Into Australian Service

For both Ansett and Australian, this new found capability will allow them to schedule greater frequencies out of ports such as Darwin, Perth, Adelaide, Hobart and through the rapidly growing Queensland coastal sectors. For the first time both carriers will have a small jet with true max payload Sydney/Perth capability regardless of the severity of the winter jetstream. This scheduling flexibility will do for both our domestics what the long ranging 767ER has done for Qantas on the regional offshore routes.

For Australian Airlines the search for a DC-9 replacement led them to the 737-300. For Ansett it almost seemed a fait accompli that they would ultimately replace their reliable -200s with the latest of the breed.

Though Australian principally acquired the -300 to replace heir DC-9-30 capability, the airline will indeed retain a number of the venerable DC-9s to use on what might well pan out to be specialised discount-type operations in competition against its arch competitor, East West. Australian spent some time evaluating its options in replacing the Nines and, claims Australian Engineering Director, Frank McMullen, the carrier really wanted a slightly smaller twinjet. Basically the 737-300 was chosen from a field consisting of the MDC MD-83 and MD-87, the 737-200 and the Fokker 100. Principally the airline was looking for an aircraft around the 90/100 seat category though none of the smaller aircraft offered the range and flexibility that was already available in Boeing’s latest 737 variant.

The Fokker 100 was the first to be dropped, states Frank. “Although it was the right size and economically attractive, the 100 didn’t offer an operational advantage over the existing DC-9 in terms of range and thrust and also the cabin was slightly narrower, which was a marketing disadvantage. Our own requirement aside though, the 100 is an excellent aircraft for any operator not requiring long range capability who wants a jet in the 90/100 seat class. They will sell a lot of them in time. On the other hand the Boeing 737-200 would have been seen by many people as a retrograde step, following Ansett after five years while at the same time it represented a fairly low-technology aeroplane and didn’t have the range to do Sydney/Perth”, he said.

“When the airline first began evaluating the 737-300, it was considered too big at around 120 passengers in a three class configuration. We encouraged Boeing to develop another variant. I called it the 737-250 because it was halfway between the -200 and -300 in capacity. As we saw it the -250 would be two seat rows shorter taking it back to around 114 seats. However, Boeing resisted the pressure for a 737-250 and the airline returned to the larger -300. We produced a configuration showing it as a 112 seater in a three class configuration with excellent seat pitch (some 33in economy) and additional cupboard and galley space”, said Frank.

“While Boeing remained unconvinced, McDonnell Douglas responded enthusiastically with the MD-87, an aircraft that was essentially developed from an Australian requirement. The MD- 83 meanwhile was a reasonably attractive eventual 727 replacement despite the smaller sized cabin. Thus the MD-87 appeared in response to our input. It was a shortened MD-83 built to accommodate 111 passengers. Unfortunately, the MD-87 was in itself a heavy and somewhat fuel-efficient aircraft by future standards. A very good companion to the larger MD-83 but in isolation not a viable 737-300 competitor. Additionally, the DC-9 replacement requirement had become fairly urgent and the MD-87 would not have been available till almost 1988”, stated Frank.

“Meanwhile the airline felt there were still problems with the 737-300, most notably in the manufacturer’s philosophy of aiming the aircraft primarily at present 737-200 operators. Consistent with this objective they said in the early days that they would keep the same aircraft standard for crew and equipment commonality. I don’t think Boeing realised what a hot seller they had on their hands at that time and did not appreciate that the aircraft had a far wider potential market appeal than merely as an adjunct to the existing -200s. Thus we pushed Boeing to develop a new generation EFIS type cockpit using the technology base they had developed via the advanced 757 and 767 twinjets. Now I think it is significant that almost every 737-300 customer since has adopted the new generation cockpit”, Mr McMullen said.

Australian Airlines will operate their aircraft as 112 seaters in a three-class configuration. Ansett basically will follow likewise in a two class configuration though both carriers can easily increase capacity as and when required if the regulatory situation changes in the years to come. What Australian wanted of course was principally a long ranging twinjet of around 100 seats, as it did not feasibly exist they opted for the larger aircraft though operated with what is probably the least capacity of any 737-300 operator in the world.

