Hawaiian’s 717 Replacement Conundrum

Hawaiian, part of Alaska Airlines Group, faces a challenge.  Its inter-island service hammers aircraft, and its 717s are aging faster in Hawaii than anywhere else. This concern has been around for years. And there’s still no ideal solution for Hawaiian, because its requirements are unique.  That makes the replacement choice a set of unique tradeoffs.

The Core Problem

Alaska Air Group’s 19 Boeing 717s have an average age of ~24 years and operate exclusively on inter-island routes — short-stage, high-cycle operations that no other carrier in the world replicates at this intensity. These 717s operate up to 16 daily segments, accumulating takeoff and landing cycles far exceeding those seen in mainland or long-haul operations. The FAA recently issued a binding directive requiring repetitive inspections of the upper lock link assembly for cracking — a direct consequence of that cycle intensity.

What Alaska Has Said

Alaska CFO Shane Tackett acknowledged these 717s need replacement but hinted at something beyond a simple 737 MAX substitution: “Is there a different sort of purpose-built short-stage length, high-cycle aircraft that could live in Hawaii better than the 737?” That’s a remarkable statement — Alaska has a deep Boeing relationship and a large MAX order book, yet its own CFO is questioning whether the MAX is the right tool for inter-island Hawaii.

He’s not wrong.  Understanding inter-island stage lengths is important. Typical inter-island flights are 30-50 minutes in the air. Hawaiian operates roughly 170 daily inter-island flights — some corridors run every 30 minutes at peak. Very high cycles in a corrosive environment are perfect for aging aircraft.

• Honolulu–Maui: ~100 miles
• Honolulu–Kauai: ~103 miles
• Honolulu–Kona: ~163 miles
• Honolulu–Hilo: ~216 miles
• Maui–Kona; ~100 miles
• Maui–Hilo: ~120 miles

Aircraft Options

737 MAX 7 — the closest-sized Boeing product to the 717, now in final certification phases with 2Q26 approval expected. Alaska’s argument for fleet commonality is strong. But the MAX 7 is optimized for range, not high-cycle short-stage operations. It carries more seats than Hawaiian needs on thinner inter-island routes and costs more to operate per cycle than purpose-built alternatives. It is quite simply ‘too much airplane.’

Airbus A220-100 — a frequently cited replacement candidate, offering 125 seats, high commonality with modern systems, and a design that handles frequent pressurization cycles well. The problem: Hawaiian is now part of the Alaska Air Group, which is deeply aligned with Boeing. An A220 order would introduce a third narrowbody type across the combined group — A321neo, MAX, and A220 — which adds maintenance and training complexity. The odds don’t favor this selection. The size match is reasonable. The fleet politics are not.

Embraer E190-E2 — the closest size match to the 717 at roughly 110 seats, with Embraer’s proven high-cycle credentials from other regional operations. The E2 is also gaining momentum. But Embraer has no existing Alaska relationship and a limited US narrowbody footprint. The E190-E2 is the right size and offers way more range than needed. That extra range capability means added weight. Embraer won’t modify its aircraft for ~20 orders.

ATR 72 – this is a non-obvious solution. The stages are realistic for a slower turboprop. These aircraft are smaller than the 717, but most certainly are not ‘too much airplane’ as the others clearly are. Hawaiian operated ATR turboprops on Molokai and Lanai routes until 2021 — the inter-island turboprop concept has been tried and abandoned once already. Whether Alaska would revisit it on a larger scale is an open question. That said, this option should not be dismissed, as it is worth considering.

The Timing Reality

Alaska has indicated it will keep the 717s for approximately 5 more years, with replacement deliveries likely to begin in 2029-2030. That means a fleet decision is probably being made internally right now — and whoever wins the order will need to demonstrate high-cycle durability credentials, not just seat economics. Indeed, this market demands something as hardy as the 717 with state-of-the-art economics.  Nothing like that exists and likely won’t exist by 2030.

Bottom Line

The “purpose-built” comment from Alaska’s CFO is the thread worth pulling. It opens the door to the ATR, E190-E2, and A220 as contenders over the MAX 7. The aircraft Hawaiian ideally needs isn’t currently in production.

The 717’s replacement isn’t just a fleet decision. It’s a market gap that Boeing can’t really compete in. Airbus has a solution, but there are obvious hurdles. Until someone does offer something realistic, Hawaii’s inter-island passengers will keep flying 24-year-old jets in one of the world’s most corrosive operating environments.

Views: 0

About The Author

Addison Schonland Partner

Co-Founder AirInsight. My previous life includes stints at Shell South Africa, CIC Research, and PA Consulting. Got bitten by the aviation bug and ended up an Avgeek. Then the data bug got me, making me a curious Avgeek seeking data-driven logic. Also, I appreciate conversations with smart people from whom I learn so much. Summary: I am very fortunate to work with and converse with great people.

See Full Bio