Guest

Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 10:21 am

Boeing's top salesman has rejected the streched B717 (-300) during a meeting with AirTran today. Boeing is pushing for the larger 737NG.

AirTran is looking for capacity more than 117 pax. 736 is 110-seater and 73G is 126-seater. Both can fly trans-continental, which suitable for AirTran's need.

"We are talking to AirTran. We think that a 737-700 or even a -600 might be the right size for doing what they do and have the capability to do what they are wanting to do," Bright told reporters on a teleconference.

There are 40 orders for the 717. AirTran already plans to take 73 of all 153 717. It may order another 50 plus 50 options this year.

AirTran Chief Executive Joe Leonard told Reuters this week that the airline would also consider buying jets from Boeing rival Airbus SAS (XETRA:EAD.DE - News; Paris:EAD.PA - News), which builds a family of jets, the A320 class, ranging from 107 seats to 185.
 
BA
Posts: 10133
Joined: Fri May 19, 2000 11:06 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 11:11 am

This is no surprise.

A 717-300 in a sense would be a clear competitor to the 737-700 even though the 717-300 was designed more for short hops, while the 737-700 is capable of transcons.

The 737NG is a much higher priority than the 717 family. Boeing will want to protect it's 737NG orders at all costs.

I think the 737-700 would be good for AirTran.

Regards
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 73

Sat Feb 01, 2003 11:21 am

I hope Airtran gives Boeing the finger. It seems to be the en vogue thing to do these days.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Just kidding.

N
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 13440
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 12:33 pm

As I said in a previous post, Boeing needs to pay careful attention to listening to what their customers want, not taking a product they don't want and cramming it down their throats.

Boeing developed the 764 solely for CO and DL. Retooling to develop a 717-300 couldn't cost much more, and a potential order for 100 of the type would really help Boeing's bottom line.

Why can't they work on that instead of telling AirTran, Silly little airline, you don't want a stretched 717...what you really want is a 73G!" and creating a customer for life?
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
BR715-A1-30
Posts: 6525
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 9:30 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 12:37 pm

If I were Joe Leonard, I would have listened to him say "No, We are not building a 717-300, but we would like to give you the 737." and then I would have just closed my book, scooted out of my chair, and said. Fine, We're going to Airbus. I bet you one thing. All Joe Leonard has to do is mention going to Airbus, and Boeing just might get some sense knocked into him.
Puhdiddle
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 73

Sat Feb 01, 2003 12:41 pm

Maybe Airbus can exhume the AE3XX program, use them to replace all of the 717s, and make a variant of that line that can meet Airtran's requirements.

BA, could you repost the picture of the AE3XX?

N
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 73

Sat Feb 01, 2003 12:48 pm

Never mind, I found it.



N
 
transswede
Posts: 969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 9:30 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 12:48 pm

Did they mention 736's? No need to buy them new... SAS has a whole bunch they would love to get rid of!  Smile
 
BA
Posts: 10133
Joined: Fri May 19, 2000 11:06 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 12:51 pm

Here you go:



Read my thread here for information about it:
http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/983565/6

Simply put, Boeing views the 717-300 as a threat. That's why they're not going to build it. They haven't been very optimistic about the 717-200 lately. It's the least marketted aircraft by Boeing.

Regards

"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
 
BA
Posts: 10133
Joined: Fri May 19, 2000 11:06 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 12:52 pm

Sorry Gigneil, you beat me.  Smile

I must have posted it right after you did.  Smile

Just to let you know Gigneil, I might write an article and put it up on Airliners.net about the 717 Family and Boeing's hesitation in developing new variants.

We'll see how it goes. I might be rambling about nothing though. If so, then I won't write it.

Regards

[Edited 2003-02-01 04:56:52]
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
 
Guest

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:00 pm

All I can say is real smart Boeing, real smart......first off, alienate Iberia, and now strong arm Air Tran into acquiring a aircraft that doesn't meet their tastes......one wonders how long they'll go on with this before they realize the foolishness of their conduct??
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 73

Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:08 pm

BA-

Write on. Even if its a ramble, I'd like to read it.

I like to read the articles over at Air Transport Business, too, but Alain has been too busy with school and work to update them lately.

N
 
BA
Posts: 10133
Joined: Fri May 19, 2000 11:06 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:13 pm

Alright Neil, I'll start it probably sometime this weekend if I have time.

