Mentour: "Will Killing the MAX-7 Save Southwest?!"

[waito]

Another interesting webcast from him.

Talking of a possible short term solution to buy another airline instead of waiting 2+ years for the 737-7 deliveries.

My personal opinion: Not a good idea. It'd disrupt many of the fundamentals SWA relies on if they try to integrate that airline.

What do you think? And why?

Will Killing the MAX-7 Save Southwest?! - YouTube

[DaveReidUK]

Clickbait.

[Kraftstoffvondesibel]

Clickbait.
It really isn’tz

[waito]

It's mildly clickbaitish, I agree. Nevertheless his point is backed by facts, so the whole video is worth a thought.

[nuisance79]

I find Mentour pretty good and balanced in his analysis plus unlike some Youtube aviation channels, he is (or at least was) currently operational out of Girona for FR.

[Less Hair]

They specifically need the MAX 7 for their network.

[procede]

They specifically need the MAX 7 for their network.
They need an aircraft with that size. The question is if the higher efficiency (and certainty) of the A220 is worth the additional cost of having an aircraft with no commonality to their current aircraft in their fleet. And that is a matter of the fleet size.

[Less Hair]

They need the 737-cockpit, the -7-performance and the ground handling to remain exactly 737.

[waito]

They need the 737-cockpit, the -7-performance and the ground handling to remain exactly 737.
wrong verb I guess.

Will they wait another 2 years and restrict their revenue, letting go opportunity - or tolerate an efficiency loss for the benefit of growth? As long as it's still profitable, why not?
​​​

[Asturias56]

One day they'll have to move on from the 737, and they won't be able to replace over 800 of them quickly so one day they'll be running at least two types.

That cost WILL occur - I guess it's a matter of how long they can put it off or, as Waito says, defer the opportunity at a cost. No doubt their economists and fleet planner shave terrabytes of economic models to assist.

[Big Pistons Forever]

SouthWest doesn’t have to just shop in the US. Porter the Canadian regional has 50 almost brand new E195’s that were just added to their Dash 8 400 fleet. It is privately owned and I am assuming would listen to a deal that would offer to take the whole fleet and have them go back to the Dash 8 operating model they used to have.

The E 195 has a 124 to 132 one class capacity, so pretty close to a MAX 7 and significantly better DOC.

Interesting speculation, however I would suggest that current the SouthWest C suite is showing signs of Boeing style management practices, including prioritizing short term profitability over investments in long term infrastructure that will ensure future success. None of these MBA bean counters are going to have the imagination or the stoned to make big decisions like breaking the one type model, even if it maybe in the best long term interests of the airline.

Herb must be rolling in his grave….

[waito]

Integrating a new a/c type into the existing company is what most of you discuss. That's a significant effort, unsteadiness

Mentour specifically speculates about buying into another company, where the fleet is already operational, settled, supplied, crews trained (and basically available in the first place) .

If it's profitable, good enough. Leave as it is, but market as SWA.
If they align routings with the existing ones: even better. SWA can open the desired routings in short time.

I see more trouble if they want to merge/integrate. On short sight at least.

[Sailvi767]

The SWA pilot contract requires pilot seniority lists to be merged if they acquire another airline operating equipment over 76 seats. Most US airline contracts have the same provisions. Prevents management attempting to whipsaw the two groups against each other.

[Fly3]

I recently was granted a visit to a B737 Max on the ground and was amazed at the similarity with the B737-300's and 400's I flew back in the 1980's. At some point Boeing will have to move on and the pain for airlines such as Southwest and Ryanair is really going to hurt.

[vegassun]

SouthWest doesn’t have to just shop in the US. Porter the Canadian regional has 50 almost brand new E195’s that were just added to their Dash 8 400 fleet. It is privately owned and I am assuming would listen to a deal that would offer to take the whole fleet and have them go back to the Dash 8 operating model they used to have.

The E 195 has a 124 to 132 one class capacity, so pretty close to a MAX 7 and significantly better DOC.

