Southwest Rapid Rewards - Which routes are the 737-800s flying?

My brother wanted me to ask which routes the 738 was going to be flying for the next few months. Anyone have any idea how to find this?

My brother wanted me to ask which routes the 738 was going to be flying for the next few months. Anyone have any idea how to find this?

Just looking at booking a MDW-FLL trip and Flight 315 looks to be scheduled as a 738 everyday for the next couple of months. Also see the 738 scheduled on some MDW-LGA flights this fall. Just click the flight number on the booking screen for this info. Best bets for the 738 are going to be from stations like MDW or BWI.

My brother wanted me to ask which routes the 738 was going to be flying for the next few months. Anyone have any idea how to find this?
Scheduled -800 trips......

#2701 June 30 BWI-HOU
#4007 July 1 HOU-MDW
#226 July 1 MDW-LAS
#425 July 2 LAS-BWI
#497 July 12 BWI-SAN
#1057 July 15 BWI-DEN-SLC
#428 July 16 SLC-DEN
#715 July 16 DEN-BWI
#109 July 16 BWI-PVD
#497 July 17 PVD-BWI
#2493 July 26 BWI-LAX
#777 July 27 LAX-MDW
#331 July 27 MDW-LAX
#2676 July 28 LAX-BWI
#1057 July 29 BWI-DEN-SLC
#428 July 30 SLC-DEN
#715 July 30 DEN-BWI
#109 July 30 BWI-PVD
#497 July 31 PVD-BWI

Much appreciated!

Just looking at booking a MDW-FLL trip and Flight 315 looks to be scheduled as a 738 everyday for the next couple of months. Also see the 738 scheduled on some MDW-LGA flights this fall. Just click the flight number on the booking screen for this info. Best bets for the 738 are going to be from stations like MDW or BWI.

I can tell you when I flew from LAS to BWI it was an 800.....and I saw 2 or 3 on the ground at BWI......I'd expect they'll be on the longer flights....for the same opposite reason SW uses 300's on the short hauls.....800's are more efficient.....

It was only the crew's 2nd flight on an 800.....It was funny watching the front flight attendant trying to figure out how to turn off the cabin lights...one finally came from the back and showed her the 'special' spot on the touch screen......

Hi All,

Where 737-800 is flying now? On which the specific route is that? I think they already put on entire 737-800 aircraft. Some of specific route is HOU-PHX, BWI-LAS, BWI-ATL, BWI-LAX, MDW-FLL, LAS-PHX, LAS-BUF, MCO-BWI and anywhere else.

I knows WN has already 16 738 aircraft is in the fleets now. One more 738 soon to be delivery later this week. 3 more 738 will delivery sometime in July.

Here the list for which aircraft has already on order.

http://www.planespotters.net/Production_List/search.php?manufacturer=Boeing&subtype=737-800&fleet=6210&fleetStatus=3

WN has already 16 738 aircraft is in the fleet. Here the list:

http://www.planespotters.net/Production_List/search.php?manufacturer=Boeing&subtype=737-800&fleet=6210&fleetStatus=1

This should be more helpful. Please share the flight schedule for me. Thanks all.

Regards

I had a 737-800 series on my leg from BWI-> PHX. Was allegedly the plane's second trip.

Ok, what about PHX-LAS? On which the flight schedule is that? I would try to fly on it.

Well, because of the nature of Southwest point-to-point-to-point roaming-the-country-almost-randomly nature of flying routes, I don't think that where a 737-800 is used one day is necessarily indicative of where it'll end up the next.

So IMHO the post by steved5480 listing specific flights on specific days sounds more useful than asking about market pairs in general.

I ran into a 737-800 on June 1 on LAX-BWI. I see it listed above for July 28, but it sure doesn't seem like it's necessarily on that route anywhere close to every day. In fact, that list above seems to repeat some groups of flights, but only after two weeks! And each group of flights seems to take several days to get back to the original "hub" city.

So based on what I see so far, I woudn't necessarily expect all that many flights to have a 738 every single day yet.

the other poster in this thread listed a flight attendant's upcoming schedule who put in for -800 flights. that's why there were gaps of a few days, and why one list of flights cannot possibly be representative of a fleet containing 16+ -800's

Since southwest knows if they are selling to 175, or 137/143, I'd like the same information at the time of booking that legacy carriers have given for years: tell me the planned aircraft model.

Since I'd prefer the factory new -800's, l'd often book a different flight time than usual, book with a stop, or book via an alternate starting city (I live midway between three Southwest stations)

Since southwest knows if they are selling to 175, or 137/143, I'd like the same information at the time of booking that legacy carriers have given for years: tell me the planned aircraft model.


For at least a few months now, they have provided this information on the reservation booking screen. Click on the flight number. Will tell you the model and 137 or 143 configuration on the -700.

Nice tip, boudinboat! It had been ages since I'd clicked one of those flight number links, as they always seemed pretty worthless. Wow, have they changed!

Non-stop on a 738:
http://i.imgur.com/LW5Ny.png
Connection with two different 73Gs:
http://i.imgur.com/kzVIp.png

How they do that? How? Where I can find? I never see it before. Is that on WN website or did you search a flight schedule.

