"Southwest Airlines’ top airports by the numbers"
https://www.anna.aero/2020/01/27/southwest-airlines-top-airports-by-the-numbers/

There was an article titled "How Huntsville’s airport is flirting with Southwest Airlines", which can be found at https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/2020/01/how-huntsvilles-airport-is-flirting-with-southwest-airlines.html which said that HSV wanted WN to add service to HSV, even though WN had stated that it had no current plans to add service to HSV.

jplatts wrote:

There was an article titled "How Huntsville’s airport is flirting with Southwest Airlines", which can be found at https://www.al.com/news/huntsville/2020/01/how-huntsvilles-airport-is-flirting-with-southwest-airlines.html which said that HSV wanted WN to add service to HSV, even though WN had stated that it had no current plans to add service to HSV.

I know AirTran served HSV, but not sure if it’ll actually happen with WN metal again.

Schedule extension delayed from Feb 13 to March 12th now.

SteveXC500 wrote:

Schedule extension delayed from Feb 13 to March 12th now.

Well with Boeing saying the MAX will require Sim training and the FAA saying should be ungrounded by mid year. WN probably has to rethink and release a schedule without all the MAX8 in it. Have a more conservative slow approach to additional flying for August-October. I wouldn't be surprised to see MAX flying fenced in to one Base like MDW or something until other bases get trained.


Flyguy

wnflyguy wrote:

SteveXC500 wrote:

Schedule extension delayed from Feb 13 to March 12th now.

Well with Boeing saying the MAX will require Sim training and the FAA saying should be ungrounded by mid year. WN probably has to rethink and release a schedule without all the MAX8 in it. Have a more conservative slow approach to additional flying for August-October. I wouldn't be surprised to see MAX flying fenced in to one Base like MDW or something until other bases get trained.


Flyguy

So, ungrounded by mid-year, but the schedule is already open through early August. Are you stating they would not be flying within the next extension, which is set to go through Oct 31?

SteveXC500 wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

SteveXC500 wrote:

Schedule extension delayed from Feb 13 to March 12th now.

Well with Boeing saying the MAX will require Sim training and the FAA saying should be ungrounded by mid year. WN probably has to rethink and release a schedule without all the MAX8 in it. Have a more conservative slow approach to additional flying for August-October. I wouldn't be surprised to see MAX flying fenced in to one Base like MDW or something until other bases get trained.


Flyguy

So, ungrounded by mid-year, but the schedule is already open through early August. Are you stating they would not be flying within the next extension, which is set to go through Oct 31?

The WN pilots have already said Sim training would take about 3 months to get everyone retrained on the MAX. So that means WN would have to take a much slower reintroduction of the MAX8 then they originally planned. They already had 73 MAX in the Schedule of June-Aug 2020. If Pilots are going to all require SIM training there's no way WN going to have the Available Staff to cover the flying that quick. WN I think has been hoping the MAX training would be a simple Home computer review since it logged so many hours already in the MAX.

Flyguy

WN had also said in last week's earnings call that it is already planning on making some adjustments to its Summer 2020 flight schedule due to delays in getting 737 MAX planes back in service, even if the 737 MAX gets approved for return to service by the end of Summer 2020.

wnflyguy wrote:

SteveXC500 wrote:

Schedule extension delayed from Feb 13 to March 12th now.

Well with Boeing saying the MAX will require Sim training and the FAA saying should be ungrounded by mid year. WN probably has to rethink and release a schedule without all the MAX8 in it. Have a more conservative slow approach to additional flying for August-October. I wouldn't be surprised to see MAX flying fenced in to one Base like MDW or something until other bases get trained.


Flyguy

They pushed the schedule extension back before most of that came to light IIRC, below is from page 1 of this thread

jplatts wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

MAX cuts have been extended

I have previously mentioned that WN might be able to pick up some used 737-700's from SK and KL as WN is not likely to be back to normal anytime soon, even if the 737 MAX is back in service by the end of this year.

WN acquiring used 737-700's from DL might also be a possibility if DL plans on getting rid of its 737-700's once it takes delivery of some A220-300 planes.

WN has also now delayed the schedule extension that was originally scheduled for February 11, 2020 to March 12, 2020.