The reason for this is one of capacity restraints imposed upon both carriers via the Two Airline Policy. Basically, each airline cannot carry more capacity onto a sector than its competitor over a given period, whether it be a week or a month or whatever. While this means that on the heavily trafficked primary East coast trunk routes the mix of A300s, 767s, DC-9s, 727s and 737s all equate at the end of the day it does present problems on lower frequency routes.

Many observers claim that in effect this only serves to decrease true competition and promotes parallel scheduling, the bain of any traveller who flies beyond the major ports of Sydney and Melbourne. Therefore, Australian has to configure the aircraft fairly similar to that of Ansett, and vice versa. If some form of TAP relaxation does come in as a result of the May enquiry, as most believe, then both carriers will be able to increase their seating to more commercially attuned standards and perhaps reduce fares as a result of greater levels of seat/kilometre efficiency.

Overseas the -300 typically seats 128 passengers in a first/ economy layout of 36in and 32in pitch (equal to the existing domestic standard). Additionally in an all-economy 32in arrange- ment some 141 passengers can be carried while the European holiday charter operators go as far as uplifting 149 passengers in a rather tight 30in pitch configuration. Thus the 112 or so passengers to fly our airways will certainly enjoy a standard of comfort unrivalled elsewhere in the world.

Another reason both carriers have opted for this configuration is that they presently don’t perceive the requirement for more capacity. After all, Ansett are using their -300s to replace 100 seaters and as mentioned previously Australian are doing likewise with 92 seat DC-9s. We would stick our necks out though and suggest that by 1988 you will find that both carriers are using their -300s to higher utilisation rates than perhaps presently imagined. The reasons are obvious. The seat/kilometre fuel consumption of the -300 is for starters some 20% better than the existing 737-200s operated by Ansett and up to 33% better than Australia’s DC-9s. Due to the inherent payload/range capability of the type, the -300 will also begin to replace the large 727-200s on more sectors than is presently envisaged through its sheer ability to save money in almost every facet of operation compared to the ageing trijet.

Indeed the numbers are interesting and tell a story that needs little explanation. According to the latest available data from Avmark, the internationally respected firm of airline consultants, the block hour fuel burn of the 737-300s in US domestic operation is 728 US gallons compared with 1,269 for the 727-200 and even 1,335 for the 767-200. Additionally the maintenance cost per flight hour is logged at only $US120 for the 737-300, $US312 for the 727-200 and $US281 for the wide bodied 767-200. Total operating expenses, which includes US crew, etc was $US1,430 for the -300, $US1,992 for the 727-200 and $US2,576 for the 767-200. Meanwhile cost per seat hour, probably the most relevant quick reference figure that can be used, stood at $US10. 46 for the -300, $US13. 20 for the 727-200 and $US12. 98 for the 767. You don’t have to have spent the past four years at Harvard to appreciate that both Ansett and Australian now have a most cost-efficient aircraft in their inventory in addition to one that also is capable of flying route segments previously the domain of the flagships of their respective fleets.

Technically the -300s of both airlines won’t differ very much apart from the fact that Australian will use the more powerful CFM56-3B2 engines of 22,000lb thrust while Ansett has opted for the standard 3B units of 20,000lb thrust. Ansett did not see the operational requirement for the more powerful engine and was unwilling to invest the extra $2m per aircraft that was required for the upgrade. Both aircraft will have excellent field performance though and will be able to operate consistently at max payload out of some previously tight fields such as Mt. Isa, Canberra and Alice Springs in the depths of summer.

Boeing have gone to great lengths to improve the 737, something that has been visibly rewarded by a record level of sales that have to date seen more than 500 -300s ordered or on option. The airframe modifications include a recontoured wing leading edge which approximates the wing shape of the 757 which consequently reduces cruise drag while keeping approach speeds similar to that of the smaller 737-200. In fact the two aircraft are so identical to fly that a common type rating has been granted similar to that which is effective for the larger 757 and 767 twinjets.