As boudinboat said, just click on the flight number(s) (while viewing a fare search results page).

You might need to disable an overly aggressive pop-up blocker.

Thanks very much for posting the flight info linky thing. That will help me avoid the new interior, and for this summer I can avoid the 800 when flying MDW-SEA or LAS-BWI. I would much rather be on a 700 and avoid a fuel stop on long legs leaving out of hot airports like LAS or short fields like MDW. I am not sure what the ultimate mission is for the 800 but I don't think it will be MDW, especially in wet cold weather.

As boudinboat said, just click on the flight number(s) (while viewing a fare search results page).

You might need to disable an overly aggressive pop-up blocker.

Thanks! I appreciate your helps and now I can see it. it was so much easy for me. I didn't have any problem at all.

For my June 23rd, SNA-PHX on WN 2455. We had a 738 as an equipment swap for our over 1-hour late original 73G. It appears that a lot of people under a certain height are going to have trouble with the new overhead bins. Also, I observed the cart drink service and spoke with the FA about it. Neither of us were fans, she also told me that with cart service, they are not allowed to give the whole can any more, even if you ask for it. Also, they are limited to a second drink service, which consists entirely of their trip back to the galley with the cart. So, if you are in the last row that the FA serves, your opportunity for a refill is seconds after receiving your initial drink. Lastly, I felt like I was on a legacy since carts blocked the aisles for both sets of lavs (1 in the front and 2 in the rear) for the entire flight. As for the seats, I noticed the reduction in legroom immediately (I am 6' 2") as my knees were touching the seatback pouch which never happens in the classic interior.

Thanks very much for posting the flight info linky thing. That will help me avoid the new interior, and for this summer I can avoid the 800 when flying MDW-SEA or LAS-BWI. I would much rather be on a 700 and avoid a fuel stop on long legs leaving out of hot airports like LAS or short fields like MDW. I am not sure what the ultimate mission is for the 800 but I don't think it will be MDW, especially in wet cold weather.

I was flying home today and overheard a flight attendant that was commuting home. He said they wants LAS to be an ETOPS qualified station to do the 800s for over water flights with overnights for the crews such as Hawaii, some Mexico cities, Northern South America such as Caracas, Ecuador, Lima and also some Central America destinations.

Who knows? If it happens, it happens.

They won't be doing LAS-HNL year round with an -800 unless they habitually block off 30 seats from sale. They won't be doing LAS-CCS unless they block about a hundred.

For my June 23rd, SNA-PHX on WN 2455. We had a 738 as an equipment swap for our over 1-hour late original 73G. It appears that a lot of people under a certain height are going to have trouble with the new overhead bins. Also, I observed the cart drink service and spoke with the FA about it. Neither of us were fans, she also told me that with cart service, they are not allowed to give the whole can any more, even if you ask for it. Also, they are limited to a second drink service, which consists entirely of their trip back to the galley with the cart. So, if you are in the last row that the FA serves, your opportunity for a refill is seconds after receiving your initial drink. Lastly, I felt like I was on a legacy since carts blocked the aisles for both sets of lavs (1 in the front and 2 in the rear) for the entire flight. As for the seats, I noticed the reduction in legroom immediately (I am 6' 2") as my knees were touching the seatback pouch which never happens in the classic interior.


what was worst about the drink service we experienced is that since all carts are sent out at the same time, if inner carts run out of something, they are blocked in and cannot go back to retrieve more. Maybe that's why they can't give out full cans.

For the interior, it's been posted on Flyertalk that the WN 737-800's have the same seat pitch as the pre-evolve flights, due to the longer range and potential for overwater flights.

I was flying home today and overheard a flight attendant that was commuting home. He said they wants LAS to be an ETOPS qualified station to do the 800s for over water flights with overnights for the crews such as Hawaii, some Mexico cities, Northern South America such as Caracas, Ecuador, Lima and also some Central America destinations.

You should take anything you hear from a F/A with a grain of salt when it comes to future strategy.

They won't be doing LAS-HNL year round with an -800 unless they habitually block off 30 seats from sale. They won't be doing LAS-CCS unless they block about a hundred.

No, I believe where WN will fly from FLL to South American flights. LAS-CCS won't even do it. Because it was out of range. It is not enough range to reaching into CCS. I think WN will plan to start HOU/FLL/MCO/TPA-CCS nonstop instead of going fly from LAS. Because LAS had no customs & immigrations in entire concourse B & C. There is no CBP facility at entire T1. Besides, I think they would start renovation the entire concourse A & B gates and they need to renovated new CBP facility.

I was flying home today and overheard a flight attendant that was commuting home. He said they wants LAS to be an ETOPS qualified station to do the 800s for over water flights with overnights for the crews such as Hawaii, some Mexico cities, Northern South America such as Caracas, Ecuador, Lima and also some Central America destinations.

Who knows? If it happens, it happens.

Hmmm...Let's wait and see. If they have a agreement. They will approved it.

They won't be doing LAS-HNL year round with an -800 unless they habitually block off 30 seats from sale. They won't be doing LAS-CCS unless they block about a hundred.

