:

Quoting bx737 (Reply 7):
I hate to disagree, but I read somewhere that the -236 designation was used on the Air Europe 757s due to the fact that the British government regarded the 757-2S3 as being a different version of the 757 to the -236, so rather than having to get a separate CoA for their aircraft, Air Europe went with the -236 designation. The same happened more recently in the Netherlands with the 737-800s ordered by KLM. Transavia got the 737-8K2 certified and in order not to have to go through the certification process again KLM opted for the -K2 version instead of their normal -06 version

The situation I describe is correct. The fifth 752 ordered and built for BA, CN 22176, LN 014, was assigned the British registration, G-BIKE. This was one of 25 registrations reserved by British Airways for its first 25 752s in the series G-BIKA to G-BIKZ.. (The letter 'Q' is never used in any British aircraft registration.)

Because of the poor state of the British and world economies in 1983 (which resulted in a posponement of the privatisation of the airline) BA did not take up delivery of 22176. Instead it was delivered on 30 March 1983 to Air Europe as G-BKRM.

The record also shows that each and every subsequent 752 ordered by either Air Europe, Air Europa or International Leisure Group was, like G-BKRM, assigned the model number '236' by Boeing. Otherwise the '36' suffix has only ever been used for new aircraft delivered to British Airways or to its predesesor, BOAC. Amongst aircraft assigned the '36' and not the 'S3' suffix were 752s ordered and delivered to Air Europa in the 1990s. This was after both Air Europe and ILG had gone into liquidation.

If you let me know what you disagree with about the above I can let you have a source to confirm what i say. But also note that there is absolutely nothing in what I have said above or in my original post that is in direct conflict with what you have said.

Personally I have not heard that reason put forward before, but I am certainly in no position to disageee with it even if it is very surprising that a government aviation agency like the CAA that had been responsible for type approval and registering Boeing aircraft for literally decades had not, at that time, understood the Boeing model numbering system and how it should be used in determining whether new type approval was required.

Here it is worth recognising that the record shows that at that time there were various Boeing 707, 737 and 747 aircraft of varying 'types' that had previously been registered in the UK. One would have expected and hoped that the regulatory authority would liase with the aircraft manufacturers and would have been able to distinguish which aircraft required type approval and which were covered by previous issues of type approval.

It is also surprising to me that Boeing continued to use the '36' suffix for 752s ordered by the Spanish airline, Air Europa, and delivered to them 10 or more years later when it could have used the 'S3' suffix that it had used for all the 737s it had delivered to them.

Having said all of that a not disimilar situation to that you suggest arose when BA leased in two 733s from Maersk Air. Unlike G-BKRM which was not the first 752 on the British register, these 733s were the first Boeing 737 300s to be operated in the UK.

Because the 733 had not been type approved by the British CAA and because the additional capacity these aircraft provided was urgently required by BA the two aircraft, OY-MMP and OY-MMR were initially put into service by BA while still on the Danish register:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © JetPix


As soon as the British CAA issued Type Approval for the Boeing 733 these two aircraft were placed on the British register as G-CMMP and 'MR:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Frank Schaefer


Two more 733s were then leased in by British Airways from Maersk Air and were immediately placed onto the British register as G-BOZA and 'ZB.

In summary I wonder whether what you have read is correct. Can remember where you read it? Could it have been written by someone suggesting a reason as to why the Boeing '36' suffix is the only suffix to have been used for aircraft delivered to two unrelated airlines?


User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3212 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4119 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Going back to the original question..
I believe UX just cancelled a 737 ... so perhaps their revenue is down and they leased or sold some undelivered completed a/c to SK .. And if the BFE was already ordered and delivered it was cheaper to install it as part of the deal.. Occasionally Boeing will help out customers strapped for cash by marketing their planes right off the production line.. (AF 777F's to Fedex comes to mind)..


