Britannia Airways 737-200s.

[Mooncrest]

Which of these aircraft were the early basic version and which were the Advanced ? My guess would be:

AVRL, AVRM, AVRN, AVRO, AXNA, AXNB, AXNC, AWSY and AZNZ - all early models.

Then, everything from BADP to BKHF plus BGNW and BJXJ were the Advanced variant.

I don't know about the various leased specimens from Gulf Air, PLUNA etc.

Thankyou.

[Meikleour]

G-BADP & G-BADR were ADVs with the small engines ie. -9 (these were tailored for flights between long runways like LGW and long sectors to the Canaries due to their lower fuel burn. ) All subsequent aircraft were ADV with -15 engines. There were some oddballs leased in for summer seasons but I will leave it to others to elaborate.

[Mooncrest]

Thankyou Meikleour. I suspected the first two Advanced weren't quite the same as the later ones; now I know it's the less powerful engines that were the difference.

I forgot to mention BOSL and OSLA. Although not owned by Britannia they were in everything but name essentially.

[GBYAJ]

What was G-BMMZ? I may be wrong but it was never a regular at NCL in the late 80’s and always wondered why.

AXNA and NB weren’t too common either but from what I’ve read they struggled from LGW with those cargo doors so NCL to TFS may not have been a step too far…

[Flightrider]

BMMZ was the Air Mali machine and a low gross weight aircraft if I remember rightly.

There was a difference (believe it or not) between BADP and BADR - can’t remember if it was weights or comms equipment but they were not identical twins as the registrations would suggest. Maybe someone else can recall …

[Rutan16]

AZNZ was a United build frame that they got rid of very early for some reason.

[WHBM]

AZNZ was a United build frame that they got rid of very early for some reason.
I think it was in the fleet until 1985, when it was disposed along with a number of the other early ones documented here when the first 767s came. It was of course an oddball being to the United spec. It ended up in Africa early this century, when it was damaged in flight by hail to the extent it wasn't worth repairing.

[Mooncrest]

AZNZ was a United build frame that they got rid of very early for some reason.

Most of Britannia's 737-200s were built to their own '204' specification. BGNW was a -219 which arrived via Air New Zealand/NAC. BJXJ was from the same source ultimately but Britannia acquired her from Dan Air. BOSL and OSLA were both - 2U4s, both built for Owners' Services but technically identical to Britannia's own Advanced -204s.

The Civil Aircraft Markings books in the 1980s used to flag up the Britannia ADV models in the type description, whereas the early birds were simply listed as -204. But I can't quite remember which was which.
I would venture that all the other British-registered 737-200s were, at that time, the Advanced models so highlighting this was unnecessary .

[GBYAJ]

G-BJXJ, always thought it was odd that DA got rid of one of their most modern aircraft to a rival. However, have now read how senior managers at DA tried to persuade Fred Newman to modernise with 737’s and when he didn’t they left for Air Europe, Air 2000 etc.. probably replaced XJ with a 1-11 or 727…

[Mooncrest]

G-BJXJ, always thought it was odd that DA got rid of one of their most modern aircraft to a rival. However, have now read how senior managers at DA tried to persuade Fred Newman to modernise with 737’s and when he didn’t they left for Air Europe, Air 2000 etc.. probably replaced XJ with a 1-11 or 727…
Ironically, two or three years earlier, Dan Air took on one of the OSL -2U4s from Britannia and re-registered her G-ILFC, then WGEL.

[WHBM]

Aircraft that appear to be equal mechanically may be very different financially when on lease, the terms of different ones of the same type can be surprisingly far apart, to the extent that the airline may look to get rid of one in short order to replace it with a comparable one on much better terms, if they can't "renegotiate". Then some may be on lease, others outright purchased - but later sold to a lessor and leased back. I think that Fred Newman at Dan-Air liked to buy older frames "for cash", and run them to end of life. Their newer ones in the fleet were nevertheless leased. Airframe hours, next D-check, etc, and the overall basis on it being hours-based, monthly-based, etc, all plays a part in the costing, and in the negotiations standoff when taking aircraft on.