Is anyone keeping tabs on the status of split-scimitar installation to Southwest's fleet? I know that most of the 737-800 aircraft now have them, with at most 7 frames still to go. N8619F probably has them; I just have not had visual confirmation of that fact either in person or via photograph. That leaves only N8620H, N8621A, N8638A, N8648A, N8649A, & N8650F remaining without the mod.

As to their 737-700 fleet, I have tried to keep track, but the sheer number of frames has made the task challenging. I will compile the numbers that I have, along with certain observations regarding which aircraft seem likely to get the installation in another post to this thread in the next day or so.

wnflyguy wrote:

SteveXC500 wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

Well with Boeing saying the MAX will require Sim training and the FAA saying should be ungrounded by mid year. WN probably has to rethink and release a schedule without all the MAX8 in it. Have a more conservative slow approach to additional flying for August-October. I wouldn't be surprised to see MAX flying fenced in to one Base like MDW or something until other bases get trained.


Flyguy

So, ungrounded by mid-year, but the schedule is already open through early August. Are you stating they would not be flying within the next extension, which is set to go through Oct 31?

The WN pilots have already said Sim training would take about 3 months to get everyone retrained on the MAX. So that means WN would have to take a much slower reintroduction of the MAX8 then they originally planned. They already had 73 MAX in the Schedule of June-Aug 2020. If Pilots are going to all require SIM training there's no way WN going to have the Available Staff to cover the flying that quick. WN I think has been hoping the MAX training would be a simple Home computer review since it logged so many hours already in the MAX.

Flyguy

The likely scenario won't require everyone to see sim training before re-introduction. Think of a phased in approach where the local pilots in DAL get the training and sequester the MAX to DAL. Then Hou, then PHX and so on. Very much like the -200 draw-down, but in reverse. It will take an equal amount of time to get the aircraft spooled up from storage, so aircraft are brought back to life at roughly the same rate as pilots getting trained.

barney captain wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

SteveXC500 wrote:

So, ungrounded by mid-year, but the schedule is already open through early August. Are you stating they would not be flying within the next extension, which is set to go through Oct 31?

The WN pilots have already said Sim training would take about 3 months to get everyone retrained on the MAX. So that means WN would have to take a much slower reintroduction of the MAX8 then they originally planned. They already had 73 MAX in the Schedule of June-Aug 2020. If Pilots are going to all require SIM training there's no way WN going to have the Available Staff to cover the flying that quick. WN I think has been hoping the MAX training would be a simple Home computer review since it logged so many hours already in the MAX.

Flyguy

The likely scenario won't require everyone to see sim training before re-introduction. Think of a phased in approach where the local pilots in DAL get the training and sequester the MAX to DAL. Then Hou, then PHX and so on. Very much like the -200 draw-down, but in reverse. It will take an equal amount of time to get the aircraft spooled up from storage, so aircraft are brought back to life at roughly the same rate as pilots getting trained.

While I agree, the network has evolved a lot since the -200 drawdown, and fencing will present some scheduling challenges. The easiest place to fence may actually be BWI because of the number of out and back flights to smaller stations in the northeast. A gradual “unfencing” there could then add ATL and Florida and keep the aircraft flying north-south on the east coast.

I agree with Barney. We’re hearing a phased introduction of the MAX with the Domiciles he just stated being trained first. DAL, HOU, and DEN is what I’m hearing. WN will also have 9 MAX Simulators up and running for training before June as well.

Cubsrule wrote:

barney captain wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

The WN pilots have already said Sim training would take about 3 months to get everyone retrained on the MAX. So that means WN would have to take a much slower reintroduction of the MAX8 then they originally planned. They already had 73 MAX in the Schedule of June-Aug 2020. If Pilots are going to all require SIM training there's no way WN going to have the Available Staff to cover the flying that quick. WN I think has been hoping the MAX training would be a simple Home computer review since it logged so many hours already in the MAX.

Flyguy

The likely scenario won't require everyone to see sim training before re-introduction. Think of a phased in approach where the local pilots in DAL get the training and sequester the MAX to DAL. Then Hou, then PHX and so on. Very much like the -200 draw-down, but in reverse. It will take an equal amount of time to get the aircraft spooled up from storage, so aircraft are brought back to life at roughly the same rate as pilots getting trained.

While I agree, the network has evolved a lot since the -200 drawdown, and fencing will present some scheduling challenges. The easiest place to fence may actually be BWI because of the number of out and back flights to smaller stations in the northeast. A gradual “unfencing” there could then add ATL and Florida and keep the aircraft flying north-south on the east coast.

Except we currently do fencing for Intl and ETOPS - I don't see it being an issue. The reason I think DAL followed by HOU is simply logistics. Those pilots can be trained in a one day footprint, as opposed to requiring an overnight with a travel day for those farther away from DAL. I also suspect you'll see Check Airman being the only one's doing the flying initially.

barney captain wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

barney captain wrote:

The likely scenario won't require everyone to see sim training before re-introduction. Think of a phased in approach where the local pilots in DAL get the training and sequester the MAX to DAL. Then Hou, then PHX and so on. Very much like the -200 draw-down, but in reverse. It will take an equal amount of time to get the aircraft spooled up from storage, so aircraft are brought back to life at roughly the same rate as pilots getting trained.

While I agree, the network has evolved a lot since the -200 drawdown, and fencing will present some scheduling challenges. The easiest place to fence may actually be BWI because of the number of out and back flights to smaller stations in the northeast. A gradual “unfencing” there could then add ATL and Florida and keep the aircraft flying north-south on the east coast.

Except we currently do fencing for Intl and ETOPS - I don't see it being an issue. The reason I think DAL followed by HOU is simply logistics. Those pilots can be trained in a one day footprint, as opposed to requiring an overnight with a travel day for those farther away from DAL. I also suspect you'll see Check Airman being the only one's doing the flying initially.

The difficulty with the comparison to Intl and ETOPS is that those are by and large defined trips; out and back for Intl and the pretty well-defined three-day Hawaii trip. With aircraft that will need to be on short domestic flights at least at first, it’s trickier.

But you’re right that the Texas bases have training advantages if they can make the scheduling work.

I was able to visually confirm split scimitars on N8619F today, so that leaves the six 737-800 frames I mentioned in my post yesterday still lacking them.

Here is what I have for the 737-700 fleet fitted with splits:

N223WN, N232WN, N251WN - N256WN, N258WN, N260WN, N262WN, N264LV - N269WN. N272WN - N285WN, N287WN - N293WN, N295WN - N299WN

N555LV, N556WN

N900WN. N902WN, N904WN, N906WN - N909WN, N912WN - N915WN, N959WN - N969WN

N7732A - N7734H, N7737E - N7742B, N7744A - N7748A, N7751A

N7855A, N7857B, N7858A, N7860A - N7862A, N7868K, N7869A, N7886A - N7889A

Total of 94 aircraft.

Among those airframes originally delivered to Southwest, it appears that any aircraft from line number 2000 onward is a likely candidate for split-scimitar installation, and a similar situation for the 737-7BD fleet from the AirTran merger. Among the other second-hand aircraft, those which were originally manufactured for China Eastern (737-79P) and AeroMexico (737-752) seem to be favored, but not exclusively.

Also, I have not been able to determine which location is used to refit these planes. The 737-800 fleet has been done mostly at KPAE (for those modified before service entry) and KIND. With the 737-700 aircraft, it seems a bit of a crapshoot.

If WN wants to expand into Canada, WN adding BWI-YUL nonstop service is a possibility since
(a) UA and AC are currently the only airlines serving YUL nonstop from the BWI/DCA/IAD market,
(b) WN would have significant connecting feed on the U.S. end in addition to O&D to support BWI-YUL nonstop service,
(c) AC is currently the only Canadian airline serving BWI, DCA, and IAD,
(d) YUL is far enough from Northeastern U.S. airports with WN service to support WN service to YUL, and
(e) WN might be able to make BWI-YUL nonstop service work with mostly U.S. point-of-sale traffic due to significant connecting feed from other U.S. cities and due to WN's large presence in the Baltimore/DC market.

WN adding YYC-DEN, YYC-LAS, and YYC-OAK nonstop service might also be a possibility with YYC being located more than 400 miles from the closest airport with WN service. Unlike YUL-WAS, which is only currently served nonstop by AC and UA, there is some competition from other airlines on YYC-DEN/LAS/SFO, including (a) nonstop service to DEN and LAS from YYC on WS, (b) nonstop service to DEN from YYC on F9, and (c) seasonal nonstop service to SFO from YYC on WS.

