Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
jfkflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 172
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:31 pm

The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Wed Oct 26, 2016 9:44 pm

When Avianca, Air france, TAROM and BA are finished with their airbus babies, will the 737-200 operators be looking to buy them second Hand? They have good short field performance, simlar seating, higher airframe, and greater lift. Isn't this the perfect replacement?
 
User avatar
atcsundevil
Moderator
Posts: 4612
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:22 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Wed Oct 26, 2016 9:48 pm

Not sure what you're asking here... The 737-200 hasn't been produced in almost 30 years, and none of those carriers you mentioned operate them, and haven't in a very, very long time. The A318 at this point is a niche aircraft, and will likely never be sold again as a traditional passenger aircraft.
 
jfkflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 172
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Wed Oct 26, 2016 9:50 pm

For Canadian, South American, African and North American (Charters) won't it be the aircraft that they so desperately need? I'm sure second hand a318 will be useful.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12604
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Wed Oct 26, 2016 9:52 pm

I think Insel, means when the current operators are retiring them in due time, then they will be picked up second hand by current B732 operators.

I think not, the first baby busses are broken up, no marked for them.
 
jfkflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 172
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:38 pm

Will the a318 that will be second-hand have enough cycles on them to be worthwhile to be operated? look how long the 737-200 and md80 made it.
 
prestwick
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 4:15 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Wed Oct 26, 2016 11:25 pm

I suspect the question is: could a 318 be retrofitted with a gravel kit to replace the 737-200 being used on unpaved runways such as Northern Canada?
 
User avatar
MD80
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:29 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Wed Oct 26, 2016 11:38 pm

InselMotherFokk wrote:
When Avianca, Air france, TAROM and BA are finished with their airbus babies, will the 737-200 operators be looking to buy them second Hand? They have good short field performance, simlar seating, higher airframe, and greater lift. Isn't this the perfect replacement?


It would be (at the first glance) more logical for Boeing 737-200-operators to replace them with used Boeing 737-600s (which was also not a great sales success due to several reasons).

Regards
 
jfkflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 172
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 1:11 am

Aren't there more a318 than 737-600? And which would be better suited?
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1852
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 1:16 am

InselMotherFokk -

Neither will be used as replacements for the 737-200. The economics are terrible in most of today's applications.
 
jfkflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 172
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 1:22 am

FriscoHeavy wrote:
InselMotherFokk -

Neither will be used as replacements for the 737-200. The economics are terrible in most of today's applications.




But wouldn't these 2 be much more efficient than the 737-200?

When will a318 and 737-600 be retired or phased out?
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 1:29 am

prestwick wrote:
I suspect the question is: could a 318 be retrofitted with a gravel kit to replace the 737-200 being used on unpaved runways such as Northern Canada?


No, and even if it could, there wouldn't be enough demand for that type of aircraft in Canada's north to warrant the certification costs. Also have to remember that the other major benefit of the few gravel-kit-equipped 732s still operating in Canada is that they're combis with the ability to carry either passengers or cargo, or a mix thereof, on the main deck, something no member of the A320 family can do without major modifications. There wouldn't even be room to install a main deck cargo door on an A318, and again, if it was possible, the certification costs would be uneconomic.
 
TSS
Posts: 3738
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 3:52 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 1:41 am

InselMotherFokk wrote:
FriscoHeavy wrote:
InselMotherFokk -

Neither will be used as replacements for the 737-200. The economics are terrible in most of today's applications.




But wouldn't these 2 be much more efficient than the 737-200?


Maybe, but the big problem is that not many of either model was produced so there's not much of a pool to draw from to begin with. I don't have the figures at hand right now (though I'm sure some interested party in ANet-land does), but I suspect there were several times as many 737-200s produced as A318s and 737-600s combined.

Slightly more realistic replacements for the 737-200s would be the A319 and 737-700: Unless I'm much mistaken, there's not a huge trip cost penalty for the slightly larger airframe in either case, plus with both there's a much, much larger pool of used aircraft to choose from.

InselMotherFokk wrote:
When will a318 and 737-600 be retired or phased out?


