Looking for thoughts on which aircraft type in the fleet is most likely to take over this route once the 757 is phased out in the coming years. I do not see the 739 or 321 having adequate runway performance/range at high payload weights. For a short time the 73G did the route for DAL, and UAL uses it between KSNA and KEWR so it apparently has the range/performance. Will DAL abandon the route once the 757 is retired or down gauge it, and if so, which aircraft?
Opinions?

UA operates the 738 and 73G on the EWR route.

They've used the 737-700 on ATL-SNA, DTW-SNA, and JFK-SNA in the past. Don't know how long they're planning to keep the 737-700s in the fleet, but I don't see why they couldn't go back to them otherwise.

Delta only has 10 737-700s in their fleet. They're pretty heavily used on routes already, and they're about to be used on one more when they resume ATL-BUR. This adds to the list of routes such as ATL-EYW and ATL-TGU where they're needed for safe operations. Not sure they have that much flexibility to operate ATL-SNA at the current level of frequency in addition to the others.

I'd say lets see how many A220s are in the fleet by the time the 757s make their exit. They will most likely have a base in ATL by that point in time.

MSP-SNA has been 3x A319 for a little while now.

evank516 wrote:

Delta only has 10 737-700s in their fleet. They're pretty heavily used on routes already, and they're about to be used on one more when they resume ATL-BUR. This adds to the list of routes such as ATL-EYW and ATL-TGU where they're needed for safe operations. Not sure they have that much flexibility to operate ATL-SNA at the current level of frequency in addition to the others.

I'd say lets see how many A220s are in the fleet by the time the 757s make their exit. They will most likely have a base in ATL by that point in time.

They also have 50-something A319s that can replicate a lot of what the 737-700s do, freeing them up for routes that truly need the capability, as well as a pile of 737-800s.

IADCA wrote:

evank516 wrote:

Delta only has 10 737-700s in their fleet. They're pretty heavily used on routes already, and they're about to be used on one more when they resume ATL-BUR. This adds to the list of routes such as ATL-EYW and ATL-TGU where they're needed for safe operations. Not sure they have that much flexibility to operate ATL-SNA at the current level of frequency in addition to the others.

I'd say lets see how many A220s are in the fleet by the time the 757s make their exit. They will most likely have a base in ATL by that point in time.

They also have 50-something A319s that can replicate a lot of what the 737-700s do, freeing them up for routes that truly need the capability, as well as a pile of 737-800s.

That's another option, they could easily use the A319 on ATL-SNA.

DL has some domestic F, non-ETOPS 752s that aren't yet 20 years old. These have lots of flying left. If they think that 199 seats crushes avg yields a 738 (maybe with a row in the back blocked off) seems like an easy move. After all, SNA-ATL is 500 miles shorter than SNA-EWR.

73G (-700) in the DAL fleet are 2008-2009 deliveries; they have 10 of them. They have 26K thrust engines (same as -800; -900ER has 27K) so apparently they are good at hot/high/short runway performance.

This is a problem that is still 6-8 years out.

NWA used the 319/320 back in the day for MSP/DTW, so they could likely do it, if they are compliant with the noise restrictions and aren't weight restricted.
A220-300 once it enters service is a thought.

6-8 years out? am skeptical about them being around this long, unless you consider the latest acquisitions by DAL of 757s. They have 5 of the newest 757-200 aircraft built; the former Shanghai birds, which are approx. 15 yrs old.

Definitely the A220. Probably the -300, and you could also expect an increase in frequency as well. Don't be surprised if the A220 also takes over EYW and other short runways that it sends mainline jets to.

Isn't EYW the shortest commercial (jet) runway in the US? DL is currently serving it with the 73G to ATL 3X daily (and 2X additional with CR7).

PlnCrzyMikey wrote:

Isn't EYW the shortest commercial (jet) runway in the US? DL is currently serving it with the 73G to ATL 3X daily (and 2X additional with CR7).

Actually DL sends the 73G to EYW 3 to 5 times daily depending on the time of year and CR7s will be reduced to less than daily as the mainline frequencies increase. Delta's 73G actually performs BETTER than the CR7 on EYW's short runway.

And yes, EYW currently has the shortest runway in the country that regularly sees 737s.

I am not surprised that the 73G outperforms the CR7. The few times that I have flown the CR7 (short hauls) it did not impress me as a performer. Never flown on a 73G; lots of rides on the 738 (ok but nothing spectacular) and 739ER (are we gonna make it before the runway ends in PHX?).
However, a 757 in/out of SNA is an experience. Fun factor to the max if one is into that kind of thing.

this thread is making me want to fly DL to EYW just to experience it.