[kenparry]

Although -DP and -DR were normally fitted with -9 engines, they were occasionally fitted with the -15 version. I think this was purely a function of engine availability - I remember a period when one of them had a -9 one side and a -15 the other. No useable performance benefit, of course!

As regards route suitability, DP & DR were not scheduled for any specific routes. With the small engines, they were not good off short runways; off a long one it was necessary to use improved climb (i.e. increased VR & V2) to get airborne at the structural limit weight. I don't recall any system or fit differences between the two.

One of the problems with the early -200s such as RL, RM, and NZ, was the low max ZFW and TOW, the latter being 49442 kg, limiting the max sector with a full load to 3 hr or so. From G-AVRN up to G-BADR that went up to 53070, and from G-BGYJ onwards to 55111kg. When those were new, they could take full fuel and a full load of passengers, and that enabled GLA to Cyprus direct. After about 10 years' service the empty weight had increased by around a tonne, so full fuel + full load was no longer possible.

[Mooncrest]

Interesting stuff; evidently there are /were variants within variants viz engine power and MTOW etc. Also about terminating lease or finance deals early in order to obtain more attractive terms on essentially an identical aircraft. Only possible without stiff penalties for early termination, I expect, or if the benefits of a new deal offset any penalty.

[treadigraph]

After about 10 years' service the empty weight had increased by around a tonne, so full fuel + full load was no longer possible.
What made up the tonne, presumably paint touch up (how often does an airliner get a strip and repaint?), anything else?

I remember once seeing a figure of how much fuel American Airlines saved by leaving their fleet largely unpainted!

[Jackjones1]

On BA jumbos when they were being weighed they allowed a tonne for condensation within the soundproofing of the cabin .... true or not it did seem an excessive amount!

[kenparry]

The weight increase was mostly, I think, not bare aircraft weight, but changes to the galley fit of trolleys for catering and duty free. A loaded trolley was around 200-250kg, I seem to remember.

The 2 cargo convertibles, G-AXNA & NB, were about a tonne heavier than their all-pax contemporaries such as G-AXNC, which was down to the freight floor, the big door, and the associated necessary fuselage strengthening.

[treadigraph]

Thanks Ken!

[Akrotiri bad boy]

The gradual age related accumulation of weight also occurs in the marine world, termed "deck creep". This is usually due to innocuous mods such as nav kit upgrades, galley reconfigurations and comfy chairs for the watchkeepers. Each mod itself doesn't amount to much but taken as a whole over a five year period it can make quite a change to the overall weight and stability of the vessel. Apologies for the thread creep in explaining deck creep.
Akro

[GBYAJ]

Sometime between 1983 (my first BY flight) and 1987 (the next one) the 737’s were fitted with little displays through the cabin showing height and speed. Then I think in the early 90’s with tv’s to compete with the likes of Air Europe and Air 2000 when it all became about service. The initial kit might have added a few extra kg’s the IFE perhaps quite a few more!

[kenparry]

The cabin data displays were called "PDADS", which meant something like Passenger Display Automatic Data System (or maybe Passenger Data Automatic Display System) - a bit of an innovation at the time. The -200 was an almost wholly analogue aircraft, and I'm unsure where the speed data came from. Altitude, easy, from the ATC transponder, but we had no readout of groundspeed* in the cockpit. Some of the guys were dab hands at timing the rate of change of the DME to measure groundspeed, but I don't think that fed the PDADS, as it's obviously only accurate when the beacon is on track.

* Further thought gets me to recall that the Omega had a groundspeed readout, and eventually most (all?) of the fleet was so fitted. However, Omega as fitted by BAL was somewhat erratic in its performance. When the Quebecair aircraft were leased in, their Omega behaved impeccably. We then learnt that the BAL installation was cheap and not so cheerful, using the ADF sense aerial to feed the Omega, whereas Quebecair's sets had dedicated aerials.

[oxenos]

Ryanair bought 6 of the Britannia 737-200s in about '93/4. They were all ADV -15 55 tonners, i.e. the most recent and best of the fleet.
I joined Ryan in '97, and they were still chuckling over the price they got them for.
G-BJCV became EI-CJC
G-BKHE " EI-CJD
G-BJCU " EI-CJE
G-BTZF (or BKHF) became EI-CJF
G-BGYK became EI-CJG
G-BGYJ " EI-JCH
The last time I flew an ex Brit 73 was in OCT 2005 (CJG). They were then being phased out, as the 787-800's took their place. My last flight before retiring was 19 DEC 05, which was one of the last 732 flights by Ryan.