Both are already being retired and used as parts donors for their larger siblings. Both models are worth more to their owners for their parts content than they are being sold as complete aircraft.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 1:43 am

MD80 wrote:
InselMotherFokk wrote:
When Avianca, Air france, TAROM and BA are finished with their airbus babies, will the 737-200 operators be looking to buy them second Hand? They have good short field performance, simlar seating, higher airframe, and greater lift. Isn't this the perfect replacement?


It would be (at the first glance) more logical for Boeing 737-200-operators to replace them with used Boeing 737-600s (which was also not a great sales success due to several reasons).

Regards


It would be not very logical to replace the 737-200 with 737-600 or even the 737-700 for operation on gravel fields. The problem of the 737NG are the low hanging engines making them rather unsuitable for operations for that use, that is I assume the main reason why these 737-200 are still in operation.
Last edited by mjoelnir on Thu Oct 27, 2016 1:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
MD80
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:29 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 1:45 am

InselMotherFokk wrote:
FriscoHeavy wrote:
InselMotherFokk -

Neither will be used as replacements for the 737-200. The economics are terrible in most of today's applications.


But wouldn't these 2 be much more efficient than the 737-200?

When will a318 and 737-600 be retired or phased out?


"FriscoHeavy" wrote correctly that the general economics of these types aren´t attractive. "Efficiency" really depends on many factors.The application of modern engines, avionics etc. doesn´t automatically result in a highly efficient aircraft. I am quiet sure that bigger members of the respective aircraft-families (Boeing 737NG/Airbus 320-family) are able to operate much more profitable with only marginally higher operating-costs.

Here are some numbers once provided by SAS Scandinavian Airlines, regarding „Fuel Consumption, l/ seat kilometer“:

Boeing 737-600 (123 seats), 0.044
Boeing 737-700 (141 seats), 0.042
Boeing 737-800 (186 seats), 0.034

It seems clear that the fuel consumption per seat kilometer improves due to the higher capacities of the Boeing 737-700/-800.
Last but not least, here are numbers of aircraft no longer in service with SAS and Blue1:

MD-81/-82 (150 seats), 0.043
MD-87 (120 seats), 0.048
MD-90 (166 seats), 0.031 (Blue1)
AVRO RJ100 (99 seats), 0.050 (Blue1)
AVRO RJ85 (84 seats), 0.056 (Blue1)

Regards
 
SCAT15F
Posts: 719
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:34 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:11 am

I was lucky enough to fly on one of Frontier's 318's 8 years ago or so. The short cabin makes it feel super roomy, and its a great climber. Definitely my fave of the 320 series, especially now with the sharklets. From a passenger perspective, its everything a single isle should be; the short cabin is better for turbulence and the feel of roominess, plus it looks great and is a hot rod...
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:22 am

SCAT15F wrote:
I was lucky enough to fly on one of Frontier's 318's 8 years ago or so. The short cabin makes it feel super roomy, and its a great climber. Definitely my fave of the 320 series, especially now with the sharklets. From a passenger perspective, its everything a single isle should be; the short cabin is better for turbulence and the feel of roominess, plus it looks great and is a hot rod...


Airlines care about economics, not looks. Many of the former Frontier A318s were scrapped after only about 3 years service. Good indication of how economic they were.

And do any airline-operated A318s have sharklets? I've never seen any photos. The only few photos I can find with sharklets are the A318CJ business jet model.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:38 am

Airline care about economics. But when you operate under adverse conditions, I would assume the airlines care more about "is the frame able to do the job". The job not economics is the reason is why you operate a 737-200 on gravel fields. In no way would a move to a A318 hurt the economics compared to a 737-200. It would also be easy to pick up an Avro 100RJ for this kind of operations. But neither a 737NG nor a DC9 and her developments would be suitable to operate on gravel fields.
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:44 am

Are gravel kits even really required anymore? I have to imagine any airport that would see a 737 up in Canada has a paved runway now. I was shocked when watching that Ice Pilots show at how many airports in the middle of nowhere had paved strips.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7704
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:51 am

I'd imagine they'd go for he lightest aircraft that will suit their needs. Lower costs and easier on the gravel runways. Someone mentioned in a similar thread that the Tu135 would actually be pretty good in the Canadian north. Does Antonov have a An-148/158 variant with a rear cargo door?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 22925
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:53 am

The E2-195 or CS100 is much better for small markets. Gravel runways are so rare that is a turboprop or a military plane. As noted, anyplace that will see a 737 is already paved.