My last few experiences on the 738 include some pretty long take off rolls, probably because I've only been on them in the summer lately. In July of 2017 we did a pretty long roll out of JFK on our way to ATL. I remember a pretty long take off roll at ATL on one back in 2012 only going to DAB.

WN's 73G takeoffs out of BUR are pretty impressive.

I think they use a pretty high thrust derate on the longer runways in 'normal' weather. The minimal thrust change at power back (sometimes even a power up) to climb thrust suggests a significantly reduced thrust takeoff. A 757 out of ATL (or ORD, DFW or LAX) does not feel like a 757 out of, say SNA. Same goes for the 738.
From what I have seen in ATL, the A220 has impressive runway performance (even if they were empty flights during certification).
So, A220 eventually for SNA-ATL? Maybe, if the later deliveries do not have the range restriction (or is that gone?).

PlnCrzyMikey wrote:

I am not surprised that the 73G outperforms the CR7. The few times that I have flown the CR7 (short hauls) it did not impress me as a performer. Never flown on a 73G; lots of rides on the 738 (ok but nothing spectacular) and 739ER (are we gonna make it before the runway ends in PHX?).
However, a 757 in/out of SNA is an experience. Fun factor to the max if one is into that kind of thing.

The CR7 is actually a high performance aircraft. Flies into ASE, very good thrust to weight ratio.

PlnCrzyMikey wrote:

I am not surprised that the 73G outperforms the CR7. The few times that I have flown the CR7 (short hauls) it did not impress me as a performer. Never flown on a 73G; lots of rides on the 738 (ok but nothing spectacular) and 739ER (are we gonna make it before the runway ends in PHX?).
However, a 757 in/out of SNA is an experience. Fun factor to the max if one is into that kind of thing.

The CR7 is actually a high performance aircraft. Flies into ASE, very good thrust to weight ratio.

Plenty of options once the last domestic 752s are gone, which won't be for a few years yet. This flight is short by transcon standards and the 738 can probably do it with a full passenger load. If not, the A319 and 73G are both options. If Boeing launches the 797 and Delta is a launch customer, they will start showing up as the last 752s are leaving, and the shorter variant will probably have good enough field performance to be an option.

PlnCrzyMikey wrote:

So, A220 eventually for SNA-ATL? Maybe, if the later deliveries do not have the range restriction (or is that gone?).

I imagine after DL writes a fat check to Toulouse to uprate the range, regardless of whether its an early or later frame. I'd guess the overall CS order will evolve into having a small-ish long range subfleet for particularly odd, yet well-yielding routes (which could even mean SNA, specifically).

I think there's a bit of an underestimation of the performance of newer 738's in here. I don't have numbers to prove it but I suspect that only on the worst of days would one have a significant issue.

DylanHarvey wrote:

PlnCrzyMikey wrote:

I am not surprised that the 73G outperforms the CR7. The few times that I have flown the CR7 (short hauls) it did not impress me as a performer. Never flown on a 73G; lots of rides on the 738 (ok but nothing spectacular) and 739ER (are we gonna make it before the runway ends in PHX?).
However, a 757 in/out of SNA is an experience. Fun factor to the max if one is into that kind of thing.

The CR7 is actually a high performance aircraft. Flies into ASE, very good thrust to weight ratio.

I don't really know what 8,006 feet of runway (looks like there's 1,000 feet less available for runway 15 ops though) at high altitudes would translate to at sea level, but the runway still has a good amount of length compared to a 4,801 foot runway in EYW. Are most take offs on runway 15 or 33 at ASE?

Aren't the A319's the same age as the newer 752's?

Doesn't FedEx fly the A300 to SNA? If that's the case without restrictions, I'm sure they'd use the 739/A321 if they can land there. If not, I know AA/UA both use the 738 into SNA. That'd be my guess.

evank516 wrote:

DylanHarvey wrote:

PlnCrzyMikey wrote:

I am not surprised that the 73G outperforms the CR7. The few times that I have flown the CR7 (short hauls) it did not impress me as a performer. Never flown on a 73G; lots of rides on the 738 (ok but nothing spectacular) and 739ER (are we gonna make it before the runway ends in PHX?).
However, a 757 in/out of SNA is an experience. Fun factor to the max if one is into that kind of thing.

The CR7 is actually a high performance aircraft. Flies into ASE, very good thrust to weight ratio.

I don't really know what 8,006 feet of runway (looks like there's 1,000 feet less available for runway 15 ops though) at high altitudes would translate to at sea level, but the runway still has a good amount of length compared to a 4,801 foot runway in EYW. Are most take offs on runway 15 or 33 at ASE?

ASE is the most demanding performance commercial airport in the United States. You can only land 15 and only depart 33 (one way in, one way out). A single engine go around passed the missed approach point is not certain in a part-25 aircraft. The climb gradient is also a major issue on departure. It has a 99ft wingspan limitation, but even if it didn't, I doubt anything but an empty 73G or 319 could get in and out legally.

This a thread on aircraft routing 6-8 years from now?

Really?

Varsity1 wrote:

evank516 wrote:

DylanHarvey wrote:

The CR7 is actually a high performance aircraft. Flies into ASE, very good thrust to weight ratio.

I don't really know what 8,006 feet of runway (looks like there's 1,000 feet less available for runway 15 ops though) at high altitudes would translate to at sea level, but the runway still has a good amount of length compared to a 4,801 foot runway in EYW. Are most take offs on runway 15 or 33 at ASE?

ASE is the most demanding performance commercial airport in the United States. You can only land 15 and only depart 33 (one way in, one way out). A single engine go around passed the missed approach point is not certain in a part-25 aircraft. The climb gradient is also a major issue on departure. It has a 99ft wingspan limitation, but even if it didn't, I doubt anything but an empty 73G or 319 could get in and out legally.

My question was more geared towards what a runway the same length at ASE at its elevation would translate to at sea level, if there is such a way to calculate?

Double post

PlnCrzyMikey wrote:

Looking for thoughts on which aircraft type in the fleet is most likely to take over this route once the 757 is phased out in the coming years. I do not see the 739 or 321 having adequate runway performance/range at high payload weights. For a short time the 73G did the route for DAL, and UAL uses it between KSNA and KEWR so it apparently has the range/performance. Will DAL abandon the route once the 757 is retired or down gauge it, and if so, which aircraft?
Opinions?

A319. Works great. Comfortable. Did it the other day from MSP.

Double post

evank516 wrote:

Varsity1 wrote:

evank516 wrote:

I don't really know what 8,006 feet of runway (looks like there's 1,000 feet less available for runway 15 ops though) at high altitudes would translate to at sea level, but the runway still has a good amount of length compared to a 4,801 foot runway in EYW. Are most take offs on runway 15 or 33 at ASE?

ASE is the most demanding performance commercial airport in the United States. You can only land 15 and only depart 33 (one way in, one way out). A single engine go around passed the missed approach point is not certain in a part-25 aircraft. The climb gradient is also a major issue on departure. It has a 99ft wingspan limitation, but even if it didn't, I doubt anything but an empty 73G or 319 could get in and out legally.

My question was more geared towards what a runway the same length at ASE at its elevation would translate to at sea level, if there is such a way to calculate?

You are looking for density altitude. Which is temperature dependent.

N292UX wrote:

Doesn't FedEx fly the A300 to SNA? If that's the case without restrictions, I'm sure they'd use the 739/A321 if they can land there. If not, I know AA/UA both use the 738 into SNA. That'd be my guess.

Yes. A 777 could takeoff from SNA if it had minimal fuel and cargo. This issue is the short runway combined with a longer stage length to ATL.

The 737-800 routes you mention are shorter routes than ATL.

A few people mentioned that UA has used the 738 to EWR. I didn’t think a 737-800 could do SNA-EWR without weight restrictions.

PlnCrzyMikey wrote:

6-8 years out? am skeptical about them being around this long, unless you consider the latest acquisitions by DAL of 757s. They have 5 of the newest 757-200 aircraft built; the former Shanghai birds, which are approx. 15 yrs old.

I'm not skeptical. Both FedEx and UPS have big fleets of 757s. There will be comprehensive support for 757s for another 15-20 years -- if not longer. Delta's got fleet replacement issues more urgent than under-20 year 757s.

BoeingGuy wrote:

N292UX wrote:

Doesn't FedEx fly the A300 to SNA? If that's the case without restrictions, I'm sure they'd use the 739/A321 if they can land there. If not, I know AA/UA both use the 738 into SNA. That'd be my guess.

Yes. A 777 could takeoff from SNA if it had minimal fuel and cargo. This issue is the short runway combined with a longer stage length to ATL.

The 737-800 routes you mention are shorter routes than ATL.

A few people mentioned that UA has used the 738 to EWR. I didn’t think a 737-800 could do SNA-EWR without weight restrictions.

You are correct. United will occassionally fly EWR-SNA on 737-800 or I've seen A320 WESTBOUND but they are always routed back to IAH to go east. United keeps the 757-200 or 737-700 for the takeoff at SNA and works that into any rotations for EWR so they don't have to weight restrict.

ok I am schooled on the CR7. never considered it high performance. possibly the times I flew it they weren't pushing it and it felt benign.
As for the 739ER...I do not see it working based on what I see as poor runway performance, however my experiences with it involve PHX in the dead of summer so maybe that is not being fair. Not decided on the A321. A319 and A320 can likely do it however some of them (DL) are also getting pretty old (all PMNW aircraft AFAIK).
738 can do ORD so why not ATL.
I just brought this topic up as a look into the furure, not something imminent in a year or two. SNA is special to me as I utilized it for travel (and plane spotting) frequently and at one time the 757 seemed to be the ideal plane for it, as several carriers utilized it on everything from up the coast to trans-con flights. Once the 757 finally does go out of service I feel it will be missed, as its unique performance characteristics cannot be duplicated by anything currently available with comparable capacity IMO. Will the NMA (797) match up? Time will tell. DL seems to be very interested in it.
The FDX A300 (used to be 310) always had me puzzled...how light do they load it to get it out of there? Not much fuel (goes to MEM) but also weight-limited as well? I also have heard (never saw it) that the 767-200 was considered for service there at one time (UAL?).
I didn't consider the long term support that will be in place for the 757 due to the freighter market. Shouldn't be an issue like DL is having with the MD-90 as it is a bit of a white elephant as far as support/spare parts/engines go. Runor is there is a solution in the works.
Just making some avgeek conversation as for some reason this was on my mind today.

PlnCrzyMikey wrote:

The FDX A300 (used to be 310) always had me puzzled...how light do they load it to get it out of there? Not much fuel (goes to MEM) but also weight-limited as well? I also have heard (never saw it) that the 767-200 was considered for service there at one time (UAL?)

The A300 is quite the field performer, and should have zero trouble from that runway with a light load of cardboard boxes.

I'd wager SNA will be one of the last DL domestic 757 routes when it's time. Over 100 were refurbished just recently with new interiors, so they'll be around for quite some time. Only the oldest 1990-1993 frames with no winglets will be the first to go when they hit cycle limits in under 5 years time. When that does happen, I'd expect those frames on short haul ATL routes (EG: ATL-PNS) to be downgraded first off 757s. For SNA it's going to be quite a while, almost a decade I'd predict.

interesting that some of the refurbs were not fitted with winglets (domestic config) or even had them removed (???). Also appears that a lot of the older frames got converted to the sports charter configuration (your namesake for one, which according to planespotters.net is Delta's oldest 757 that is still in service).
Smiling as I type this as the 10:30 PM 757 departure just flew overhead. Nightly FedEx run to MEM and the only 757 my little hometown airport gets (unless weather goes south in ATL and we get diversions).
So I am gathering that SNA will keep the 757 until the end.

PlnCrzyMikey wrote:

interesting that some of the refurbs were not fitted with winglets (domestic config) or even had them removed (???). Also appears that a lot of the older frames got converted to the sports charter configuration (your namesake for one, which according to planespotters.net is Delta's oldest 757 that is still in service).

The older frames that got refurbed into domestic configuration will only be in that configuration a few years before cycles-driven retirement, so the winglet ROI didn't pan out in a low fuel price environment. Winglets were removed from a few older frames to install on ETOPS frames (including the 5x ex-Shanghai birds) that didn't have them. They save more fuel on longer missions.

makes sense. The INTL/premium trans-con configured planes were acquired without winglets; former AA/TWA, whereas the Hawaii ETOPS -200 fleet (PMNW) from what I can tell had the winglets fitted before the merger. The 757-300 fleet was winglet-fitted after the merger.
OK I am a bit of a fan of the DL 757. Memories of flying on 4 generations of DL liveries into/out of SNA/LAX. The flying I do now (ATL-PHX) seems to have been taken over by the 739ER and A321 with the snowbird/spring training shift to larger aircraft during high demand times (varies between 752-753-A333).