PHXA340 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 832 posts, RR: 1 Posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2041 times:
Apologies if this has been discussed. I was flying a longer sector on WN (3+ Hours) and was surprised to see the equipment was a 300. I then flew a very short segment and it was a 700. Doesn't the 700 perform a lot better , as far as fuel burn goes, on the longer sectors ? The 300 also had no winglets - I know winglets are more advantageous the farther your fly.
Do I have this backwards or is WN short on 700s for longer flights ?
Kcrwflyer From United States of America, joined May 2004, 3761 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1928 times:
Ideally, they try to keep 700 on very long routes when possible... doesn't always work out though. I'd think the true transcons get a 700, 99% of the time. You get a good mix of both planes on short and long routes. It's the only way they can keep them flying all day.
usflyguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 790 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1817 times:
True, but the -300/-500 series aircraft do 4+ hour flights as well... I've been told it's to decrease the pace of the number of cycles being put on the older ones down to keep them in the fleet longer. As for the winglets, if a -300 doesn't have winglets by now, it's probably coming up on retirement. None of the -500's have winglets.
Personally, I've done SFO-MDW, MCI-SEA-MDW, PHX-MDW, LAS-MDW and many others on -500's. The longest -300 flight that I remember doing was IAD-LAS.
Basically, all of the different series of 737's fly just about everything.
My post is my ideas and my opinions only, I do not represent the ideas or opinions of anyone else or company.