Interesting speculation, however I would suggest that current the SouthWest C suite is showing signs of Boeing style management practices, including prioritizing short term profitability over investments in long term infrastructure that will ensure future success. None of these MBA bean counters are going to have the imagination or the stoned to make big decisions like breaking the one type model, even if it maybe in the best long term interests of the airline.

Herb must be rolling in his grave….

BPF, this is really really old news. It started when Herb stepped down in 2008 and was in full swing within 3-4 years. They were only interested in ROI capital and taking care of the poor mistreated shareholders. Everything else be damned. I saw it with my own eyes. It's really a sad story about a once great company and will probably be discussed in some business textbook of the future.

[WillowRun 6-3]

Realizing it's a thread, I still (as SLF/attorney) want to say "hey pull the reins some here". I recall AW&ST articles - at the time of publication, not archived - about Southwest employees being trained for, and performing, several different roles to facilitate (and maybe the correct word is, to "enable") fast turn-around times, in the summer of 1975. Maybe it was 1976. The cabin crew uniforms, yes, a point of anachronistic interest, perhaps. But it is exaggerating the situation to invoke the name of the founder.

I believe if Herb K. were to be briefed on the state of affairs at the airline he founded and drove forward - remember, wasn't it the Texas Railroad Commission that controlled the routes and fares before deregulation, and how the business enterprise he founded had to kind of scratch and claw for slots and permission to operate at all in Texas, at Love Field (iirc), so contemporary "disrupters", maybe take note - if he were briefed he would want to make two points clear. First, I believe Herb K. would be quite displeased, although most likely not surprised, by the litigation filed by the pilots' union against Boeing. Not the content of the suit as such, not the fact they sued Boeing, but the root issue, that the pilots had stridently opposed having a new variant of the 737 which would have required more training. Opposed to acquiring the piloting profession's additional increment of knowledge, skills and abilities? This (imho) would have shocked the man who required everyone (or nearly everyone) employed to do multiple jobs to turn airplanes around more quickly, part of the method (I'm not a pilot, you understand, I don't know the diference between "ways" and "means" for implementing strategies) for getting a toehold - which is all it was at first - against entrenched carriers. Remember, at the start, Mr. Kelleher wasn't getting telephone calls from Mr. Crandall to discuss, that is, anything other than airline fares. (If this post misstates anything about the SWA pilots lawsuit against Boeing in the aftermath of the 737 MAX accidents, I'm not cutting time to go read old pleadings, and (though I tried) I wasn't part of their legal team.)

Second, I think Herb K. would scoff at the idea that intergrating seniority rosters could even be tried in this environment, the ridiculous blame placed on air transport operators for situations way outside their control for one thing, the outrageous misbehavior and misconduct of pax for absolutely no good or respectable reason - yes not involving pilots directly as such but indicative of there being no willingness in the the Executive Branch - at present anyhow - to help such an acquisition (of another airline operation like Porter reportedly did) reach closure.

Should Southwest migrate its operation away from all-737? Of course it should. What was so "workhorse-special" about the 737 back in the Love Field early days isn't true anymore. But that having been said, I'm not so sure - because I don't fly airplanes and I would absolutely positively want to know the wide-ranging views of the pilots who do. Is it really better from an operational standpoint to have just one type to know and to keep current on? Does the company really and truly obtain safer operations overall, more efficient operations overall, with just one type? As noted above, if the lawsuit and its background had a good basis in fact, then "one type only" thinking led to unjustified rejection of a new variant which - if Boeing had not lied (and people had not died (with apologies to Paul Cassell, Counsel for some families of the crash victims and legally under federal law, crime victims)) - would have required some more extensive "differences training."

I'll bet, ranting SLF/attorney as I am, that Elliott venture or hedge fund people will have plenty of differences with current management and Board. We'll see.

Edit: Elliott Investment Management is an activist investor, of course.

[MechEngr]

I recently was granted a visit to a B737 Max on the ground and was amazed at the similarity with the B737-300's and 400's I flew back in the 1980's. At some point Boeing will have to move on and the pain for airlines such as Southwest and Ryanair is really going to hurt.