The A318 and 736 are worth too much as parts to be a trickle down airframe. Perhaps the E-170 with a short field kit?

Lightsaber
 
User avatar
NYCRuss
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 9:54 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:56 am

jetblueguy22 wrote:
Are gravel kits even really required anymore? I have to imagine any airport that would see a 737 up in Canada has a paved runway now. I was shocked when watching that Ice Pilots show at how many airports in the middle of nowhere had paved strips.

YBB, YCB, YCO, YCY, YDA, YGT, YIO, YOC, YTE, YUX, YVM, YXP, and YYH have gravel strips.
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:58 am

NYCRuss wrote:
jetblueguy22 wrote:
Are gravel kits even really required anymore? I have to imagine any airport that would see a 737 up in Canada has a paved runway now. I was shocked when watching that Ice Pilots show at how many airports in the middle of nowhere had paved strips.

YBB, YCB, YCO, YCY, YDA, YGT, YIO, YOC, YTE, YUX, YVM, YXP, and YYH have gravel strips.

Okay, but how many of those actually see much, if any, jet service?
 
tmac22
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 9:18 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:59 am

prestwick wrote:
I suspect the question is: could a 318 be retrofitted with a gravel kit to replace the 737-200 being used on unpaved runways such as Northern Canada?


That is 100% what I am thinking as well. I remember this topic came up not long ago as well.
 
User avatar
NYCRuss
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 9:54 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 3:06 am

jetblueguy22 wrote:
NYCRuss wrote:
jetblueguy22 wrote:
Are gravel kits even really required anymore? I have to imagine any airport that would see a 737 up in Canada has a paved runway now. I was shocked when watching that Ice Pilots show at how many airports in the middle of nowhere had paved strips.

YBB, YCB, YCO, YCY, YDA, YGT, YIO, YOC, YTE, YUX, YVM, YXP, and YYH have gravel strips.

Okay, but how many of those actually see much, if any, jet service?

Not sure. Those 13 airports serve a combined population of 14 people. Give or take. So I doubt that they see much jet service. Q400CCs seem like a great choice to serve those places.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 3:26 am

jetblueguy22 wrote:
NYCRuss wrote:
jetblueguy22 wrote:
Are gravel kits even really required anymore? I have to imagine any airport that would see a 737 up in Canada has a paved runway now. I was shocked when watching that Ice Pilots show at how many airports in the middle of nowhere had paved strips.

YBB, YCB, YCO, YCY, YDA, YGT, YIO, YOC, YTE, YUX, YVM, YXP, and YYH have gravel strips.

Okay, but how many of those actually see much, if any, jet service?


As far as I can tell, only one of those airports (Cambridge Bay/YCB) has scheduled service with the 732 combi currently, and only 5 flights a week. And about half of those airports have runways too short for a 737. A few are less than 4,000 ft. and one less than 3,000 ft. Only 5 are at least 5,000 ft. and none longer than 5,500. I can't recall the 732 combis in Canada ever operating scheduled service to airports with runways shorter than 5,000 ft.

Most of the 732 combi flights where the gravel kits are needed are to remote mine strips, not to the scheduled service airports above..
 
User avatar
NYCRuss
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 9:54 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 3:28 am

Viscount724 wrote:
jetblueguy22 wrote:
NYCRuss wrote:
YBB, YCB, YCO, YCY, YDA, YGT, YIO, YOC, YTE, YUX, YVM, YXP, and YYH have gravel strips.

Okay, but how many of those actually see much, if any, jet service?


As far as I can tell, only one of those airports (Cambridge Bay/YCB) has scheduled service with the 732 combi currently, and only 5 flights a week. And about half of those airports have runways too short for a 737. A few are less than 4,000 ft. and one less than 3,000 ft. Only 5 are at least 5,000 ft. and none longer than 5,500. I can't recall the 732 combis in Canada ever operating scheduled service to airports with runways shorter than 5,000 ft.

Most of the 732 combi flights where the gravel kits are needed are to remote mine strips, not to the scheduled service airports above..