I always felt Britannia missed a golden opportunity when they got rid of the 73's and went all 757/767. They had a number of good, recent 732's which they sold, flooding the market and so not getting a good price. They got rid of a lot of pilots, paying out on redundancy deals.. Brit was up until then running a cheap "no-frills" schedule between Luton and Belfast, and, selling every seat.
If they had kept the best aircraft, kept on pilots to operate them, and expanded the no frills routes, they could have had a good thing going, using their buying power to keep costs down on fuel, handling, etc. Ryanair may never have expanded as it did, and Easyjet may never have got started.
Not sour grapes on my part - I did very well out of the redundancy, and spent the next 12 years flying ex Brit 732's fot different outfits, including Easy, when it started with two aircraft leased in, and later with Ryan.

[mustbeaboeing]

Quote.
“I always felt Britannia missed a golden opportunity when they got rid of the 73's and went all 757/767”.

My understanding was that Britannia traded in the B737-200’s to Boeing to get a good deal on the B757’s and Boeing ‘sold / leased’ them on.

Agreed about the pulling back on the Scheduled routes. LTN BFS LTN could have been the start of something else.

A phrase for those who were there by the then MD, was ‘the wrong kind of profit’ ………if only

[WHBM]

. Also about terminating lease or finance deals early in order to obtain more attractive terms on essentially an identical aircraft. Only possible without stiff penalties for early termination, I expect, or if the benefits of a new deal offset any penalty.
There's no such thing as a standard set of lease terms, all depends on individual negotiation and how the market is. Commonly there are break points when you can more readily hand back, which themselves become times for further hard-nosed renegotiation. There's normally an exec at most carriers who is the expert at this.

A phrase for those who were there by the then MD, was ‘the wrong kind of profit’ ………Indeed. One has known several organisations whose accounts show them profitable every quarter - until they go bankrupt.

[Mooncrest]

I guess by about 1972-73, i.e. when BADP and BADR were delivered, the Advanced was the standard production variant. Did any other early 737 customers, e.g. Aer Lingus and Braathens, also order the Advanced ? Both these airlines were regular or semi-regular users of LBA's short runway in the 1970s, albeit not flying long distances. Their early 737s should therefore have been able to cope.

[WHBM]

Sure, the Advanced became the standard production type. Both Aer Lingus and Braathens bought later aircraft, they both had integrated local short-haul networks with substantial IT flights to the Mediterranean, which particularly for Braathens from Scandinavia stretched the aircraft as each improvement came along.

[oxenos]

Britannia traded in the B737-200’s to Boeing to get a good deal on the B757’s
G-BECG and G-BECH were apparently owned by an American pension fund - I believe for dentists. When they left Brit, they were taken on a 4 year lease by the Independent Aviation Group, who were a firm of seat brokers ( not the other IAG). It not being economical to have an Air Operator's Certificate for 2 aircraft, they were put on G.B.'s AOC, and G.B. recruited extra pilots to cover them. These pilots did not just fly CG and CH, but all GB pilots flew both these and GB's other 732s, which were British Airways pattern.
IAG found various charters to use the aircraft on, including work for Sterling in Denmark and Sobelair (SABENA's charter division).
In 1995, IAG got the contract to start Easyjet, with flights commencing in the November. At that pont, Easyjet consisted of the two aircraft and two routes, LTN-GLA-LTN and LTN-EDI-LTN. G.B provided the pilots and senior cabin crew, and Easyjet the remaining cabin crew.
This involved the expense of crews travelling from their LGW base to LTN and back, and ocasionally hotel accomodation in LTN, so in July 1996, the aircraft were transferred to Air Foyle's AOC in LTN. Air Foyle recruited pilots, some transferring from G.B., the others being largely ex Brtannia.
Once it was seen that there was the demand, Easyjet started to acquire their own aircraft and crews and add routes. Early additions were Inverness, Aberdeen and Amsterdam..
In April 1997 IAG's contract with Easyjet expired, and they switched to a contract with Virgin Express. CG and CH were based in Heathrow, operating LHR- Brussels, and on to other Virgin Express destinations, usually Nice and Milan (Malpensa).
This continued until early October 1997.
At that pont the lease on the aircraft expired. To renew it would have required IAG to pay for them to be hush kitted, so it was not renewed.
I believe both aircraft ended up in Argentina, and were scrapped about 10 years later.
.

