Per their newest SEC filing, AS will reactivate two Q400s that were previously stored due to the MAX Delays. They will rejoin the fleet later this year.

Covered on page 37.
http://investor.alaskaair.com/static-fi ... f816d03cef

Thats a separate line item (b) has nothing to do with the max. And looks like they bring 2 back. But return 3. For a net loss of 1 by end 2020...

amcnd wrote:

Thats a separate line item (b) has nothing to do with the max. And looks like they bring 2 back. But return 3. For a net loss of 1 by end 2020...

It may or may not be MAX related but the question is really is net -1 where they planned to be before the MAX grounding. That’s the issue. Being net -1 doesn’t mean anything in terms of what changed.

AS will only take 1 MAX 9 this year, deferring two deliveries to 2020. This puts expected MAX 9 deliveries for 2020 to 9 frames.

enilria wrote:

amcnd wrote:

Thats a separate line item (b) has nothing to do with the max. And looks like they bring 2 back. But return 3. For a net loss of 1 by end 2020...

It may or may not be MAX related but the question is really is net -1 where they planned to be before the MAX grounding. That’s the issue. Being net -1 doesn’t mean anything in terms of what changed.

Prior to the MAX Grounding, they planned to be net -3 this year. Two of those three that were pulled out are coming back.

Love that PA. Your aircraft has been downgraded from a 737 Max to a Q400.... all those with middle seats rejoice. You get a isle or window. Oh and we need 100 volunteers.. were over sold.. (ok i know thats not how it works. But funny huuu...)

amcnd wrote:

Love that PA. Your aircraft has been downgraded from a 737 Max to a Q400.... all those with middle seats rejoice. You get a isle or window. Oh and we need 100 volunteers.. were over sold.. (ok i know thats not how it works. But funny huuu...)

And DOT regs don't require us to pay IDB compensation because there's a loophole for substitution of smaller aircraft...

Change of carrier (as from AS to QX) allows passengers to take a refund, however.

amcnd wrote:

Love that PA. Your aircraft has been downgraded from a 737 Max to a Q400.... all those with middle seats rejoice. You get a isle or window. Oh and we need 100 volunteers.. were over sold.. (ok i know thats not how it works. But funny huuu...)

In fairness to the Q400, I flew on one from BOS-YHZ on AC last year and I was amazed at how quiet of an aircraft it was. The only odd thing was that the propeller noise kept "fading" in and out. I mean, it wasn't noisy, but it was noticeable. Overall, a very quiet and comfortable ride. I think AS customers might appreciate the quietness of the Q400; it's far quieter than all the 737s I've been on!

Too bad they cant hold on to pilots long enough to fly those Qs. The only thing that could be worse here is adding more E170s

Interesting. I thought the plan in the PacNW was to further remove the Q400's from competitive routes where DL is flying a 3-cabin jet.

n7371f wrote:

Interesting. I thought the plan in the PacNW was to further remove the Q400's from competitive routes where DL is flying a 3-cabin jet.

I’m assuming they’re putting them back on the short intra-NW routes that have gotten mainline service (i.e. SEA-PDX/GEG) so they can backfill planned MAX capacity that was put into the schedule with those mainline planes making short hops.

n7371f wrote:

Interesting. I thought the plan in the PacNW was to further remove the Q400's from competitive routes where DL is flying a 3-cabin jet.

The MAX has caused alot of issues for airlines. Airlines are desperate to get any type of capacity back they can. Airlines have to keep everything open at this point. Throw planning out the window at this point. No one on Earth knows when the MAX will fly again, if ever, airlines have to keep all options on the table. We saw United purchase 737-700s, AA is delaying the retirement of 757s to re coop some of that max lost capacity. They have to prepare for the worst they don't want to be stuck leasing planes like Norweigan. Again we have no end date, smart move to get some easy capacity back with a familiar plane easy to get back online.

slcdeltarumd11 wrote:

No one on Earth knows when the MAX will fly again, if ever,

Seriously? You don't think that's just a bit over the top?

Boeing, worth 3% of our GDP, can't afford not to get the MAX flying.

MIflyer12 wrote:

amcnd wrote:

Love that PA. Your aircraft has been downgraded from a 737 Max to a Q400.... all those with middle seats rejoice. You get a isle or window. Oh and we need 100 volunteers.. were over sold.. (ok i know thats not how it works. But funny huuu...)

And DOT regs don't require us to pay IDB compensation because there's a loophole for substitution of smaller aircraft...

