AirTran to order new 737's

NWgoldelite · 08-01-2003, 10:38 PM

Quote:

AirTran Airways, a subsidiary of AirTran Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:AAI),today announced at a press conference at Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport that the airline has placed an order for 100 new Boeing 737-700 and -800 series aircraft - of which 50 are firm orders and 50 are options.

http://www.airtran.com/aboutus/news/boeing737.jsp

Just thought I'd mention this. I also recall you, dbaker, saying on flyertalk that AirTran purposely ordered 717's instead of 737's to save training costs, since the DC-9 and 717 were similarly constructed.

dbaker · 08-01-2003, 11:16 PM

You think they accidently clicked the "Buy Now!" button on boeing.com? I'm not sure what you're suggesting.

The training cost issue is a commonly known fact for those of us who read about this industry outside of flyertalk and ityt.

jetmech717 · 08-02-2003, 08:55 AM

even if that was the case about training cost (which it wasnt, at that time all AirTran needed was short haul a/c) and we still required alot of training on the 717. It isnt even a factor now because at the present time, the 737 is going to fill in the void that we need to fly cross country. As for training cost......I'm pretty sure we can afford it right now.

dbaker · 08-02-2003, 09:17 AM

Quote:

even if that was the case about training cost (which it wasnt, at that time all AirTran needed was short haul a/c)

It's really hard to discuss this with you, jetmech, because you just make up facts that seem reasonable to you. Pretty much everything you say is not true. Either you're lying or you don't know what you're talking about. I'm not sure which is better. Do you read Aviation Week? That might help you here.

Additionally, the 737 purchase is really a negative thing for AirTran's structure. The idea was to operate a uniform fleet and AirTran's CEO was quoted less than two years ago bragging about how much money they were going to save by eliminating the 737 line from the AirTran fleet.

Then again, things have changed and it looks like Boeing may shut down the 717 program. Accordingly, it might be best for AirTran to get with the 737 program to avoid running an ancient fleet that's no longer under development again.

jetmech717 · 08-02-2003, 09:33 AM

ok Baker let me see if I can make up some more facts or try to tell the truth here. First of all your digging man...you are running out of ways to bash AirTran and your scrapping for anything you can. With that being said....Yes AirTran used to have 737's and yes we did save money getting rid of them, but do you even know why? No you dont, they were 737-200 series a/c, getting just as old as our Dc-9's so since we are trying to get all new planes it just makes since doesnt it. The order we placed now is for BRAND NEW 737-700/800's (probably a little easier to maintain and I know they'll burn less fuel than the old ones). Sorry I missed the aviation week article, I didnt know that we had our own personnal reporter that sat in on the meetings that the company has when they discuss our future. As far as wanting an all 717 fleet...yes that would be nice and we would save $$$ but we just couldnt wait any longer on Boeings decision about making a larger 717-300 series. Oh well at least its still boeing!

dbaker · 08-02-2003, 09:36 AM

Would you like me to quote the CEO of AirTran disagreeing with your statement, or can you just promise to do some reading now before you try to pretend that you know what you're talking about?

Arguing with you is like arguing with a four year old. You just make up what you don't know and no matter who wins the argument, I lose.

jetmech717 · 08-02-2003, 09:42 AM

O.K Baker I give up, you win.
I'll call Joe Leonard (AirTran's CEO) and tell him that every plan that he has announced to the media can never be changed because DBaker said you have to. So I guess plans can never change once there made.....man I hope you dont own a business. You would never make it as far as this 4yr old would!!!!! I'll let you keep reading 2year old news articles if you want to.

haze · 08-02-2003, 03:00 PM

...like jetmech717 said, the issue is all about range. AirTran will eventually be flying all up and down the west coast and to Canada, Mexico, and the Carribean. The 717 just doesn't have this sort of range and Boeing is dragging it's feet on an ER version. It sure would be nice to have one aircraft type throughout the fleet, thus AirTran's attempt at a 717ER model. But business plans are constantly evolving, and the ability to roll with that is what makes AirTran such a success. So AirTran will have two aircraft models, I suppose that makes them unsafe too. Isn't that what this site is about, the safety of AirTran. No it's not, it's apparent that the agenda is simply to bash and slander a great airline out of sheer fear of competition and envy. By the way, speaking of "making things up" and "acting like a 4-year old", how would AirTran's fleet become "ancient" just because Boeing discontinued the model? Boeing is about to discontinue the 757 too, didn't you read that in Aviation Week?

NWgoldelite · 08-06-2003, 02:42 PM

dbaker wrote:

Quote:

I'm not sure what you're suggesting.

I wasn't really suggesting anything. Just thought I'd announce that AirTran was going to order 737's even after you said they werent because of training costs etc.

dbaker wrote:

Quote:

The training cost issue is a commonly known fact for those of us who read about this industry outside of flyertalk and ityt.

Lets not forget Airliners.net

dbaker · 08-06-2003, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haze

...like jetmech717 said, the issue is all about range. AirTran will eventually be flying all up and down the west coast and to Canada, Mexico, and the Carribean. The 717 just doesn't have this sort of range and Boeing is dragging it's feet on an ER version.