Boeing already moved on. The 757, 767, 777, 787. Yet the 737, as is, remains a popular product with the buyers. Buyers didn't ask Boeing for a new flight deck on the 737, they asked for fuel efficiency to the similar market Airbus.

[Sailvi767]

Boeing already moved on. The 757, 767, 777, 787. Yet the 737, as is, remains a popular product with the buyers. Buyers didn't ask Boeing for a new flight deck on the 737, they asked for fuel efficiency to the similar market Airbus.

The comparable model 737’s have always had better fuel efficiency than the A320 series. They also have a better dispatch reliability. The Airbus needs a new wing. That’s the one thing Boeing did right. The NG wing is excellent.

[waito]

The comparable model 737’s have always had better fuel efficiency than the A320 series.

That's not the competing Aircraft mentioned by Mentour. Forget the A320.

He talks of picking up Breeze Airways. They currently operate EMB 190/195. BUT: That airline already took delivery of first A220s, and are in progress to get 80 of them (no mention of the timeline though) . But certainly there's no waiting for years until a viable fleet of modern and very efficient aircraft allow expansion. And how about seat capacity? Well, it's the perfect alternative to the MAX -7 in this regard.

[procede]

The comparable model 737’s have always had better fuel efficiency than the A320 series. They also have a better dispatch reliability. The Airbus needs a new wing. That’s the one thing Boeing did right. The NG wing is excellent.

I'm pretty sure that is not true for the Neo vs.Max. Also Boeing has nothing comparable to the A321. The Max 10 might get close in passenger capacity, but it does not have the range.

[Sailvi767]

That's not the competing Aircraft mentioned by Mentour. Forget the A320.

He talks of picking up Breeze Airways. They currently operate EMB 190/195. BUT: That airline already took delivery of first A220s, and are in progress to get 80 of them (no mention of the timeline though) . But certainly there's no waiting for years until a viable fleet of modern and very efficient aircraft allow expansion. And how about seat capacity? Well, it's the perfect alternative to the MAX -7 in this regard.

Southwest needs a 737 replacement across their fleet. Anything they purchase needs to cover the 149 seat to 200 plus seat market. If they just buy a Max 7 replacement they will soon have to introduce a third aircraft type.

[waito]

Southwest needs a 737 replacement across their fleet. Anything they purchase needs to cover the 149 seat to 200 plus seat market. If they just buy a Max 7 replacement they will soon have to introduce a third aircraft type.

But how? I recently read, A320 Family new order will place you in 2031 IIRC.

They will stick to the 737-8 which is modern and efficient enough for them in its capacity class. Delivery rate is reduced, but at least they are in the queue for 207 more -8. I mean, that's the only aircraft they can get in the short term.

[Asturias56]

Theoretically - but that assumes every airline wants deliveries as per their order - which may have been several years ago. I'm sure that for a significant SW order Airbus would shake the trees and produce a flow of early deliveries. And of course with a SW order in their pocket they'd be well placed to fund a significant increase in production

"In January, Airbus delivered 30 jets, including two A220s, 26 A320s (all NEO), and two A330s. The official A320 production rate is 45 aircraft per month and has remained at this level since the end of 2021. On average, the company delivered 48 A320s per month in 2023 compared to 43 in 2022. Production is currently being increased and an official rate hike is coming soon. In connection with the release of their 2023 full-year earnings this month, we can expect the A320 rate to be officially raised. At this time, we consider the unofficial A320 production rate to be 48 per month but will keep the rate in our charts and tables at 45 for now. The A320 program is expected to reach a monthly rate of 65 by late 2024. We can therefore expect a series of rate increases this year. Also, Airbus is working with its supply chain to increase A320 production to 75 aircraft per month in 2026."

https://flightplan.forecastinternational.com/2024/02/15/airbus-and-boeing-report-january-2024-commercial-aircraft-orders-and-deliveries/#:~:text=The%20official%20A320%20production%20rate,rate%20hi ke%20is%20coming%20soon.

