B739s for MH?

[flee 5]

From Bernama:

 

SEATTLE: Malaysia Airlines (MAS) is studying the possibility of buying the 737-900ER as it has the right to substitute it with the current order of 737-800, Boeing’s senior sales director for commercial airplanes, Paul Dubeck said.

 

"They are studying it (and) have the right to substitute," he said when asked if MAS had shown an interest in the 737-900ER.

 

The 737-900ER is a short-to-medium range twinjet that increases the capability of the Next-Generation 737 family.

 

The 737-900ER carries 26 more passengers than the 737-900 and up to 215 passengers in a single-class configuration. It also flies about 500 nautical miles further - up to 3,200 nautical miles (5,925 km)- while having lower operating costs compared to the A321.

 

MAS ordered 35 of the Next-Generation 737-800 airplanes in 2008. The order was valued at more than $2.6 billion at then list prices.

 

The airline also acquired purchase rights for an additional 20 Next-Generation 737-800s.

 

The fourth of the 737-800 of the 35 jets ordered is due for delivery in mid-March this year.

 

The fourth aircraft is installed with blended winglets that will help to reduce fuel usage by about four per cent or US$480,000 a year. It also has increased range, and reduce CO2 emissions and take-off noise.

 

This new fleet of Next-Generation 737-800s will replace the existing 737-400 fleet.

 

The new plane also comes fitted with the Boeing Sky Interior.

 

However, Dubeck was tight-lipped when asked if MAS had exercised its purchasing right for the remaining 20 737-800.

 

There was a news report recently that Boeing has taken 32 new orders for 737s in the year to date.

 

It was revealed last Thurday that of this number, Alaska Airlines had ordered 15 airplanes, the US Navy six, one from a non-airline operator and 10 more from an unidentified customer.

[Johan Z 0]

How about 737-800 for domestic and 737-900ER for HND, ICN and other regionals? If demand is low, substitute with 737-800.

[Syukri 0]

It is brilliant for low density medium-range route... Way to go MH!!

Edited February 16, 2011 by Syukri

[Josh T 0]

The B737-900ER would be perfect for short-medium haul international routes like India, SEA, China/Taiwan, etc. I'm surprised they didn't get some of these birds outright.

[flee 5]

Indonesia's Lion Air has 44 of them. This aircraft is their workhorse!

 

 

Lion Air was the launch customer for the 737-900ER. In MH use, a two class configration with 180 seats would be quite useful for regional routes that can't fill up the A330-300.

[Tamizi Hj Tamby 1]

Isn't MH were given option to swap the 738 order to 739ER? Why not MH swap some of the 738 orders to 739ER.And i do agree with flee; the 739ER could be useful for regional routes which can't accommodate the A330s.

[Mohd Suhaimi Fariz 2]

Isn't MH were given option to swap the 738 order to 739ER? Why not MH swap some of the 738 orders to 739ER.And i do agree with flee; the 739ER could be useful for regional routes which can't accommodate the A330s.

 

I think that's the gist of the article, MH using their swap option to take 739ERs instead of 738.

[flee 5]

Well I do think that MH might just place additional orders or convert their options. They will assign the B738 orders to FY since those are needed by them urgently. The B739 waiting list should be a lot shorter than the B738's!

Edited February 16, 2011 by flee

[Josh T 0]

Well I do think that MH might just place additional orders or convert their options. They will assign the B738 orders to FY since those are needed by them urgently. The B739 waiting list should be a lot shorter than the B738's!

That makes sense. If FY places a new order, they'll have to wait even longer for the arrival of their B738. MH can convert their options to firm orders and they can bypass the waiting times. Not only that, but they may decide to convert those B738 orders to B739s instead if there is growth on the routes they're currently using the B738s on.

[flee 5]

It would not be surprising if FY also had some B739ERs too! Anything can happen, since FY seems to be searching for new markets and ways to expand.

[N Azman 0]

Propaganda and some 'direct selling' courtesy of paul dubeck. boeing's getting really desperate for the ROI on the -900ER. so far, the only 900ERs sold are to Lion and some small lessors and VIP charters. Not even close to achieving ROI on a/c derivative design and tooling/jig mods. Worse still, they are moving towards redesigning the 737 altogether so they might end up closing the 737 project with massive losses on the 739!

 

if MH is smart, they could get it at waaaaaaayyyyy discounted price (maybe even lower than 738 list price!) so let's see how this cookie crumbles.

 

Personally, i liken this aircraft to the 757. too big for short haul, too narrow for medium haul. hardly any belly cargo space so it wont fit hub-to-hub operations. so i suppose it fits routes with almost-widebody volume, no cargo, and poor yield (offset by low op cost of the 739). got many of those...

[Josh T 0]

Propaganda and some 'direct selling' courtesy of paul dubeck. boeing's getting really desperate for the ROI on the -900ER. so far, the only 900ERs sold are to Lion and some small lessors and VIP charters. Not even close to achieving ROI on a/c derivative design and tooling/jig mods. Worse still, they are moving towards redesigning the 737 altogether so they might end up closing the 737 project with massive losses on the 739!

