User avatar
Erebus
Posts: 991
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 2:40 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:12 pm

bob75013 wrote:
Erebus wrote:

I said better. Are you certain that they can't get a better deal than what they already get?


I suspect that BA takes very good care of WN, it's most important customer in the world.


So, to answer my question, WN can't get a better deal from Boeing than what they already get?

bob75013 wrote:
The fact that WN's profit levels exceed every other major airline in NA says that it gets good enough deals.


Are those other airlines not getting as good enough deals as WN then?
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3143
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:13 pm

swacle wrote:
Aptivaboy wrote:
Does Southwest have a need for a plane to run on long - thin routes? Or, do they wish to continue the multiple connection model to get to a destination reasonably far away? My cousin takes Southwest CLE- to wherever, often SAN on business trips, or Florida, and multiple connections are the norm. Might the C-Series (sorry, I just can't call it an Airbus!) change that part of their business model if there is a need for longer distance nonstops?

Thanks for listening.


Southwest does not sell multiple connection flights, barring irregular operations and reroutes.


Yes they do. I have had many 3 stop flights over the years booked online with I start here & end here without multiple bookings.
 
FATFlyer
Posts: 4821
Joined: Fri May 18, 2001 4:12 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 12:31 am

Revelation wrote:
FATFlyer wrote:
Gary Kelly this morning added more for this thread to speculate around:

"We're an all Boeing 737 carrier," Kelly also said on CNBC, "That doesn't mean we'll be an all 737 carrier into perpetuity."
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/southwest-airlines/2019/04/25/southwest-posts-record-q1-revenuedespite-737-max-grounding-headaches

On the flip side, Jon Ostrower ( https://twitter.com/jonostrower/status/ ... 9622690816 ) tweeted:

Southwest confirms @theaircurrent reporting. The airline visited an A220 operator. "We didn’t reveal that we took this trip...This trip was planned a long time ago,” says CEO Gary Kelly, who called the timing coincidental.

... which is the opposite of confirming theaircurrent's report that the visit was a test of WN's relationship with Boeing.

Life's tough out there in the click bait oriented world of modern media.


Unless Boeing produces the 737 into perpetuity, then Gary Kelly's statement is correct. The only question is how far out does he consider perpetuity? ;)
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." - Mark Twain
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3143
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 12:44 am

bob75013 wrote:
Erebus wrote:
bob75013 wrote:

You have any evidence that WN isn't getting good deals now? I suspect not.


I said better. Are you certain that they can't get a better deal than what they already get?


I suspect that BA takes very good care of WN, it's most important customer in the world. The fact that WN's profit levels exceed every other major airline in NA says
that it gets good enough deals.


British Airways (BA) is taking care of WN because they are their most important customer. I figured AA would be BA's most important customer.
 
bob75013
Posts: 818
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:09 am

Erebus wrote:
bob75013 wrote:
Erebus wrote:

I said better. Are you certain that they can't get a better deal than what they already get?


I suspect that BA takes very good care of WN, it's most important customer in the world.


So, to answer my question, WN can't get a better deal from Boeing than what they already get?

bob75013 wrote:
The fact that WN's profit levels exceed every other major airline in NA says that it gets good enough deals.




Are those other airlines not getting as good enough deals as WN then?


Why don't you tell us the deals that WN got and then you can tell us whether or not it could have gotten better deals.
 
mga707
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 5:52 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:17 am

rbavfan wrote:
swacle wrote:
Aptivaboy wrote:
Does Southwest have a need for a plane to run on long - thin routes? Or, do they wish to continue the multiple connection model to get to a destination reasonably far away? My cousin takes Southwest CLE- to wherever, often SAN on business trips, or Florida, and multiple connections are the norm. Might the C-Series (sorry, I just can't call it an Airbus!) change that part of their business model if there is a need for longer distance nonstops?

Thanks for listening.


Southwest does not sell multiple connection flights, barring irregular operations and reroutes.


Yes they do. I have had many 3 stop flights over the years booked online with I start here & end here without multiple bookings.


Three-stop flights are still DIRECT flights, and are NOT the same thing as multiple connections. Southwest does sell three-stop flights (although far fewer than they used to) but does not sell multiple connections.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13805
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:24 am

planecane wrote:
That's not the sense I would make. My point is that there is no need for a 737-700 replacement in the next 8-10 years.

By the time they actually need a replacement for the -700, there will be more options and the A220 will probably be offered in an NEO version.

This whole thing about WN serving smaller markets goes against their business model. It would make for high cost stations if they can only support 2 or 3 flights a day, even if using the A220 (the most efficient and versatile aircraft ever built).


The A220-300 will carry about the same number of passengers as the 737-700, about 5 tonnes lighter empty weight than a MAX 7, and about 1 tonne an hour less fuel than a MAX 7. That works out to be about 2.9-3 million less fuel per airframe per year (around 44 million over the span of 15 years). Boeing could never reduce the MAX 7 purchase price down enough to compete with that.