[Liffy 1M]

I guess by about 1972-73, i.e. when BADP and BADR were delivered, the Advanced was the standard production variant. Did any other early 737 customers, e.g. Aer Lingus and Braathens, also order the Advanced ? Both these airlines were regular or semi-regular users of LBA's short runway in the 1970s, albeit not flying long distances. Their early 737s should therefore have been able to cope.
Aer Lingus bought three Advanced 737s new: EI-ASL (-248C) and EI-BEB/BEC. A further, secondhand, acquisition was also of the Advanced model, viz EI-BDY (a series -2E1, ex-Eastern Provincial). For reasons of standardisation across the airline's 737 fleet, all were fitted with -9A engines.

[Mooncrest]

Thanks all. I remember seeing EI-BDY in summer 1987 when Britannia had her on a damp lease from Aer Lingus.

I've often wondered if the Britannia and Braathens 737s and 767s were more or less identical ? My theory is based solely on the adjacent Boeing customer codes, -04 and -05!

[Mr @ Spotty M]

The B767-200s both of Britannia and Braathens were the only ones to my knowledge that had twin over-wing exits.

[TCU]

So checked my log and flew the following BY 737's:

10.02.83 LTN-GVA G-BGYL
17.02.83 GVA-LTN G-BFVB (named Sir Thomas Sopwith)
15.02.92 ZRH-LGW G-AVRN

It has always provided me with a bit of nerdy amusement that my first BY 737 flight was in a G-BG reg aircraft, and my last, some 9 year later, was in an "original" G-AV aircraft.....

'YL of course ended her days plummeting into the Panamanian jungle, with COPA, in what was "suspected" as one of the early rudder hard over incidents

[thegypsy]

G BMMZ was a nightmare of an aircraft. Useless weather radar.
I had smoke in cockpit on flight from Nice to Luton, landed at Lyon and waited for engineers from Ltn to fix it.
Latter when a B767/757 Captain I too took redundancy in 1994 and worked as expat for the last 9 years until 60.

[DH106]

'YL of course ended her days plummeting into the Panamanian jungle, with COPA, in what was "suspected" as one of the early rudder hard over incidents

I thought that one had been shown to be an artificial horizon failure on a dark night?

[WHBM]

I thought that one had been shown to be an artificial horizon failure on a dark night?
Me too. And the failure was attributed to the connecting cables found being installed overtight and short-circuiting (identified by the FAA/NTSB/Boeing in the USA). Likewise the CVR was failed because the tape had snapped. Both pointed to the last time they had been maintained/reinstalled, which had not happened during the lease. The form of the loss of control also looked more like following a failed horizon rather than a jammed rudder. The aircraft still belonged to Britannia, who sent personnel to the accident scene and the enquiry. It had been leased to Copa Panama just 8 weeks beforehand, and was still essentially in Britannia livery, with the Copa name stuck over the top. It was also different in some horizon switch settings to other Copa 737s, which the crew had not been through any differences training on, and possibly the leasing carrier had not even identified. It had been re-reg in Panama for the duration of the lease so the AAIB did not need to get involved.

[TCU]

I thought that one had been shown to be an artificial horizon failure on a dark night?
DH106. You and WHBM are correct and it was my bad in not fully expanding on my use of the word "suspected". Must have been an awful journey down.

[Airbanda]

AZNZ was a United build frame that they got rid of very early for some reason.

We flew Mahon to Castle Don on NZ in April 1975. My recollection is that it was mainly used on behalf of Horizon Midlands from BHX or EMA (still CDD at the time). There was a plaque with the Horizon Midlands logo just inside the forward door.