 

if MH is smart, they could get it at waaaaaaayyyyy discounted price (maybe even lower than 738 list price!) so let's see how this cookie crumbles.

 

Personally, i liken this aircraft to the 757. too big for short haul, too narrow for medium haul. hardly any belly cargo space so it wont fit hub-to-hub operations. so i suppose it fits routes with almost-widebody volume, no cargo, and poor yield (offset by low op cost of the 739). got many of those...

KLM have quite a few 737-900s but I don't know if they are the ERs.

[Tamizi Hj Tamby 1]

KLM have quite a few 737-900s but I don't know if they are the ERs.

 

 

I think they're operating the non-ER series.

 

There are several 739 operators besides than Lion Air & KLM,which are:

 

* Korean Air (both non ER and 739ER)

* Alaska Airlines (both non ER and 739ER; launch customer of the 739)

* Continental Airlines (all fleet to be transferred to the United Airlines upon merging)

* Shenzhen Airlines (non ER)

* Turkish Airlines (739ER)

Edited February 18, 2011 by Tamizi Hj Tamby

[KK Lee 5]

To optimize load, MH need aircraft between A333 and 734, 739 is a pretty good fit. If 739 is ordered means MH will not consider 787 for the next 10 years.

 

After 787 is in service, 739 yield on the same route is likely to be lower.

[c.lee 0]

To optimize load, MH need aircraft between A333 and 734, 739 is a pretty good fit.

Agree, especially for short/medium haul routes which are too small for an A333, yet too big for a 738.

 

If 739 is ordered means MH will not consider 787 for the next 10 years.

Probably not. 739ER and 787 will be serving different routes; 739ER for short/medium haul and 787 for long haul.

 

I think MH should have ordered the 739ER loooong time ago. For domestic/short haul routes, should the load factor for that particular flight is healthy, a 739ER can be easily deployed to replace 738. However, it is important to have hardware consistency (PTV, same type of J/Y seats etc) for the 738 and 739ER.

[flee 5]

Here are some of MH CEO's Tweets:

 

We have another new B738 for @MAS coming soon. We are still looking at B739s, and have rights to change to it if we want

 

B739 is larger than B738. It has a better cost per seat, but that's relevant only if you can fill it up

 

Looks like they have not even thought about this. They are happy with the B738, which is a big improvement over the B734.

[KK Lee 5]

Sound like MH is struggling to fill 738

[Radzi 2]

Can the B739ER be a substitute to the A333?

[N Azman 0]

Can the B739ER be a substitute to the A333?

 

I suppose yes and no, depending on which route youre referring to. I don't believe the 739 can make the 6-9 hour radius destinations....and also, you're short by about 80 seats.

 

In the case of your employer Radzi if youre referring to A333 flights to CGK and DPS, then i would say yes the 739 would be perfect for these.

[Ahmad M 1]

I suppose yes and no, depending on which route youre referring to. I don't believe the 739 can make the 6-9 hour radius destinations....and also, you're short by about 80 seats.

 

In the case of your employer Radzi if youre referring to A333 flights to CGK and DPS, then i would say yes the 739 would be perfect for these.

 

 

Not really perfect I don't think. Just to get the -900ER to do those sectors is not really feasible as the whole idea of getting the ER is to go longer anyway. Another thought, on a flight 6 hours or longer, would you fly a wide body, twin aisle aircraft or a narrow body single aisle aircraft? Unless MH is considering new routes and destinations which suits the 737-900ER than they'll probably stick to the -800s for the time being.

[flee 5]

MH has previously stated they only want to operate 3 aircraft types. However, there appears to be a relaxation of that policy. But MH is still wary about having small subfleets because operational costs may rise since specialist aircraft for special routes have a greater overhead over a homogeneous fleet.

 

I think the B739 has to be taken in consideration along with MH's other fleet renewal plans. They have no real urgent need for it right now and they are taking their time evaluating. Its no bad thing though, as the Middle East situation now is volatile.

 

If oil prices skyrocket, MH might not even order any new aircraft for tome time to come. Their strategy of leasing B738s for FY now appears to be a very good decision indeed!

[Ikman Ikreza 0]

Just to share, two Lion Air airplanes skidded on the runway on Monday (14Feb) and Tuesday (15Feb) at Sultan Syarif Kasim II Airport at Pekanbaru, Riau in wet conditions. The Ministry bans Boeing 737-900 ER from landing on wet runways. So maybe MH should consider this possibility of buying B737-900ER.

 

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/02/16/ministry-bans-boeing-737900-er-landing-wet-runways.html

[flee 5]

That airport's runway is 2,220m long - Kota Bharu airport is 2,128m long and might also be dangerous for a B739ER landing in the wet. However, a lot depends on the operating weights of the aircraft when landing.

 

If MH buys the B739ER, they are more likely to deploy it to regional routes. International airports tend to have 3,000m or longer runways.

Edited February 19, 2011 by flee

[Josh T 0]

Yes, I foresee MH using the 739s only for international routes.