Change of carrier (as from AS to QX) allows passengers to take a refund, however.

Drama much? AS will have this planned well in advance, and its likely not to be a 1 for 1 switch.

Anyone know which exact frames are being brought back?

alasizon wrote:

enilria wrote:

amcnd wrote:

Thats a separate line item (b) has nothing to do with the max. And looks like they bring 2 back. But return 3. For a net loss of 1 by end 2020...

It may or may not be MAX related but the question is really is net -1 where they planned to be before the MAX grounding. That’s the issue. Being net -1 doesn’t mean anything in terms of what changed.

Prior to the MAX Grounding, they planned to be net -3 this year. Two of those three that were pulled out are coming back.

If that's true your title is accurate. I would expect them to do something like this. Now if somebody can explain what is going on with the WN/UA 73Gs!

enilria wrote:

Now if somebody can explain what is going on with the WN/UA 73Gs!

What's there to explain that isn't already covered in the UA fleet thread?

hOMSaR wrote:

enilria wrote:

Now if somebody can explain what is going on with the WN/UA 73Gs!

What's there to explain that isn't already covered in the UA fleet thread?

So quickly...WN planned to get rid of them, but had a change of heart thanks to the MAX, but UA beat them to it? The articles said that UA would take the planes to fill in for the MAX, but the timing for that doesn't really work unless the grounding goes basically to 2021. WN should be dropping tons of flying if that's what happened. I don't really see much above what they already were cutting for the MAX grounding.

enilria wrote:

hOMSaR wrote:

enilria wrote:

Now if somebody can explain what is going on with the WN/UA 73Gs!

What's there to explain that isn't already covered in the UA fleet thread?

So quickly...WN planned to get rid of them, but had a change of heart thanks to the MAX, but UA beat them to it? The articles said that UA would take the planes to fill in for the MAX, but the timing for that doesn't really work unless the grounding goes basically to 2021. WN should be dropping tons of flying if that's what happened. I don't really see much above what they already were cutting for the MAX grounding.

"The articles" were wrong if they said this, because as UA themselves said, this acquisition was in the works long before the grounding.

hOMSaR wrote:

enilria wrote:

hOMSaR wrote:

What's there to explain that isn't already covered in the UA fleet thread?

So quickly...WN planned to get rid of them, but had a change of heart thanks to the MAX, but UA beat them to it? The articles said that UA would take the planes to fill in for the MAX, but the timing for that doesn't really work unless the grounding goes basically to 2021. WN should be dropping tons of flying if that's what happened. I don't really see much above what they already were cutting for the MAX grounding.

"The articles" were wrong if they said this, because as UA themselves said, this acquisition was in the works long before the grounding.

All the MSM reported it that way. I don't ever trust them, so I don't doubt you are correct. Just confused me to see it reported that way.
United Airlines is getting creative in its plans to maintain capacity as the grounding of the Boeing 737 Max enters its fifth month.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/17/business ... index.html
United did not break out how the grounding, now in its fifth month, affected its bottom line but said it signed an agreement to buy 19 used Boeing 737-700 planes, older jets that it can use to meet growing demand.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/16/united-airlines-earnings-q2-2019-top-estimates.html

enilria wrote:

hOMSaR wrote:

enilria wrote:

So quickly...WN planned to get rid of them, but had a change of heart thanks to the MAX, but UA beat them to it? The articles said that UA would take the planes to fill in for the MAX, but the timing for that doesn't really work unless the grounding goes basically to 2021. WN should be dropping tons of flying if that's what happened. I don't really see much above what they already were cutting for the MAX grounding.

"The articles" were wrong if they said this, because as UA themselves said, this acquisition was in the works long before the grounding.

All the MSM reported it that way. I don't ever trust them, so I don't doubt you are correct. Just confused me to see it reported that way.
United Airlines is getting creative in its plans to maintain capacity as the grounding of the Boeing 737 Max enters its fifth month.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/17/business ... index.html
United did not break out how the grounding, now in its fifth month, affected its bottom line but said it signed an agreement to buy 19 used Boeing 737-700 planes, older jets that it can use to meet growing demand.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/16/united-airlines-earnings-q2-2019-top-estimates.html

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1411803&start=1750#p21555613

Also https://thepointsguy.com/news/united-or ... -737-700s/

But none of this has anything to do with AS, Q400s, or the MAX.

WN is returning the sub-fleet acquired from AirTran that was leased from GECAS (there is also a sub-fleet from FL that is owned and those stay). These are all going to UA. The returns are spaced out over 12 months+ from industry speculation. Should the MAX continue to be grounded well into 2020, then I don't know what WN does.