[rog747]

BY's early 737's were delivered with original Boeing 707/727 type hat rack interiors with individual PSU's over the seat rows, in addition all the early ones had just a forward galley with 2 toilets aft, whereas the newer BY 737's had split galley's fore and aft.

First seating config was 117 pax to match the Bristol Britannia's, but this went eventually up to the charter norm of 130 pax.

I recall BCAL around 1973 began installing on their 707C's the new wide-look cabin interior with flush overhead lockers to compete with 747/DC-10/Tristar Jumbo Operators in the new wide-body age.
Britannia would eventually follow suit for their 737's, and later orders would have been delivered with the new cabins installed, but I have no idea what was the first new aircraft to have this factory fitted, but it may have been later deliveries that ended towards the time of new 767 deliveries in 1984.
Early BY 737 aircraft still in the fleet were retrofitted with the new wide-look cabins.

United had sold some of their first -222 fleet early on to both Britannia and Transavia.

737-200ADV Advanced were built from June 1971 onwards.
Thus G-AVRL-O, G-AXNA-C, G-AWSY, and G-AZNZ were not ADV models,
but from 1973 G-BADP-R, G-BAZG-I G-BECG/H and those then on were all -204 or 2U4 ADV models --- I'm sure someone here will clarify this.

Britannia's 767-204's had GE CF6 engines with a 2-4-2 seating config for 273, then to 290 pax, but Braathen's pair of 767-205's had PW JT9D engines with a nicer 2-3-2 config seating 256.
Braathens soon found the 767 unsuitable and too big, and offered them for sale in 1986.
Britannia, I assume due to their PW engines did not take them despite the pair having the 2 extra over wing exits to enable 290 pax.
However, one did come into BY's fleet later on a lease as G-BNAX.
Aeromaritime also ordered a 762 with two extra over wing exits, this 767 went to Balkan.

BY 204 and BU 205 Boeing Codes were both given for early 1968 orders for the first new European Customer 737-200 deliveries.

[Mooncrest]

Reading this again has refreshed my memory. Once Braathens had decided the 767 wasn't really their thing, they plugged the resultant shortfall in capacity by ordering another half-dozen or so 737-205s, at the same time offloading their F28s. Interesting that Braathens opted for a tried and tested and thoroughly proven aeroplane, rather than going for the new 737-300. Similarly, their chums at Britannia preferred the 737-200 over the -300 and disposed of their Orion acquisitions after a couple of years or so.

I wonder if the Owners Services 737s, BOSL and OSLA, were actually ordered by Britannia but purchased by OSL as a means of avoiding a potential import tax bill for Britannia ? Or some other complex legal or financial reason ? The aircraft were effectively operated and maintained as if they were Britannia's own -204s, the only difference being a small variance in the customer number, i.e. 2U4. I thought the same about BECH and BECG, although they were -204s.

[oxenos]

I thought the same about BECH and BECG, although they were -204s.
CG and CH were I believe, owned by an American dentists pension fund. (See Post #26) I believe they left the British Register in OCT97/

[Mooncrest]

I've often been intrigued by the minutiae of aircraft ownership and leasing. Over the years, I've read several plaques in the passenger entrances with variations on, "this aircraft, with or without its engines, is owned by Blah Finance (Cayman Islands/Jersey/Antigua etc) is leased to GECAS/ILFC, is sub-leased to ABC Airways and is sub-sub-leased to XYZ Airlines, which is a trading style of Blah Aviation (Bermuda) Limited". I know, it's a purely fictional and extreme example!

[Flightrider]

I think there was a fleet commonality issue for Braathens with a mix of -200s and -300s, just as there was for Britannia until they inherited the Orion aircraft with the take-over. And the early 737-300s with B1 engines were not exactly long-range aircraft which would have limited Braathens' capability to do Norway-Canaries which they did with the later HGW 737-200s. Then again, I seem to recall Orion doing LGW-Tel Aviv with a B1 737-300!!