LAS-CCS won't even do it. Because it was out of range. It is not enough range to reaching into CCS. I think WN will plan to start HOU/FLL/MCO/TPA-CCS nonstop instead of going fly from LAS.

There's no reason to think these would be non-stop flights. LAS would work fine as a crew base on a one stop flight like LAS-SFO/LAX-HNL or LAS-HOU/FLL-CCS.

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B206 Safari/7534.48.3)

Thanks very much for posting the flight info linky thing. That will help me avoid the new interior, and for this summer I can avoid the 800 when flying MDW-SEA or LAS-BWI. I would much rather be on a 700 and avoid a fuel stop on long legs leaving out of hot airports like LAS or short fields like MDW. I am not sure what the ultimate mission is for the 800 but I don't think it will be MDW, especially in wet cold weather.

I'm curious if you avoid other carrier's 738s out of LAS in the summer months? Or if you avoided flying ATA's 738s out of MDW?

If AS can take a 738 MIA-SEA in January with a flight time over 7 hours, WN can get theirs to BWI or MDW from the west coast.

By the way the 6p PHX-SNA flight is scheduled as a 738 for the summer. It does a turn in SNA and returns as the 8p flight to PHX.

If AS can take a 738 MIA-SEA in January with a flight time over 7 hours, WN can get theirs to BWI or MDW from the west coast.


Except MIA-SEA is a 5.5 hour flight, max.... :confused:

Except MIA-SEA is a 5.5 hour flight, max.... :confused:

Block time on that flight is 6:15. But that's not always what happens, as you can see here. (http://flightaware.com/live/flight/ASA17/history/20120118/1325Z/KMIA/KSEA)

I'm curious if you avoid other carrier's 738s out of LAS in the summer months? Or if you avoided flying ATA's 738s out of MDW?

If AS can take a 738 MIA-SEA in January with a flight time over 7 hours, WN can get theirs to BWI or MDW from the west coast.

By the way the 6p PHX-SNA flight is scheduled as a 738 for the summer. It does a turn in SNA and returns as the 8p flight to PHX.
Um, while the plane body of a 738 is the same from carrier to carrier, the seating isn't. The reason the OP is avoiding the 738 on Southwest is because it guarantees this seating:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/southwest-rapid-rewards/1303449-southwest-airlines-new-interior-adds-1-row-claims-preserve-knee-room.html

(There are ways to get that seating sometimes on non-738s, of course, but just a small chance for now. But on a 738, you're guaranteed to get that seating, so if you hate it, you want to avoid the 738.)

But the seating is completely different on Alaska. Alaska has reservable exit rows (if you have status at AS, DL< or AA), Alaska has first class, and at any rate even the lowly "ordinary" coach seats on Alaska are not "too low" the way the new Southwest seats are for some people.

So many people would much rather fly on an Alaska 738 for 7 hours than on a Southwest 738 for 3.5 hours!

But it's because of the seats that each airline has (differently) put on their 738, not because of the 738 plane hull itself!

(Southwest used to have better seating than all the legacies until this change. Now the legacies, at least for some people, have better seating than Southwest's newest -- 738 -- or newly-refurbished planes.)

Um, while the plane body of a 738 is the same from carrier to carrier, the seating isn't. The reason the OP is avoiding the 738 on Southwest is because it guarantees this seating:

I'm well aware of the Evolve interior on the 738s (which is reportedly 32"). However, if you read kerflumexed's quote, you'll see he made a comment about taking a -700 over a -800 to avoid fuel stops:

I would much rather be on a 700 and avoid a fuel stop on long legs leaving out of hot airports like LAS or short fields like MDW.

Which is why I posted what I did....

Except MIA-SEA is a 5.5 hour flight, max.... :confused:

Right, almost 6 hours in-flight.

I'm well aware of the Evolve interior on the 738s (which is reportedly 32"). However, if you read kerflumexed's quote, you'll see he made a comment about taking a -700 over a -800 to avoid fuel stops:

I would much rather be on a 700 and avoid a fuel stop on long legs leaving out of hot airports like LAS or short fields like MDW.

Which is why I posted what I did....
Well, not all airplanes run with full fuel. It adds extra weight.

At any rate, for whatever reason(s), the amount of fuel loaded can differ greatly on a 7-hour flight on one airline on one route vs a 3.5-hour flight on another airline on another route.

Furthermore, the policies on that may differ by airilne and/or route and/or maybe even crew (on or off ground). There was a recent episode of On The Fly where they first think they have to kick off 4 passengers due to excess weight, then only 1, then play some magic and don't have to kick off any. (After the pilot says he can only adjust fuel by passengers, cargo, or fuel.)

If the short runway of MDW leads to underloading of fuel, then that would only affect airlines that serve MDW. Most if not all legacies serve ORD instead. ORD doesn't have short runway. (It may or may not have enough for all weather scenarios, but that's a different issue than whether they're short.) So by flying an airline that uses ORD instead of MDW, you may be able to avoid whatever short runway issues there are and their effect on fuel loading.