How well would a Q400CC service those remote mine strips?
 
YZF101
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 8:12 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 4:46 am

The mine I work at has twice weekly 732 service, once weekly RJ-85, and numerous Dash-7 flights. We've also used the ATR-42, DHC-8-100 for passenger flights, as well as the Lockheed L-100 freighters. Unsure how the newer Q400 would work, but no one has one that operates up here. One of the older mines also ran a B727-200 adv and DHC-6 for some time as well, but those aircraft were owned by the mine. Sad to be seeing the end of those 732s, though.
 
columba
Posts: 5274
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:12 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:00 am

ATR 42/72 seem to be the most logical choice in my opinion.
 
Dominion301
Posts: 3043
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 1:41 pm

jetblueguy22 wrote:
Are gravel kits even really required anymore? I have to imagine any airport that would see a 737 up in Canada has a paved runway now. I was shocked when watching that Ice Pilots show at how many airports in the middle of nowhere had paved strips.


Very few airports north of the 60th parallel in Canada have paved runways. These are the only ones: YXY, YEV, YVQ, YFS, YZF, YSM, YHY, YRT and YFB, that's it. Everything else is dirt/gravel. Likewise, in northern Quebec beyond the end of the road network, only YVP has a paved runway (their short runway is gravel).

jetblueguy22 wrote:
NYCRuss wrote:
jetblueguy22 wrote:
Are gravel kits even really required anymore? I have to imagine any airport that would see a 737 up in Canada has a paved runway now. I was shocked when watching that Ice Pilots show at how many airports in the middle of nowhere had paved strips.

YBB, YCB, YCO, YCY, YDA, YGT, YIO, YOC, YTE, YUX, YVM, YXP, and YYH have gravel strips.

Okay, but how many of those actually see much, if any, jet service?


Currently three gravel see scheduled jet service on a regular basis (i.e. multiple times per week): YCB and YCO with Canadian North in Nunavut and YPX with Air Inuit in Nunavik. However, there are many other mine sites in the territories and northern Quebec that rely upon jets with gravel ops capabilities.

The 732s though are dwindling even in Canada. First Air have retired all of theirs and now only fly 734s on paved runways.
 
User avatar
AA777223
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:12 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 3:24 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
MD80 wrote:
InselMotherFokk wrote:
When Avianca, Air france, TAROM and BA are finished with their airbus babies, will the 737-200 operators be looking to buy them second Hand? They have good short field performance, simlar seating, higher airframe, and greater lift. Isn't this the perfect replacement?


It would be (at the first glance) more logical for Boeing 737-200-operators to replace them with used Boeing 737-600s (which was also not a great sales success due to several reasons).

Regards


It would be not very logical to replace the 737-200 with 737-600 or even the 737-700 for operation on gravel fields. The problem of the 737NG are the low hanging engines making them rather unsuitable for operations for that use, that is I assume the main reason why these 737-200 are still in operation.

I think that is the reason he suggested an A318, instead of the 736 - it's engines aren't nearly as low. While I think everyone here is correct (it won't happen), the notion is an interesting one.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 5737
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 4:16 pm

Few days ago I read a thread that suggest CRJ's engine position might work for those unpaved runways?
 
B-HOP
Posts: 840
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2000 8:09 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 4:22 pm

What about Fokker 100? T-tail rear engine, only things missing is a QC option,it is fairly rugged built, Avro..well, it got let down by 4 motors, CRJ, maybe too expensive.
 
User avatar
hOMSaR
Moderator
Posts: 2389
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:47 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 4:25 pm

B-HOP wrote:
What about Fokker 100? T-tail rear engine, only things missing is a QC option


Well...that, and maybe manufacturer support?
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2822
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 4:31 pm

MD80 wrote:
It would be (at the first glance) more logical for Boeing 737-200-operators to replace them with used Boeing 737-600s (which was also not a great sales success due to several reasons).

Regards



There's no gravel kit for any CFM engined 737. The airlines that need to use 737-200's for their ability to use gravel runways can transfer those kits from one 737-200 to a newer one with fewer hours and cycles.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2822
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 4:34 pm

Used A319's are much more widely available. I doubt they could be adapted with a gravel kit.
 