The OSL 737-200s were ordered by OSL and Britannia won a contract to fly them against other UK rivals. The arrangement was packed up by the end of Summer 1983 and Rank/OSL flew their passengers on the ex-Laker BCal Charter DC10-10s, later becoming Cal-Air and then Novair as a wholly owned subsidiary of Rank/OSL by that time. Novair had two 737-400s towards the end of its life (one of which went to British Midland to replace the aircraft lost at Kegworth), and one of the OSL 737-200s went on to Dan-Air as G-ILFC and then G-WGEL which stayed with them until the bitter end.

[Mooncrest]

Thankyou Flightrider. It's remarkable what goes on behind the scenes. I've looked at the data for some of the 1980-build Monarch 737-200s and they had even greater MTOWs, coming in at over 56 tons. That must have given them quite an edge over Britannia's 1968 machines.

[WHBM]

I think there was a fleet commonality issue for Braathens with a mix of -200s and -300s, just as there was for Britannia until they inherited the Orion aircraft with the take-over. And the early 737-300s with B1 engines were not exactly long-range aircraft which would have limited Braathens' capability to do Norway-Canaries which they did with the later HGW 737-200s. Then again, I seem to recall Orion doing LGW-Tel Aviv with a B1 737-300!!

I'm quite surprised that Braathens managed Oslo to Las Palmas with a 737-200, it's over 2,200 nm, well beyond even the quoted Gatwick to Tel Aviv of 1,900. It was for this particular route that both Spanish and Scandinavian charter carriers kept 3- and 4- engined aircraft in stock.

I was at university in Edinburgh in the early 1970s, which for historical reasons had a substantial Norwegian contingent then. Each start and end of term they chartered from Braathens for Oslo to Edinburgh. When I first was there it was a DC-6B, which for about 120 students needed to do two round trips, and took the whole day to do so. Must have been about 1974 they changed to a 737, which not only managed it in one trip, but I worked out had done an early schedule return from Oslo to Bergen and back, then the Edinburgh rounder, and then a holiday flight to Malaga. It was a notable example of how productivity improved with modern aircraft.

[Mooncrest]

How is the MTOW of a single-design aeroplane varied anyway ? I remember when Air UK Leisure received its 737-400s, there was some company literature (inflight magazine, perhaps) stating that two of their newcomers were a certain weight, but the other two had a higher weight and could therefore go further.

[DaveReidUK]

How is the MTOW of a single-design aeroplane varied anyway ? I remember when Air UK Leisure received its 737-400s, there was some company literature (inflight magazine, perhaps) stating that two of their newcomers were a certain weight, but the other two had a higher weight and could therefore go further.

I think the 737, with all its variants, is about as far from a "single-design" as you can get. Even within a single series, the manufacturer will typically offer weight/price options (which will be expanded as development and service experience progresses), and operators also have an incentive to certify individual fleet members at a lower MTOM in order to reduce landing fees, route charges, etc.

An extreme example is the MD-81/82/83 series where recertifying an aircraft from, say, an MD-83 to an MD-82 (or any other combination) is purely a paperwork exercise.

[kenparry]

MTOW variation:

Two ways - structural, or paperwork.

The earliest Britannia 737-200 variant had an MTOW of 49442kg, the final batch 55111kg. They were all designated B737-204 (which was only a customer identifier) but were structurally different - stronger spars at least, maybe different gauge skins, perhaps different wheelbrakes (memory has faded on the detail!)

Later, with the B757 fleet, all the -204 were delivered with the same MTOW. I think this was 113398kg, but all were downgraded on paper to 112699, and later some to 103699kg.

Why do that? To save money. In the 1990s, 3 roughly equal items made up 75% of the DOC, namely fuel, en route charges, and landing and handling costs. The other 25% covered purchase, maintenance, insurance, and crew costs, plus overheads. By reducing the declared MTOW, the aircraft moved into a lower weight category and the airline paid less for en route and landing charges. The savings were significant.

The airline could do this without penalty provided that the declared MTOW was adequate for the planned sectors. As the B757 had more than enough range for all the normal Europe/Med destinations, that was OK, until............

We also went as far as Banjul; easy if the MTOW was 112699, but not at 103699. Of course, occasionally the wrong aircraft was allocated through force of circumstances, and a tech stop would be needed in the Canaries both ways - thus negating the savings........