I've been very busy lately with school work as well.

Yes, Alain is an excellent writer. His articles are quite fantastic on his website. He's even gotten some articles published in magazines.

Regards
"Generosity is giving more than you can, and pride is taking less than you need." - Khalil Gibran
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:16 pm

And now we know the reason for that earlier comment by Airtran about looking at Airburst Aircraft.

If Boeing isn't willing to build them their first choice of aircraft, I can't blame them for hunting around.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
ba319-131
Posts: 8133
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2001 1:27 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:18 pm

Boeing would be better off listening to ther customers.

Making a 717-300 is likely to help sales of the 717-200,hell,it might become a big seller.

Airlines like a common type,have pilots be able to fly different types,sizes etc,look to the 757/767 and bar the A300/310 the same pilot can fly the entire Airbus range with minimal training.

Not just that,spares,common to the -200 and -300 for example.Same engine types etc,the list goes on.

Its highly unlikely,almost non existant as a possibility,but,Airtran could go to Airbus,get a sweet deal and dump Boeing.

The econony is on a downer,but making a 717-300 now could place Boeing in a better position once everything picks up and the airlines get their cheque books out again.

Rgds

BA319-131
111,732,3,4,5,7,8,BBJ,741,742,743,744,752,762,763,764,772,77L,773,77W,L15,D10,30,40,AB3,AB6,A312.313,319,320,321,332,333
 
JU101
Posts: 831
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2001 1:57 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 73

Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:27 pm

I am sure that Boeing would make more profit in selling the 737 versus the 717. First of all the cost of purchasing a 737 is more than the 717, and furthermore the 737 is in absolute mass-production, and thus may have lower production cost per unit sold as opposed to the less popular 717.

Overall its essential that the company does not overlap its aircraft models. I personally think that investing in the 767-400 was unneeded, considering that the 777 has more to offer. Nevertheless, the 767-300 and 767-200 should continue as they did up to now, however with attainable modifications to improve their overall modernity and efficiency.
 
HlywdCatft
Posts: 5232
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:21 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:36 pm

How hard would it be to throw a couple of plugs into a 717-200 and make a 717-300?
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 73

Sat Feb 01, 2003 1:40 pm

JU101 - Whilst I agree that the 767-400 is a red-headed stepchild of an airplane, one would wonder what CO and DL would have replaced their DC-10s and L-1011s with.

I doubt it would have been 777s.

HllywdCatft- It would probably take a higher rated engine, too.

N
 
sv11
Posts: 216
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 1999 6:26 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 2:13 pm

Is Airtran asking for a 717-300? The 717 and 737 have different ranges, I don't see them competing with each other. I agree Boeing should pay attention to their customer's wants-they developed 747 for PanAm, 737 for Lufthansa. As someone said putting more plugs and higher thrust engines shouldn't be hard.

sv11
 
BR715-A1-30
Posts: 6525
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 9:30 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 2:17 pm

BA, Please write and post an article. I would love to read it.

See, This is why I liked McDonnell Douglas. They listened to the customer. They didn't tell Valujet "No No, You want the MD-80, They fly farther." They listened to Valujet/AirTran and worked with them on the MD-95/717. The same with the MD-90. They worked with Delta on the production of the MD-90, and they also worked with other airlines who ordered it.

I think what Boeing fails to realize that if they have a potential customer for an aircraft, they should go ahead, and throw in a few fuselage plugs, and make some money. By saying "NO!" to the 717-300, they probably lost a couple of billion dollars.

Nice going Boeing  Yeah sure

I wouldn't doubt it if Joe Leonard orders some CFM powered A318 and A319 aircraft now.

And please don't gimme that B-S- about Boeing owning part of AirTran. I am sure that AirTran could drop that deal, and let Airbus finance that part of them. Airbus seems to be looking out for potential customers, and I am sure they would gladly work with AirTran on the A320 family.

If I were Joe Leonard, I'd be pissed off at Phil Condom right about now.
Puhdiddle
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 2:24 pm

All I can say is real smart Boeing, real smart......first off, alienate Iberia, and now strong arm Air Tran into acquiring a aircraft that doesn't meet their tastes......one wonders how long they'll go on with this before they realize the foolishness of their conduct??