WesternA318
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:55 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 5:37 pm

As much as I love the A318...I dont see how feasible it would be to use it on those types of flights and those airfields...
 
Dominion301
Posts: 3043
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 5:41 pm

c933103 wrote:
Few days ago I read a thread that suggest CRJ's engine position might work for those unpaved runways?


The CRJ usually needs more than the 1,547m (5,076 ft) to get off the ground available in YCB.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:06 pm

The tail engines might look far of the ground and therefor protected from gravel, but the reality is, that their position is not optimal on gravel airfields, being that far behind the MLG. So DC9's, MD80's, Fokker 70/100, CRJ are not good on gravel fields
The 737NG is not good on gravel because of the low position of the engine.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:33 pm

I suspect that operators in the far north will find it cheaper to pave the runways that need it rather than certify a new gravel kit for ANY jet. Either that or revert to turboprops.
 
User avatar
PHBVF
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2015 6:45 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 7:02 pm

What would a gravelkit encompass?
If it has to do with strengthening of the gear, wouldn't (though only a few are available) the old double bogey A320s in India be up for the task?
Image
 
Dominion301
Posts: 3043
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:48 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 7:25 pm

SEPilot wrote:
I suspect that operators in the far north will find it cheaper to pave the runways that need it rather than certify a new gravel kit for ANY jet. Either that or revert to turboprops.


Not likely due to the permafrost, nor would they have the actual ability to do so even if they wanted to. The largest turboprops out there is likely the eventual solution once the 732s have at last timed-out. The Government of Nunavut actually announced back in 2005, the paving of YCB's runway. Well it's 11 years later and still nothing's happened.

PHBVF wrote:
What would a gravelkit encompass?
If it has to do with strengthening of the gear, wouldn't (though only a few are available) the old double bogey A320s in India be up for the task?
Image


The landing gear isn't the issue. It's the engines.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 7:34 pm

Dominion301 wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
I suspect that operators in the far north will find it cheaper to pave the runways that need it rather than certify a new gravel kit for ANY jet. Either that or revert to turboprops.


Not likely due to the permafrost, nor would they have the actual ability to do so even if they wanted to. The largest turboprops out there is likely the eventual solution once the 732s have at last timed-out. The Government of Nunavut actually announced back in 2005, the paving of YCB's runway. Well it's 11 years later and still nothing's happened.

PHBVF wrote:
What would a gravelkit encompass?
If it has to do with strengthening of the gear, wouldn't (though only a few are available) the old double bogey A320s in India be up for the task?
Image


The landing gear isn't the issue. It's the engines.

The gravel kit was a tube that blasted air ahead of the engines to blow away any gravel that might enter the engines. That is much easier with the 732 engines, as the intakes are much smaller. Any high bypass engine is far too big for that to be effective.
 
User avatar
GE9X
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 12:13 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 8:16 pm

Some in this thread pointed out the A318 is more fuel efficient, but it is the least of the worries for 732 operators. In northern Canada, fares can run higher than a business class transatlantic trips, and for charter flights, fuel costs are included in the bill (part of why many North American charter operators still fly 737 Classics rather than brand new fuel efficient planes) and having low capital costs (aircraft paid for) is more important in the long run. In any case, reliability and capability trumps everything else when you're flying combis and mine charters to the middle of nowhere.

SEPilot wrote:
I suspect that operators in the far north will find it cheaper to pave the runways that need it rather than certify a new gravel kit for ANY jet. Either that or revert to turboprops.


Paving a runway in permafrost, at such remote locations, is *much* more expensive than down south. It's certainly not a technical challenge for the mining companies, which build roads and infrastructure in these places all the time, but it's a big added cost, and I can't see it being worth it unless the mine is built for decades of operations. The 732s do the job just fine as it is.