If you're actually flying to LAS, of course, that city has only one airport, used by all carriers that fly to Las Vegas. However, the reference to LAS may have been related to changing planes there, and again, most legacies (US excepted) won't change planes in LAS or PHX but elsewhere. (Only US and WN have "hubs" in Nevada/Arizona. DL does have a hub in Utah, but northern Utah, and also SLC is a couple thousand feet higher in altitude than LAS, and thus it doesn't have quite the same level of issues with the ground/air being superhot as LAS does.)

So I think his complaint was airport-specific, and by not flying WN he will be changing planes at other airports (or perhaps flying nonstop more often?).

Well, not all airplanes run with full fuel. It adds extra weight.

At any rate, for whatever reason(s), the amount of fuel loaded can differ greatly on a 7-hour flight on one airline on one route vs a 3.5-hour flight on another airline on another route.

Furthermore, the policies on that may differ by airilne and/or route and/or maybe even crew (on or off ground). There was a recent episode of On The Fly where they first think they have to kick off 4 passengers due to excess weight, then only 1, then play some magic and don't have to kick off any. (After the pilot says he can only adjust fuel by passengers, cargo, or fuel.)

If the short runway of MDW leads to underloading of fuel, then that would only affect airlines that serve MDW. Most if not all legacies serve ORD instead. ORD doesn't have short runway. (It may or may not have enough for all weather scenarios, but that's a different issue than whether they're short.) So by flying an airline that uses ORD instead of MDW, you may be able to avoid whatever short runway issues there are and their effect on fuel loading.

In reality, very few airlines operate with fuel tanks, since fuel loads are by nature and necessity mission-specific, and a delicate balance of several factors (as far as weights go) such as max takeoff weight, max landing weight, planned flight duration, weather/winds, and the planned payload (pax, bags, cargo) to be transported.

If a flight is takeoff-limited and the temperature at actual departure time is lower than originally planned, recalculating the max takeoff weight to the lower temperature usually results in a higher weight, and enabling the flight to now take everyone and not leave anyone behind. Conversely, if the temperature spikes up a couple of degrees warmer than planned, then the max takeoff weight decreases, and that may entail returning to the gate to offload weight in excess of what's permissible for that new hotter temp.

This used to be a real PITA for airlines operating from the old DEN Stapleton (and other "hot and high" airports) with the previous generation of airliners powered by Pratt & Whitney's venerable JT8D engine (which were on the 727s, DC-9s, and 737-200s of the era) but it is much a problem with the high-bypass engines common on most of today's operating aircraft (the exception being the MD-80, which still uses a later version of the JT8D). That said, MDW or DEN at 100F+ gets rather interesting and we stay busy.

Most airline flights are not actually takeoff weight limited, but are landing weight limited, i.e. they could get the aircraft off the ground at max takeoff weight at the departure airport, but then after consumption of the fuel it takes to get from A to B, they'd be arriving over max landing weight. The solution is to add the fuel to be consumed A to B to the max landing weight at B, and then restrict the aircraft to that figure so that the flight arrives not to exceed max landing weight. On a landing weight limited flight, the temperature at the takeoff airport will then usually have no effect as far as being able to get more passengers aboard the flight.

As far as the "underloading" of fuel is concerned, there are specific requirements in the FAA regs that cover fuel planning, and the minimum fuel load is what the dispatcher and captain must concur upon as to what's safe and legal to operate the flight. If that minimum fuel requirement won't permit all the passengers to go, other options (including fuel stops) are considered.

Since southwest knows if they are selling to 175, or 137/143, I'd like the same information at the time of booking that legacy carriers have given for years: tell me the planned aircraft model.
In addition to the flight info tip posted above, I see that Bill Owen has written (http://www.blogsouthwest.com/blog/4-1-1-two-new-equipment-types-swa-fleet):
For those of you with access to industry schedule feeds, we’re using the equipment code “73W” for the “Evolve” -700s, instead of the industry-standard equipment code 73G... Our -800...flights will carry the code “73H.”

Um, while the plane body of a 738 is the same from carrier to carrier, the seating isn't. The reason the OP is avoiding the 738 on Southwest is because it guarantees this seating:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/southwest-rapid-rewards/1303449-southwest-airlines-new-interior-adds-1-row-claims-preserve-knee-room.html

(There are ways to get that seating sometimes on non-738s, of course, but just a small chance for now. But on a 738, you're guaranteed to get that seating, so if you hate it, you want to avoid the 738.)

I seem to recall that the row spacing is greater on the 737-800 than on the 143-passenger 737-700. Is my memory correct?

A few years ago I flew an AeroMexico 737-800 in coach and it was a wonderful flight in every way, with plenty of seat pitch. After that experience, I was sad to see Southwest put the squeeze on seat pitch.

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B206 Safari/7534.48.3)



I'm curious if you avoid other carrier's 738s out of LAS in the summer months? Or if you avoided flying ATA's 738s out of MDW?

If AS can take a 738 MIA-SEA in January with a flight time over 7 hours, WN can get theirs to BWI or MDW from the west coast.

By the way the 6p PHX-SNA flight is scheduled as a 738 for the summer. It does a turn in SNA and returns as the 8p flight to PHX.


To answer your question, I would not avoid AS as I think highly of their flight operations department, and I have spent a bunch of time in their training center, so I think they have the 800 figured out. I have never flown AirTran.

