SWA expected upgrade times?

[Candide]

The short term prospect for upgrade at SWA is not great. The company needs to integrate 1700 Airtran pilots, replace its antediluvian reservations system, retire ~175 Classic aircraft, and, according to management, replace or remove 88 B-717s.

But if you look to the last half of the decade and later, upgrades should start to accelerate. While we don't have quite as good numbers as many of the legacies, there will be about 1270 Age 65 retirements through 2020. More importantly, we have 597 orders or options on 737NG and MAX aircraft. Near international flying is coming and could very well pave the way to more distant international. This would require a new airframe with a higher pilot/aircraft ratio which could--at least temporarily--bring us back to the good old days of pilot growth. The days of 5 year upgrades are probably over but there are feasible scenarios that are pretty bright. And while you wait for upgrade, mid to senior FO pay is comparable to or better than a lot of Part 121 Captain rates.

SWA pilots who look at the depressing verdict of the SWAPA seniority projector (which assumes zero growth) are smart to do so. Hope for the best, plan for the worst, etc., etc.. I do think we need to balance that with more optimistic scenarios, however, especially for guys and gals considering SWA.

So if you're someone considering applying to SWA and you're 1) a good pilot, 2) don't take yourself too seriously and 3) are pleasant to spend a 3 day trip with, I say come on over! The crystal ball is a bit fuzzier, but I think the future is still bright and you'll start getting a tan on the left side of your face sooner than you may think. If you're lacking in any of those 3 categories, I'd say avoid this place like the plague: you're apt to languish in the right seat for your entire, dismal career.

 

[Lear70]

SWA pilots who look at the depressing verdict of the SWAPA seniority projector (which assumes zero growth) are smart to do so. Hope for the best, plan for the worst, etc., etc.. I do think we need to balance that with more optimistic scenarios, however, especially for guys and gals considering SWA.

Take a look at www.myseniority.com Available only for SWA and AAI pilots, it takes the current combined pilot list, all known age 65 retirements, and allows you to put in your own guess on yearly growth average... 1.5%, 2%, 3%, whatever, then shows you where you'll be each year on the relative global seniority list.

Handy tool for doing what you're talking about, inputting a more realistic growth scenario than 0.

 

[CDub]

Thanks gentlemen. I appreciate your honest, thought out replies. I just wanted to get confirmation on what was shared with me by a random Southwest pilot I met the other day.

I guess I shouldn't be but I'm shocked that upgrades are being projected so far out for Southwest... Even with the merger.

 

[General Lee]

One thing that doesn't help your cause is your "one type" aircraft approach. It's great for your company, no doubt, but for pilot movement it is not. It's called "derivative" aircraft, and you can simplify training, mx parts, etc. Saves you big bucks. When you do eventually get rid of those 717s, then you only have to have two replacements for one retirement. When the senior SWA guy leaves, one senior FO moves up to 737 Captain, and SWA then hires a newhire. When a legacy loses a widebody Captain, then a narrowbody body Capt moves up to the widebody, the Narrowbody FO moves up to Narrowbody Captian, and down the line, which could mean multiple training events, all the way down to newhire. That does cost a lot of money for the airline, but the airline decides which types of planes need to be on which routes, and it is their decision. INTL and DOM operations usually have different types of planes.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[humveedriver]

Well you can't have it both ways can General. I will gladly take SWA approach to single fleet at the expense of pilot movement. Especially when the fleet is transport category. We actually wanted Boeing to add a aux tank and a fuselage plug to the 717 so we could stay single fleet. But there just weren't any other buyers. Plus the 800 and 900 open some doors too. It seems to be working for Alaska too. I get what your saying, but profitability is way more important to me than flying twin aisle.

 

[redflyer65]

Single fleet type is a massive cost difference. Not just the huge number of parts that are need to keep on-hand, but just as the General states above, the training cost are exorbitant. (remember there are eleven training events for one retirement).

 

[jball2]

However, our single fleet type poses some risks too!