The following destinations are within range of the 717 from ATL:

Las Vegas (LAS)
Los Angeles (LAX)
Mexico City (MEX)
Zihuatanejo (ZIH)
Nassau (NAS)
Grand Cayman (GCM)
Quebec City (YQB)

Dare I ask where you're going in the Carribean or Mexico that isn't within 2000nm of Atlanta?

As someone who has flown in MD80s/DC9s to the west coast, I am living proof that the DC9/MD80/717 can make it without running out of fuel.

For what it's worth, I'd also drag my feet on the idea of spending millions to further develop a product that almost nobody wants.

jetmech717 · 08-06-2003, 06:47 PM

Hey Baker I'm proud of you. It looks like you actually looked up some facts and specs on something before you spoke. To bad you didnt look harder...The stats for the B717 are for a basic plane configuration, AirTrans 717's hold 12 business class and 105 coach passengers. For a total of 117, thus this adds more weight and burns more fuel. Now if we do the math together........I can assure you that AIRTRANS B717's will not make it to LAX without stopping in Dallas to refuel. Trust me we've had to do it when an Airbus broke. We are really pushing it to fly the Denver route with the 717 (you know that the FAA makes you have to have so much reserve fuel you just cant go diving into cities on fumes....What happens if you get put into a holding pattern? Yet another example of an outsider looking in, but dont be discouraged baker if you ever want the facts just ask!

dbaker · 08-06-2003, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jetmech717

(you know that the FAA makes you have to have so much reserve fuel you just cant go diving into cities on fumes....What happens if you get put into a holding pattern? Yet another example of an outsider looking in, but dont be discouraged baker if you ever want the facts just ask!

I'm an outsider looking in, huh? When was the last time that you calculated fuel burn? Calculated an IFR reserve? Flew a hold? Filed an alternate? Flew an ILS? Missed approach? VOR? Backcourse? Published arrival? Had an airtran 717 hold short for you to land at HOU?

jetmech717 · 08-06-2003, 07:30 PM

Baker I'm a mechanic not a pilot...... you know this. I also know that you are in the process of trying to be a pilot...not a mechanic, but I do know my airplanes and how far they are capable of flying. So if I have any pilot questions I'll ask you, and PLEASE if you have any questions about the maintenance part of aviation just ask instead of making it up as you go.

haze · 08-07-2003, 09:52 AM

...I have a friend from NJ who is a co-pilot for US Airways. He flies the newer 737-800s, the ones with the cool little winglets that assist lift and range and aerodynamics. We were chatting about the new versions of the 737 (700,800, and 900), the winglets, it's range, AirTran's plans to purchase these etc. He basically said "What am I telling you for, you know more about the frikin' things than I do?!" Of course he was refering to the history of the model, other airlines' plans for the newer models, the future of the line, etc. Of course he knows what he's doing, knows his aircraft from top to bottom, and can fly the thing while I can't. But what I'm getting at is that I'd trust a mechanic on these matters before I would a pilot. Just like I knew that the 717 was simply a name change of the MD-95, when dbaker claimed it was the MD-80. Oh well, he's the pilot

jetmech717 · 08-16-2003, 10:51 AM

Dbaker said:

Quote:

I'm an outsider looking in, huh? When was the last time that you calculated fuel burn? Calculated an IFR reserve? Flew a hold? Filed an alternate? Flew an ILS? Missed approach? VOR? Backcourse? Published arrival? Had an airtran 717 hold short for you to land at HOU?

by the way baker........
In todays commercial aviation world, technology has allowed for pilots to no longer have to calculate anything (at least on the 717). Once the pilots enter in the baggage and passenger weights the plane calculates everything else.......go figure.

dbaker · 08-16-2003, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jetmech717

In todays commercial aviation world, technology has allowed for pilots to no longer have to calculate anything (at least on the 717). Once the pilots enter in the baggage and passenger weights the plane calculates everything else.......go figure.

Tell that to the pilots of Air MidWest Express 5481, which crashed in January. Did you read that report?

Oh wait, never mind, I see that you made a huge generalization and then qualified it down to one specific, unpopular plane.

jetmech717 · 08-19-2003, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Oh wait, never mind, I see that you made a huge generalization and then qualified it down to one specific, unpopular plane.

you like the way I did that

Anyways unpopular plane or not, the Boeing 717 has been a blessing to AirTran and is the key factor in the turn-around story....So its very popular with us. Also like we have discussed in previous threads, When I say commercial aviation I am talking about the big boy planes, not the little guys...of course they may not have all the luxerys of the avionics packages that are in the heavys, probably not feasible I guess. So you can do your piloting math on the little guys.

08-02-2003, 08:55 AM	#3
jetmech717 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Atlanta Hartsfield Int. Airport Posts: 171	either way even if that was the case about training cost (which it wasnt, at that time all AirTran needed was short haul a/c) and we still required alot of training on the 717. It isnt even a factor now because at the present time, the 737 is going to fill in the void that we need to fly cross country. As for training cost......I'm pretty sure we can afford it right now.