On a fleet of 500 aircraft, that is a fuel savings of 1.4 billion PER YEAR.I dont care what sort of allegiance any company has to Boeing, 1.4 billion dollars is a serious savings that can be made, which can either be translated to better fares to customers, add previously unprofitable cities to their network, or to significantly improve the bottom line.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:35 am

zeke wrote:
planecane wrote:
That's not the sense I would make. My point is that there is no need for a 737-700 replacement in the next 8-10 years.

By the time they actually need a replacement for the -700, there will be more options and the A220 will probably be offered in an NEO version.

This whole thing about WN serving smaller markets goes against their business model. It would make for high cost stations if they can only support 2 or 3 flights a day, even if using the A220 (the most efficient and versatile aircraft ever built).


The A220-300 will carry about the same number of passengers as the 737-700, about 5 tonnes lighter empty weight than a MAX 7, and about 1 tonne an hour less fuel than a MAX 7. That works out to be about 2.9-3 million less fuel per airframe per year (around 44 million over the span of 15 years). Boeing could never reduce the MAX 7 purchase price down enough to compete with that.

On a fleet of 500 aircraft, that is a fuel savings of 1.4 billion PER YEAR.I dont care what sort of allegiance any company has to Boeing, 1.4 billion dollars is a serious savings that can be made, which can either be translated to better fares to customers, add previously unprofitable cities to their network, or to significantly improve the bottom line.

Hold on zeke. How dare you introduce hard data in an argument about WN & BCA? Don't you know that WN is bound hands and feet with BCA & the 737? BCA will keep the 737 line open ad vitam aeternam just for WN.

/s of course... Thanks for the insight.
 
User avatar
Erebus
Posts: 991
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 2:40 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:32 am

bob75013 wrote:
Erebus wrote:
bob75013 wrote:

I suspect that BA takes very good care of WN, it's most important customer in the world.


So, to answer my question, WN can't get a better deal from Boeing than what they already get?

bob75013 wrote:
The fact that WN's profit levels exceed every other major airline in NA says that it gets good enough deals.




Are those other airlines not getting as good enough deals as WN then?


Why don't you tell us the deals that WN got and then you can tell us whether or not it could have gotten better deals.


You cannot ever say that there's never an opportunity to try and go for better deals.

Southwest was reported to have gotten something around 64% discount off list price on their launch order for the MAX. United was reported to have received something around 70-75% off list price for the 737-700 when they ran an intense competition between Boeing and Bombardier. Note, I mentioned % off list price. Whether they are NG or MAX or different sub-types shouldn't influence the % proportion of the discount significantly as the cost difference is already reflected in the list prices.
 
planecane
Posts: 1015
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:34 am

zeke wrote:
planecane wrote:
That's not the sense I would make. My point is that there is no need for a 737-700 replacement in the next 8-10 years.

By the time they actually need a replacement for the -700, there will be more options and the A220 will probably be offered in an NEO version.

This whole thing about WN serving smaller markets goes against their business model. It would make for high cost stations if they can only support 2 or 3 flights a day, even if using the A220 (the most efficient and versatile aircraft ever built).


The A220-300 will carry about the same number of passengers as the 737-700, about 5 tonnes lighter empty weight than a MAX 7, and about 1 tonne an hour less fuel than a MAX 7. That works out to be about 2.9-3 million less fuel per airframe per year (around 44 million over the span of 15 years). Boeing could never reduce the MAX 7 purchase price down enough to compete with that.

On a fleet of 500 aircraft, that is a fuel savings of 1.4 billion PER YEAR.I dont care what sort of allegiance any company has to Boeing, 1.4 billion dollars is a serious savings that can be made, which can either be translated to better fares to customers, add previously unprofitable cities to their network, or to significantly improve the bottom line.


I agree and suspect that WN won't end up taking very many MAX7s. They may even work something out with Boeing to turn the first few into BBJs and replace them with MAX8s. My opinion is related to the fact that they don't need a sub 150 seat replacement for at least 8 years. They can keep flying the -700s they own on the lower demand routes (and routes that need field performance).

When they do need a replacement in that size class, there will be other options. I'd be absolutely shocked if the Boeing/Embraer JV didn't launch something within 3 years in that size class. Boeing will certainly launch the NSA/737 replacement within 8 years. They can't possibly be banking on the MAX being in production for much more than 10 years.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 3:45 am

WayexTDI wrote:
zeke wrote:
planecane wrote:
That's not the sense I would make. My point is that there is no need for a 737-700 replacement in the next 8-10 years.

By the time they actually need a replacement for the -700, there will be more options and the A220 will probably be offered in an NEO version.

This whole thing about WN serving smaller markets goes against their business model. It would make for high cost stations if they can only support 2 or 3 flights a day, even if using the A220 (the most efficient and versatile aircraft ever built).


