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

Why not international?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tycer
  • Start date Start date
  • Watchers Watchers 5

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

Tycer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Posts
54
Why doesn't SWA fly any international cities. Don't those 800 have the ability to get up and go? Don't get me wrong they have the magic formula, but why not a few south America routes?
 
Now thats danm funny. Ive lived in ElPaso. And I know funny. And that's it there.
 
Not sure if this is true....but I believe the reason they don't fly the 800 is because it would seat more passengers and thus require an extra flight attendant. Also, overwater flights would require the airplane to be equipped with life rafts. This would mean equipping the entire fleet. Both are cost measures that SWA would rather not pay.
 
Flotation Devices

The -700 does require fewer FA's than the -800. However the
-700 has the range for intl./overwater ops.

Also, as a cost saving measure numerous FA's have already been equipped with flotation devices.

Juan
 
Re: Flotation Devices

juan2go said:

Also, as a cost saving measure numerous FA's have already been equipped with flotation devices.

Juan

Isnt it usually a captain that pays for the retro fit flotation devices on the FA's ?
 
When I was in upgrade Herb was asked why we weren't flying to Canada & Mexico. He said that the labor laws in those countries made it difficult to do SWA type of operations. He also said that for now there was more opportunity in the US than flying international. As was said earlier if SWA did fly to the islands or Europe life rafts & other flotation devices would have to be added to the aircraft. That is an expense that SWA doesn't want & it is also why SWA doesn't fly across the Gulf to get to or from FL. We just stay within 50 miles of shore.
 
Well, I suppose that takes care of the rumor of Southwest buying Aloha now wouldn't it?
 
It's not the best utilization of the asset. THe longer the stage length the harder it is to maximize the use of the aircraft. If LUV were to fly to Hawaii they would be tying up a 737 for a 2500 mile flight. What's the max that they could charge for a seat? Then the aircraft has to return. How much will they make? What's the break even load factor?

Let's say it takes LUV hypotheticly 13 hours to send an aircraft to HNL, turn it around and then back to LAX. That aircraft is shot for the day and the crew is only good for the flight out to HNL. They need two crews.

Luv can make much more money from the aircraft and the crew if they do smaller stage lengths on high density routes. Something that luv and the 737 excell at.
 
Last edited:
G4G5 said: "the crew is only good for the flight out to HNL. They need two crews"

Stick a third pilot in there and you are good to go for a turn.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top