 

[General Lee]

Well you can't have it both ways can General. I will gladly take SWA approach to single fleet at the expense of pilot movement. Especially when the fleet is transport category. We actually wanted Boeing to add a aux tank and a fuselage plug to the 717 so we could stay single fleet. But there just weren't any other buyers. Plus the 800 and 900 open some doors too. It seems to be working for Alaska too. I get what your saying, but profitability is way more important to me than flying twin aisle.

Wait, what do you mean you can't have it both ways? My airline has been very profitable the last few years, with single and twin aisle jets. The CEO is saying about a $1.25 billion profit this year, even with high oil. It's all about putting the right sized plane on the correct routes. Yes, there is more training involved if you have a fleet with multiple planes, but if those multiple planes bring in large profits, then great. That's just an expense worth having. As far as what is important for you to fly, you just have to look at your options. I am glad you are happy.


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[General Lee]

Single fleet type is a massive cost difference. Not just the huge number of parts that are need to keep on-hand, but just as the General states above, the training cost are exorbitant. (remember there are eleven training events for one retirement).

True, and it is the cost of doing business. It is up to management to decide which planes it wants where. If it brings in 4 times the profit than domestic airlines, then great. A lot of it is figuring out where the planes should go to make money. Right now Asia is hot, but Europe isn't doing great lately due to the economic mess. Luckily, some of the planes that go there can be moved to Asia or South America. That is what is good about having the right sized fleet. During the Summer the A330s do a lot of Europe out of our biggest hub, ATL. After the loads drop off a bit in September, those A330s start to switch to other regions, and 767ERs replace them. The 744s and 777s usually do trunk routes that have a lot of cargo and have pretty good loads year round, like LAX to SYD. If you had 100 744s, and economies tanked all around the World, that might be really bad.


Sorry about the thread creep. Hopefully your SWA upgrades continue at a fast pace...


Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[PCL_128]

General, I'm not sure that either of our carriers are doing it exactly right. We should probably end up with another aircraft type or two when we start expanding internationally, but you should probably scale back to fewer aircraft types. There really isn't any need for an airline to operate the DC-9, the MD-88, the MD-90, the 737, and the A319/320. I mean, seriously? On the other hand, flying to Europe or South America in a stretch 737 isn't really an appealing idea, either. There should be a happy middle ground in there somewhere.

 

[jonjuan]

General, I'm not sure that either of our carriers are doing it exactly right. We should probably end up with another aircraft type or two when we start expanding internationally, but you should probably scale back to fewer aircraft types. There really isn't any need for an airline to operate the DC-9, the MD-88, the MD-90, the 737, and the A319/320. I mean, seriously? On the other hand, flying to Europe or South America in a stretch 737 isn't really an appealing idea, either. There should be a happy middle ground in there somewhere.

Hey numbnuts, it was called a merger. "I mean, seriously?" (are you a sorority girl?) According to GL, those old aircraft are paid for and make big $$$ (and they apparently will be leaving soon). swa flying internationally? LOL.....Have fun in Cancun.

 

[redflyer65]

Your right Juan, I'm sure Southwest is just ordering the 800's with rafts and Satcom to go to Omaha and Lubbock.

Long range international? Will come with a second fleet type after the 717 is gone. Two fleet types...total. Upgrades to follow.

 

[scoreboardII]

However, our single fleet type poses some risks too!

Not really. Even though we have an all 737 fleet, they consist of different blocks of 300, 500, 700, and now 800. Example, when the convertible option became a problem in the 300, we only had to look at 100 or so airframes 300's, not every 300 and not any 5's or 7's.

 

[humveedriver]

Point well taken GL. Continental started the ball rolling in the 1990's trying to simplify their fleet types. It was 777, 757 and 737 for a while. USair followed suit by going all Airbus. Then merger mania kinda threw things for a loop and the mad dog series has been hanging on through thick and thin. You can't just say single fleet is the answer to every airline; it has cost advantages and route limitations. As far a thread creep go's, this topic is way less depressing than the thought of a 20 year upgrade for a SWA new hire. I hear SWA is a good company to work though. Ask me in two years I should be working for them by then.

 

[LearLove]

Take a look at www.myseniority.com

I wouldn't mess around with those things, they are bad juju.