The A220-300 will carry about the same number of passengers as the 737-700, about 5 tonnes lighter empty weight than a MAX 7, and about 1 tonne an hour less fuel than a MAX 7. That works out to be about 2.9-3 million less fuel per airframe per year (around 44 million over the span of 15 years). Boeing could never reduce the MAX 7 purchase price down enough to compete with that.

On a fleet of 500 aircraft, that is a fuel savings of 1.4 billion PER YEAR.I dont care what sort of allegiance any company has to Boeing, 1.4 billion dollars is a serious savings that can be made, which can either be translated to better fares to customers, add previously unprofitable cities to their network, or to significantly improve the bottom line.

Hold on zeke. How dare you introduce hard data in an argument about WN & BCA? Don't you know that WN is bound hands and feet with BCA & the 737? BCA will keep the 737 line open ad vitam aeternam just for WN.

/s of course... Thanks for the insight.


Those numbers are impressive and all but I doubt at SWA Pilot pay rates.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13805
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:40 am

planecane wrote:
I agree and suspect that WN won't end up taking very many MAX7s. They may even work something out with Boeing to turn the first few into BBJs and replace them with MAX8s. My opinion is related to the fact that they don't need a sub 150 seat replacement for at least 8 years. They can keep flying the -700s they own on the lower demand routes (and routes that need field performance).


If I was a shareholder I would be asking why is the airline is happy to pay over 15 billion more fuel costs over the 8 years where there are other options that will reduce both fuel and maintenance costs.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8505
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:51 am

zeke wrote:
planecane wrote:
I agree and suspect that WN won't end up taking very many MAX7s. They may even work something out with Boeing to turn the first few into BBJs and replace them with MAX8s. My opinion is related to the fact that they don't need a sub 150 seat replacement for at least 8 years. They can keep flying the -700s they own on the lower demand routes (and routes that need field performance).


If I was a shareholder I would be asking why is the airline is happy to pay over 15 billion more fuel costs over the 8 years where there are other options that will reduce both fuel and maintenance costs.


Reduced maintenance cost, reduced crew training costs, unbeaten dispatch reliability, positive customer feedback on flying an American made airplane, higher resale value, probably lower purchase price (economies of scale),...
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1375
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:59 am

WayexTDI wrote:
zeke wrote:
planecane wrote:
That's not the sense I would make. My point is that there is no need for a 737-700 replacement in the next 8-10 years.

By the time they actually need a replacement for the -700, there will be more options and the A220 will probably be offered in an NEO version.

This whole thing about WN serving smaller markets goes against their business model. It would make for high cost stations if they can only support 2 or 3 flights a day, even if using the A220 (the most efficient and versatile aircraft ever built).


The A220-300 will carry about the same number of passengers as the 737-700, about 5 tonnes lighter empty weight than a MAX 7, and about 1 tonne an hour less fuel than a MAX 7. That works out to be about 2.9-3 million less fuel per airframe per year (around 44 million over the span of 15 years). Boeing could never reduce the MAX 7 purchase price down enough to compete with that.

On a fleet of 500 aircraft, that is a fuel savings of 1.4 billion PER YEAR.I dont care what sort of allegiance any company has to Boeing, 1.4 billion dollars is a serious savings that can be made, which can either be translated to better fares to customers, add previously unprofitable cities to their network, or to significantly improve the bottom line.

Hold on zeke. How dare you introduce hard data in an argument about WN & BCA? Don't you know that WN is bound hands and feet with BCA & the 737? BCA will keep the 737 line open ad vitam aeternam just for WN.

/s of course... Thanks for the insight.

Here’s another fact, but perhaps a little rosy.. The big “yeah but” on the A220 is that there is no way that Airbus/BBD can build enough to satisfy WN’s needs. That’s even before the question of what profit if any they could make.
 
planecane
Posts: 1015
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:59 am

zeke wrote:
planecane wrote:
I agree and suspect that WN won't end up taking very many MAX7s. They may even work something out with Boeing to turn the first few into BBJs and replace them with MAX8s. My opinion is related to the fact that they don't need a sub 150 seat replacement for at least 8 years. They can keep flying the -700s they own on the lower demand routes (and routes that need field performance).


If I was a shareholder I would be asking why is the airline is happy to pay over 15 billion more fuel costs over the 8 years where there are other options that will reduce both fuel and maintenance costs.



How much does an A220 cost to purchase? That cost has to be deducted from the 15 billion fuel savings assuming the -700s they replace are paid off at this point.
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 5:15 am

many321 wrote:
FATFlyer wrote:
Gary Kelly this morning added more for this thread to speculate around:

"We're an all Boeing 737 carrier," Kelly also said on CNBC, "That doesn't mean we'll be an all 737 carrier into perpetuity."
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/southwest-airlines/2019/04/25/southwest-posts-record-q1-revenuedespite-737-max-grounding-headaches


Yup, he threw up a bone for us. I'd be shocked if they do go with the A220. Though, to be frank it will help them if they want to work at smaller/rural airports with either the A221 or A223. Let's see what happens.