It just shows that Sod's Law will get you whenever it can

[Mooncrest]

Thankyou for your explanations, Dave and Ken. It reminds me of the British Midland Saab 340s, which was a mixed fleet of -As and -Bs. The former flew largely from East Midlands whereas the latter were almost always based at Leeds Bradford. The -B was, I think, fitted with more powerful engines and therefore better suited to LBA's shorter runway, even though they were only operating sectors of just a few hundred miles. The -B might have been a higher weight aircraft too.

[Discorde]

BY's early 737's were delivered with original Boeing 707/727 type hat rack interiors with individual PSU's over the seat rows, in addition all the early ones had just a forward galley with 2 toilets aft, whereas the newer BY 737's had split galley's fore and aft.

On the loos-at-the-back aircraft, if the pilots needed to go back to use these facilities they would have to run the gauntlet of pax comments such as 'who's flying the plane?'. As you can imagine, there were a variety of responses.

[DaveReidUK]

The -B might have been a higher weight aircraft too.

Yes, the 340B has a 1,000 lb higher MTOM.

[Flightrider]

The 737-200s with the twin toilets in the tail was the spec on the early aircraft and was also common across the BA and Sabena 737-200s (which later ended up with European Air Charter). The rear galley was split into two smaller units forward of the toilets, instead of the transverse rear galley on the later Britannia 737s. The earlier variant was a bloody nightmare on which to work, as pretty much any and all activity in the galley stopped every time someone wanted to enter or exit the toilets.

The transverse galley with the toilets placed behind the rear row of seats was a whole lot easier.

If I remember rightly, the Britannia aircraft up to G-AXNC had the split rear galley / toilets in the tail (G-AZNZ was an ex-United aircraft) and from G-BADP onwards, which were the first of the 737-204ADVs, the aircraft had the transverse galley with a lot more stowage space and working space. Of those aircraft, I think G-AVRN kept going for by far the longest of any, but mostly confined to Britannia's LTN-Belfast International scheduled services and the trooping flights in its latter days.

[WHBM]

If I remember rightly, the Britannia aircraft up to G-AXNC had the split rear galley / toilets in the tail (G-AZNZ was an ex-United aircraft) and from G-BADP onwards, which were the first of the 737-204ADVs, the aircraft had the transverse galley with a lot more stowage space and working space. Of those aircraft, I think G-AVRN kept going for by far the longest of any, but mostly confined to Britannia's LTN-Belfast International scheduled services and the trooping flights in its latter days.
There was a business-oriented BBC TV programme ("The Money Programme", I seem to recall, which did a feature on the Britannia base at Luton. At the time Romeo November was going through a complete D-check, possibly the first that Britannia had done, or done internally. It was described in the programme how extensive the work was. Later there was an article in Flight which covered this overhaul, and stated that the cost had been so extensive (it was seen as a pioneer job) that the decision was not to do them any more, but to sell the aircraft before they approached the hours, and buy replacements. However, having done the job RN was kept on for as long as practical. RN was one of the original 1969 aircraft, this was probably happening in the early 1980s, it was finally disposed at the end of the 1993 season.

[Flightrider]

It always seemed slightly odd that AVRN kept going for far longer than its sisterships, which I think went off to Presidential in the USA. By the end, RN's capability was degraded so far by the changes in MTOW calculations and increases in notional pax/bag weights that it was incredibly limited in what it could do. The latter-day performance of the rest of the Britannia 737-200 fleet was not helped by the decision to fit TV screens (an early incarnation of IFE!) which added a lot to the dry operating weight - I seem to remember about a tonne - and generally made life all the more difficult.

[Spantax leased a 737 from Presidential one summer and it flew around for the whole summer with the rear doors never being opened, as it was one of the few 737-200s with rear airstairs and they apparently were not certificated for use in Europe! Typical Spantax.]

And if saving D Checks on G-AVRN's sisterships was the price of bringing G-BMMZ into the fleet from Air Tanzania - well, an interesting incarnation of the old phrase "Better the Devil you Know"!

[Discorde]

'MZ was an oddball. An Advanced -9 (so non-sparkling performance) with placards in French (AEROFREIN for speedbrake, VOLETS for flaps &c). No performance computer, no area nav capability so direct routings not available.