Real smart comment, real smart  Insane . Ever consider that AirTran may be trying to strong arm Boeing into building an aircraft that will have only one customer and hurt Boeing's bottom line? Is anyone else other than Air Tran going to buy a 717-300? Why the hell should Boeing tailor make an aircraft for just ONE airline? Do you how much that would cost Boeing? Listening to customers is smart, but those customers must realize that Boeing is a business too. I say AirTran is the dumbass in this situation.

B4e-Forever New Frontiers
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 2:33 pm

I think what Boeing fails to realize that if they have a potential customer for an aircraft, they should go ahead, and throw in a few fuselage plugs, and make some money. By saying "NO!" to the 717-300, they probably lost a couple of billion dollars.

Nice going Boeing


What you fail to realize is the pointlessness of developing a new aircraft that will have only one customer. OK, so Boeing builds the 713, and in a year you will be bitching about its dry orderbook, fill with only 10 AirTran orders.

See, This is why I liked McDonnell Douglas. They listened to the customer. They didn't tell Valujet "No No, You want the MD-80, They fly farther." They listened to Valujet/AirTran and worked with them on the MD-95/717. The same with the MD-90. They worked with Delta on the production of the MD-90, and they also worked with other airlines who ordered it.

No, they didn't, and Boeing isn't doing this either. What AirTran wants is simply non-feasable. Boeing knows this, tough luck for AirTran.

And please don't gimme that B-S- about Boeing owning part of AirTran. I am sure that AirTran could drop that deal, and let Airbus finance that part of them. Airbus seems to be looking out for potential customers, and I am sure they would gladly work with AirTran on the A320 family.

I doubt it will go that far. And it costs much more to integrate the A320 family than it would to integrate the 73NGs with the 717s. If Airbus were placed in the same situation, their reaction would be the same. Aeronautical Engineers ain't stupid. They have math skills BR, and the math shows that a 717-300 would be suicide.

B4e-Forever New Frontiers

 
Flyer732
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 1999 6:09 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 2:36 pm

The Tran would order a 737 before a 717-300 anyways...at least thats how I see it...

 
avroarrow
Posts: 804
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2001 10:40 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 2:57 pm

PRIDE...that is what it comes down to all around!!! No matter how good the 717/MD 8X product is Boeing will always consider it to be the stepchild that it never wanted. Air-tran wants what fits in with its fleet and Boeing would like nothing better than to just continue on with its own baby the 737, of which it is justifiably proud. I can draw a weak parallel between Boeing and the company I work for and say that eventually you have to bend to customers wishes and do something special for them and so long as they cover the cost either through development payments or through enough orders to cover the development costs it is worth it in the long run in order to stop the competition from winning the business. Just my late night opinion.
Ed
Give me a mile of road and I can take you a mile. Give me a mile of runway and I can show you the world.
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 3:03 pm

AvroArrow...I doubt pride is the matter. Boeing is a business out for +$$$$$$. They did the math, and developing the 713 solely for AirTran and then watch as it is tossed into aviation history's trash can results in -$$$$$$$.

B4e-Forever New Frontiers
 
MD88Captain
Posts: 1224
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 9:50 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 3:09 pm

At what point would does the 717 production line become profitable? Does anyone here know? BA has not sold many and the first 50 sold were sold very cheaply to Valujet. My guess is that the break even point is hundreds of as yet unbuilt aircraft away. Do not quote me, but I remember seeing somewhere that BA would have to see 500 717s to recoup its investment. I do not think Airtran could buy enough 717-300s for BA to see a profit.

The argument that BA must build an aircraft in order to keep Airtran happy is ludicrious. BA must sell aircraft profitably. That being said, I am not sure why BA is even keeping Long Beach alive. Politics.
 
MD-90
Posts: 7835
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 3:15 pm

Boeing4ever, I'm a sophomore studying Aerospace Engineering here at Mississippi State University, which is well known for it's aero program (as well as having the largest university flight lab in the country).

I think the 717-300 makes excellent sense, from an engineering standpoint. Right now, it's up to the accountants and other bean counters to decide whether it makes economic sense.

Frankly (now this is just me), I'm not a very big fan of Airbus, but if Boeing won't develop a stretched 717 for AirTran, then frankly I hope AirTran goes Airbus. It might teach Boeing a lesson.

SAS sure seems to be regretting ordering the 736 over the MD-95 (i.e. 717) right now
 
avroarrow
Posts: 804
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2001 10:40 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 3:21 pm

Of course I never claimed to be a business expert, it would just cheese me off to see B lose the business to A if Air Trans pride makes them go to A just to make a point about not being pushed around by B. In either case I would expect Air Tran will incur significant cost in re-training or hiring for crews for the appropriate winning aircraft. That said I would hope that if Air Tran REALLY wants the 717 developed to their own needs they should pay the whole shot, or at least a significant portion of it. I think there may be other potential markets for a 717-300 too, but I guess it is up to Boeing to determine that for themselves. What a hell of a spot for both parties to be in!! (I am more of a B fan than and A fan and hopefully both parties can come to an amicable agreement.)
Give me a mile of road and I can take you a mile. Give me a mile of runway and I can show you the world.
 
Dash8King
Posts: 2657
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2001 8:45 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 3:27 pm

Real smart comment, real smart . Ever consider that AirTran may be trying to strong arm Boeing into building an aircraft that will have only one customer and hurt Boeing's bottom line? Is anyone else other than Air Tran going to buy a 717-300? Why the hell should Boeing tailor make an aircraft for just ONE airline? Do you how much that would cost Boeing? Listening to customers is smart, but those customers must realize that Boeing is a business too. I say AirTran is the dumbass in this situation.

I second that, imagine if you were a Boeing shareholder would you want them to make an aircraft that they will most likely lose money on or maybe break-even on? Right now they are up-selling it is the right thing to do. I would love to see the 717 continue and be successful but chances are it isn't going to happen and maybe it is time to let it go.
 
sllevin
Posts: 3312
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 1:57 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 73

Sat Feb 01, 2003 3:47 pm

Without a doubt, if AirTran had the backing and finances to commit deeply to a 717-300 programme, Boeing would build it.

But the reality is that that FL isn't all that strong, and would be looking for Boeing Capital to finance a significant portion of the additional airplanes. In short, Boeing would be getting all the risk -- not only of the costs of certifying and developing the variant, but on the financing end as well. In short, Boeing could be promoting it's own loss.

The secondary issue, aside from the number of aircraft ordered, is the rate of delivery. Boeing is marginal delivering just 3 a month; 4 a month would be better for their bottom line. Given that no one else is stepping up to order the 717, that means FL would have to absorb that production rate -- which I doubt it can do. With the 737, FL would not be under pressure to accept new aircraft at such a rapid pace (remembering again, that Boeing would likely be put into the position of providing the financing to drive said overexpansion).

The truth is, in the business world, sometimes you DO have to say no, and let deals get away. You can't chase unprofitable deals, and Boeing is well aware of that.

It will be a good day for Boeing when they can finally close the 717 line. It's not clear they've ever made money on the programme at all.

Steve
 
717fan
Posts: 1975
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2001 10:51 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 3:50 pm

Its cheaper to sell an airplane who exists as to develope a new one...thats the reason why Boeing is pushing the 737NG....but it seems that Airtran still wants a new 717 version....otherwise such an article makes no sense.
Boeing has fear that another loyal customer is shopping in Europe (goes for A32X instaed of 737NG!!!)
Just some thougts....
 
BR715-A1-30
Posts: 6525
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 9:30 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 3:54 pm

There IS a reason that Valujet didn't go with BOEING in 1995.

They went with McD instead because McD was committed to the customer.

William Boeing would puke if he saw how Phil Condit and Alan Mulally have shit all over his creation.
Puhdiddle
 
jwenting
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:12 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 7:51 pm

Ah, all the self-appointed business specialists are at it again.

Has anyone even tried to find out the development cost and likely market for the 717-300, AND the estimated loss of revenue to the 737 program that such an aircraft would mean?

I thought not.

A decision by Boeing to NOT produce an aircraft for a single customer can only mean that they don't see a market for that aircraft that's bigger than the loss of revenue to their other products that such an aircraft would cause.

If development and production cost 5 billion for the 100 aircraft, those need to be sold at 50 million each just to break even (just an example).
That's 100 sales (potential) lost to the 737 program for which development cost has already been absorbed by several thousand airframes delivered in the past.

Just some prices for comparison (from boeing.com, indication only):
717-200: $35.5-39.5 million
737-600: $41-49 million
737-700: $47-55 million

A 717-300 would likely have the range of a 717-200 with the payload of a 737-700 but cost the same as that 737-700. That's not a marketable aircraft.
I wish I were flying
 
ouboy79
Posts: 4111
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2001 1:48 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 8:03 pm

Some random thoughts here...so this post will jump all over the place - you are warned.