Either that or there's the reality that the 737 won't be offered into perpetuity. Just because WN is looking at the A220, that doesn't mean you're going to see orders for that type within the next five years. The A223/CS3 can hold up to 160 passengers, for what that's worth. And, we don't know what a potential A220-500 could seat.

Does that mean WN is abandoning the 737 program in the near future? No. Could we possibly see the A220 family work its way into the WN fleet 20 years from now? It's possible; not saying it's likely, but anything is possible.

To add to the drama, here's an article posted Thursday in the Dallas Business Journal:

https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news ... irbus.html
2019: DAL, MCI, PHX, LAS, DFW, SAT, ORD, SLC, SEA, DTW; B73G (WN x3), B738 (WN, AA, DL), A20N (NK), MD83 (AA), B788 (AA x2), CS1 (DL), 739 (DL), 712 (DL)
Next: AA: DFW-PHL (752), PHL-MIA (763), MIA-LAX (77W), LAX-DFW (789)
 
marcelh
Posts: 641
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 6:32 am

rbavfan wrote:
Also WN like any other airlines keeps track of their options.

But WN isn’t “any other airline”.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13805
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 6:43 am

planecane wrote:
How much does an A220 cost to purchase? That cost has to be deducted from the 15 billion fuel savings assuming the -700s they replace are paid off at this point.


The list price on the A220-300 is around 20 million less than the A320neo.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
AirwayBill
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:37 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 6:59 am

I smell a lot of panic on this thread.

Somehow a well established airline with 700+ planes could not profitably implement a highly efficient 2nd aircraft type into their fleet, alongside the 737? Give me a break.

The A220 is the perfect candidate to sustain WN's lower density market. The 737 MAX 7, training costs left aside, is an awkward fit and I suspect WN will convert some of them to bigger -8s, while simply cancelling some others, giving way to a better long term solution.

I can understand the fear of losing yet another all-Boeing Airline though.
 
n562wn
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 5:50 pm

WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 7:10 am

AirwayBill wrote:
I smell a lot of panic on this thread.

Somehow a well established airline with 700+ planes could not profitably implement a highly efficient 2nd aircraft type into their fleet, alongside the 737? Give me a break.

The A220 is the perfect candidate to sustain WN's lower density market. The 737 MAX 7, training costs left aside, is an awkward fit and I suspect WN will convert some of them to bigger -8s, while simply cancelling some others, giving way to a better long term solution.

I can understand the fear of losing yet another all-Boeing Airline though.


I tend to agree. Pure speculation, but if WN decided to go with the A220, I can still see keeping some 737-7 Max on the order books for longer stage lengths, such as PHX/LAS-Hawaii.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 12:04 pm

william wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
zeke wrote:

The A220-300 will carry about the same number of passengers as the 737-700, about 5 tonnes lighter empty weight than a MAX 7, and about 1 tonne an hour less fuel than a MAX 7. That works out to be about 2.9-3 million less fuel per airframe per year (around 44 million over the span of 15 years). Boeing could never reduce the MAX 7 purchase price down enough to compete with that.

On a fleet of 500 aircraft, that is a fuel savings of 1.4 billion PER YEAR.I dont care what sort of allegiance any company has to Boeing, 1.4 billion dollars is a serious savings that can be made, which can either be translated to better fares to customers, add previously unprofitable cities to their network, or to significantly improve the bottom line.

Hold on zeke. How dare you introduce hard data in an argument about WN & BCA? Don't you know that WN is bound hands and feet with BCA & the 737? BCA will keep the 737 line open ad vitam aeternam just for WN.

/s of course... Thanks for the insight.


Those numbers are impressive and all but I doubt at SWA Pilot pay rates.

Care to explain what the Pilot Pay Rate has to do with Fuel Saving? Even if the pilots flew for free (which they don't), WN would still save $1.4b in fuel per year according to zeke switching to the A220.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 12:06 pm

seahawk wrote:
zeke wrote:
planecane wrote:
I agree and suspect that WN won't end up taking very many MAX7s. They may even work something out with Boeing to turn the first few into BBJs and replace them with MAX8s. My opinion is related to the fact that they don't need a sub 150 seat replacement for at least 8 years. They can keep flying the -700s they own on the lower demand routes (and routes that need field performance).


If I was a shareholder I would be asking why is the airline is happy to pay over 15 billion more fuel costs over the 8 years where there are other options that will reduce both fuel and maintenance costs.


Reduced maintenance cost, reduced crew training costs, unbeaten dispatch reliability, positive customer feedback on flying an American made airplane, higher resale value, probably lower purchase price (economies of scale),...

First, most customers have no clue on what plane they fly.
Second, (at least some of) the A220's would be labelled "Final Assembly of this Aircraft in the USA" (Mobile, AL)...
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20918
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 12:25 pm

AirwayBill wrote:
I can understand the fear of losing yet another all-Boeing Airline though.

