Any AirTran Guys Flying the 737NG Yet - Your Impressions vs. 717

[Heavy Set]

A friend of mine saw a newly-painted AirTran 737-700 at ATL the other day. Curious to know what the former 717 drivers thought about it now that they have had a taste of the 737NG. What routes will it fly initially? Also, when is the transcon service supposed to begin with the 737NG?

Still trying to get used to the new paint scheme. I'd love to see winglets on that bird sometime soon too.

 

[Ponchus pilot]

They are both really old designs with a glass cockpit. I hope Boeing redesigns the 737 after the 7E7.

 

[flx757]

I'd love to see winglets on that bird sometime soon too.

It is my understanding no winglets on the -700 for AirTran. On the -800 maybe, assuming they exercise some options for -800s instead of -700s.

If you MUST see winglets....here's OUR latest, to be delivered next year.

http://www.alaskasworld.com/news/2004/04/images/16_B800.jpg

 

[FlyDouglasJets]

Operationally, the wing on the NG, kicks arse for hi-alt perf. vs. the old Dc9 wing with BMW engines strapped-on.

On a typical 3hr flt, the fuel burn on the NG vs. the 717 is within about +3%. You get about 20 more seats, go a tad faster, and can get to FL410 if light.

For most, that would be considered, muy bueno.

 

[ILStoMinimums]

It is my understanding no winglets on the -700 for AirTran. On the -800 maybe, assuming they exercise some options for -800s instead of -700s.

If you MUST see winglets....here's OUR latest, to be delivered next year.

http://www.alaskasworld.com/news/2004/04/images/16_B800.jpg

Very nice! I was JSing up front on one of AS NG's and the crew told me of a rumor that HNL might be on the market for those new -800's? You think this is possible?

 

[SKC]

Also, when is the transcon service supposed to begin with the 737NG?

I wouldn't be surprised to see the A320s continue the ATL-SFO route for awhile, and possibly even the ATL-LAX run. I'm curious to see exactly how the loss of Air Wiskey will affect the immediate plans for the 737, since the new birds might have to cover 717s that are covering CRJs, etc.

 

[AMRCostUnit]

Very nice! I was JSing up front on one of AS NG's and the crew told me of a rumor that HNL might be on the market for those new -800's? You think this is possible?

Aloha currently does SNA-Hawaii and RNO-Hawaii in a -700 with winglets so I suppose it would be a logical progression.

Unit

 

[Fly-By-Cable]

I wouldn't be surprised to see the A320s continue the ATL-SFO route for awhile, and possibly even the ATL-LAX run. I'm curious to see exactly how the loss of Air Wiskey will affect the immediate plans for the 737, since the new birds might have to cover 717s that are covering CRJs, etc.

737 will takeover ATL-SFO on Oct. 1st, and at the same time one daily ATL-LAX.

The second daily ATL-LAX and all of ATL-LAS will be flown by 737 starting Dec 1st. Which will be the end of Ryan contract.

(according to website schedule)

 

[Ganja60Heavy]

Dumb ETOPS question...

Under what rules (or waiver) does the 737-700 fly to Hawaii?? That's alot of water!

 

[75M]

There's only one way to go over that much water with two engines. That's 180 minute ETOPS (Extended Twin-engine Operations). The same rules that permit the 757/767, etc. to fly up to three hours from a suitable airport. It requires some more backup systems than older two engine jets had. For example a small generator powered by circulating hydraulic fluid provides an extra source of electrical power on the 75/76. Also additional engine reliability is a big factor. If an airline has any more than "X" amount of inflight engine shutdowns per year based on the size of the fleet, the ETOPS (sometimes referred to as EROPS (Extended Range Ops)) authorization will be suspended or revoked.

I don't know anything about the 737 systems, but I imagine the extra hardware for ETOPS is optional.

Hope this answered your question.

 

[Mooseflyer]

If you MUST see winglets....here's OUR latest, to be delivered next year.

http://www.alaskasworld.com/news/2004/04/images/16_B800.jpg

Now THAT'S a pretty sight!!

 

[MiniMeGotWings]

I don't know anything about the 737 systems, but I imagine the extra hardware for ETOPS is optional.

I'm not really sure what is required specifically for our ETOPS flights equipment wise that isn't already standard equipment, but there are definitely procedural/training/mx requirements that must be met. Obvious equipment requirements that I can think of include liferafts and survival equipment, emergency medical kit, additional oxygen, navigation systems (RNP 10 and RVSM compliant) and fuel. To comply with the requirement for a back-up powersource, we run the APU from pushback until we are within one hour of a suitable airport enroute. The Engine Failure Ratio is (oversimplified) 2 per 100,000 flt hours. Yes it is a long way to go over the water in a 737, but amazingly enough, eastbound to the west coast, we burn very little fuel out of the wings. There is a lot of contingency fuel in case of the loss of one engine and simultaneous loss of pressurization at ETP, a situation that would require a 180 minute flight, single engine, at 10,000 feet.

 

[On Your Six]

Can any Air Tran guys answer the original question?

 

[Obi-Wan]

They should have got A320's instead.

 

[SKC]

They should have got A320's instead.

Only if you want them on mechanical half the time.

 

[Heavy Set]

I'll ask a different question next time.

 

[Obi-Wan]

Only if you want them on mechanical half the time.

Whats really interesting is that people who have never flown the bus hate it and people who have dont want to fly anything else.

 

[FLB717]

Only a few AAI pilots have flown both (IP's), but regular guys are starting to get online rather soon. Most are in training, so you question may what a while for an reply. Why did we go Boeing vs Airbus. $, lots and lots of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Any questions, seeing none I adjourn.

 

[SKC]

Whats really interesting is that people who have never flown the bus hate it and people who have dont want to fly anything else.

Personally (from a dispatcher's viewpoint), I like the Bus. It's a nice roomy aircraft that can do transcon fairly easily. The only problem is that it does tend to end up on the mechanic's rack fairly often. We operate(d) 3 types of 737, 757, A320/321, 727, and DC10s, and the Bus is down more than any other type that we fly. The only exception is the 25 year old 737-200 that we drug out of the desert last year.

Over the years probably 20 hrs of required jumpseating has been in the A320, and the main problem has always been the manual sidestick actuator. I kid, I kid.

 

[MDP727]

I have been on the 737 winglet acft a ATA from the start and have a few thousand hours in it now. I can only compare it to the 727, and md-80.

I like the 737ng, it has it's corks like the rest. Everyone complains about the vnav in the airplane, I think it works fine, most people that complain don't know how to use it properly. The aircraft will get you to altitude nicely with a decent load. It performs nicely at 410. It is fully capabale of 45 degree banks at 410. The speed brakes are not very effective so a little more thought eliminates the use of them.
I think the winglets make high crosswind landings a little more of a handful. I landed the 727 in a 45 knot direct crosswind, no problem. In the 737 winglet acft this requires a tremendous amout of rudder, the winglets aid in weathervaning.
The speed tape seems too sensitive at times. A heavy landing at flaps 40 in gusty conditions will have you bouncing from ref right to the flap load relief speed very easily.
I was trained at boeing and they teach not to use V/S mode with altitude changes of more than 1000ft. I see people using this mode when they shouldn't, with no speed protection they might role it down into a 3500ft rate of desent and the airspeed will shoot into the barber pole no problem.
Just a few notes I have over the last few years.