April 2011 Fleet Plan
 

According to the company fleet plan, the UAL side is parking one 747 in the first quarter and 1 747 in the 4th quarter. On the CAL side, we are adding 3 739's total in the first three quarters for a whopping net gain of 1 aircraft, 711 total combined in 2011. The plan does not "yet?" show the parking or loss of the 2 767-200 aircraft.

Dont be so naive. They will park many more than that and will take on more rjs than what they said.

Question....."Shell-Game"??

Are the 3 NG's they are adding in 2011 being accelerated/"borrowed" from the lot of 19 that are slotted to arrive in 2012??

Or is it 3 THIS year, plus the entire 19 next year as mentioned below??

Bueller??

SEATTLE, April 26, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Boeing (NYSE:BA - News) today celebrated the delivery of the first Next-Generation 737-900ER (extended range) with the Boeing Sky Interior to United Continental Holdings, Inc. subsidiary Continental Airlines. The carrier is the first U.S. airline to operate the 737-800 and 737-900ER featuring the all-new interior.
Boeing also announced that Continental converted existing 2012 orders for Next-Generation 737s to 737-900ERs and will now be taking 19 737-900ERs in 2012.

PArk the 737/500's and the aging 757/200's. After those plus the "new" planes what will that net?

And don't forget the 767-200's

Replacing 2 747's with 3 739's? Wow. That -900 must be some magic airplane!

I'm just asking, not trying to throw darts, but are the "aging 757-200" older UAL planes or the mid 90s era CAL planes?

Just trying to see what DAL might do in that situation.

Dal is parking 30-40 dc9's and getting 50-60 md80's. For a positive net #

In the eyes of the bean counters it is. For those of us on the line AHHH we get overs stopping in MCI for gas on an eastbound transcon from SAN...

I think you meant MD-90's. ;)

Yep. Md-80. Md 90 whatever it takes. ( mr mom)

Wow; does it really have an issue doing something like SAN-EWR? Is that because of takeoff limitations at SAN or something?

EWR-LAX/SFO/SEA okay in the winter against strong headwinds?

Yep. It is a runway pig to say the least. Barely got out of DEN last week going to EWR after they closed 34L on the taxi out. It was a pleasent 61 degrees with wind straight out of the north. We do have a fair share of fuel stops in the winter, but probably not many more then the Bus. Long story short, management thinks it's a 757 replacement. Reality is it's not on 1:1 basis.

All I do is 737-800/900 transcons. I've never had a fuel stop. It does eat runway though. I'm tired of rotating on the opposite end numbers. While it is a domestic replacement for the 757, it will never perform like a 757.
737-900ER = 173 seats (less cost, less gas = more money for Jeffy)
757-200 = 175 seats

Well as long as Jeff is happy, I mean that's what (he thinks) you're all here for, right?

"but probably not many more then the Bus."

Flew a320 Cap for two years and never made a fuel stop.
As a 737-300 Cap did one fuel stop, BOS - DEN.

The most restrictive 320 flight I ever did, fuel wise, was SNA - ORD in winter with fuel for alternate. Short runway and full pax load, still made it with a 30 minute hold for ORD. SEA - IAD? No sweat.

767 - 300 ferried fuel from IAD - LAX, full load of people and landed with 60,000 pounds of fuel on board. Someone thought it was cheaper to haul fuel one day to LAX.

737-900ER, from what you guys say, where's the ER part?

War stories ;) But, we get paid to fly em "safe" and someone else decides which airplanes.

I did an entire month of SJO-EWR when we first started getting the 900ER's. Loaded up on peeps and then dropped into Libera for gas. Hey one stop service ain't bad! Wonderful month for my paycheck, not so much for the commute. Had to chuckle at the bean counter that assumed we could 'make it work'. Back to 800's the following month and as you probably know now it's partly a 75 trip in peak season.

ER stands for Enhanced Revenue

Just curious guys/gals. I flew the 737-300/500 for a while.

Is the APU any better on the ground for cooling/heating on the NGs? The restriction on the -300/500 from what I remember was only 1 pack turned on while on the ground with only the APU running. Can you turn the packs to high in flight on the NG or still just "auto"?

Thanks

On the NGs, when the APU is running on the ground, both packs can be operated in the HIGH position to cool (or warm as the case may be) the cabin. It is essential in during the summer, esp. in IAH.

As far as the "ER" designation goes for the -900, I think there is a misconception out there. It has nothing to do with range. Per the company the terms used interchangeably are:

Extra Rows (some of us commuters like to call them Employee Rows)

or

Enhanced Revenue (as was mentioned above). :D

Otto says it well and nothing anyone has said about 737 NGs is untrue. It's a small tube and pit. There are certain routes where given the load and airport challenges, the 757 would be a better fit (SJO-EWR comes to mind). However, the 737 NG family does provide a lot of flexibility at a reasonable cost. The -700... SNA-EWR is no problem any time of year. Unfortunately, is it only holds 12/112. The -800 is a nice compromise and works well on transcons, but it can't do EGE or SNA-EWR, and SJO-EWR is usually a challenge. The -900ER is OK for transcons in the summer, but westbound transcons in the winter are tight. As has been said it eats runway and has a pretty tight margin for tailstrikes on landing. I've flown the 737 for over 10 years and never had to make a fuel stop (though we've just had the -900ERs for a few years and it does have flights with scheduled fuel stops). Like you say... we don't control what they buy. It's up to us to determine who flys them and for how much.

With luck UCAL will keep the busses for a long time, I never want to sit in a guppy cockpit again.

Until you hit a flock of geese.

Agreed, bus cockpit WAY roomier than guppy.

KC

Try doing what Sully did in a Boeing. Plus, I'm sure a Boeing wouldn't fair any better..... :rolleyes:

More room to tackle those revisions, right? :D

Not when you already have "Ship Kits".

Hence the :D at the end. ;)

don't worry, if you actually look out the window you can avoid the geese!

At least he would of known that the engines weren't flamed out in a Boeing.