And so you can also understand the strange arousal some seem to have about Airbus cracking an all-Boeing account.

Both are silly, IMHO.

I'm going by what the WN CEO is telling us, see #56 above.

Sure, at some point in the future things can change, and yes, eventually 737 will be replaced by something else, so there's hopes to cling to.

Meanwhile, WN doesn't need to replace the 737-7 any time soon, and the A220 production line with its feeble production rate is booked out for years.

There's really nothing to see here.

Yet we'll see more of this strange arousal in a new a.net thread every time a WN employee goes near an A220 for years to come.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
texl1649
Posts: 996
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 12:30 pm

Of some note, the 3-6 minute startup, reliability, performance, support and honest feedback from a non-competitor airline for the GTF might also be something WN could be interested in getting feedback on, seeing as Boeing is heavily competing Pratt/CFM for the NMA/NSA series next. It's not like they'd go to Europe just to see how pretty the plane looks on a stand; they were seeking feedback on various systems I would guess, also probably the Rockwell Collins software/health info (AHMS).

Again, serious interest/consideration as to the maturity and performance of systems on various aircraft would logically make sense for SWA (like any other airline, yes) to analyze. They are no doubt acutely aware that, just as the DC-9 era has ended, the 737 one will in the next decade (for fleet planning/future orders). Oh, and Boeing basically built the NG and MAX around their feedback.

They haven't flown a Pratt engine since the 737-jurassics were retired, of course...
 
AIRT0M
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2018 8:54 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 12:54 pm

AirwayBill wrote:
I smell a lot of panic on this thread.


There has been a lot of panic on a.net lately. And a lot of predictions that turned out to be wrong. After what happened in the last couple months in the world of aviation, the only sure thing is, that nothing is ever for sure.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13025
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:09 pm

Maintenance costs of the older 737-700s will go up, warranties are off. Of 2 possible replacements the costs of one are significant lower & nobody is buying the other. The airline will do what's right. Replacing -700s with high cost, 4 ca 180 seat 737-8s isn't so logical at all if you don't need the capacity. Southwest couldn' take a A220 soon, it requires preparations and production is fully booked for some time.
Last edited by keesje on Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:14 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
william wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Hold on zeke. How dare you introduce hard data in an argument about WN & BCA? Don't you know that WN is bound hands and feet with BCA & the 737? BCA will keep the 737 line open ad vitam aeternam just for WN.

/s of course... Thanks for the insight.


Those numbers are impressive and all but I doubt at SWA Pilot pay rates.

Care to explain what the Pilot Pay Rate has to do with Fuel Saving? Even if the pilots flew for free (which they don't), WN would still save $1.4b in fuel per year according to zeke switching to the A220.


Introduce another type and you introduce another payscale. In case you have not realized it, SWA pilot salaries are not cheap. The same argument could be said of the 717, it was more efficient, but not in SWA overall system.

Or let me put it another way, the same reason EasyJet only flies the A320 family, its more efficient in their overall system.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:17 pm

keesje wrote:
Maintenance costs of the older aircraft will go up, warranties are off. Of 2 possible replacements the costs of one are significant lower & nobody is buying the other. The airline will do what's right. Replacing with highr costs, 4 ca 180 seat 737s isn't so logical.


........But, but, more people are traveling, airports are not growing, so larger planes are required, not smaller ones.....................
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:20 pm

william wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
william wrote:

Those numbers are impressive and all but I doubt at SWA Pilot pay rates.

Care to explain what the Pilot Pay Rate has to do with Fuel Saving? Even if the pilots flew for free (which they don't), WN would still save $1.4b in fuel per year according to zeke switching to the A220.


Introduce another type and you introduce another payscale. In case you have not realized it, SWA pilot salaries are not cheap. The same argument could be said of the 717, it was more efficient, but not in SWA overall system.

Or let me put it another way, the same reason EasyJet only flies the A320 family, its more efficient in their overall system.

There is a great chance if a smaller type is introduced, the pay scale will be lower than that of the 737; which actually goes against your argument.
And that still doesn't discount the fuel saving, which is the only thing zeke was talking about.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:21 pm

william wrote:
keesje wrote:
Maintenance costs of the older aircraft will go up, warranties are off. Of 2 possible replacements the costs of one are significant lower & nobody is buying the other. The airline will do what's right. Replacing with highr costs, 4 ca 180 seat 737s isn't so logical.


........But, but, more people are traveling, airports are not growing, so larger planes are required, not smaller ones.....................

Hold on: you're repeating the argument of the A380, which has been debunked on a.net as being fiction and was somewhat proven to be true.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13025
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:23 pm

william wrote:
keesje wrote:
Maintenance costs of the older aircraft will go up, warranties are off. Of 2 possible replacements the costs of one are significant lower & nobody is buying the other. The airline will do what's right. Replacing with highr costs, 4 ca 180 seat 737s isn't so logical.


........But, but, more people are traveling, airports are not growing, so larger planes are required, not smaller ones.....................


Southwest has 500 737-700 and less -800s for a reason. I'm sure not all 700s will be replaced by same capacity aircraft. Maybe 60-70%? And a A223 is slightly bigger too. Going over 150 seats adds an fa on every flight. What if you need on average 120-130 seats for a route?
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:40 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
william wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Care to explain what the Pilot Pay Rate has to do with Fuel Saving? Even if the pilots flew for free (which they don't), WN would still save $1.4b in fuel per year according to zeke switching to the A220.


Introduce another type and you introduce another payscale. In case you have not realized it, SWA pilot salaries are not cheap. The same argument could be said of the 717, it was more efficient, but not in SWA overall system.

Or let me put it another way, the same reason EasyJet only flies the A320 family, its more efficient in their overall system.

There is a great chance if a smaller type is introduced, the pay scale will be lower than that of the 737; which actually goes against your argument.
And that still doesn't discount the fuel saving, which is the only thing zeke was talking about.


Doubt it when it comes to pay scales, the aircrafts have similar capabilities. I should correct myself, I should have stated adding a different type of aircraft instead of pay (though it would come into play).

In the end, its up to SWA, if they think adding a second type into its ops is worth it or not, even with the fuel savings counted in.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:41 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
william wrote:
keesje wrote:
Maintenance costs of the older aircraft will go up, warranties are off. Of 2 possible replacements the costs of one are significant lower & nobody is buying the other. The airline will do what's right. Replacing with highr costs, 4 ca 180 seat 737s isn't so logical.


........But, but, more people are traveling, airports are not growing, so larger planes are required, not smaller ones.....................

Hold on: you're repeating the argument of the A380, which has been debunked on a.net as being fiction and was somewhat proven to be true.


Ahhh..........someone caught the sarcasm.........
 
planecane
Posts: 1015
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:50 pm

keesje wrote:
Maintenance costs of the older 737-700s will go up, warranties are off. Of 2 possible replacements the costs of one are significant lower & nobody is buying the other. The airline will do what's right. Replacing -700s with high cost, 4 ca 180 seat 737-8s isn't so logical at all if you don't need the capacity. Southwest couldn' take a A220 soon, it requires preparations and production is fully booked for some time.

If it meant keeping WN exclusive, I think Boeing would do something to help offset the maintenance costs.

Like I've said before, I'd be surprised if the Boeing/Embraer JV didn't launch an aircraft in the same size range as the A220 within 3 years. One they do, WN can evaluate it against the A220 and decide which is best since either would be "not a 737." Although, I wouldn't be shocked if the FBW was programmed to make the new plane fly like a 737, even making a similar cockpit layout.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:51 pm

keesje wrote:
william wrote:
keesje wrote:
Maintenance costs of the older aircraft will go up, warranties are off. Of 2 possible replacements the costs of one are significant lower & nobody is buying the other. The airline will do what's right. Replacing with highr costs, 4 ca 180 seat 737s isn't so logical.


........But, but, more people are traveling, airports are not growing, so larger planes are required, not smaller ones.....................


Southwest has 500 737-700 and less -800s for a reason. I'm sure not all 700s will be replaced by same capacity aircraft. Maybe 60-70%? And a A223 is slightly bigger too. Going over 150 seats adds an fa on every flight. What if you need on average 120-130 seats for a route?


Yes, this question has been argued back in forth on Anet for decades. Does SWA need a smaller plane especially on thinner routes? The answer so far is no, but, yes it could change.

The answer to your question is that SWA would schedule the route with multiple stops to fill those seats or not schedule the route at all. The fuel savings of the A220 is real and is impressive vs a 737-700 or A319. But we avgeeks are spec geeks. And as been stated many times, more than specs are taken into account when ordering an expensive asset to be operated for 20 years.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3094
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:53 pm

planecane wrote:
keesje wrote:
Maintenance costs of the older 737-700s will go up, warranties are off. Of 2 possible replacements the costs of one are significant lower & nobody is buying the other. The airline will do what's right. Replacing -700s with high cost, 4 ca 180 seat 737-8s isn't so logical at all if you don't need the capacity. Southwest couldn' take a A220 soon, it requires preparations and production is fully booked for some time.

If it meant keeping WN exclusive, I think Boeing would do something to help offset the maintenance costs.

Like I've said before, I'd be surprised if the Boeing/Embraer JV didn't launch an aircraft in the same size range as the A220 within 3 years. One they do, WN can evaluate it against the A220 and decide which is best since either would be "not a 737." Although, I wouldn't be shocked if the FBW was programmed to make the new plane fly like a 737, even making a similar cockpit layout.


