• NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.
  • Logbook Pro for Apple iOS version 8.1 is now available on the App Store. Major update including signature endorsements and dark/light theme support. Click here to install now.

SWA down the road - RJs?

BeerNear

Active member
Joined
Apr 2, 2002
Posts
41
Total Time
3000
Howdy,

Sorry to bug everybody about Southwest. Do ya'll think with the recent boom in RJ traffic, Southwest will eventually fly RJs? It seems as though the average trip leg and numbers of passengers per trip that Southwest flies, the RJ aircraft would be a great fit in the battle plan. It would open up many more cities and alterante airports to big cities for SWA. I know it is contrary to the SWA school of thought, keep it simple. Thanks for any input.

Adios,

BN
 

Hovernut

Home Based Again!
Joined
May 7, 2002
Posts
720
Total Time
8000
Lil' 73

If they did, the now defunct DO-428J would've been a cute little sister to the 737 fleet! Just think, SW could finally have "Baby Shamu!"
 

captjim

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 2, 2001
Posts
461
Total Time
9000
Never! They are the only airline really making money. No reason to change things now when its worked for so long.
 

RedBelly

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2002
Posts
87
Total Time
14,000
Another thing to consider.... how much less is an RJ to buy than a 737? I think boeing lists a 737-700 for about $40 million. I bet that SWA gets a discount though. Anyone know how much the different RJ's cost?
 

hyper

We got "change" alright.
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
469
Total Time
6000
1 type, same parts, same maintenance, same certificates.....I think they broke the code with over simplification which may be a good reason why they're so successful.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
 

chawbein

Well-known member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
689
Total Time
999999
If I were SWA, I wouldn't go with RJ's. If they were going to add another type to their inventory, they should go with a larger aircraft. I would look at 75's. I would only fly them on a few select routes. SWA does have a few routes where every flight is filled every day. On the other hand, is it hard to load and unload a larger plane?

Just my $.02
 

na265

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2001
Posts
272
Total Time
4300
I am a former SWA FA. When I left the co. 2 yrs ago, Colleen Barrett(sp?) had an article in the inflight mag. It delt with the topic of RJ's and why SWA didn't have them. If I remember right, her response was that the formula the co. had at the time was working well (all 737's). However, she also stated that in order to grow and continue to lead the industry, change will always be necessary. If this change involved RJ's, it was tough to say. She finished the article by saying anything is possible.
 

BeerNear

Active member
Joined
Apr 2, 2002
Posts
41
Total Time
3000
Flying into smaller airports

These are great points. You are absolutely right. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I was just trying figure out where SWA could be in 20 years. Just imagine SWA flying RJs into smaller airports in big cities that might have been inaccessible(sp) with 737s i.e. Provo, Centennial in Denver, North Las Vegas etc... I think that expanding to bigger aircraft might be harder than smaller aircraft. I just truly believe RJs are going to be the powerhouse of domestic flights in the future.

Thanks for your inputs. Take care and ya'll lfy safe,

BN
 

BeerNear

Active member
Joined
Apr 2, 2002
Posts
41
Total Time
3000
Sorry, I forgot to mention.....

Sorry, I forgot to mention..

Growing up in PHX and watching my father's company expand was a great lesson for me. In the 70s and 80s, they were constantly trying to figure where to go next while they mastered what they did best. I don't have an MBA and I may be wrong, but if you are not trying to think of new ideas of expansion and growth, you will stagnate and eventually run a company into the ground. I watched this happen to my father's company in the 90s when they merged with other larger companies. Sad sight.

Take care,

BN
 

Delta3

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
136
Total Time
x
Southwest is great at flight frequency which really helps with their business customers. If they use RJs they will only help their cause by increasing the numbers of departures a day.
 

flyboy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2002
Posts
277
Total Time
28yrs
I may be wrong (so please correct me if I am) but if the idea is to get into more accessable airports, would something like a CRJ be efficient? I used to work with UAX and flew on it many times and as I recall, it ate up a ton of runway. I don't know much about the ERJ, though i think it has a shorter takeoff roll (on average). It seems that if any RJ would allow more "access" it would be the BAE 146. But like I said, I could be wrong.
 

Captain Over

Goldmember
Joined
Jan 31, 2002
Posts
14
Total Time
785
Let me pose a question or two. How similiar are the -200 through the -700 models? Enough to require training in only one type and you're good to go on the others? I know the panels are different, but what else?

I fly out of a field(KLBB) serviced by SWA, AE, COEX, and ASA?(Candler). Southwest's runway of choice is 8000'(RWY26). They routinely use the exit 7500' down(M), whereas the others(ERJs, CRJs) use the hi-speed approx. 6000' down(R). And, more than a few occasions, I have seen Southwest have to exit 26 on RWY17R/35L. I might be wrong on this, but didn't they have to increase their(B737) approach speeds because of the rudder problems that weren't really happening?

Here's another one:if Boeing continues to grow the 737, won't it soon be a 757/767?
 

Delta3

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
136
Total Time
x
737 Variants

I was talking to an ATA cpatain and he said the 732 and 737-700 are the same when looking at the overhead panel, but totally different when looking at the instrument panel.

He said Boeing tried to redesign the overhead switches, but the FAA said that if they did, then they would have to have new licende requirements for 737-700 pilots. So in the end Boeing kept the 732 overhead for fleet commonality sake.
 
Top