While WS already serves the DEN, LAS, and SFO/OAK/SJC markets nonstop from YYC on at least a seasonal basis, WN has stronger point-of-sale than WS does on the U.S. side to support nonstop service to YYC from DEN, LAS, and OAK. WN would also have some connecting feed to YYC from some U.S. cities not served by WS if it adds service to YYC.

justplanesmart wrote:

I was able to visually confirm split scimitars on N8619F today, so that leaves the six 737-800 frames I mentioned in my post yesterday still lacking them.

Here is what I have for the 737-700 fleet fitted with splits:

N223WN, N232WN, N251WN - N256WN, N258WN, N260WN, N262WN, N264LV - N269WN. N272WN - N285WN, N287WN - N293WN, N295WN - N299WN

N555LV, N556WN

N900WN. N902WN, N904WN, N906WN - N909WN, N912WN - N915WN, N959WN - N969WN

N7732A - N7734H, N7737E - N7742B, N7744A - N7748A, N7751A

N7855A, N7857B, N7858A, N7860A - N7862A, N7868K, N7869A, N7886A - N7889A

Total of 94 aircraft.

Among those airframes originally delivered to Southwest, it appears that any aircraft from line number 2000 onward is a likely candidate for split-scimitar installation, and a similar situation for the 737-7BD fleet from the AirTran merger. Among the other second-hand aircraft, those which were originally manufactured for China Eastern (737-79P) and AeroMexico (737-752) seem to be favored, but not exclusively.

Also, I have not been able to determine which location is used to refit these planes. The 737-800 fleet has been done mostly at KPAE (for those modified before service entry) and KIND. With the 737-700 aircraft, it seems a bit of a crapshoot.

Do you happen to know how much of their fleet is still in the old livery?

whywhytee wrote:

Do you happen to know how much of their fleet is still in the old livery?

26.45% of the fleet (197 aircraft)

MAX moved back to August. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boei ... SKBN2071JT

Jshank83 wrote:

MAX moved back to August. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boei ... SKBN2071JT

I just read that. That is not good. If there is one airline that is definitely communicating daily with Boeing, it's WN. That will be 16+ months out of service.

WN had to drop the only 737s for is nonsense
They have now been dead in the water for over a year cutting flights while most airports are seeing increase usage. Ditch the MAX7s on paper and order up some A223s already.

Looks like WN axed some weekday flights in response to the MAX grounding. I'm not sure what else, but I've been personally affected by the removal of nonstop MSY-OAK flights (those are still continuing on weekends though.)

WN had 78.52% load factors on GSP-BWI nonstop service in November 2019, and WN carried more passengers out of GSP than out of CRP, PNS, DSM, or RIC in November 2019.

Here are the number of passengers that WN carried out of its smallest U.S. stations in November 2019:
LIH - 10975
CRP - 16225
PNS - 20801
DSM - 21574
RIC - 22083
GSP - 22100
PWM - 24671
KOA - 25304
ECP - 26032
ICP - 26653
AMA - 27188
GRR - 31455
IAD - 32039
ROC - 35746

WaywardMemphian wrote:

WN had to drop the only 737s for is nonsense
They have now been dead in the water for over a year cutting flights while most airports are seeing increase usage. Ditch the MAX7s on paper and order up some A223s already.

It isn't like buying a Corolla.

By the time they are ordered, built, delivered and trained for, the MAX will long since have been back in service.

FiscAutTecGarte wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

MAX moved back to August. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boei ... SKBN2071JT

I just read that. That is not good. If there is one airline that is definitely communicating daily with Boeing, it's WN. That will be 16+ months out of service.

WN had said in its January 2020 earnings call that it was going to make some cuts to its Summer 2020 flight schedule, even if the 737 MAX fixes get approved by the FAA prior to Summer 2020.

WN needs to make some defensive moves against possible adds by Breeze (who has plans to serve some markets that already have WN service) and Allegiant (who has announced plans to serve MDW and HOU, which are two of WN's largest focus cities).