08-02-2003, 09:33 AM	#5
jetmech717 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Atlanta Hartsfield Int. Airport Posts: 171	let me see ok Baker let me see if I can make up some more facts or try to tell the truth here. First of all your digging man...you are running out of ways to bash AirTran and your scrapping for anything you can. With that being said....Yes AirTran used to have 737's and yes we did save money getting rid of them, but do you even know why? No you dont, they were 737-200 series a/c, getting just as old as our Dc-9's so since we are trying to get all new planes it just makes since doesnt it. The order we placed now is for BRAND NEW 737-700/800's (probably a little easier to maintain and I know they'll burn less fuel than the old ones). Sorry I missed the aviation week article, I didnt know that we had our own personnal reporter that sat in on the meetings that the company has when they discuss our future. As far as wanting an all 717 fleet...yes that would be nice and we would save $$$ but we just couldnt wait any longer on Boeings decision about making a larger 717-300 series. Oh well at least its still boeing!

08-02-2003, 09:42 AM	#7
jetmech717 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Atlanta Hartsfield Int. Airport Posts: 171	ok i give up O.K Baker I give up, you win. I'll call Joe Leonard (AirTran's CEO) and tell him that every plan that he has announced to the media can never be changed because DBaker said you have to. So I guess plans can never change once there made.....man I hope you dont own a business. You would never make it as far as this 4yr old would!!!!! I'll let you keep reading 2year old news articles if you want to.

08-02-2003, 03:00 PM	#8
haze Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: ATL Posts: 271	717 vs 737 ...like jetmech717 said, the issue is all about range. AirTran will eventually be flying all up and down the west coast and to Canada, Mexico, and the Carribean. The 717 just doesn't have this sort of range and Boeing is dragging it's feet on an ER version. It sure would be nice to have one aircraft type throughout the fleet, thus AirTran's attempt at a 717ER model. But business plans are constantly evolving, and the ability to roll with that is what makes AirTran such a success. So AirTran will have two aircraft models, I suppose that makes them unsafe too. Isn't that what this site is about, the safety of AirTran. No it's not, it's apparent that the agenda is simply to bash and slander a great airline out of sheer fear of competition and envy. By the way, speaking of "making things up" and "acting like a 4-year old", how would AirTran's fleet become "ancient" just because Boeing discontinued the model? Boeing is about to discontinue the 757 too, didn't you read that in Aviation Week?

08-06-2003, 06:47 PM	#11
jetmech717 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Atlanta Hartsfield Int. Airport Posts: 171	Hey stupid Hey Baker I'm proud of you. It looks like you actually looked up some facts and specs on something before you spoke. To bad you didnt look harder...The stats for the B717 are for a basic plane configuration, AirTrans 717's hold 12 business class and 105 coach passengers. For a total of 117, thus this adds more weight and burns more fuel. Now if we do the math together........I can assure you that AIRTRANS B717's will not make it to LAX without stopping in Dallas to refuel. Trust me we've had to do it when an Airbus broke. We are really pushing it to fly the Denver route with the 717 (you know that the FAA makes you have to have so much reserve fuel you just cant go diving into cities on fumes....What happens if you get put into a holding pattern? Yet another example of an outsider looking in, but dont be discouraged baker if you ever want the facts just ask!

08-01-2003, 11:16 PM	#2
dbaker Senior Member First Class Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: IAH/HOU Posts: 2,354	You think they accidently clicked the "Buy Now!" button on boeing.com? I'm not sure what you're suggesting. The training cost issue is a commonly known fact for those of us who read about this industry outside of flyertalk and ityt.

08-02-2003, 09:36 AM	#6
dbaker Senior Member First Class Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: IAH/HOU Posts: 2,354	Would you like me to quote the CEO of AirTran disagreeing with your statement, or can you just promise to do some reading now before you try to pretend that you know what you're talking about? Arguing with you is like arguing with a four year old. You just make up what you don't know and no matter who wins the argument, I lose.

08-06-2003, 07:30 PM	#13
jetmech717 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Atlanta Hartsfield Int. Airport Posts: 171	Baker I'm a mechanic not a pilot...... you know this. I also know that you are in the process of trying to be a pilot...not a mechanic, but I do know my airplanes and how far they are capable of flying. So if I have any pilot questions I'll ask you, and PLEASE if you have any questions about the maintenance part of aviation just ask instead of making it up as you go.

08-07-2003, 09:52 AM	#14
haze Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: ATL Posts: 271	Eggzackly ...I have a friend from NJ who is a co-pilot for US Airways. He flies the newer 737-800s, the ones with the cool little winglets that assist lift and range and aerodynamics. We were chatting about the new versions of the 737 (700,800, and 900), the winglets, it's range, AirTran's plans to purchase these etc. He basically said "What am I telling you for, you know more about the frikin' things than I do?!" Of course he was refering to the history of the model, other airlines' plans for the newer models, the future of the line, etc. Of course he knows what he's doing, knows his aircraft from top to bottom, and can fly the thing while I can't. But what I'm getting at is that I'd trust a mechanic on these matters before I would a pilot. Just like I knew that the 717 was simply a name change of the MD-95, when dbaker claimed it was the MD-80. Oh well, he's the pilot

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search