Originally Posted by
blakman7
Ok buddy, point made.
But try to look at it this way.....
1) A new base will need crews and airplanes.
2) SWA just got 140 airplanes from AT.
3) Multiple -800's will be on property in the years to come.
4) Replacing 40 classics with 33 -800's is a gain in terms of seats for sale.
- Lets say for example that the 40 classics were all 137 seat airplanes. That would be 5,480 seats total. Now, with 33 737-800's with 175 seats each, that's 5,775 seats total. That's not even including that fact that some of SWA's classics only have 122 seats, which would make the number of seat difference even greater. Also, that's not including the fact that SWA might use some of the 800's on some transcon routes or over water routes (ETOPS) which will cost more to the paying passenger. All in all, it looks like a gain and expansion to me.
Yes, 727C47 was right......the sun is actually shining.
The ETOPS stuff that WN is planning (and the only ETOPS that the -800 is capable of) is Hawaii. That is not high yield per seat... sorry. The -800 is not capable of Europe without a stop. The Northeast US-Caribbean or South America is an ETOPS 76 minute benign area and does not require ETOPS equipped aircraft.
More seats with less airplanes at the same pay? Well, that's a loss too. It might be an expansion in seats, but it is a loss in equipment and a loss in pilot staffing.