And don't be surprised if said new plane did not have a healthy amount of input from SWA.
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1375
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:01 pm

keesje wrote:
william wrote:
keesje wrote:
Maintenance costs of the older aircraft will go up, warranties are off. Of 2 possible replacements the costs of one are significant lower & nobody is buying the other. The airline will do what's right. Replacing with highr costs, 4 ca 180 seat 737s isn't so logical.


........But, but, more people are traveling, airports are not growing, so larger planes are required, not smaller ones.....................


Southwest has 500 737-700 and less -800s for a reason. I'm sure not all 700s will be replaced by same capacity aircraft. Maybe 60-70%? And a A223 is slightly bigger too. Going over 150 seats adds an fa on every flight. What if you need on average 120-130 seats for a route?

First WN 737-700 delivery - December 17, 1997
First WN 737-800 delivery - March 8, 2012

Maybe WN has more -700s than -800s is that they started buying them over 14 years earlier? Now they are taking bigger planes. If it was such an issue for WN to have a 120-130 for a route, then maybe. But that's not the way they fly their system. They would do a city pair light and follow full on the next pair.
 
Babyshark
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:08 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
There is a great chance if a smaller type is introduced, the pay scale will be lower than that of the 737; which actually goes against your argument.
And that still doesn't discount the fuel saving, which is the only thing zeke was talking about.


Why would the SWA pilots union vote yes to lower pay rates on any new jet? Especially a supposed -7 equivalent?
 
Babyshark
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:12 pm

zeke wrote:

The A220-300 will carry about the same number of passengers as the 737-700, about 5 tonnes lighter empty weight than a MAX 7, and about 1 tonne an hour less fuel than a MAX 7. That works out to be about 2.9-3 million less fuel per airframe per year (around 44 million over the span of 15 years). Boeing could never reduce the MAX 7 purchase price down enough to compete with that.

On a fleet of 500 aircraft, that is a fuel savings of 1.4 billion PER YEAR.I dont care what sort of allegiance any company has to Boeing, 1.4 billion dollars is a serious savings that can be made, which can either be translated to better fares to customers, add previously unprofitable cities to their network, or to significantly improve the bottom line.


Now let’s recalculate the numbers adding the cost of running the pilot side of a separate fleet, not only in initial qual but daily operations and staffing, especially given SWA is the airline who demands no new type rating for 73max for cost efficiencies.
 
Varsity1
Posts: 1907
Joined: Mon May 02, 2016 4:55 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:12 pm

Babyshark wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
There is a great chance if a smaller type is introduced, the pay scale will be lower than that of the 737; which actually goes against your argument.
And that still doesn't discount the fuel saving, which is the only thing zeke was talking about.


Why would the SWA pilots union vote yes to lower pay rates on any new jet? Especially a supposed -7 equivalent?


It's a lighter and smaller airplane. The A220 at Delta tops out at $175 in the right seat, The 737-700 tops out at $194. Southwest would be similar, Pilot's aren't irrational, and this is industry standard.
"PPRuNe will no longer allow discussions regarding Etihad Airlines, its employees, executives, agents, or other representatives. Such threads will be deleted." - ME3 thug airlines suing anyone who brings negative information public..
 
Babyshark
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:14 pm

zeke wrote:

If I was a shareholder I would be asking why is the airline is happy to pay over 15 billion more fuel costs over the 8 years where there are other options that will reduce both fuel and maintenance costs.


If I was a shareholder I would also ask if we go the 220 route, when are they showing up given the 3 or so frame production a month?
 
texl1649
Posts: 996
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 2:29 pm

Great question if they were interested in it, banyshark. Answer would probably be 2028 for any sizeable quantities.
 
wnflyguy
Posts: 1670
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:58 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 3:01 pm

zeke wrote:
planecane wrote:
That's not the sense I would make. My point is that there is no need for a 737-700 replacement in the next 8-10 years.

By the time they actually need a replacement for the -700, there will be more options and the A220 will probably be offered in an NEO version.

This whole thing about WN serving smaller markets goes against their business model. It would make for high cost stations if they can only support 2 or 3 flights a day, even if using the A220 (the most efficient and versatile aircraft ever built).


The A220-300 will carry about the same number of passengers as the 737-700, about 5 tonnes lighter empty weight than a MAX 7, and about 1 tonne an hour less fuel than a MAX 7. That works out to be about 2.9-3 million less fuel per airframe per year (around 44 million over the span of 15 years). Boeing could never reduce the MAX 7 purchase price down enough to compete with that.

On a fleet of 500 aircraft, that is a fuel savings of 1.4 billion PER YEAR.I dont care what sort of allegiance any company has to Boeing, 1.4 billion dollars is a serious savings that can be made, which can either be translated to better fares to customers, add previously unprofitable cities to their network, or to significantly improve the bottom line.


To Add the A220-300 would also have ETOPS. Lower operating cost plus great short field performance could makes it great for Hawaii-West coast.

Never say Never.

