concorde1518
Posts: 723
Joined: Thu May 17, 2001 12:02 pm

Why Are Some A/c Better At Short Hops?

Mon Jan 07, 2002 12:42 pm

Hi, with the selling point of the 717 being that it can handle short hops better than the 737-600, I was wondering what that meant. Can the BR engines handle it better than the CMF's, or it is easier to turn around, or what? The 737NG can't be that bad on short hops, because SW's aircraft do about 5 one hour flights a day, being turned around in 20 mins, right?
 
teahan
Posts: 4987
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 1999 11:18 pm

RE: Why Are Some A/c Better At Short Hops?

Tue Jan 08, 2002 3:25 am

Hello,

Well, one reason might be that the wing and fuel capacity of particular aircraft are more suited for longer flights.

Jeremiah
Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
 
boeingmd82
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 11:14 am

RE: Why Are Some A/c Better At Short Hops?

Tue Jan 08, 2002 3:41 am

The 5 one hour trip example that you mentioned for Southwest, is perfectly suited for the B737NG, they may be short hops, but that's only 5 cycles (takeoffs and landings) per day.

The B717 with it's BR715 engines can handle many more without tearing up the engines. Hawaiian works their B717s 10 or more cycles per day.

Takeoffs are the most demanding part of a flight for the engine, the BR715 is designed for this type of abuse, the -56 is not.

BMD82
 
RoyalDutch
Posts: 862
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2001 9:51 pm

RE: Why Are Some A/c Better At Short Hops?

Tue Jan 08, 2002 3:50 am

According to info I got from Boeing, the 717 can handle up to 12 1 hour Flights per day (Which really seems like a lot to me).
 
woodsboy
Posts: 899
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2000 5:59 am

RE: Why Are Some A/c Better At Short Hops?

Tue Jan 08, 2002 7:37 am

I wouldnt lump all 737NG into the "good for short hops" catagory when such a/c as the -700 are meant for smaller capacity medium haul routes and the -600 for shorter hops. But its true, the 717 is truely designed for the shorter hops.

Its a considerably lighter aircraft than a 737-600 (closest 737NG in size) thus it is stressed less in a high cycle lifestyle. Everytime an airplane lands "heavy" with more fuel than it needed for the trip, the wear and tear on gear, wings and structure is more. The 717 is very fuel efficient and carries less fuel so its not as heavy to begin with.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AirPacific747, atlflyer, azstar, Bing [Bot], coronado, FergYVR, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], ikolkyo, IPFreely, jetstar, jpetekyxmd80, legacyins, MrHMSH, msycajun, Prost, Rdeggendorfer, TailDragging, thekorean, thomasphoto60, UltraAmps, YYCowboy, zkncj and 241 guests