The 737 is an old design like the 717...but the 73 hasn't undergone any major changes like the 717 has compared to the DC-9. There is a reason why Airbus is sucking up the majority of orders right now - 1) price 2) cost effective airplanes...from where the airlines stand.

The 717-300 would only make sense in order to boost the production of the -200. How many airlines choose a product simply based on the fact it has a "family" to go with it. Here you have one of the largest LCCs in the country, that is making money, wanting to buy 100 jets from you that are common with their existing fleet. Sure the 737-700 is a nice plane...but why should AirTran operate 2 fleet types, when it is irresponsible for anyone else to? If Boeing pushes the 737-700 onto AirTran...they are going to have to completely replace the 717s as well in order to keep costs down. It is like telling JetBlue...if you want anything bigger than an A320...buy some 757s.

This is going to come down to whether Boeing is going to want to maintain the 717 line or not. Forcing AirTran to choose between the 319/320 and the 737 will esentially push them to the Airbus. They can get them cheaper and will have a complete family from the 318 to 321 - even though it is yet to be seen how well the 318 performs...it could turn into a complete failure like the 737-600.

If Boeing builds the 717-300 for AirTran, they will get 100 orders off the bat. As AirTran expands...they will want more -200s and -300s. Midwest may also step in and pick up 20 or so -300s, other unknown airlines could also jump in on this and then there is that always looming Northwest narrowbody order 5-10 years down the road. What better way to get Northwest interested than to offer a family of planes that would fit their needs where the 319 can't. One reason I say that is because of the actions taken by US Airways to move the 319s to longer stage lengths than the 737s; obviously they cost more to operate on a network similar to AirTran...short hops. If Boeing can develop the 717-300...I have no doubt that Northwest would be interested in throwing those on their short hops that are getting converted to all ARJs or even CRJs now.

Boeing really needs to get its act together. Since the move to Chicago they seem to have their head in so many places they don't know which way is which. A very good article in AW&ST made it perfectly clear. If Boeing cannot go through with any new projects or be innovative as it once was - they will become the laughing stock of the industry, have no credibility, and begin to wither away. The 717 has the chance to essentially stand side-by-side of its step sister, the 737, by serving a completely different market...but at the same time help work to fight back Airbus. Unfortunately, Boeing feels like one of the "good old boys" type of companies...where change and innovation are hard to come by. Hopefully one day...the customers and stock holders of Boeing will do something to wake them up and get their butt in gear - which will hopefully include the replacement of existing management with one that has a vision, not one that is there for old times sake.

Hell...maybe good ol' Gordo should go back to Boeing - at least things wouldn't be so dull.  Smile
 
atcboy73
Posts: 1084
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2001 10:09 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 10:01 pm

Did I miss something. Has Air Tran stated publicly that they want a 717-300?

 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sat Feb 01, 2003 10:34 pm

This is why I liked McDonnell Douglas. They listened to the customer.

Oh please BR715, don't post rubbish. If McDD listened to their customers how come they were left with three products no one wanted? The MD-90 was hardly a success. The MD-11 was a flop - due to McDD. The MD-95 has been a failure. McDD DIDN'T listen to its customers.

William Boeing would puke if he saw how Phil Condit and Alan Mulally have shit all over his creation.

Coming from the expert aviation analyst BR715. Grow up kid.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
John
Posts: 1253
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 1999 10:47 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 12:18 am

This is just a thought. A 717-300 would essentially BE an MD-87, correct? So, why not just reopen that line with a few modifications(mainly the engines), and redub it the B717-300? I know nothing about aircraft production and costs, but would it actually be that cost prohibitive? I would assume they have all the neccessary tools to start an MD-87 line back up. And I absolutely agree, the 717 has been relatively unsuccessful for the most part, because there is no family of aircraft options. And I believe(the 717) is in a different classification than the 737, being specific performance and weight characteristics. The 717 mainly serves one purpose, the 737 the other. Perhaps Boeing should drop the 737-600?
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5272
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 12:49 am

You guys all have to realize that Boeing is slowly phasing itself out of commercial aviation. Look at Boeing's recent earnings report, you'll notice they were profitable despite the money losing commercial sector. Will Boeing completely abandon commercial aviation? No. However, I expect they will become more of a niche player producing only 737/757/767/777 for only a small portfolio of clientele.