[waito]

I'm sure that for a significant SW order Airbus would shake the trees and produce a flow of early deliveries. And of course with a SW order in their pocket they'd be well placed to fund a significant increase in production

That's a good point, Asturias. Also if other customers drop out for various reasons. That scenario would be realistic if SWA fundamentally changes course and introduce a second fleet across the whole capacity range. (But keep in mind, many airlines are desperate because of the GTF engine overhaul crisis, searching for way to bridge it).

It doesn't solve the short term issue however with the 150 seat fleet. A319? I doubt it, even existing Airbus customers are hesitating. SWA still need to hope for the 737-7 - or ways to get a hold on A220s. Now...

... delivered 30 jets, including two A220s, 26 A320s (all NEO), ... Production is currently being increased and an official rate hike is coming soon.

2 A220s. And they are not able to increase that rate as "easy" as in their highly efficient A320 family production. A220 production is small scale from the start, with teething issues, and still unprofitable!

SWA simply can't close the gap in the next 2 years. Extending the use of 737-700 does not really allow expansion. Maybe some of those can be freed from routes that grew into MAX 8 territory.

Alternative to this whole mess is to keep 737-800 longer and use them with empty seats on thin routes, while new MAX 8 keep coming. Maybe this is the least risky and somehow affordable solution.

[tdracer]

When (if?) Boeing bites the bullet with a 737 replacement, it's a good bet that it will have high commonality of flight deck layout and handling, processes, and procedures with the current 737 (not to mention the 777 and 787). That would make training and crossover with the existing 737 fleet less of an issue than going with an entirely different platform on the A320 or A220 series.
It's worth remembering that the 777 flightdeck had a great deal of commonality with the 757/767 flightdeck (including using the same structural bits), which made the transition of existing 757/767 flight crews much easier.

[Less Hair]

Today it might be some 787 style flight deck and a similar FBW. But because of the upcoming next engine generation, they might target 2035 like Airbus is doing. Then it might be a single pilot operated (or at least single pilot+remote certified) cockpit with the next layout and procedures. Boeing missed the right moment. After the A320neo announcement Boeing should have launched the NSA right away and at full speed, when they had all those 787 engineers and current design experience available. Sooner or later the MAX will need replacement. With years lost the business case yields much less than hoped for.

[Sailvi767]

Both Boeing and Airbus need a new narrow body. Neither company currently has the engineering talent available. Both also don’t seem to want to make the investment. It’s almost like they are colluding with each other to offer 40 year old technology. If neither makes a move the airlines have no alternative.
It’s also important to understand that Airbus did not purchase the A220 because they liked the airframe. They purchased it to eliminate a competitor. When a downturn hits and airframe sales crash I would expect Airbus to close the A220 program.

[Less Hair]

By buying the CSeries Airbus prevented Boeing from buying it. With the Boeing-Embraer cooperation failed Boeing had to go MAX. I am still not sure how much sense the A220, while being a top aircraft itself, makes as a separate product for Airbus. The CSeries could have been the easy way out for Boeing. A modern low end family and then some clean sheet NMA on top.

[A320LGW]

Both Boeing and Airbus need a new narrow body. Neither company currently has the engineering talent available. Both also don’t seem to want to make the investment. It’s almost like they are colluding with each other to offer 40 year old technology. If neither makes a move the airlines have no alternative.
It’s also important to understand that Airbus did not purchase the A220 because they liked the airframe. They purchased it to eliminate a competitor. When a downturn hits and airframe sales crash I would expect Airbus to close the A220 program.

Why fix what isn't broken? The A320 does an exceptional job, along with the 737. They are both very good at what they were designed to do and still (more so the 320) very relevant.

This is more a reflection of how good the engineering teams were 40/50 yrs ago rather than how "bad" the teams are today.

[Asturias56]

When you look at the cost of introducing and certifying a clean sheet design you can see why both Mr B and Airbus put off doing it. It used to be thought worthwhile if you could improve things by 15-20% but given the costs now I'd bet it would have to be a lot higher to take that risk. We may have to accept that like the motor car, the mass production models have reached a plateau and they're all going to look much the same from now on out with the odd tweak now and then. When you think about it, it's astonishing that the 737 set the pattern with an early 1960's design.

