Yeah okay thanks. I just looked up pictures at airliners.net but didn't realise they stopped using them that long ago.

 

Wikipedia is (usually) rather accurate, and up to date too !

I never understand why the SP was even made... It looks so strange, a very short widebody with two floors and 4 engines.

 

For extended range, sure. But they weren't very popular with the airlines.

 

You have to look at many variables of the times. Those days of air travel were very different then they are today as was vacation travel ,client flying and airports capable of handling a very much larger 747.

 

American has never flown a 747-400. They had the 747-100 from 1970–1984 and those silly 747-SP from 1986–1994.

 

The old 747-100's are now famous for ferrying around the Space Shuttle and those 747-SP's were just weird compact looking things as they were shortened 747's:

 

Of course!! Your right.

 

I should remember not to post do early in the morning.

 

Lee

Of course!! Your right.

 

I should remember not to post do early in the morning.

 

No worries Lee.....We've all done that before.

 

I just hope that some one buys one of the 2 remaining 747-100's that NASA is currently decommissioning and preserve it in a museum. They played such an important part of the Space Shuttle program, and apparently they have a very retro 1970's style lounge inside of them that is still in good shape.

Not necessarily, whether a 737 or A320 is better is very route specific. Depending on the route network the benefits of being able to match the best plane to the route might outweigh the costs of operating two types.

Another reason an airline might want to operate both types is simply the availability of production slots, which people have speculated is part of the reason for both American and Norwegian ordering both the NEO and the MAX.

As you say it is very unusual for an airline to operate both types though, as they are very similar in capability and operating only 1 type is generally cheaper than operating 2.

 

Exactly, well said. Case in point: Delta. A32x's mostly do east coast stuff for them, it seems. They do west coast routes regularly, but it seems 73NG's get more of that. DL aslo uses some 319's for VIP charters. I think DL subs 737's for 757's on low freq. winter routes. For instance, SEA-SLC is almost all 752's in the summer and 738's in the winter. I think one route is even an M88 in the winter. It seems that 73NG's get longer routes, while 320's and 319's take shorter segments. SNA has 73G's on SNA-ATL, SNA-MSP, and a few other subs. 319's mostly take SNA-SLC. They have a 752 in there in the summer for SNA-ATL.

 

 

Hmmmm. I think the main reason a company would accept the cost of operating both families would be because it would have inherited a large amount of one or another type through an acquisition or a merger.

 

PS (edit) : But you're right about American and production slots (or I should say at least that I have read the same story :smile: )

 

 

 

KLM does fly NGs. Air France used to fly 733s and 735s but disposed of the last 735 in 2007. But both AF and KLM have a low-cost subsidiary named TRANSAVIA (in fact two companies, one Dutch and one French belonging to the TRANSAVIA group) and they both fly 737 NGs.

 

So, if you include subsidiaries, AF-KLM (or at least Air France) qualifies for the club.

 

Bruno

 

If you count subsidiaries, Singapore operates the 777 and until recently the 747. It's subsidiary Silk Air currently flies the A320 but has ordered the 737 MAX (because the A320 NEO was sold out, literally) and so will use the A320 and 737 MAX concurrently for a while. Of course the 747 has been retired.

 

Qantas flies the 737NG and 744, its Jetstar subsidiary flies the A320, but neither have the T7.