The problem with turboprops like the Dash 8 is that they are less capable and especially lack the range to reach some of these remote places from the major cities in the south with direct flights (e.g. mine workers or freight charter). I'm thinking the 732s are here to stay for now, and there's no obvious solution to the replacement problem, but if push comes to shove, a half handful of C-130 Hercules or one of the smaller military turboprops might be the best solution. Lockheed Martin offers the civilian LM-100 Hercules, and there's plenty of old Lockheed L-100s still flying. I'm not sure they can be certified to carry passengers though... The Russians might have something as well, but politically it would be a bit tricky at the moment.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 12604
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 8:21 pm

How many B732 are still flying up north? And how many would be available in the world marked to replace these?
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 5737
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Thu Oct 27, 2016 11:57 pm

How about something like BAe 146/An-148? Both seems to have demomnstrated the ability to land on unpaved runway according to photos online, and are at least newer than 732..

Or just put passenger seats onto something like A400M?
 
User avatar
JannEejit
Posts: 1810
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:04 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Fri Oct 28, 2016 12:01 am

I saw this thread title and assumed it was one of those old ones that resurfaced from the 90's !
 
User avatar
Roadcruiser1
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2016 12:05 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Fri Oct 28, 2016 1:50 am

Simple. The Boeing 737-200 will be replaced by the Antonov An-148.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... An-148.jpg

Image

The Antonov An-158 can be used on more trafficked routes.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 697575.jpg

Image

Cargo could be carried on the Antonov An-178

http://airheadsfly.com/wp-content/uploa ... anhest.jpg

Image

Anything that requires heavy lifting the size of a Boeing 747-8F could be brought in by the Antonov An-124 Ruslan. The smaller sibling of the Antonov An-225 Mriya.

http://www.bankofaircraft.com/wp-conten ... An-124.jpg

Image

All of them are capable of landing on unpaved runways, and can operate in bad conditions. The Antonov An-124 Ruslan is even capable of kneeling, and the nose is capable of flipping up to allow more cargo to be loaded on board.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 19316
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Fri Oct 28, 2016 2:18 am

SEPilot wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
I suspect that operators in the far north will find it cheaper to pave the runways that need it rather than certify a new gravel kit for ANY jet. Either that or revert to turboprops.


Not likely due to the permafrost, nor would they have the actual ability to do so even if they wanted to. The largest turboprops out there is likely the eventual solution once the 732s have at last timed-out. The Government of Nunavut actually announced back in 2005, the paving of YCB's runway. Well it's 11 years later and still nothing's happened.

PHBVF wrote:
What would a gravelkit encompass?
If it has to do with strengthening of the gear, wouldn't (though only a few are available) the old double bogey A320s in India be up for the task?
Image


The landing gear isn't the issue. It's the engines.

The gravel kit was a tube that blasted air ahead of the engines to blow away any gravel that might enter the engines. That is much easier with the 732 engines, as the intakes are much smaller. Any high bypass engine is far too big for that to be effective.


The bleed air nozzle on the engine intake is only one element of the gravel kit. Scroll down to the "Unpaved strip kit" section here for the rest of the gravel kit modifications:
http://www.b737.org.uk/737original.htm# ... onvertible
 
oldannyboy
Posts: 2668
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:28 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Fri Oct 28, 2016 10:10 am

There really is no factual need to "replace the 732". There are only a handful in service in a very limited (yet, admittedly, specialized) role, in Northern Canada. These will probably be superseded by a variety of ATRs, Dash-8s and other jets, on a case by case number. There will be no direct replacement for this type, given how small the numbers are. If you really wanted to pin-point a currently available jet to replace these old workhorses at a decent cost, you would probably want to look at the 146/RJ.. It's an old (yet not SO old) jet that is still available in pretty large numbers, offers jet speed and comfort, and excellent stol capabilies and is certified to operate from unprepared strips. Given, it's smaller, has less range, cannot carry cargo, and has other issues of its own, but it's probably as close a replacement as possible if you had to realistically go on a one-to-one basis. The newer jets are either too expensive to buy/lease, too delicate for the harsh environment, or simply unable to undertake the special ops the 732s do un in the far north..
 
Redd
Posts: 1377
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 3:40 am

Re: The perfect 737-200 replacement: the A318

Fri Oct 28, 2016 10:23 am

SEPilot wrote:
The gravel kit was a tube that blasted air ahead of the engines to blow away any gravel that might enter the engines. That is much easier with the 732 engines, as the intakes are much smaller. Any high bypass engine is far too big for that to be effective.



If I'm not mistaken, it doesn't blast any air at all forward. It's a vortex dissipation device.

Image

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos