Just curious what people here think, people are always saying how WN might be interested in the 797. But are they actually? If they haven't ordered anything besides a 737 yet, why would that change now?

sonicruiser wrote:

Just curious what people here think, people are always saying how WN might be interested in the 797. But are they actually? If they haven't ordered anything besides a 737 yet, why would that change now?

The 797? Likely not.

The 737 replacement (NSA) - almost a certainty.

Just depends on the quantities they think their network can support. If it hits a critical mass, then it might work.

Nobody really knows how 797 will look like, for what market and routes is it going to most optimized. Is it going to be 737 successor? For long haul probably makes a lot of sense. But are they ever going to change money making practices which they use over 30 years. They should and they will but just in 5 to 10 years period.

I think it's the only way they could expand at slot controlled airports like LGA and DCA. WN has a disproportionately low number of slots at those airports.

TTailedTiger wrote:

I think it's the only way they could expand at slot controlled airports like LGA and DCA. WN has a disproportionately low number of slots at those airports.

Somehow I don't see a 7 abreast, dual aisle, wide-body serving LGA or DCA.

barney captain wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

I think it's the only way they could expand at slot controlled airports like LGA and DCA. WN has a disproportionately low number of slots at those airports.

Somehow I don't see a 7 abreast, dual aisle, wide-body serving LGA or DCA.

Delta and Air Canada regularly served LGA with the 767. I'm not saying WN will order the 797 but if they did I could see it working at those two airports.

TTailedTiger wrote:

barney captain wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

I think it's the only way they could expand at slot controlled airports like LGA and DCA. WN has a disproportionately low number of slots at those airports.

Somehow I don't see a 7 abreast, dual aisle, wide-body serving LGA or DCA.

Delta and Air Canada regularly served LGA with the 767. I'm not saying WN will order the 797 but if they did I could see it working at those two airports.

Thanks, I never knew that!

GalebG4 wrote:

Nobody really knows how 797 will look like, for what market and routes is it going to most optimized. Is it going to be 737 successor? For long haul probably makes a lot of sense. But are they ever going to change money making practices which they use over 30 years. They should and they will but just in 5 to 10 years period.

I heard it will be a smaller version of a 787.

TTailedTiger wrote:

Delta and Air Canada regularly served LGA with the 767. I'm not saying WN will order the 797 but if they did I could see it working at those two airports.

Heck, the DC-10, L1011, and A300 were all frequent visitors to LGA. EA even used a couple of A300s on the LGA-BOS Shuttle (although not LGA-DCA as they never got approval to use the A300 at DCA). One of the key design criteria for the DC-10 and L1011 was the ability to operate from LGA's 7000' runways, but of course not at MTOW. DL bought the 767-400ER as an L10 replacement in part because the 764ER could operate at LGA and fly the dense routes like LGA-Florida/ATL.

IMO the 797 will be able to operate both DCA- and LGA-West Coast. The former is already permissible with the beyond-perimeter exemptions and no doubt AA and DL would like to take more premium traffic on their flights from DCA. LGA would be a hedge in case the Port Authority were to moderate its stance on the LGA perimeter in future.

If you believe the regular a.net cheerleaders United, Southwest, Delta, Singapore, Lufthansa, Air Canada, Qantas, one or both of the Japanese carriers, Icelandair, Alaska, TAP and half a dozen other carriers are all fighting each other fiercely for the honour of being the launch customer for this as-yet unspecified paper plane.

zkojq wrote:

If you believe the regular a.net cheerleaders United, Southwest, Delta, Singapore, Lufthansa, Air Canada, Qantas, one or both of the Japanese carriers, Icelandair, Alaska, TAP and half a dozen other carriers are all fighting each other fiercely for the honour of being the launch customer for this as-yet unspecified paper plane.

Which is interesting given Boeing’s recent history of new planes crashing or catching on fire...

The 797, like the 787, could eventually become a good plane, but I wouldn’t want to be the first.

zkojq wrote:

If you believe the regular a.net cheerleaders United, Southwest, Delta, Singapore, Lufthansa, Air Canada, Qantas, one or both of the Japanese carriers, Icelandair, Alaska, TAP and half a dozen other carriers are all fighting each other fiercely for the honour of being the launch customer for this as-yet unspecified paper plane.

Your exaggeration and sarcasm would make more sense if we didn't actually have CEOs who have seen detailed presentations on NMA telling the media that they want to be the launch customer.

That said, I personally don't think WN will be an early adopter of NMA.

I think the days of widebody domestic flying are over for now.

The widebodies at LGA were another time and place.