The Airtran situation is a real problem for Boeing. Should Boeing keep producing a money losing aircraft (717) just to keep one client happy? Should Boeing keep the 717 line open another ten years hoping that a big order from NW finally comes in? Should Boeing produce an aircraft like the 717-300 which overlaps with another Boeing product 737-700?

The situation is further complicated by the fact that Airtran can't pay for their own planes and can't get financing from anyone but Boeing or Airbus. None of the leasing and financing companies wanted to have anything to do with the 717.
 
BR715-A1-30
Posts: 6525
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 9:30 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 12:51 am

Boeing cannot drop the 737-600 because it is built on the same line as the -700/-800/-900. If they shut down the -600, They'd have to shut down the rest too. Or so I'm told.

I still think they could drop it. More 717s have been delivered than 737-600s. Boeing says the 717 is a failure, but if they get their heads out of their a**es, They will find that the 737-600 is a FAILURE... BIG TIME.
Puhdiddle
 
717fan
Posts: 1975
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2001 10:51 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 1:38 am

Until now everything is just talk, Airtran has said that they want a new aircraft, Boeing says that will more likely sell the 737 than a 713, At one time Airbus will also say something. In this industry everybody is so nervous at the moment.... I higly doubt if Airtran is in the position to order up to 100 new birds this year.....
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8005
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 1:53 am

Didn't AirTran fly the 737-200 for a while during the 1990's?

I think AirTran should take the offer to buy the 737-700 because WN has demonstrated it can fly the plane on the OAK-BWI route with a full-load of 124 passengers.
 
ouboy79
Posts: 4111
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2001 1:48 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 2:12 am

AirTran's original fleet was comprised of 737-200s. Then the ValuJet merger came along and the fleet had DC-9s and 73Ss...eventually the 717s started coming on board and replaced the 73S first.

I think AirTran should take the offer to buy the 737-700 because WN has demonstrated it can fly the plane on the OAK-BWI route with a full-load of 124 passengers.

WN also has a common fleet type - the 737. AirTran makes the 717 work for them...and also has only one fleet type (at least by the end of the year when the DC-9s are gone). Heck, AirTran could go all Airbus...I mean, JetBlue is making it work aren't they? Adding another fleet type is just going to raise FL's costs...not what an LCC needs.
 
elwood64151
Posts: 2410
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 10:22 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 2:47 am

Jwenting:

Where do you get $5B for developing the 717-300? It didn't cost that much to develop the 712!

I'm sure that Boeing believes it is acting in its own best interests, but The 736 is to much aircraft and not enough passengers. That's why no one is buying it and instead are buying 717s and 73Gs. The 735 wasn't all that successful, either. The MD-87 wasn't very profitable, and it's in that same size area. The -87 and 735/6 were all too heavy for their pax load, increasing costs.

Still, the 737 family is profitable and successful. There's no reason to believe that the 713 will affect the 73G's sales, except that FL won't buy 73Gs.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
 
goingboeing
Posts: 4727
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 1999 1:58 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 3:23 am

Oddly enough, I am reading "21st Century jet". Boeing seems to have forgotten something in a rather short time...this is from the first chapter of the book:

The airlines of the world told us they wanted an airplane that was bigger than a 767, but smaller than a 747. And we said, "Why don't you buy 767s" and they said, "We want an airplane that's bigger than a 767 and smaller than a 747, because on some of the city pairs we fly we cannot get enough people to fill up a '47 abd we have too many people for a '67". It took us two years to figure out that they really wanted an airplane that was bigger than the '67 and smaller than the '47. So we decided to make a new airplane.

Note to Boeing - you've got a customer telling you what they want. The economy sucks right now, and a customer is telling you "We will buy X number of this plane". Rather than telling them what they "should" buy, you ought to take their money, use the tooling that's already in place, and build the damn planes.
 
artsyman
Posts: 4516
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 12:35 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 3:34 am

Rather than telling them what they "should" buy, you ought to take their money, use the tooling that's already in place, and build the damn planes.

Doesnt quite work like that, Boeing built the 764 for DL/CO under these conditions, and while I love the plane, it hasnt sold all that well, so that argument doesnt always work.