Flyguy
my post are my opinion only and not those of southwest airlines and or airtran airlines.
 
many321
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2017 6:15 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 3:17 pm

wnflyguy wrote:

To Add the A220-300 would also have ETOPS. Lower operating cost plus great short field performance could make it great for Hawaii-West coast.

Never say Never.

Flyguy


SNA would be more than happy if this ever came to fruition.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 3:29 pm

Babyshark wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
There is a great chance if a smaller type is introduced, the pay scale will be lower than that of the 737; which actually goes against your argument.
And that still doesn't discount the fuel saving, which is the only thing zeke was talking about.


Why would the SWA pilots union vote yes to lower pay rates on any new jet? Especially a supposed -7 equivalent?

Because it's not a 737-700/-7 equivalent; it's a smaller plane.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13025
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 3:39 pm

Just googled SouthWest A220. This is a hyper sensitive topic. SW even responded to Jon's article, to downplay the event for Boeing.

https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2019/04/25/southwest-airlines-airbus.html

I agree with SouthWest timing is coincidence and it has little do to do with MAX grounding, and probably more with operating / fuel costs.

SW put the breaks on -7 deliveries in 2018, before the crashes.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
catdaddy63
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:27 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 3:52 pm

Looking into the crystal ball, I think NSA will come sooner rather than later and I'd bet B is pretty far along with its definition if not the basic design. An NSA replacement for the 738 will likely be the smallest member of the family and I agree that the WN model can certainly use a sub 150 seat aircraft for much of its network for years to come. An aircraft like the A223 would be a good fit, efficient and modern and it would thrive in the WN environment. Now, anyone expecting the pilots to create another pay scale for the A223 is crazy, no way would WN pilots allow it. While we could see WN place a 200+200 order, this may be the push that B needs to get NSA (and NMA for that matter) launched and into full-scale development. I have a theory that the delay of NMA to next year will allow the business case to grow, having NSA as part of the package may be necessary to the financial risk of the program.
 
User avatar
NeBaNi
Posts: 444
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 10:45 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:05 pm

Revelation wrote:
AirwayBill wrote:
I can understand the fear of losing yet another all-Boeing Airline though.

And so you can also understand the strange arousal some seem to have about Airbus cracking an all-Boeing account.

Both are silly, IMHO.

I'm going by what the WN CEO is telling us, see #56 above.

Sure, at some point in the future things can change, and yes, eventually 737 will be replaced by something else, so there's hopes to cling to.

Meanwhile, WN doesn't need to replace the 737-7 any time soon, and the A220 production line with its feeble production rate is booked out for years.

There's really nothing to see here.

Yet we'll see more of this strange arousal in a new a.net thread every time a WN employee goes near an A220 for years to come.

"Strange arousal" sounds pretty judgy. In a site of AvGeeks, you bet we're excited about potentially seeing a new airliner/livery combo. What's strange to me is the usage of the words "strange arousal" that seems picked out to shame people discussing their interests here.

And as for "nothing to see here", the fact that a WN team visited a European A220 operator shows there's something to see here. Air Asia has had painted models of the C-Series IIRC, and it was just as fun speculating about a potential order then as it is now. I see nothing wrong with speculation like that, especially when there is a lead to go off of that is more substantial than pilot rumors. You say nothing to see here, I say, clearly there is something to see.
 
wrongwayup
Posts: 366
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:31 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
Babyshark wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
There is a great chance if a smaller type is introduced, the pay scale will be lower than that of the 737; which actually goes against your argument.
And that still doesn't discount the fuel saving, which is the only thing zeke was talking about.


Why would the SWA pilots union vote yes to lower pay rates on any new jet? Especially a supposed -7 equivalent?

Because it's not a 737-700/-7 equivalent; it's a smaller plane.


Smaller in what way? A220-300 carries more passengers further than a 737-700. That it does so with a lower wingspan, shorter tail, lower engine thrust and lower design weights is a metric of efficiency, not "size".
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8505
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: WN looking at A220

Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:43 pm

Bricktop wrote:
keesje wrote:
william wrote:

........But, but, more people are traveling, airports are not growing, so larger planes are required, not smaller ones.....................


Southwest has 500 737-700 and less -800s for a reason. I'm sure not all 700s will be replaced by same capacity aircraft. Maybe 60-70%? And a A223 is slightly bigger too. Going over 150 seats adds an fa on every flight. What if you need on average 120-130 seats for a route?

First WN 737-700 delivery - December 17, 1997
First WN 737-800 delivery - March 8, 2012

Maybe WN has more -700s than -800s is that they started buying them over 14 years earlier? Now they are taking bigger planes. If it was such an issue for WN to have a 120-130 for a route, then maybe. But that's not the way they fly their system. They would do a city pair light and follow full on the next pair.


Even if you use a very conservative annual traffic growth of 1,5% and based on 143 seats SW used and a conservative 80% load factor, you need something bigger after 15 years
as 115 pax become 143 pax after 15 years, so logically for the next 15 years you want a bigger plane.

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