Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

SWA & -800's

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

proav

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 24, 2002
Posts
79
Not really a interview question but does anyone know if SWA
has or ever will consider using the 737-800. With the launch of
some of the long haul flights I was just curious if it would be a
worthwile venture. I know absolutely nothing about the 800
other than it is longer than the little brothers. Is it as economical
to operate as the other ones?
 
Our -700's work quite well for us in the fact it'll go anywhere we need it to in our route system. Yes the -800 has more seats, and I'm sure we could fill them.

However, all our planes require only 3 flight attendents, the -800 requires 4 which presents a problem. For instance, if we have a -800 show up at a gate during an unscheduled aircraft swap, and we have a -200/-300/-500/-700 flight attendent compliment, we now cannot take that plane.

We do have a very good relationship with Boeing, and are able to change our -700 orders/options with -800's or even -900's if we chose to do that.

Hope this helps!
 
Dudes

The cost per segment has gone up to the point that it may be worth dealing with the FA issues..

Both the FAA and the TSA have just about pushed SWA into the longer routes due to the increased costs.The more people per segment the less each ticket will cost..

Since the 800 or even 900 doesnt cost that much more to operate than the 700 over a longer leg this combination of factors may make the 800-900 a real possibility..

One of the real concerns that is being discussed is how long it would take to unload one..A real factor in a 20 to 25 minute turn..The dual boarding jetways at AUS havnt worked out as well as we had hoped..

One of the other issues would be the FAA and weither they would continue to allow us to operate the 800-900 like we have the 200-300-500-700 as far as training..

I think that the 800-900 makes since but there are way to many factors to consider when you get above 149 seats..

Mike
MLBWINGBORN
 
No one got my joke. The reference to wider planes was in response to Southwest's announcement that it would require large people to purchase two seats. Hence wider planes would allow wider seats and thus fit the "metabolically challenged."

Ahh, but nevermind...
 
two seats

Heres an idea eat less work out often,

ie. get off you'r #$%%^& do some thing about the weight,

If not then i think the airlines ,just before take off schould collect extra money for fuel from those people who just cant stop eating, :rolleyes:
 
SWA GUY said:


We do have a very good relationship with Boeing, and are able to change our -700 orders/options with -800's or even -900's if we chose to do that.


Yes, Boeing does LUV SWA! Seriously, I can't see why SWA would consider a -900 since the 1-Class occupancy, 189 pax, is (limited I believe by the # of emergency exits) the same as the -800. Well unless, of course, they took TriStar_drvr's idea about wider seats. :D

The -700 has the longest range anyway, beating out the -800/-900 by 369/593 nm.
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top