AC still brings it in the day after an IROP tho

When the venerable 737 eventually comes into that 'zone of promotion' WN will have to go through the stages of grief and move on. The NMA and NSA are/will be likely designed to make all of that easier. I suspect WN will eventually buy both but I don't expect to be around and see it. LOL

zkojq wrote:

If you believe the regular a.net cheerleaders United, Southwest, Delta, Singapore, Lufthansa, Air Canada, Qantas, one or both of the Japanese carriers, Icelandair, Alaska, TAP and half a dozen other carriers are all fighting each other fiercely for the honour of being the launch customer for this as-yet unspecified paper plane.

or you can listen to their ceos?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ls-797-jet

zkojq wrote:

If you believe the regular a.net cheerleaders United, Southwest, Delta, Singapore, Lufthansa, Air Canada, Qantas, one or both of the Japanese carriers, Icelandair, Alaska, TAP and half a dozen other carriers are all fighting each other fiercely for the honour of being the launch customer for this as-yet unspecified paper plane.

Looks as if you have a face full of egg on it. Perhaps time for a slice of humble pie?

Google search found this:

https://leehamnews.com/2018/03/01/south ... ing-737-7/

"Until a replacement for the 737 is the only choice, [CEO Gary] Kelly said, though he conceded the carrier will look at the prospective Boeing NMA/797. He also said Southwest looks at all aircraft, including the Bombardier CSeries—but he has no interest in anything but the 737 “as long as I am CEO.”

How seriously will WN really review and consider the 797? Who knows, but with the safety issues currently facing the 737 MAX, I bet they are taking a stronger look than they were a few months ago. I also recall reading in more than one print source that one of the reasons that WN is interested in the 797 is that a twin aisle cross section would shorten turnarounds by reducing time required for boarding/deplaning. Aside from the overall planned reductions in operating costs, less time on the ground allows for more time in the air being productive and generating revenue.

musman9853 wrote:

or you can listen to their ceos?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ls-797-jet

If there is only one airline that would order the 797, it would be DL. It is essentially a modern 767, and DL made that model work pretty well as it was its biggest operator.

I think we should consider the fact they did operate 727s, the predecessor of the predecessor of the NMA. Which means they can't be so far off that size, the more recent shift from 737-300/700 to the -800 size also shows they are adding larger aircraft.

But, even if they do order some, they won't be using them for another decade, so it's perhaps not the best time to speculate, especially with details as murky as they are.

If the B38Ms being grounded has any effect on their orders, it won't affect the 797 anyway, as worst case, they'll just lease some more NGs or delay further retirements.

I must have missed something, but do we have any indication from Boeing or the airlines that the 797 (or MoM or NMA or whatever it's called) will be a widebody?

Because I haven't seen anything in that sense and everything I know about the aviation market makes me think that it will rather NOT be a widebody.

WaywardMemphian wrote:

BNA-ANC-Tokyo and using the overlooked ability to transit through ANC with going through customs to the lower 48.

Hmm, overlooked. Like US48-HNL-Asia, something like BNA-ANC-Asia is overlooked because too few passengers want it. Business travelers want lie-flat seats and long/uninterrupted stages for sleep. Without business travelers you're just chasing junk yields. The WOW failure is yet another lesson in how well that works long-haul.

Somehow I don't see a 7 abreast, dual aisle, wide-body serving LGA or DCA.

The DC-10 and the L-1011 were designed, in large part, specifically to operate out of smallish airports like LGA. LGA operations were a part of their design briefs, and the reason they went with three engines and a widebody cabin was to literally get the most passenger bang for the buck for each flight, and to possess sufficient thrust to get into and out of LGA's shorter runway.

Sorry, but that's the historical truth.

with the natural progression growth of SWA and rising cost structure, it would not be beyond some wild dream to suspect they would order a new/more efficient jet in the next 5-15yrs that can carry 199 pax and operate from main focus cities (MDW, DAL, HOU) with a true range of 2500-3000nm.

Does WN need a 4500nm twin aisle aircraft? I think that would be ideal for Hawaiian or Icelandair. Does WN need a twin aisle aircraft 50 seats larger than the 738 with 3000nm range? I would say yes.

The 738 is about a 40m long aircraft, the A321 is about 45m. A 50m long (164') aircraft with 2-2-2 seating would easily fit 225 in WN configuration. Obviously the aircraft would sit high for rotation clearance and larger diameter geared engines. Everybody throws shade on the 2-2-2 concept, but I think it hits the sweet spot at this seating size.

WaywardMemphian wrote:

One wonders if JetBlue enters TATL and is su cessful at it, how long will WN sit by.

WN is not an airline known for emulating the sides of others. I don't see them going to Europe in the next decade but if they do, it won't be beacause B6 made it work for them.

TTailedTiger wrote:

barney captain wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

I think it's the only way they could expand at slot controlled airports like LGA and DCA. WN has a disproportionately low number of slots at those airports.

Somehow I don't see a 7 abreast, dual aisle, wide-body serving LGA or DCA.

Delta and Air Canada regularly served LGA with the 767. I'm not saying WN will order the 797 but if they did I could see it working at those two airports.

As did United. And Pan Am and EA operated the A300 and A310.

NameOmitted wrote:

WaywardMemphian wrote:

One wonders if JetBlue enters TATL and is su cessful at it, how long will WN sit by.

WN is not an airline known for emulating the sides of others. I don't see them going to Europe in the next decade but if they do, it won't be beacause B6 made it work for them.

Rumor has it SWA is looking at going south instead of east, which IMO will be perfect for the MAX7. However the conspiracy theorist in me says someone in Dallas in a back room behind a blast door is sizing up B6 for a takeover. Don't quote me on that, I have absolutely nothing to base that off of but some how in my mind it makes sense especially once B6 jumps across the pond on their own dime.

Back OT, i believe the largest plane SWA will operate until they state otherwise is the MAX10 which will be perfect for them.

I think a big problem, if its a wide body, will be its gates. Most of WN’s gates aren’t equipped to handle anything bigger than a 737. They’re still working on getting them all capable to handle the -800/-8.

ericm2031 wrote:

I think a big problem, if its a wide body, will be its gates. Most of WN’s gates aren’t equipped to handle anything bigger than a 737. They’re still working on getting them all capable to handle the -800/-8.

Since we know nothing about what Boeing is actually planning, we can throw all sorts of things into the wish list. Like, for instance, folding wing tips that allow the larger aircraft to dance with the 737 on the tarmac.

At this point, does Southwest care about a paper airplane? Probably not.

Let's talk when the 797 design specs are actually firmed up.

Revelation wrote:

zkojq wrote:

If you believe the regular a.net cheerleaders United, Southwest, Delta, Singapore, Lufthansa, Air Canada, Qantas, one or both of the Japanese carriers, Icelandair, Alaska, TAP and half a dozen other carriers are all fighting each other fiercely for the honour of being the launch customer for this as-yet unspecified paper plane.

Your exaggeration and sarcasm would make more sense if we didn't actually have CEOs who have seen detailed presentations on NMA telling the media that they want to be the launch customer.

That's the thing though, I'm not. In Qantas' report at the end of 2017 there was a single slide showing a capacity vs range chart with different aircraft of the Qantas Group fleet position on it. There was also the hypothetical 797 on the chart, with the label "under investigation". Based soley off that, it took less than a week for the Australian Aviation thread to confirm that Qantas is definitely going to be the launch customer.

Aptivaboy wrote:

Somehow I don't see a 7 abreast, dual aisle, wide-body serving LGA or DCA.

The DC-10 and the L-1011 were designed, in large part, specifically to operate out of smallish airports like LGA. LGA operations were a part of their design briefs, and the reason they went with three engines and a widebody cabin was to literally get the most passenger bang for the buck for each flight, and to possess sufficient thrust to get into and out of LGA's shorter runway.

Sorry, but that's the historical truth.

That’s great, but it’s 2019 and not the 1970’s anymore. Airlines don’t generally work like that anymore. I would be surprised if LGA is a main influence on the 797.

NameOmitted wrote:

ericm2031 wrote:

I think a big problem, if its a wide body, will be its gates. Most of WN’s gates aren’t equipped to handle anything bigger than a 737. They’re still working on getting them all capable to handle the -800/-8.

Since we know nothing about what Boeing is actually planning, we can throw all sorts of things into the wish list. Like, for instance, folding wing tips that allow the larger aircraft to dance with the 737 on the tarmac.

IMO Wn runs out of expansion opportunties within 10 years. It will have two option

1) Buy a smaller plane that will let it open up smaller markets to serve

2) Buy a plane with greater range that will open up markets that distance prevents it from currently serving.

I'd bet on the latter, and with a 797 with folding wingtips it could also use in narrow body gates at slot controlled airports.

WaywardMemphian wrote:

One wonders if JetBlue enters TATL and is su cessful at it, how long will WN sit by

you may wonder, but I don't think many others do, least of all WN management.
after many decades of hugely profitable TATL ops by the 6 big legacy cartels/JV/alliances from both sides, the Canadian carriers, smaller players like Iceland Air, and even the odd fifth freedom route (SQ and others)..... why exactly would JetBlue be the ones to "turn the light on" for WN?

WaywardMemphian wrote:

Out of left field but one route that I have wondered about as it seems like one of those perfect GCM routes combines with the car industry. BNA-ANC-Tokyo and using the overlooked ability to transit through ANC with going through customs to the lower 48.

please, just please tell me you're kidding.
Tokyo? Southwest... to Tokyo? carrying throngs of auto industry execs?

That’s great, but it’s 2019 and not the 1970’s anymore. Airlines don’t generally work like that anymore. I would be surprised if LGA is a main influence on the 797.

Go back and reread the post that I was responding to, and my own post. I wasn't implying that LGA will run the 797's specifications. The post I responded to said that the poster had trouble seeing a seven abreast widebody operate out of LGA. Well, two famous widebodies were pretty much designed for LGA operations, and widebodies can operate in and out of there today. That was the thrust of my post.

Now, in response to your post, manufacturers can and will design planes to the needs of airlines. If getting in and out of small airports is a pressing and overriding need, then their designs will be tailored to that specification. Or, a variant will be created that's better suited for that goal. Or, a performance package will be created to upgrade an existing design for operations from said airport, or to reach some other specific performance goal. Or, some combination of the above will occur. They did that in the 1970s, and they still do it today in 2019.