717-300 as mentioned above only has negative reprecussions, it steals from the 737 series, and Airtran will not order enough off them to justify a whole new plane. It may pay for the development costs, but Boeing has a lot of shareholders that demand more than that. 100 737's (that already exist) is a great deal for them. I don't see airtran going airbus as they pose the same problem, Airbus will not build them a 717-300.

There is not enough of a difference to choose between the 737's and A320 series, so Airtran in the end will most likely stay Boeing

Jeremy
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 4:01 am

Note to Boeing - you've got a customer telling you what they want. The economy sucks right now, and a customer is telling you "We will buy X number of this plane". Rather than telling them what they "should" buy, you ought to take their money, use the tooling that's already in place, and build the damn planes.

People here are so foolish! There is ONE customer telling Boeing the need for the 713. NO OTHER airlines want it or have approached Boeing about it. The 777 has sold to MANY airlines because MANY airlines had described a need for an aircraft larger than a 767 and smaller than a 747. Developing a new plane for ONE airline is stupid.

Those dumbasses at AirTran need some common sense beaten into THEM! Boeing is a business too, and sometimes you HAVE to say no! Seriously, all you people calling Boeing stupid, I challange you to list all the other airlines that would order a 713! I doubt it will get beyond three more...and that's if you're lucky.

B4e-Forever New Frontiers
 
MCOtoATL
Posts: 448
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 1999 12:01 pm

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 4:33 am

"Those dumbasses at AirTran need some common sense beaten into THEM! "

Yeah, they have some nerve actually telling people what they want for their company!

Actually, I don't think Boeing is off base for saying "No." Will they lose Airtran as a customer? Maybe so, but that's life. There are no guarantees that Airtran (or any other carrier) will be around five years from now.

On the other hand, to criticize Airtran is ludicrous. They have the right to ask Boeing to build an aircraft that will meet their needs. Boeing has the right to say "no," and that is probably the best decision to make. But in a free enterprise, Airtran has every right to head over the Airbus.
 
goingboeing
Posts: 4727
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 1999 1:58 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 4:47 am

Okay Boeing4ever- go down to your Chevy dealer, tell them you want a Corvette, and allow the to smack some sense into you and tell you that you should buy a Cavalier instead.

Is Boeing being flooded with orders for 777's? How about 747's? Maybe 767's? How about 757's? No, right now they aren't. So a customer walks up and tells them we'd like this, and you think that the CUSTOMER needs some sense slapped into them? With passenger loads down, who is to say that the 717 might not be a little better fit for a lot of airlines now?
 
MD88Captain
Posts: 1224
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 9:50 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 4:53 am

Should Boeing build 717-300's even if it means losing money on everone it builds? Isn't that like asking Boeing for money? Maybe BA should just skip the building process and just hand cash over to Airtran.
 
ybacpa
Posts: 1080
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 5:39 am

RE: Boeing Rejects 717-300 For AirTran; Pushing 737NG

Sun Feb 02, 2003 4:53 am

Just because more 717s have been built than 736s does not make the 717 more successful... having to run a completely separate assembly line substantially increases overhead cost per unit, whereas the indirect overhead to produce a 736 is spread across the entire 737NG line.

As for 717-300, there are two good arguements here, one for each side:

(for the 717-300): While it would overlap the 737 line somewhat, keep in mind it is targetted at 717 operators who do not want to add another type to their fleet (AirTran). Boeing could produce this plane at a minimal increase in production costs using the existing 717 line. Keep in mind other Boeings do overlap in one way or another- 739's are comparable to 752's in capacity, 753's are comparable to 763's in capacity, and even, argueably, 773's are loosely comparable to 744's capacity. Range is clearly different between these models, but, hopefully, you get the point I'm trying to make.

(against the 717-300): Simply put, we are only talking about one order. Granted, the 764 was only two orders, and, IMHO, I think Boeing honestly thought that if they built it, they would come (ugh, cliche'). The 717 is built on a completely separate line, so much of the indirect costs are being allocated to just the one model. The difference with the 767 is Boeing was producing two models, the 762 and 763. All they did, from a bookkeeping standpoint, is redirect those costs to the 764.

Oh well, let the critism fly!  Smile

SkyTeam: The alliance for third rate airlines finally getting their act together!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: angelopga, audidudi, Baidu [Spider], barney captain, clrd4t8koff, deltal1011man, Erfan76, qf15, sierra3tango, stefanJ, StTim, tootallsd, tvh, WIederling, wrcairline, ZK-NBT and 305 guests