User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2673 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3782 times:

Quoting vv701 (Reply 6):
The first was back in the economic downturn in the early to mid 1980s. It impacted deliveries of the 752 to BA. Instead of being delivered to BA a couple of aircraft were delivered by Boeing to Air Europe that was then, coincidentally, a sister airline to Air Europa (both then being owned by ILG - International Leisure Group). The impact of this transfer was not on the cabins. Instead all of the 757s subsequently delivered to Air Europe, Air Europa and British Airways were designated 'Boeing 757 236' even though Air Europe / Air Europa already has its own designator 'S3' that had been used on the 732s it had ordered and had had delivered.

Interesting. Did Air Europe and BA deal them self, or did Boeing help them with the transaction?

Quoting kanban (Reply 9):
Going back to the original question..

Thank you  
Quoting kanban (Reply 9):
I believe UX just cancelled a 737 ... so perhaps their revenue is down and they leased or sold some undelivered completed a/c to SK .. And if the BFE was already ordered and delivered it was cheaper to install it as part of the deal.. Occasionally Boeing will help out customers strapped for cash by marketing their planes right off the production line.. (AF 777F's to Fedex comes to mind)..

If this is correct then these are not part of the 23 737-800 originally ordered by SAS? These three are 3 more?



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlinemarky From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 208 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3204 times:

Quoting vv701 (Reply 8):
The situation I describe is correct.

Not entirely!

G-BIKE wasn't part of the BA 757 batch as it had already been allocated to a Piper PA-28 in 1980 - you can see this at http://www.caa.co.uk/application.asp...&appid=1&mode=reg&fullregmark=BIKE

Quoting bx737 (Reply 7):
but I read somewhere that the -236 designation was used on the Air Europe 757s due to the fact that the British government regarded the 757-2S3 as being a different version of the 757 to the -236, so rather than having to get a separate CoA for their aircraft, Air Europe went with the -236 designation

This can't be true - aircraft types get a type certificate, individual aircraft get a CofA. Although the various 'variants' such as 236 are included on the type certificate, there no way a different customer variant would have been treated as an entirely different type for certification purposes. I have no idea why Boeing continued to use the 236 variant for Air Europe's 757s though. The UK TCDS (Type Certificate Data Sheet) for the 757 is at http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/1419/srg_acp_fa28-05.pdf

Quoting vv701 (Reply 8):
BA leased in two 733s from Maersk Air.
Quoting vv701 (Reply 8):
Because the 733 had not been type approved by the British CAA

This is not true either, the 737 was type approved by the CAA much earlier - Orion Airways were one of the first customers for the 733 (maybe first in Europe?) and the first UK 737-300 was registered in 1984 - see http://www.caa.co.uk/application.asp...appid=1&mode=reg&fullregmark=BLKB. Again, I don't know why the aircraft operated on the Danish register for a while - maybe it was initially a wet lease operated by Maersk crews?


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24084 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3099 times:

Quoting marky (Reply 11):
Quoting vv701 (Reply 8):
Because the 733 had not been type approved by the British CAA

This is not true either, the 737 was type approved by the CAA much earlier - Orion Airways were one of the first customers for the 733 (maybe first in Europe?) and the first UK 737-300 was registered in 1984

Orion was the 3rd carrier in the world to order and take delivery of the 737-300, after US Airways and Southwest.


User currently offlinebx737 From Ireland, joined Sep 2001, 669 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2898 times:

Quoting marky (Reply 11):
aircraft types get a type certificate, individual aircraft get a CofA. Although the various 'variants' such as 236 are included on the type certificate, there no way a different customer variant would have been treated as an entirely different type for certification purposes

Sorry about the incorrect terminology, it was the type certificate I was referring to in that case. It is interesting that the CAA only approve certain variants of the 757 and the document was only issued in 2001, so I still stand over the information I gave, bearing in mind that in the early 1980s the only approved variant would have been the 236. I can't recall off hand exactly where I read that about the BA/Air Europe 757-236. The different customer variant is definitely the reason that KLM has 737-8K2s and not the 737-806s they should have.