I do think that SWA is still trying to figure out how to best use the 800. AUS-DCA service starts this Sunday and originally I think it was supposed to be an 800 but it is now served by a 700. It will be interesting to see how the loads work out on this route. It starts with one flight per day - a turn-around, and I am guessing, but not sure, that the ground services will be contracted out. It will also be curious if the local politicos, lobbyists, etc. take this non-stop flight or do they continue to connect thru DFW on AA since they can most likely get F seating (Lloyd Doggett is an example here as AA gives him the special service and escort).

Maybe the 800 was seen as the ideal for service out of Love field when it opens up - just a thought. But now that SWA is the launch customer for the Max, and with it's fuel saving improvements, the 800 may be less desirable with lower after-market values. Maybe this is one reason why SWA deferred deliveries on the 800. After all it is a 10 year old airplane.

Whatever happens, they need to figure out a way to dispose of the armor plated 300's and 500's before the front entry door blows out (ref latest AD from the FAA).

And, although not 800 related, it will be fun to see how Spirit does against SWA flying Dallas-Houston. This should sharpen the differences between the two business models. I would like to see Mikey leave to pursue other opportunities and for Gary to take early retirement to spend more time with his family, and for HDK to return to straighten things out and reset the culture. Wishful thinking on my part...

I would like to see Mikey leave to pursue other opportunities and for Gary to take early retirement to spend more time with his family, and for HDK to return to straighten things out and reset the culture. Wishful thinking on my part...

A CEO is not a time machine. 2012 will still be very different from 1995.

I doubt that Herb would have done things very differently than Gary Kelly has done. The competitive environment changes and you have to adapt or die.

A CEO is not a time machine. 2012 will still be very different from 1995.

A very good point.

I doubt that Herb would have done things very differently than Gary Kelly has done.

An enormous leap from the lead-in observation, IMO. We do know that GK sought and received HK's blessing for the AirTran acquisition, but there almost certainly would have been a large number of significantly different decisions over the years. I'm not an expert on the topic but I have the impression HK was much more aggressive than GK. SWA is facing numerous serious issues and I think an SWA led by (a younger than now) HK would be attacking them, whereas GK is awfully passive (we'll just sit tight until ROI hits 15%).

Herb was an inspiring entrepreneur, a builder, a brawler in court, a bet-the-house, serious risk-taking guy. A profane, whiskey-swilling chain-smoker. The type of guy you follow into battle.

GK is an accountant. And it shows.

Totally different personalities and skill sets, and I cannot believe they'd be doing the same things now.

Herb was an inspiring entrepreneur, a builder, a brawler in court, a bet-the-house, serious risk-taking guy. A profane, whiskey-swilling chain-smoker. The type of guy you follow into battle.

GK is an accountant. And it shows.

As in: "We love to flycount pennies, and it shows?" ;)

GK virtually bet the house on no-fee branding against the unsolicited advice of most industry analysts. He had the guts to break from the pack and stay the course, win or lose. Very few CEOs these days have that kind of courage. Herb was one of them.

You can accuse GK of mistaken decisions, but not of aversion to risk.

Herb had a huge cost advantage relative to the legacies. I don't think we can blame loosing that cost advantage on GK.

When you have a cost advantage, it is much easier to look like a superior CEO and there are many more things you can do.

To sway back to topic, my July 5th PHX-LAS WN 572 was on a 737-800. According to the crew, this was the planned equipment for this route and flight. Unfortunately, I cannot remember what they said the leg into PHX was, but it had a different flight number and it was a pseudo-transcon.

GK virtually bet the house on no-fee branding against the unsolicited advice of most industry analysts. He had the and stay the course, win or lose. Very few CEOs these days have that kind of courage. Herb was one of them.

You can accuse GK of mistaken decisions, but not of aversion to risk.

Sorry, I'm not buying it. First off, GK was at the time one of about eight or so USA major carrier CEOs. Is it your assertion that dramatically fewer than one in eight CEOs in this country choose to take any path other than the one followed by all their competitors? Have competitive corporations really become that homogeneous? Perhaps so; I don't know, but I hope not.

Second, let's look back at GK's "guts to break from the pack." Recall prior discussion as to why SWA chose not to implement change fees: WN doesn't charge change fees because they can't.

Think about the fees WN has had over the years: excess bag fees; award reissuance fees; more recently pet fees and UM fees. None of those fees were ever "attached" to a ticket. You have too many bags? Pay a fee to the lady at the counter when you drop them off. You want us to reissue an award? Send us the info and the money and someone in Dallas will take care of it. Pet or minor? Pay the nice lady at the counter. In every case there is a gatekeeper to collect the fee and cause or allow something to happen.

Now think about the most common fees WN does not charge: fuel surcharge; change fee; short-notice award ticketing. All those fees are very closely tied to ticketing transactions. WN doesn't charge them because they can't.

Is it appropriate to say a CEO is not risk adverse because in one particular situation he chose a path that did not align with his competition, when he chose that path largely because it was the only option available to him? Give me some examples of where GK had real choices and in which he brazenly chose the riskier course of action, and I'll reconsider my opinion.