[WHBM]

'MZ was ex-Air Algerie, new 1971, and thence Air Mali, both French-speaking onetime colonies, before coming to Britannia at 15 years old, hence the French placards. That must have been one of the first ADV aircraft. After Britannia it later went on to Europe Aero Services in Perpignan, France's equivalent of Dan-Air for a large charter fleet, oddball old aircraft repository, where the placarding would have come in useful again. If Britannia took it back to Algeria once I wonder who there recognised an old friend !

[thegypsy]

Had smoke in Flight Deck in MZ when operating Nice to Luton.

Went into Lyon awaiting engineers to rectify caused by CB fault I seem to remember.
Had a bad weather radar too.

[Mooncrest]

I was only very young when Britannia began using LBA in 1976. At the time, not only did I think Britannia was a Spanish company (the significance of the name hadn't dawned on me!) but I didn't realise the 737s they used there were relatively youthful. To begin with, I guess it was BAZG, BAZH and BAZI that did the honours, so all only about two or three years old at the time. We didn't see the non-Advanced models as they couldn't reach the Mediterranean off the then 5400 foot runway. Even when I first came across later models such as BGYK, I wasn't aware how new they were. I guess BKHE and BKHF were the final pair of -200s to join Britannia, apart from BJXJ which came from Dan-Air.

[Mooncrest]

Another of my observations is how, at LBA, Britannia had the place to themselves for ITs for four or five years. Then along came Air Europe in 1980 doing flights to Palma and Barcelona. AE didn't operate through LBA in 1981 but came back for '82. This year also saw Monarch make their LBA debut along with Air Malta. These two might have started flights from Southend at the same time. By 1983, Britannia, Monarch, Air Europe and Air Malta had been joined on ITs by Orion and Dan Air, all flying Advanced 732s off the then 5400 ft runway. Suddenly, all the Tour Operators wanted a slice of the LBA pie and they might not have got it (until the runway was extended) without that aeroplane.

[SWBKCB]

[Spantax leased a 737 from Presidential one summer and it flew around for the whole summer with the rear doors never being opened, as it was one of the few 737-200s with rear airstairs and they apparently were not certificated for use in Europe! Typical Spantax.]



Didn't think the doors and the airstairs were linked - or were the rear airstairs different? And didn't somebody take out the front airstairs to save weight?

[DaveReidUK]

Didn't think the doors and the airstairs were linked - or were the rear airstairs different? And didn't somebody take out the front airstairs to save weight?

B732 rear airstairs were an integral part of the door.

[SWBKCB]

Thanks for that, another school day. And for anybody that wants to know more, here's some details from the example in the Alaska Aviation Museum...

https://www.wy2.org/aircraft/b737/b737-airstair.php

My excuse is the rear door was shut when I was there! :O

https://www.flickr.com/photos/swbkcb/48961098201/

[WHBM]

I was always fascinated by the 737 forward airstair (and door) extension and retraction. As a piece of mechanical engineering it was a classic.

[rog747]

I was always fascinated by the 737 forward air stair (and door) extension and retraction. As a piece of mechanical engineering it was a classic.

When the Holiday Jets were introduced by the late 60's the new 737's (including Britannia's) all came with built in front stairs.

The early 737-130's that LH used for Condor had both front, and the drop down rear door air stairs.
Britannia and most other Charter 737-200 all had the forward ones.
Mey Air had both front and rear stairs, possibly the only 737-200 charter airline to have both,
and Busy Bee just had the rear drop down door stairs (This was a gravel strip 737RC)

Charter 1-11's had both front and rear stairs. (The DC-9 30 soon followed, and that too was self sufficient for ground handling)
Caravelle's all had rear stairs.
727's had rear stairs, but some also had the forward air stairs option -- Wardair was one, but Condor and Transair Sweden's did not, nor did AFA, TIA and Worlds'.
The second-hand 727-100's for Dan Air and Hapag Lloyd all only had the rear air stairs.

The 737 front stair option continues to this day, but Charter airlines TUI, Neos, Enter Air and Smartwings have not selected them on their MAX fleet,
but Ryanair (plus Buzz and Malta Air) has opted for front stairs for their new 737 M8-200's.