Efficient and good-looking ... they almost named it the 7-WanderingJustin-7! (Courtesy of Aircraftmania.com)
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer is reporting that the Boeing 787 might be going wheels-up for the first time before July 1.
Let’s hope so. The 787 has the potential to change travel for the better. I’m not just talking about its fuel economy, which is still a great step forward. I’m not talking about its higher cabin humidity and bigger windows, which will make travel more comfortable.
I’m mostly thinking of the sum of its benefits. With its fuel economy, any company considering phasing out a bunch of older planes should really have a good think about the 787. Yes, it’s a big wide-body twinjet. But imagine replacing five 737-800s with three 787s-3s: Depending on the seating configuration, you’d carry more people with fewer planes.
Long term, I’d bet that adds up to fuel savings, more passengers moved, fewer gate fees and fewer planes clogging the taxiways and airways. On that last point: Southwest Airlines sends a never-ending stream of 737s from Phoenix to LA. Call me crazy, but why not fewer flights in more airplanes? That means paying fewer crew members, too. And it would free up some gates that airports could use to entice other airlines – like you, Phoenix Sky Harbor, that so dreadfully lacks international carriers to major international destinations (hint, poke, hint, hint).
That could mean fewer flight delays, resulting in happier customers (especially when you factor in the cabin enhancements).
I know I’m not alone here, as the always-wise Patrick Smith of Ask the Pilot fame confirms. I remember that, back in the “old days,” you flew from Phoenix to Chicago in a Boeing 767, a heavy twinjet. You didn’t fly in a 737 or Airbus A319.
“… you might have noticed that the “big” planes have themselves been getting smaller. Narrow-bodied jetliners like the A319, A320, 737 and MD-88 now make up the bulk of the majors’ fleets,” Smith writes. “Airlines sell frequency. And, right or wrong, passengers buy it.” (Smith is right on the money)
The 787 really gives airlines a chance to do better as their fleets age – if they’re only wise enough to do it. I’m not betting on that, but I’m hoping like an airborne Chicago Cubs fan.
More From wandering_justin
- Admit You’re Boring – It’s the First Step to Recovery
- Coming soon – more bike posts!
- Coming Soon: Max Powder and The Ice Queen
wandering_justin Recommends
- The 5 things you must know NOW before travelling (Gear Up and Play)
- Frontier will soon start charging for food (Carrying On: Travel Blog)
- Demon Blockers – A Women’s Travel Story (Gear Up and Play)
Not too familiar with this puppy yet, but it sounds pretty nice from everything you mentioned. As trivial as it seems, higher humidity’s a pretty big deal when you’re flying for 10+ hours.
Southwest just started up here in the Twin Cities, but given their prices, I’ll probably be using them for domestic trips. It’d be cool if they switched, but isn’t their entire fleet 737′s?
Yes, the humidity factor is huge. The plane can do this because of the wide-scale use of composites in the fuselage.
Southwest is using mostly next-gen 737-700s right now. That’s part of its business model – maximum interchangeability of parts and people’s knowledge. They’ll probably always use the 737, unfortunately. Some of the 737s are actually pretty big – the -900 can carry up to 190 people. It’s no 787 or even 767, but that’s better than 130, I guess. A full fleet of those could reduce traffic by 15 percent or so.