(I admit GK probably could have chosen to adopt bag fees while eschewing change fees, but that's an obviously inferior marketing message, so I don't consider it a real option available to him at the time.)

Daily
RDU-LAS
BWI-DEN
DEN-SLC
BWI-LAX
BWI-SAN

Question, does these planes change, I mean I see a 737-700 for flights I am taking in October could equipment change by than?

Question, does these planes change, I mean I see a 737-700 for flights I am taking in October could equipment change by than?

It's always possible that it could change, even after departure time and pushback from the gate. I had a -700 aircraft last week that picked taxi-out to have a mechanical issue, and once back at the gate, the only available aircraft we had to swap with was a -300, so we did.

That said, most of the time (90%+ if I had to guess) it'll be what it's scheduled for, but in a biz that's as dynamic as the airline biz, changes cannot be totally ruled out.

Any new schedule change for 738 aircraft?

What's next?

How about PHX-LAX/SFO/OAK/SAN or MCO?

Been watching LAS-WAS for October - in addition to the -800s showing up on the BWI nonstops, saw one scheduled for a LAS-BUF nonstop. Didn't try to follow it from there - maybe on to Florida?

Hoping a LAS-STL-DCA option will come along, but just have to be patient.

I noticed that the August 12 schedule change shuffles up the 800s a little bit.

They'll be off the LAS-PDX and PHX-LAS/HOU/SNA routes. I only found one on the inhumanely early 6a SMF-LAS route. Not sure what other routes they're roaming around on.

I think this route's been mentioned previously, but two weeks ago I had an -800 (N8311Q) on SWA1895 (MDW-SEA), which was a pleasant surprise. I've flown a ton of miles on DL, CO and AS -800s but this was my first experience with the new interior, and I really enjoyed the flight an awful lot. The captain gave a neat little speech about how we were flying aboard one of Southwest's newest aircraft, and how the airline has prided itself on always flying Seattle-built Boeing aircraft. Since we seemed to have a number of Boeing people aboard, that drew a huge round of applause.

After having flown on -800s on a lot of long-haul routes with other carriers, it was therefore a little weird the next week to do SEA-BWI nonstop aboard a -700. I know the -700 has the range for such things, and ours performed admirably (even if the kid behind me kept kicking my seat the first couple hours), but then again I'm still wrapping my head around the fact the 737 has evolved into, more or less, a modern 707. :)

For my June 23rd, SNA-PHX on WN 2455. We had a 738 as an equipment swap for our over 1-hour late original 73G. It appears that a lot of people under a certain height are going to have trouble with the new overhead bins. Also, I observed the cart drink service and spoke with the FA about it. Neither of us were fans, she also told me that with cart service, they are not allowed to give the whole can any more, even if you ask for it. Also, they are limited to a second drink service, which consists entirely of their trip back to the galley with the cart. So, if you are in the last row that the FA serves, your opportunity for a refill is seconds after receiving your initial drink. Lastly, I felt like I was on a legacy since carts blocked the aisles for both sets of lavs (1 in the front and 2 in the rear) for the entire flight. As for the seats, I noticed the reduction in legroom immediately (I am 6' 2") as my knees were touching the seatback pouch which never happens in the classic interior.

SWA has put the kabosh on the carts and converting back to trays. I wonder if the carts were CFO Laura Wright's idea since she is leaving to spend more time with her family. The new CFO in Dallas is Tony Romo.

SWA has put the kabosh on the carts and converting back to trays. I wonder if the carts were CFO Laura Wright's idea since she is leaving to spend more time with her family. The new CFO in Dallas is Tony Romo.

Where did you hear this? On my flight last week on a 800 they were still using the carts.

Semi-related: When I booked the flight I took this morning it was supposed to be on an 800, but I was dissapointed to discover on boarding that the plane was an Evolve 700. :(

I was on an -800 last week where they used the carts for 1st round and trays for seconds.

SWA has put the kabosh on the carts and converting back to trays.

MODS please move/merge as appropriate - Somewhat of a highjacked thread at this point.

The little asile service carts that were introduced with the -800s are being eliminated. Effective September 2nd, all service fleetwide will be via F/A carried trays.

MODS please move/merge as appropriate - Somewhat of a highjacked thread at this point.

The little asile service carts that were introduced with the -800s are being eliminated. Effective September 2nd, all service fleetwide will be via F/A carried trays.

Awesome news!

I wonder if the change was based on customer feedback (would be a good sign that WN is still listening) or because the FAs disliked them as well?

I asked FAs on all of my -800 flights what they thought of the carts. Every single one that I asked responded that they absolutely hated them. One mentioned that the carts being used were a lot narrower than standard carts. This made them prone to tip over very easily making it a challenge to maneuver down the aisles. I wonder if liability with this played a role in the decision. i.e. potential workers comp claims, pax injury claims, etc...

...
It was only the crew's 2nd flight on an 800.....It was funny watching the front flight attendant trying to figure out how to turn off the cabin lights...one finally came from the back and showed her the 'special' spot on the touch screen......