Destinations in markets with WN service that Breeze is considering serving include (sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeze_Airways, https://www.smartertravel.com/finally-a-new-low-cost-us-airline/, and https://www.cntraveler.com/story/all-of-the-details-we-have-on-david-neelemans-new-domestic-airline):
AUS
BOS
FTW (in the same market as DAL and DFW)
GYY (in the same market as MDW and ORD)
BDL
BUR
JAX
ISP
FRG (in the same market as LGA, JFK, and ISP)
BLV (in the same market as STL)
MKE
OAK
ONT
SFB (in the same market as MCO)
AZA (in the same market as PHX)
PVD
SEA
PIE (in the same market as TPA)

Some of the routes that Breeze Airways is considering adding could support nonstop service on WN since
(a) WN already has brand recognition and an established frequent flyer base in some of the markets that Breeze is considering serving,
(b) WN would be able to offer connections to destinations not served by Breeze Airways on some of the new nonstop routes that get added by WN, and
(c) WN doesn't charge fees for the 1st and 2nd checked bags and itinerary changes whereas Breeze might possibly charge fees for these services.

jplatts wrote:

Destinations in markets with WN service that Breeze is considering serving include (sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeze_Airways, https://www.smartertravel.com/finally-a-new-low-cost-us-airline/, and https://www.cntraveler.com/story/all-of-the-details-we-have-on-david-neelemans-new-domestic-airline):
AUS
BOS
FTW (in the same market as DAL and DFW)
GYY (in the same market as MDW and ORD)
BDL
BUR
JAX
ISP
FRG (in the same market as LGA, JFK, and ISP)
BLV (in the same market as STL)
MKE
OAK
ONT
SFB (in the same market as MCO)
AZA (in the same market as PHX)
PVD
SEA
PIE (in the same market as TPA)

GYY's last attempt at scheduled passenger service was G4's service to SFB, which ended in 2013. GYY has been in the middle of an ongoing battle to be the "third airport" in Chicagoland; the cities of Gary and Chicago supported GYY claiming that status, but the state of Illinois has long been pushing for the Peotone scheme which is not going over too well outside of the halls of power in Springfield. The Illinois DOT is certainly acting as though this airport will be a reality, for some stupid reason:

https://www.southsuburbanairport.com/

As for FRG, convincing New Yorkers or Long Islanders to consider flying out of there is going to be challenging at best. It would seem that convincing Long Islanders to use ISP over JFK/LGA is not going over well.

And any attempt by Breeze to make BLV work might be the last attempt to make that airport even remotely viable.

ctrabs0114 wrote:

And any attempt by Breeze to make BLV work might be the last attempt to make that airport even remotely viable.

BLV has a terminal expansion plan they are looking at doing. So maybe that has Breeze in mind? Allegiant is expanding there a fair amount next year but it seems a little excessive to me.

It was announced that WN is opening inflight satellite bases at ABQ, TPA, and BNA. This comes directly from the Rally in Dallas.

BMWdrvr75 wrote:

WN has always told the good folks in Palm Springs that they don’t do seasonal service it’s not conducive to their business plan.....Wonder what they will use for an excuse now?

PSP is likely far enough from ONT to support WN service to PSP with ONT being 68 miles west of Downtown Palm Springs. If WN does add service to PSP, WN would probably serve at least DEN, OAK, and PHX nonstop from PSP.

WN can probably make PSP work as the population of the PSP catchment area (which includes the Coachella Valley along with a few places in between the Coachella Valley and Redlands such as Beaumont (CA), Banning, and Calimesa) is approximately 500,000 people, which is bigger by population than a few smaller U.S. markets already served by WN such as Amarillo, Kahului, Kailua-Kona, Lihue, Lubbock, Midland/Odessa, Panama City (FL), and Pensacola.

There are also a few contiguous U.S. airports already served by WN such as AMA, LBB, MHT, MAF, ECP, and ICT that carried fewer domestic passengers in the December 2018 - November 2019 time period than PSP did. LIT and PNS also carried approximately the same amount of domestic passengers that PSP did in the December 2018 - November 2019 time period.