Still another advancement is in the corrosion protection area, something for which Boeing has previously not been noted for. Again manufacturing techniques developed for the larger twins are now standard on the 737. This includes t’1e application of special sealants and enamelling of major portions of the internal fuselage structure. Now in operation for more than a year and a half, with nearly 200,000 commercial flight hours behind it and over 110,000 cycles the 300 is claiming a general 99% dispatch reliability rate. Both our domestics will certainly benefit by receiving their aircraft with some real life flight mileage behind them which is a point always appreciated by the engineering and scheduling people.

The interior of the -300s is also state of the art. All 737s nowadays are being built with what is literally the 757 standard of interior. Scalloped sidewalls now allow two inches of additional cabin width which in Australian’s case allows the middle seat in each ‘three pack’ to be one inch wider than those alongside it. In this way the airline hopes to be able to make the journey for whoever draws the centre seat a little less confined. The luxurious 33in pitch in economy on both carriers also won’t go astray for those who are shaped more akin to Malcolm Fraser rather than John Howard!

As mentioned earlier, Australian Airlines, and indeed Ansett had a significant input into the cockpit environment of the new aircraft. In Australian Airlines case it also influenced the software that was specifically developed to support the computer-generated instruments in the cockpit. However, the cockpit instruments are not all totally new. Where the new technology hasn’t superseded the existing instruments they have been retained as buying technology for technology’s sake can often be an expensive and commercially dubious pastime.

“Our cockpit uses all the latest technology where there are significant benefits in the improved display and guidance data for flight crews”, said Australian Airlines Technical Services manager, John Cramond. But where the benefits of later technology are not so great and where the present analog instruments have proven reliability, they have been retained. ” said John.

“We had many criticisms of the 737-300 in its early developmental stage. Boeing planned minimum change to the flight deck from the -200 while we believed that in many ways the initial Boeing 737-300 was a 1960s aircraft with a fuselage stretch and more efficient engines. Boeing argued that they could provide a more efficient aircraft for airlines already operating the 737-200 and cockpit commonality would thus provide easier transition and reduce crew training costs. Our view was that the proposed analog cockpit was not suitable for an aircraft planned to operate in large numbers beyond the turn of the century, stated Mr Cramond.

The first changes were in navigational equipment following an early decision to replace the vertical and directional gyros which generate the aircraft’s attitude and heading information via the Inertial Reference System (IRS). However, the airline insisted on further changes to the navigational Flight Management System (FMS). Therefore, the single FMS has been supplemented with additional computation units so that the aircraft now has triple navigation computers independent of ground facilities. Another major demand was to insist on CRT displays for primary flight instruments as on the 767. However, the airline had further input by suggesting a different software programme for the computer that would include extra features on the CRT display such as an Airspeed Tape. Another innovation was the inclusion of a system to provide guidance to pilots when they encounter wind shear conditions.

The Australian 737-300s will also use ACARS (Aircraft Communications Addressing & Reporting System). ACARS can automatically transmit data from the air to the ground to provide real time extensive data and monitoring of engine and aircraft performance. The pilot’s checklists will also be included in ACARS while the flight crew will communicate with the system through the integrated Display Unit which nowadays is touch sensitive.

The Australian airline system has certainly seen a massive degree of change through the nineteen eighties. The A300 was heralded as the first wide bodied domestic in 1981 to be followed in due course by the digital 767. Qantas have more recently introduced the improved 747-300 and the long-range variant of the advanced 767. Now both domestics are investing heavily in two dozen of the 737-300s while later this decade they again will introduce even newer technology via the Airbus A320. Down the scale of performance, but certainly right up there in design finesse and advanced technology are the ATR428 for Air Queensland, the Fokker 50 propjets for the Ansett group and the SF340 for the rapidly expanding Kendell Airlines.

Of all these types though the one that may well be around the longest, and have the greatest long-term impact on the overall domestic route network, will be the 737-300. Its long range, unsurpassed fuel efficiency in its class and quietness in the circuit will in time hallmark it as one of the most significant steps forward in Australian domestic airline operations.