I've been on exactly one Southwest 800 - MDW-LAS on Aug 19. Gorgeous new aircraft. What was interesting on that flight was watching 4 FAs trying to maneuver 4 carts in one aisle, getting in each other's way. Took them 2-1/2 hours to get everyone their beverage. IMO, they'd do a lot better sticking to carrying trays around 2 from the front, 2 from the back.

Awesome news!

I wonder if the change was based on customer feedback (would be a good sign that WN is still listening) or because the FAs disliked them as well?

The story is "C", all of the above. Now if we could just get a mtechanic to bring a set of wrenches over to all of these -700s that need to be un-Evolved, we'd actually have corporate LISTENING...

Glad to see the carts go away. Wonder if they'll keep them onboard now or not. Supposedly the only reason they were on the -800s to begin with had to do with galley configuration. At least there are three lavs...

And if anyone is interested, there's an -800 flying the morning MDW-PDX-MDW flight. It parked next to my AS 737-800 yesterday.

The story is "C", all of the above. Now if we could just get a mtechanic to bring a set of wrenches over to all of these -700s that need to be un-Evolved, we'd actually have corporate LISTENING...

I could be wrong on this but isn't the 800's configuration of seat pitches and such is the same as on the 700s Evolved aircraft? At least i thought someone told me that in person or on here before.

I could be wrong on this but isn't the 800's configuration of seat pitches and such is the same as on the 700s Evolved aircraft? At least i thought someone told me that in person or on here before.

Seat pitch on the -800's reportedly appears normal, i.e. greater than on the Evolve -700's.

I had an -800 ONT-MDW and the return flight to ONT. No wifi on the return flight. I overheard the FA's saying a few of the -800's don't have wifi. You really miss it on a 4 hour flight.

I had an -800 ONT-MDW and the return flight to ONT. No wifi on the return flight. I overheard the FA's saying a few of the -800's don't have wifi. You really miss it on a 4 hour flight.

My LAS-MDW flight today was on an 800, and (against my better judgement) I paid the $5 for the wifi, thinking it might be working since it was a brand new plane.

<sad trombone>

The system took my credit card info, charged my card, and proceeded to bump me immediately off. I rebooted my computer, cleared my cache, tried multiple browsers... nothing would work. It would show the portal page and the flight tracker, but nothing outside that (including Southwest's site).

I should have known better.

My IAD-DEN leg today was an 800. (first time on an 800) The flight continued on to PDX. I missed the update about the carts being eliminated, so I was surprised when I saw the FAs using trays. It was a nice acft. Great having 2lavs in the back.

LAS-BDL yesterday in an 800. Plane not equipped for wifi but otherwise very nice.

LAS-BDL yesterday in an 800. Plane not equipped for wifi but otherwise very nice.

I believe they have wifi. I think they already install it but, I am not quite sure.

My IAD-DEN leg today was an 800. I missed the update about the carts being eliminated, so I was surprised when I saw the FAs using trays. It was a nice acft. Great having 2lavs in the back.

How did the tray service x4 seem to work on the -800 vs. the initial cart cluster? Word is they're now in the process of changing/retrofitting the galleys so that the FA's have adequate counter space to work/stage drinks, etc.

I believe they have wifi. I think they already install it but, I am not quite sure.

Asked the Flight Attendant, who said that not all the 800s have wifi.

The registration was N8313F, I believe.

How did the tray service x4 seem to work on the -800 vs. the initial cart cluster? Word is they're now in the process of changing/retrofitting the galleys so that the FA's have adequate counter space to work/stage drinks, etc.

They seem to have adapted to make it work quite well. I'm on an 800 right now
SEA-DEN ( trying out the $5.00 all day WIFI :) ). On my flight last week, it did seem to take a while from the time I made my drink order to when I received my drink. On this flight, my FA took orders for a tray full of drinks and then delivered them and then took the next tray full of drink orders and delivered them and so on. It didn't seem to take as long.

LAS-BDL yesterday in an 800. Plane not equipped for wifi but otherwise very nice.

There is no reason to put an 800 into service without WiFi except bad planning.

Are WN 738=>73G/733 swaps common? Have an upcoming WN 738 flight and am wondering if it likely they will swap equipment. Anxious to see the new aircraft first time on SWA in about five years.

Are WN 738=>73G/733 swaps common? Have an upcoming WN 738 flight and am wondering if it likely they will swap equipment. Anxious to see the new aircraft first time on SWA in about five years.

Not "common", but also not necessarily uncommon if that makes sense. No more common that swapping -700s/-300s, other than for you statisticians that will wisely observe the fleet has more of "those" than "these" :D

Given that if the trip is sold out they'd potentially have 32-38 less seats remaining on the swap, it's certainly not something they would do on purpose (in that scenario), especially if you're starting from a smaller out-station. I've probably had a dozen or so -800 trips scheduled in and out of MCI since August and all operated as advertised.

The -800s have now been in the system long enough that they seem to have settled-in any operational impacts, somewhat slower turns, etc. They're a nice ride, smell "new", and most find the new seats more comfortable than the EVO retrofit in the -700s.

What is your routing and when and let's see what we can see.....

There is no reason to put an 800 into service without WiFi except bad planning.

So the aircraft should sit on a pad up in Seattle for weeks until there is an install slot available? Sounds like a winning formula to me..

