it was mostly a TIC observation.

absent some fountain of 'ute' for the 757 there aren't going to be any other options. Except maybe the C-series, or other (newer) WB airframes??

I'm guessing if/when it rolls off the line, the 73-10 will come with a bumped GW, an upgraded engine rating, and maybe even more fuel.

IF the -900 can get airborne off of lax, it usually is satisfactory in making hnl and koa. But that is a big 'IF'. The RATOW TW/KT penalty on the -900 is huge. I think about 1500-1700lb/kt if memory serves.

Understanding most -900 flights LAX to HNL/KOA depart at or near MGTOW, the standard 6-8kt TW lax tolerates in staying in a west operation pretty much hammers the -900s ability to get airborne with a full load.

I'm guessing for UA/AK SEA and SFO are not so limiting in their runway ops.

Anecdotally....have known of flights that sat out on the taxiway for hour(s) waiting for the wind to shift...or at least go calm....to be under the RATOW limit.

And if a crew is filed and requests an opposite direction departure for winds....lax atc will not even start coordinating until you call for taxi...and their standard advisory is 'expect at least 2 hours to coordinate'.

The other hammer is when the -900 is planned at FL260 the whole way to the islands because of ride.....and not so much wind. Its a FL limited airframe on a good day on the top end. But if it cant get into the 30's there is going to be a problem with endurance. This was the situation when the agent came onboard and told me 'we are pulling 40 pax'.

As with the 765...the final growth variants of most airframes result in calculated compromises.

The 737-900 is no different.