[Less Hair]

The CSeries seems to prove the opposite. Both big players had to beef up their established families in a hurry because the clean sheet was so much better.

[tdracer]

The CSeries seems to prove the opposite. Both big players had to beef up their established families in a hurry because the clean sheet was so much better.
Problem with the CSeries is it's too expensive to build. For a small, shorter range aircraft, the aluminum/composite cost tradeoff still falls squarely on the side of aluminum, and that's not likely to change anytime soon. Right now, building A220's is a money pit. Upping the production rate will help, but due to the requirements of the composite structures, upping the rate means a massive infrastructure investment - far more than what would be needed for an aluminum aircraft.
So, while the CSeries is a good aircraft, it's unlikely to ever be a money maker.

[waito]

Why fix what isn't broken? The A320 does an exceptional job, along with the 737. They are both very good at what they were designed to do and still (more so the 320) very relevant.


There's always room for improvement, so your statement will expire one day. Which in fact expires later than usual:

Neither A nor B will start another conventional short/midrange a/c program now. NEO and MAX are still quite fresh.

They will certainly start unconventional new design with tech that enable more improvements than yet another conventional design.

They need to start now. Anybody thinks they will design a conventional type in parallel, unless the new tech fails?

[tdracer]

There's always room for improvement, so your statement will expire one day. Which in fact expires later than usual:

Neither A nor B will start another conventional short/midrange a/c program now. NEO and MAX are still quite fresh.

They will certainly start unconventional new design with tech that enable more improvements than yet another conventional design.

They need to start now. Anybody thinks they will design a conventional type in parallel, unless the new tech fails?
Boeing will need a lengthy period of recovery before they can even think of 737 a replacement. They've lost something like $32 Billion in the last six years (and over 60% of the share price), with no end in sight to their money loosing ways until they get the 737 and 787 production issues sorted and the 777X certified and start deliveries (there are a whole bunch of complete - less engines 777Xs sitting around Everett, I'm guessing some more may be parked elsewhere). They need a significant period of profitability to generate the free cash needed to launch any new aircraft program - or even to make major investments in new technology in anticipation of a new program.

[Asturias56]

We also forget the increasing burden of certification and moding older designs. -. Boeing have struggled with the 777 and the 767 derived tanker . It 's brave man who would launch a completely new design when they have a multi year order book for what they already produce

[Lonewolf_50]

I flew from Houston to Baltimore and back this weekend on a Southwest 737-8 MAX each time.
I don't get the hysteria. Is it airframe retirement rates versus usage rates?
I think that DaveReidUK's assessment of clickbait is spot on.

Less Hair: thanks for your posts, informative.

[waito]

Also, Airbus is working with its supply chain to increase A320 production to 75 aircraft per month in 2026.

Airbus just announced they can't achieve their expansion plan. It's not a drastic setback, but they need to stretch the timeline. WRT A320, they now aim for 2027 to produce 75 per month. Impact to financial figures will be stronger, they want to invest 0.9 Billion into supplier efficiency.

Good news: they don't "push it no matter what".

[Less Hair]

It is mainly the GTF repair that takes time. No surprise. This might not be the right moment for SWA to consider changing fleets.

[waito]

It is mainly the GTF repair that takes time. No surprise. This might not be the right moment for SWA to consider changing fleets.
I agree, changing fleet is absolutely impossible. Especially on short term. Let's really stop this discussion.
Adding a different type in the 140 seat class (new or used): 2 year wait for the 737-7. other options: none in the short term. you cant built up a viable fleet.

So we come back to the initial post: buying another airline with existing 140 seat fleet.

[Less Hair]

That idea is beyond absurd if it should be meant for fleet replacement.

[waito]

That idea is beyond absurd if it should be meant for fleet replacement.
Fleet replacement? What are you talking about?

[Less Hair]

Your topic is about "killing the MAX 7". I will leave this nonsense debate right now.

[waito]

Your topic is about "killing the MAX 7". I will leave this nonsense debate right now.
Thank you!!