Are WN 738=>73G/733 swaps common? Have an upcoming WN 738 flight and am wondering if it likely they will swap equipment. Anxious to see the new aircraft first time on SWA in about five years.

swaps are VERY uncommon. Even if not needed at your airport, it is likely scheduled/needed at the destination airport. There is a 4th FA staffed on that schedule as well.

The -800's have caused some delays because swaps are a much bigger logistical challenge. A recent Vegas flight that I was on to the East Coast turned into a redeye after its afternoon departure delayed by 6 hours. Southwest lost $35,000 on that one, because they gave out $200 vouchers to each passenger. (plus free booze)

I was very surprised to be on a -800 MDW-LGA a week ago Sunday. Those 2 airports have some of the shortest runways in the nation and I thought I read here of performance issues, so I was surprised. Of course, this is winter where density altitude doesn't come into play...

I was very surprised to be on a -800 MDW-LGA a week ago Sunday. Those 2 airports have some of the shortest runways in the nation and I thought I read here of performance issues, so I was surprised. Of course, this is winter where density altitude doesn't come into play...

I wouldn't expect there to be performance issues out of either airport on a 700-800 mile flight.

I've been on -800s almost exclusively since late October on my weekly RDU-MDW runs. I believe it does the last in, first out turn at RDU. The lighting controls are much more conducive to sleeping, although I miss the 7A seat without the window for my morning refresher.

There seem to be a lot of 800s on MDW-DEN right now. Not 100%, but about half the flights. Having an 800 made my return flight last night, which was booked to 136, a lot more comfortable for most people as there were now 39 extra open middle seats.

All the PIT-LAS LAS-PIT flights I've been on has the 800. I paid the $5 for the wifi last flight. It was meh. Performance was really really bad at times. For $5 it was OK. Hope they don't think of raising that price.

A friend of mine sent me a pic of the Sky Interior from a 738 on a AUS-BWI flight he was on recently.

Our flight AUS-DCA and return were both on the new plane

My ONT-PHX 6:55am flight on Jan 2 was on a 737-800. It was going onward to MCO. Later that same day my flight back to ONT at 8:40pm was also on an 800. Quite surprised at the luck I had that day. ^

Seems as though a fair number of AUS-DCA flights are using the 800.

I flew MCI-LAS last Wednesday on the -800. I think the plane might have been switched out to accommodate an influx of Kansas State fans trying to connect to Phoenix for the Fiesta Bowl... there sure was a LOT of purple on that plane. (too bad about that Fiesta Bowl, Wildcats)

I had an 800 from MDW to RSW today - totally full!

I was supposed to be on -800 from PHL to LAS but was swapped out for a -700 about 5 minutes before boarding.

On the way home, I was on a -800 from LAS-MDW. Really like the sky interior, felt like there was a lot more room and the overhead bins were gigantic.

Here are a few pics:

http://flic.kr/s/aHsjDFiccf

The -700 I was on from MDW-PHL suddenly felt very old :-)

My first time on a -800 from SLC to LAS Sunday afternoon. The continuation of the flight was on to Tampa. I sat 7 rows back or so (habit) having boarded A1. Normally that puts me just ahead of the engines, but with the longer body they were further back.

I didn't realize at first I was on an -800 as my first thought boarding was relief that it had wifi then distain as I thought- "ug retro plane" with the new seats. I was starting to put my carryon above and notice the 777 style bins. A minor note- the seats were not staggered as normal. all 6 across are even.

Ride was quieter, climbed up to cruising altitude quickly and seemed like a nice ride. Having connected to a -700 "retro" back to home base I realized the -800 had more tray distance to the passenger, closer to the -700 non retro. On the retro -700s it's much closer. I felt more squished into the seat than other seats but I could be wrong.

Wifi was blistering fast initially (I fly almost weekly so seriously yes) but of course within a few minutes it was probably the worst wifi I've had. Probably due to the video feed offered as the NFC championship game was playing while airborne.

Last thought- having boarded early I got to hear folks during the entire boarding process commenting positively about the new plane. the greeting FA was frequently telling passengers what they were on and how many seats it had. PAX count was a little over 100.

My opinion after the flight? Better WN cabin experience short of a non retro'd 700 with wifi and better than a retro'd -700.

Dumb question: I have a WN flight booked for a few weeks from now and ExpertFlyer shows the plane as "73H". Is that the 737-800?

Dumb question: I have a WN flight booked for a few weeks from now and ExpertFlyer shows the plane as "73H". Is that the 737-800?

Yes, but if you want to be sure you can check on southwest.com. Go through the motions as if you want to book a ticket on your flight and then click on the flight number when you get to the flight selection page. It will show what type of aircraft is scheduled to operate your flight.

Yes, but if you want to be sure you can check on southwest.com. Go through the motions as if you want to book a ticket on your flight and then click on the flight number when you get to the flight selection page. It will show what type of aircraft is scheduled to operate your flight.

Hey so it does! Now I'm even more excited I booked this flight...$123 one way AND my first Southwest 738!

I had my first ride on one of the -800s on Friday from DAL-AUS. The plane then went from AUS to LAX and LAS. Beautiful aircraft. Very pleasant experience.