In the Florida Panhandle, WN operates 2 daily nonstops to BNA from PNS, 2 daily nonstops to BNA from ECP, 1 daily nonstop to HOU from PNS, 1 daily nonstop to HOU from ECP, and seasonal nonstop service to PNS and ECP from some other WN destinations.

Well rumbling coming from the WN DAL company Rally.
A long with the HDN seasonal service.
How do you get 325 daily cancelled flights back into your system in the fall/winter 2020 without relying on the MAX?
Shave 700 turn times down to 30min.
Shave 800 turn times down to 40min.
Increase daily aircraft usage from 10.25hrs daily to 14.30hrs daily.
If Rumours are true The Red eye are coming the red eyes are coming.
( I personally don't think Red eyes are coming but last time WN increased it's aircraft usage flight started there day earlier around 05:00 and finished on average around 02:45 in may places.)

Flyguy

N7706A completed it's lease return test hop today. Returned to GECAS.

jplatts wrote:

BMWdrvr75 wrote:

WN has always told the good folks in Palm Springs that they don’t do seasonal service it’s not conducive to their business plan.....Wonder what they will use for an excuse now?

PSP is likely far enough from ONT to support WN service to PSP with ONT being 68 miles west of Downtown Palm Springs. If WN does add service to PSP, WN would probably serve at least DEN, OAK, and PHX nonstop from PSP.

WN can probably make PSP work as the population of the PSP catchment area (which includes the Coachella Valley along with a few places in between the Coachella Valley and Redlands such as Beaumont (CA), Banning, and Calimesa) is approximately 500,000 people, which is bigger by population than a few smaller U.S. markets already served by WN such as Amarillo, Kahului, Kailua-Kona, Lihue, Lubbock, Midland/Odessa, Panama City (FL), and Pensacola.

There are also a few contiguous U.S. airports already served by WN such as AMA, LBB, MHT, MAF, ECP, and ICT that carried fewer domestic passengers in the December 2018 - November 2019 time period than PSP did. LIT and PNS also carried approximately the same amount of domestic passengers that PSP did in the December 2018 - November 2019 time period.

In the Florida Panhandle, WN operates 2 daily nonstops to BNA from PNS, 2 daily nonstops to BNA from ECP, 1 daily nonstop to HOU from PNS, 1 daily nonstop to HOU from ECP, and seasonal nonstop service to PNS and ECP from some other WN destinations.

wnflyguy wrote:

Well rumbling coming from the WN DAL company Rally.....

Flyguy

Oh boy. Here we go again.

When’s the next scheduled released?

tomaheath wrote:

When’s the next scheduled released?

March 12

wnflyguy wrote:

Shave 700 turn times down to 30min.
Shave 800 turn times down to 40min.

Last time they tried this, it went very, very badly.

spongenotbob wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

Shave 700 turn times down to 30min.
Shave 800 turn times down to 40min.

Last time they tried this, it went very, very badly.

Oh the unions are gonna love this.

spongenotbob wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

Shave 700 turn times down to 30min.
Shave 800 turn times down to 40min.

Last time they tried this, it went very, very badly.

We used to do this all the time. Turn times on -300/-500/-700’s used to be as low as 20 minutes. 30 minutes and 40 minutes should be possible and realistically it’s the only way to get more productivity out of the current fleet. I really don’t think WN has any choice at this point but to cut the turn times.

SWADawg wrote:

spongenotbob wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

Shave 700 turn times down to 30min.
Shave 800 turn times down to 40min.

Last time they tried this, it went very, very badly.

We used to do this all the time. Turn times on -300/-500/-700’s used to be as low as 20 minutes. 30 minutes and 40 minutes should be possible and realistically it’s the only way to get more productivity out of the current fleet. I really don’t think WN has any choice at this point but to cut the turn times.

Was that back before they added a row of seats and they were running a 60% load factor?

LotsaRunway wrote:

SWADawg wrote:

spongenotbob wrote:

Last time they tried this, it went very, very badly.

We used to do this all the time. Turn times on -300/-500/-700’s used to be as low as 20 minutes. 30 minutes and 40 minutes should be possible and realistically it’s the only way to get more productivity out of the current fleet. I really don’t think WN has any choice at this point but to cut the turn times.

Was that back before they added a row of seats and they were running a 60% load factor?

Would they ever just have the faster turn times at stations that are less delayed prone?