By the way sorrry OyKIE for going off on a slight bit of a tangent, but I thought it was related. I would say the situation you came across is quite common. As we know the airline industry is very cyclical. An airline is in a period of expansion during an economic boom and decides that they need x number of aircraft, so they order these and pay their deposits. The aircraft will join the fleet in 24 months. As far as I know stage payments are made during that 24 month period. Then the economy collapses and the airline doesn't need the aircraft, but the aircraft is near delivery and under the terms of the contract the cancellation charge is a lot, so the aircraft is sold to another airline who needs an aircraft on short notice thus the situation you described comes into play.


User currently offlinekanban From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 3212 posts, RR: 26
Reply 14, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2770 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 10):
If this is correct then these are not part of the 23 737-800 originally ordered by SAS? These three are 3 more?

they actually could be.. earlier planes at a discount... I'd take if offered...


User currently offlinevv701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7258 posts, RR: 17
Reply 15, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2654 times:

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 10):
Interesting. Did Air Europe and BA deal them self, or did Boeing help them with the transaction?

I am not sure. However in the 1980s there was a lot of cooperation between BA and Air Europe. BA temporarilly flew several Air Europe 752s and 732s and Air Europe leased in a BA 752. So I think it probable that BA and Air Europe got together. Here is what should have been G-BIKF - not G-BIKE (see below) - that became G-BKRM in service with BA and a BA 752 that went temporarilly in the opposite direction:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gary Watt
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © John James

Quoting marky (Reply 11):
G-BIKE wasn't part of the BA 757 batch as it had already been allocated to a Piper PA-28 in 1980

Thanks for the correction. There was a second BA 752 from the initial batch that got treated the same way - I forget which one. But the originally allocated registration was used instead for the next aircraft delivered by Boeing. This explains something I never understood - why BA used that second reg but not G-BIKE!

Quoting marky (Reply 11):
the 737 was type approved by the CAA much earlier

Again thanks. It looks as if your suggestion of an initial a wet lease is the explanation for the retention of the Danish registrations.


User currently offlineSomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3173 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2629 times:

Basically, Air Europa had to cancel these aircrafts, however the production of these aircrafts had already begun, thus it was too late to cancel them. SAS needed a few more 737-800s and decided then to take up these planes. AFAIK they got them for a discount, but more important, they got these 3 737-800 on a short notice.

The reason for the Air Europe configuration -85P, and not the usuall -883 for SAS was that the production of these planes had come too far and the parts ordered was for the -85P configuration.

Personally, I hate these 3 aircrafts, as they are the most cramped ones in the SAS fleet. Neither is the light blue leather seats any good looking. But unfortunately is there no current planes to change the interior of these OSL based planes into the standard SAS interior  


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...
What Is The Story Behind This Image? posted Wed Jan 28 2004 20:12:23 by Mirrodie
What Is The Story Behind This Lufthansa A320 Crash posted Tue Oct 23 2001 01:45:48 by Sushka
What Is The Story On DL MD90 N917DN? posted Thu Jul 2 2009 08:46:49 by CVG2LGA
What Is The Story With This Iran Air F-100? posted Tue Apr 1 2008 17:59:44 by UAL747
What Is The Secret Behind Southwest? posted Fri Jan 5 2007 04:42:23 by JetBlueAUS
What Is The Story About The NWA 717s? posted Sat Aug 17 2002 16:39:10 by BR715-A1-30
What's The Story Behind The Boeing MD-10? posted Sat Sep 23 2000 04:24:04 by Delta777-XXX
What's The Story Behind This Picture? posted Fri Mar 13 2009 17:10:05 by Markdirk
What's The Story Behind This Strange "Aircraft"? posted Mon Sep 15 2008 06:43:12 by Peh
What's The Story Behind This Southwest 737? posted Thu Aug 9 2007 00:42:22 by Ssides