SWA starting its INTERNATIONAL FOOTPRINT
03-21-2013, 02:36 PM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: DOWNGRADE COMPLETE: Thanks Gary. Thanks SWAPA.
Posts: 6,665
Ahhhh.......the pompousness is still alive and well I see.
03-21-2013, 02:37 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: DOWNGRADE COMPLETE: Thanks Gary. Thanks SWAPA.
Posts: 6,665
I don't get it. What does San Diego have to do with a near international flying?
03-21-2013, 02:38 PM
#33
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
Was that the SWA that had ran out of options on expansion and required buying AAI for its future?
03-21-2013, 03:35 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: FDX MD11 Capt in MEM
Posts: 886
I don't get it. What does San Diego have to do with a near international flying?
03-21-2013, 04:02 PM
#35
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
03-21-2013, 06:10 PM
#36
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Posts: 99
HEY WHACKMASTER
Earlier in this post SATA 400PR complained going 4 hours ATL AUA and commented he could not go that long in SWA Coach.
My post was to just comment that it is done daily BWI SAN was just the example. SWA has a lot of flights from East Coast to West Coast the BWI SAN is just one of the longest I found.
You think that is bad try going DUB ATL on DL 767 on which everything is broken, At least on domestic SWA flight you can pay for WIFI and entertain yourself.
That also brings up the subject when SWA starts International will Row44 work since it is satellite based.
Earlier in this post SATA 400PR complained going 4 hours ATL AUA and commented he could not go that long in SWA Coach.
My post was to just comment that it is done daily BWI SAN was just the example. SWA has a lot of flights from East Coast to West Coast the BWI SAN is just one of the longest I found.
You think that is bad try going DUB ATL on DL 767 on which everything is broken, At least on domestic SWA flight you can pay for WIFI and entertain yourself.
That also brings up the subject when SWA starts International will Row44 work since it is satellite based.
03-21-2013, 06:49 PM
#37
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
HEY WHACKMASTER
Earlier in this post SATA 400PR complained going 4 hours ATL AUA and commented he could not go that long in SWA Coach.
My post was to just comment that it is done daily BWI SAN was just the example. SWA has a lot of flights from East Coast to West Coast the BWI SAN is just one of the longest I found.
You think that is bad try going DUB ATL on DL 767 on which everything is broken, At least on domestic SWA flight you can pay for WIFI and entertain yourself.
That also brings up the subject when SWA starts International will Row44 work since it is satellite based.
Earlier in this post SATA 400PR complained going 4 hours ATL AUA and commented he could not go that long in SWA Coach.
My post was to just comment that it is done daily BWI SAN was just the example. SWA has a lot of flights from East Coast to West Coast the BWI SAN is just one of the longest I found.
You think that is bad try going DUB ATL on DL 767 on which everything is broken, At least on domestic SWA flight you can pay for WIFI and entertain yourself.
That also brings up the subject when SWA starts International will Row44 work since it is satellite based.
Yup. I'll take the B767 everytime. Most people use their personal tablets and smartphones now anyways. Plus, it's nice to be able to walk to the lav while there is a cart in the other aisle.
BTW, all of DALs domestic flights have wifi, & satellite wifi starts soon. It will work globally.
03-21-2013, 10:00 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2011
Posts: 166
More like 0.3% . . .
Does carrying the Row 44 Ku-band antenna system atop its fuselages impact fuel burn? Southwest chief engineer of flight operations Brian Gleason says: “The short answer is that the effect of the winglets on our fuel burn is about ten times greater than the effect of the Wi-Fi radome. We can actually differentiate between engine performance and aircraft (or drag) performance variations. In the case of the winglets, we took data before and after the modification and found that the winglets indeed reduced the aircraft drag and improved our fuel mileage on the order of 3.5 percent. *And we did this on several aircraft just to be sure. When it came time to install the radome for the Row 44 system, we went through the same analysis on several aircraft and found that on average the combined impact of the installed equipment weight plus the drag of the radome results in approximately a 1/3 percent fuel burn penalty. *So even though it looks big, the actual impact is pretty small.”
Does carrying the Row 44 Ku-band antenna system atop its fuselages impact fuel burn? Southwest chief engineer of flight operations Brian Gleason says: “The short answer is that the effect of the winglets on our fuel burn is about ten times greater than the effect of the Wi-Fi radome. We can actually differentiate between engine performance and aircraft (or drag) performance variations. In the case of the winglets, we took data before and after the modification and found that the winglets indeed reduced the aircraft drag and improved our fuel mileage on the order of 3.5 percent. *And we did this on several aircraft just to be sure. When it came time to install the radome for the Row 44 system, we went through the same analysis on several aircraft and found that on average the combined impact of the installed equipment weight plus the drag of the radome results in approximately a 1/3 percent fuel burn penalty. *So even though it looks big, the actual impact is pretty small.”
03-21-2013, 10:04 PM
#40
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
More like 0.3% . . .
Does carrying the Row 44 Ku-band antenna system atop its fuselages impact fuel burn? Southwest chief engineer of flight operations Brian Gleason says: “The short answer is that the effect of the winglets on our fuel burn is about ten times greater than the effect of the Wi-Fi radome. We can actually differentiate between engine performance and aircraft (or drag) performance variations. In the case of the winglets, we took data before and after the modification and found that the winglets indeed reduced the aircraft drag and improved our fuel mileage on the order of 3.5 percent. *And we did this on several aircraft just to be sure. When it came time to install the radome for the Row 44 system, we went through the same analysis on several aircraft and found that on average the combined impact of the installed equipment weight plus the drag of the radome results in approximately a 1/3 percent fuel burn penalty. *So even though it looks big, the actual impact is pretty small.”
Does carrying the Row 44 Ku-band antenna system atop its fuselages impact fuel burn? Southwest chief engineer of flight operations Brian Gleason says: “The short answer is that the effect of the winglets on our fuel burn is about ten times greater than the effect of the Wi-Fi radome. We can actually differentiate between engine performance and aircraft (or drag) performance variations. In the case of the winglets, we took data before and after the modification and found that the winglets indeed reduced the aircraft drag and improved our fuel mileage on the order of 3.5 percent. *And we did this on several aircraft just to be sure. When it came time to install the radome for the Row 44 system, we went through the same analysis on several aircraft and found that on average the combined impact of the installed equipment weight plus the drag of the radome results in approximately a 1/3 percent fuel burn penalty. *So even though it looks big, the actual impact is pretty small.”
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