LotsaRunway wrote:

SWADawg wrote:

spongenotbob wrote:

Last time they tried this, it went very, very badly.

We used to do this all the time. Turn times on -300/-500/-700’s used to be as low as 20 minutes. 30 minutes and 40 minutes should be possible and realistically it’s the only way to get more productivity out of the current fleet. I really don’t think WN has any choice at this point but to cut the turn times.

Was that back before they added a row of seats and they were running a 60% load factor?

Yes, briefly.

southwest1675 wrote:

spongenotbob wrote:

wnflyguy wrote:

Shave 700 turn times down to 30min.
Shave 800 turn times down to 40min.

Last time they tried this, it went very, very badly.

Oh the unions are gonna love this.

Yea. We can barely handle 40 min turns with how much crap we put on our aircraft. Only way we could perform 30 min turns at best is to have 4 man crews.

WNagent310 wrote:

southwest1675 wrote:

spongenotbob wrote:

Last time they tried this, it went very, very badly.

Oh the unions are gonna love this.

Yea. We can barely handle 40 min turns with how much crap we put on our aircraft. Only way we could perform 30 min turns at best is to have 4 man crews.

Would the cost of running a 4 person crew be worth the cost versus the benefits of faster turns?

There are a few different ways of looking at that question. One really, really simple one (that ignores work or idle time between the 30/40 minute turns):

3 person crew on a 40 minute turn = 120 minutes of labor

4 person crew on a 30 minute turn = 120 minutes of labor

Even beyond aircraft utilization, it's an opportunity to improve gate utilization. There must be some WN stations where they are gate-constrained today -- they wouldn't be looking at adding gates (like at DEN) if they weren't.

AirFiero wrote:

WNagent310 wrote:

southwest1675 wrote:

Oh the unions are gonna love this.

Yea. We can barely handle 40 min turns with how much crap we put on our aircraft. Only way we could perform 30 min turns at best is to have 4 man crews.

Would the cost of running a 4 person crew be worth the cost versus the benefits of faster turns?

Given that the starting pay for our ramp agents is around $12 bucks. I’d imagine it’s pretty cost effective to add an extra gate crew agent to help turn our aircraft faster. Running 3 man crews it’s nearly impossible to turn in 30 mins or less.

MIflyer12 wrote:

There are a few different ways of looking at that question. One really, really simple one (that ignores work or idle time between the 30/40 minute turns):

3 person crew on a 40 minute turn = 120 minutes of labor

4 person crew on a 30 minute turn = 120 minutes of labor

Even beyond aircraft utilization, it's an opportunity to improve gate utilization. There must be some WN stations where they are gate-constrained today -- they wouldn't be looking at adding gates (like at DEN) if they weren't.

Where I work. Los Angeles(LAX) is still to this day gate constrained even with the reduction in flights thanks to the MAX grounding. To me, it isn’t a matter of labor since we’re all on shift for 8 hours or more at any given day and are getting paid whether we’re sitting in the break room or working a turnaround. It’s a matter of our utilization. Over staffed as we are along with almost every other station in our system. Running 4 man crews can certainly help turn our aircraft in 30 mins on most occasions.

Seems the slowest part of the turns is the time for passengers deplaning and getting on. 350 for a full -800 is painfully slow it seems.
I don't see how a blanket 30/40 minute turn schedule can be attainable. I bet it is easier at CRP than MDW to accomplish....

I'll be a little curious how WN handles their schedule extension Thursday. Normally they would have the MAX factored in but part of me wonders with the coronavirus uncertainty if they hold actually hold some capacity back this time. Or if they do the same thing as putting out a full schedule and then pulling some back if needed later. I guess it depends how long they think this downturn in flying lasts.

sprxUSA wrote:

Seems the slowest part of the turns is the time for passengers deplaning and getting on. 350 for a full -800 is painfully slow it seems.
I don't see how a blanket 30/40 minute turn schedule can be attainable. I bet it is easier at CRP than MDW to accomplish....

They could maybe have different turn times depending on the station as many carriers do. Some of their stations are using front and back deplaning/enplaning, which probably speeds up the process quite a bit. I believe this is done in BUR, SMF, SJC from what I remember...if it is still being done.