And as for what UA is doing with all of these -700 and -319 used acquisitions, it's a much cheaper way of acquiring close-to-100-seat-lift than buying new A220's. Delta got the deal of a lifetime on those. Plus availability is stretched out vs taking in the used a/c.

enilria wrote:

hOMSaR wrote:

enilria wrote:

Now if somebody can explain what is going on with the WN/UA 73Gs!

What's there to explain that isn't already covered in the UA fleet thread?

So quickly...WN planned to get rid of them, but had a change of heart thanks to the MAX, but UA beat them to it? The articles said that UA would take the planes to fill in for the MAX, but the timing for that doesn't really work unless the grounding goes basically to 2021. WN should be dropping tons of flying if that's what happened. I don't really see much above what they already were cutting for the MAX grounding.

n7371f wrote:

WN is returning the sub-fleet acquired from AirTran that was leased from GECAS (there is also a sub-fleet from FL that is owned and those stay). These are all going to UA. The returns are spaced out over 12 months+ from industry speculation. Should the MAX continue to be grounded well into 2020, then I don't know what WN does.

And as for what UA is doing with all of these -700 and -319 used acquisitions, it's a much cheaper way of acquiring close-to-100-seat-lift than buying new A220's. Delta got the deal of a lifetime on those. Plus availability is stretched out vs taking in the used a/c.

enilria wrote:

hOMSaR wrote:

What's there to explain that isn't already covered in the UA fleet thread?

So quickly...WN planned to get rid of them, but had a change of heart thanks to the MAX, but UA beat them to it? The articles said that UA would take the planes to fill in for the MAX, but the timing for that doesn't really work unless the grounding goes basically to 2021. WN should be dropping tons of flying if that's what happened. I don't really see much above what they already were cutting for the MAX grounding.

This is a way out there question and meant for a lawyer but does WN have any standing that losing those birds can effect interstate commerce based on the MAX grounding if it we’re to continue? Essentially WN can argue to a court that losing those planes will inadvertently effect its ability to support interstate commerce under the current situation and have a court force GECAS to allow the planes to stay at WN until the grounding is over. UA will theoretically be expanding its offerings under the current situation which may or may not support interstate commerce depending on how they plan to deploy the aircraft. Since both carriers are effected by the grounding I think WN will have a chance to prove it is more negatively effected by the grounding by losing the birds to UA than UA is by picking up the planes and operating its current route structure with the planes.

OKCDCA wrote:

n7371f wrote:

WN is returning the sub-fleet acquired from AirTran that was leased from GECAS (there is also a sub-fleet from FL that is owned and those stay). These are all going to UA. The returns are spaced out over 12 months+ from industry speculation. Should the MAX continue to be grounded well into 2020, then I don't know what WN does.

And as for what UA is doing with all of these -700 and -319 used acquisitions, it's a much cheaper way of acquiring close-to-100-seat-lift than buying new A220's. Delta got the deal of a lifetime on those. Plus availability is stretched out vs taking in the used a/c.

enilria wrote:

So quickly...WN planned to get rid of them, but had a change of heart thanks to the MAX, but UA beat them to it? The articles said that UA would take the planes to fill in for the MAX, but the timing for that doesn't really work unless the grounding goes basically to 2021. WN should be dropping tons of flying if that's what happened. I don't really see much above what they already were cutting for the MAX grounding.

This is a way out there question and meant for a lawyer but does WN have any standing that losing those birds can effect interstate commerce based on the MAX grounding if it we’re to continue? Essentially WN can argue to a court that losing those planes will inadvertently effect its ability to support interstate commerce under the current situation and have a court force GECAS to allow the planes to stay at WN until the grounding is over. UA will theoretically be expanding its offerings under the current situation which may or may not support interstate commerce depending on how they plan to deploy the aircraft. Since both carriers are effected by the grounding I think WN will have a chance to prove it is more negatively effected by the grounding by losing the birds to UA than UA is by picking up the planes and operating its current route structure with the planes.

IANAL, but I’m guessing this all comes down to contract language, which won’t be available to us. AFAIK these sorts of contracts have notice deadlines where the lessee has to notify the lessor of their intention to extend or terminate the lease. Given that the airline industry is deregulated in the US, I doubt a court would look beyond the contract. If WN did choose to sue, I’d expect part of the defense would be that WN has access to 737-300s that are parked in the desert, if they wanted to fly them they could (but they’d have to toss a huge amount of money to the pilots to make it happen.)

