737 NG vs A-320 family

I don’t want this to turn into a Euro-US pissing contest, but which is the better aircraft to build an airline around? I’m talking about in this game, not the real world.

My money is on the 737-700 BGW… With the 737-900ER BGW a good alternative for higher capacity routes.

Thanks for the reply. Just looking at the comparison tool, It looked to me like the 737 NG family had a very slight edge over the A-320’s.

Also, the 737-900 ER HGW (without winglets) have a much lower operating cost for longer routes - such as Dubai-London than any other aircraft I’ve come across (the winglets version is only slightly higher). I also feel it does a pretty good job with shorter routes too.

So like me, if your daily long haul return takes 16 hours, you can fit in a short haul return and leave enough time for maintenance while getting ‘probably’ the lowest overall cost per seat.


The 737 series is by superior for that capacity. For the larger capacities I think I like the A330/340 series. The commonality makes them ideal. The 340 has some serious range.

Yes, the 737 family is better in AirlineSim. Apart from better economic performance, A320 family has one annoying feature - somehow A321’s turn time is 15 minutes longer than that of an A320, while all 737 models have the same turn time. That makes it impossible to switch the schedule between A320 and A321, which is a huge minus.

Well, the A321 is still a very profitable aircraft in AirlineSim.

Both familys have strong and weak aircraft. My airline performs well with mainly A320 and A321. Just the A319 should be avoided.

So in my eyes, the main benefit of the 737NG ist the range of the 737-900ER HGW.

Pardon my ignorance, but why?

The A319 has the highest cost per seat in the A320 family.

I’d recommend just to pick a “standard” route you you’d like to operate and compare all 737NGs and A318/319/320/321. This should provide the best overview.

Another slight advantage of the mentioned Airbus aircraft is, that they need a little less maintenance time. This advantage grows, if your planes operate more (shorter) flights per day.

I think most will agree that the A-318 and 737-600 are useless with all of the RJ’s available.

What? The 767 is a widebody

Typo, I meant 737-600. I know that the 767 is a widebody and there is no 767-600.

I have airlines wih A318 and B737-600 on Tempelhof. Booth are good and profitable aircraft.

But nothing is such good as the 737-700BGW.

One thing I am interested in knowing is if the slight reduction in fuel consumption for the winglet version outweighs the slightly higher min. seat cost in the longer run?

I have just ran a couple of trials with the evaluation tool. The only plane where the winglet version is cheaper to operate at the moment is the 737-700 HGW winglets instead of the 737-700 HGW. For the other 737 versions at the current fuel prices the winglets are only extra cost (about 2-10 $ per seat).

I was thinking for several days at the same question and decided to go for [font=Helvetica]Boeing 737-700 BGW and [/font][font=Helvetica]Boeing 737-900ER HGW[/font]

Agreed, with the one minor exception where your in the range critical area of the performance envelope in which case you can just inch ahead with the 737-900ER HGW (Winglets) because it allows you to carry a couple more pax over the same distance.