Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
is the new SW 737 any more comfortable/wider than the old Airtran 717? my last Airtran trip was last December and I made a last minute business class upgrade because i couldn't deal with the cramped accomodations. worst is always when i get up to stretch or visit the john there is no place to put my drink and i hate having to wait after landing with my head craned downward for everyone to vacate before retrieving my luggage from rows behind me. it was extra fare well spent
well my brother will be flying from Atl to NY on SW soon I guess he can tell me what its like
would the new SW terminal be at the same place at the airports (like LaGuardia at terminal 2) or would it be a total merger with already existing SW?
Yes the 737 are wider then the 717 (2x3 seating 2x2 in biz) , but.... SW does not have any Biz Class, and its 737 have 3x3 seating in most rows, some plane are missing a seat or two next to window emergency exit ,
so seat space is the same as 717's
For Extra Space, your best bet is to buy a early get on position try for a exit row or bulk head seat. Or you can get a "Biz" ticket, but all the seats are the same, there is no Biz seating.
I like the feel of the new 737-800/900 that have in the fleet.
As mentioned in another thread Southwest is not IOSA certified(IATA Operational Safety Audit). This is typical of backwater operations like AirAsia that are good enough to operate but do not maintain industry best safety practices. Considering that southwest is not up to industry standards my family will not fly on Southwest. Southwest had suffered a number of safety blunders over the last decade and is quite lucky to not have suffered massive causalities due to numerous safety breaches. I have flown on Southwest 737s in the past and they are grossly inferior to the AirTran 717 in all measures; safety, cabin noise and comfort.
Didn't the Fokker F100 also have a hard leading edge and no reversers? It had a low-sweep wing and the only time I ever flew on one the speeds seemed like everyone else's, around 130-150 on final.
Not familiar with the F100. 150 ref is very fast. The A320 at max landing weight is around 135. The CRJ weighs 1/3 of an A320 and at max gross is a knot or two shy of 150.
As mentioned in another thread Southwest is not IOSA certified(IATA Operational Safety Audit). This is typical of backwater operations like AirAsia that are good enough to operate but do not maintain industry best safety practices. Considering that southwest is not up to industry standards my family will not fly on Southwest. Southwest had suffered a number of safety blunders over the last decade and is quite lucky to not have suffered massive causalities due to numerous safety breaches. I have flown on Southwest 737s in the past and they are grossly inferior to the AirTran 717 in all measures; safety, cabin noise and comfort.
I won't quibble with that. SWA is not perfect, but it's safety record is definitely good. Whether that's pure luck or not, I don't know. Those pics are among the worst of their accidents. I have personally seen the scene of the NWA 255 crash while it was still burning. It was way worse than any of SWA's. Nevertheless, I would never hesitate to fly on Northwest, my favorite former airline. However, that's me. I understand your view and respect it.
Not familiar with the F100. 150 ref is very fast. The A320 at max landing weight is around 135. The CRJ weighs 1/3 of an A320 and at max gross is a knot or two shy of 150.
Fat-fingered it, meant 130-140. It was likely much closer to 130. Seemed similar to the F-16 which flies final at around 140-145 under most configurations.
ive been told an Airtran 717 takes off at about 140-150 mph whereas a larger plane takes off at about 170-180
if this is true does the Airtran 717 land at the same speed it took off from?
No. The take-off and landing speeds are affected by the various factors that have been mentioned. However, the rough Vref speed for landing is in the 135 knot indicated airspeed range. ( 155 mph ) Also, take-off speeds are more than the landing speeds. Generally due to weight. There is a lot more to all of this but these are the basics.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