OKCDCA wrote:

Essentially WN can argue to a court that losing those planes will inadvertently effect its ability to support interstate commerce under the current situation and have a court force GECAS to allow the planes to stay at WN until the grounding is over.

I'm not a lawyer but I know of no such provision in the law. Congress can regulate interstate commerce but general effects to interstate commerce aren't reasons for voiding contracts between two private parties.

USAirKid wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

amcnd wrote:

Love that PA. Your aircraft has been downgraded from a 737 Max to a Q400.... all those with middle seats rejoice. You get a isle or window. Oh and we need 100 volunteers.. were over sold.. (ok i know thats not how it works. But funny huuu...)

And DOT regs don't require us to pay IDB compensation because there's a loophole for substitution of smaller aircraft...

Change of carrier (as from AS to QX) allows passengers to take a refund, however.

Drama much? AS will have this planned well in advance, and its likely not to be a 1 for 1 switch.

Change of carrier gives passengers a right to refund to original form of payment, per DOT guidance letters. Some passengers may not want a prop. Some may use the flexibility to avoid change fees for a change of plan for any other reason.

Iloveboeing wrote:

In fairness to the Q400, I flew on one from BOS-YHZ on AC last year and I was amazed at how quiet of an aircraft it was. The only odd thing was that the propeller noise kept "fading" in and out. I mean, it wasn't noisy, but it was noticeable. Overall, a very quiet and comfortable ride. I think AS customers might appreciate the quietness of the Q400; it's far quieter than all the 737s I've been on!

Actually, if the flight is under 1.5 hours in the Q400, I'd take that over the latest 737s AS has. I find the seats to be more comfortable and have a better head rest, and the smaller overhead bins force people to actually check bags as they should, thereby making boarding/deplaning faster.

For me, if it's 1.5 hours or less, Q400 is great. If it's 2.5 hours or less, E175. And if it's over 3 hours, upgrade or fly on the AS A320s (or HA to Hawaii - 6-7 hours in a 737 is too long!). Or maybe just stay out of the back of the latest AS 737 cabin altogether.

Only advantage in the Q vs 737 is the time it takes to get off the aircraft... worst is the last row of a 737. At least :15 mins to get off Q 3 mins

USAirKid wrote:

OKCDCA wrote:

n7371f wrote:

WN is returning the sub-fleet acquired from AirTran that was leased from GECAS (there is also a sub-fleet from FL that is owned and those stay). These are all going to UA. The returns are spaced out over 12 months+ from industry speculation. Should the MAX continue to be grounded well into 2020, then I don't know what WN does.

And as for what UA is doing with all of these -700 and -319 used acquisitions, it's a much cheaper way of acquiring close-to-100-seat-lift than buying new A220's. Delta got the deal of a lifetime on those. Plus availability is stretched out vs taking in the used a/c.

This is a way out there question and meant for a lawyer but does WN have any standing that losing those birds can effect interstate commerce based on the MAX grounding if it we’re to continue? Essentially WN can argue to a court that losing those planes will inadvertently effect its ability to support interstate commerce under the current situation and have a court force GECAS to allow the planes to stay at WN until the grounding is over. UA will theoretically be expanding its offerings under the current situation which may or may not support interstate commerce depending on how they plan to deploy the aircraft. Since both carriers are effected by the grounding I think WN will have a chance to prove it is more negatively effected by the grounding by losing the birds to UA than UA is by picking up the planes and operating its current route structure with the planes.

IANAL, but I’m guessing this all comes down to contract language, which won’t be available to us. AFAIK these sorts of contracts have notice deadlines where the lessee has to notify the lessor of their intention to extend or terminate the lease. Given that the airline industry is deregulated in the US, I doubt a court would look beyond the contract. If WN did choose to sue, I’d expect part of the defense would be that WN has access to 737-300s that are parked in the desert, if they wanted to fly them they could (but they’d have to toss a huge amount of money to the pilots to make it happen.)

So it would seem that the only party WN might "choose to sue" would be WN itself for choosing to return the off-lease assets to the lessor.

amcnd wrote:

Only advantage in the Q vs 737 is the time it takes to get off the aircraft... worst is the last row of a 737. At least :15 mins to get off Q 3 mins

Depends on the station. Going into BUR or SMF; last row is quicker than the front half the time (particularly in SMF where they use a jetway up front and stairs in back)

iAmAlaska49 wrote:

Anyone know which exact frames are being brought back?

N6666QX