New Phl Flights

[Walmartgreeter]

The 737-300LR's could barely make DAY-LAX back in the day.

Somebody probably already answered....but of course the 737-300 used to fly to the coast....nonstop from PIT to LAX, SAN, SFO, and even ONT...as well as from other bases. The aux tanks have most all been deactivated, maybe someone can chime in as to whether the actual tanks were removed for weight. In my opinion (not to start a debate) the -400 ended up being a dissapointment at the time, as it could NOT make it to the coast (weight). It has turned out to be a great north south aircraft. Best Greeter.

 

[Art at ISP]

ITRADE

Don't shoot the messenger--I said I could be mistaken. The LR's definitely were stretching--I didn't say they couldn't do it.

The NG's are much faster and have much better range.

Thanks

 

[TBONEJ4J]

Anybody know if the E170 is EOW capable?

 

[StewGuy86]

I know both US and PI used the 733s for transcon. At Piedmont, we had 4 different A/C types doing the transcon runs. Initially just the 727, then the 733, followed by the 767 once they arrived on the property and, finally, the 734. Man, we had some SWEET trips on the 767 back in the day....4 day trips with one transcon leg per day. Ahhh. But I digress. I can tell you the 733 and the 734 were miserable planes to be on during transcon flights, either as a PAX or as a F/A. I recall the 734 didn't last long on those runs and I think you're right, they just didn't have the range. I don't remember the 733 ever having a problem with it, but I DO remember having to make unscheduled landings for fuel a couple of times on the 727 on westbound transcons due to headwinds. No doubt the 737NGs truly are a whole different breed of A/C and that's a good thing for anyone who's on them transcon. If you told me I'd ever have to work (or ride) on a 733 for 5 hours across the country again, I'd probably just take Greyhound instead!

 

[WorldTraveler]

The point is really not whether one particular aircraft can make it across the country or not. On a system basis, all of the airplanes still fly for USAirways. Shifting costly airplanes from one hub to another does not accomplish anything if one hub becomes more profitable and another becomes less profitable. When you do that, then there is a tremendous urge to say that you have another money-losing hub on your hands that needs to be closed. In time, the more expensive airplanes need to be replaced but for now it makes the most sense to put the most capable aircraft on the routes where they are most needed and use the less capable aircraft to fill in, understanding that there is a cost penalty that has to be factored in as long as that plane is in service. The options are either to restructure the network to fly where the planes can make money or replace the aircraft.

 

[StewGuy86]

We can't properly handle the flights we already have at PHL.

Amen to that!!