Hawaiian Airlines (Alaska) is now scheduling its larger Airbus A321neo jets on select interisland flights, temporarily supplementing its Boeing 717 fleet. Schedule data first posted by Ishrion Aviation shows A321neos operating between Honolulu and Kona (Dec 2–17, Feb 1–Mar 17), Kahului (Dec 18–Jan 5, Feb 1–Mar 17), Lihue (Feb 1–Mar 17), and Hilo (Mar 1–17). This is a scheduled service, not ad hoc positioning, and it puts Hawaiian’s 189-seat A321neo on routes long dominated by the 128-seat 717.
What is changing and why it matters.
The A321neo adds 61 seats per flight compared to the 717, about a 48% jump in capacity. That’s notable in a market where loads swing by time of day and day of week. The cabin feels different too. The A321neo features a 3-3 configuration, meaning every row has two middle seats.
The 717 is a 2-3 configuration, which couples and solo travelers often prefer, given that there is just one middle seat per row. For flights of roughly 25 to 45 minutes, comfort differences are small, but the experience feels more mainland on the A321neo.
This is not a 717 replacement move.
The A321neo is optimized for longer stage lengths than these flights. Using it on very short hops is generally less efficient. The current appearance of A321neos interisland should be viewed as temporary scheduling tied to undisclosed reasons, such as peak windows, rotations, or aircraft availability. The 717 remains the backbone of interisland flying, and nothing in this schedule block suggests a permanent type swap. When that happens, it will look very different.
The Alaska factor, made specific.
Alaska’s ownership favors simpler, more efficient fleets. The 717s are aging and unique to Hawaii operations, which adds complexity to the situation. What is being evaluated now is not replacing the 717 with the A321neo for island hops, but instead appears to be how to manage schedules during busy periods while longer-term questions are assessed subsequently.
Those include how long to keep running a quarter-century old dedicated 717 operation and, if not, what future aircraft type best fits true short-haul island missions and mixes well with the remainder of Alaska’s fleet. Our earlier reporting outlines why maintaining a small, aging subfleet is a challenging task.
See Alaska keeping old Hawaiian 717 fleet? Good for airlines, not passengers.
Why the 717 worked so well here.
The 717 was designed for frequent short cycles, quick turns, and short to medium-length runways. Its 2-3 cabin, fast boarding through a single jet bridge, and unique, robust high-cycle tolerance made it a natural fit for Hawaii interisland flight patterns. That’s why finding a like-for-like successor is hard. For now, Hawaiian will maintain this interisland workhorse with seating up to 128 in two classes, and a popular 2-3 main-cabin layout.
See Hawaiian 717 fleet still rules Hawai‘i skies but FAA flags concern.
What could actually replace the 717.
We’ve covered the short list before. The Airbus A220 offers excellent efficiency and passenger comfort but raises questions about cost, delivery slots, and how it would fit into Alaska’s all Boeing mainline fleet.
The Embraer E195-E2, certified by the FAA in 2022, may come closest to the 717’s mission, with comparable capacity of about 120 to 146 seats, strong short runway performance, and fast turn capability. But no U.S. airline operates the E2 series, so Hawaiian would need to build new maintenance support and crew training systems from the outset.
Boeing’s 737 MAX 7 is still awaiting FAA certification and would be heavier and less efficient for very short island hops, even once approved. For now, no aircraft matches the 717’s mix of intense cycle tolerance, right-sized passenger and cargo capacity, and quick turn reliability, which is why it remains in service.
See Time is running out for these Hawaiian planes.
Capacity, frequency, fares, and the 717s during these blocks.
A 61-seat increase per flight raises fair questions about frequency. There is no indication that Hawaiian plans to reduce daily trips based on these short deployments. If they ever did, commuters would feel the reduction in choice first.
During these A321neo blocks, the freed 717 time can be used to cover other island pairs or for additional maintenance windows if needed. Hawaiian has not detailed how each frame is reassigned, but those are among the most likely uses.
Bottom line for island travelers.
For residents, the 717 remains the interisland workhorse despite its age. Seeing an A321neo at your gate is interesting, but it does not change the core mission; the 717 still flies today and until it is retired.
Have you flown both? Which would you choose for island hops, the familiar 717 or the newer A321neo?
Get Breaking Hawaii Travel News
Without a doubt, I would prefer the 2-3 seating. Of the interisland flights we have had on the 717, I never saw the aircraft full, perhaps usually betwee 70 -85% full. I have often wondered why, Boeing could not offer a 2-3 seating option on the Max 7?
I’d really like to travel on a state-run ferry system like the wonderful one in Washington state. Take your own car with your stuff in the back, super convenient with multiple sailings per day, professional state workers taking care of you at every step of the way, and enjoying the sea voyage, assuming they have the proper well-designed stabilizers for our often rough inter-island currents.
We’re likely still a good ways away from the 717 bidding aloha on the interisland routes. If Alaska wants to keep basically the same capacity, the A220 strikes me as the only viable option. If they do it right, could be very user-friendly. I was in one twice over the last week on JetBlue to San Juan on 3.5 hour flights. Didn’t feel cramped. Seat comfort was adequate.
Maybe they could use new, smaller planes to bring back a couple of flights daily that stop in MKK and LNY, as was the case many years ago and help residents there who justifiably complain about Mokulele Airlines service.
We have several on both the A321n from Long Beach to Kahului and the B717 on several inter-island hops. I have always had a pleasant experience on the 717, indeed on all variants of the DC-9 up through the 717. Not the most comfortable aircraft in the world, but I can deal with anything for two hours or less. I don’t think I have ever seen a Hawaiian 717 loaded to more than about 80% capacity. Frankly, I see the A321 as a bit of overkill, unless Hawai….I mean Alaska, intends to cut the frequency of flights, thus keeping the number of available seats about the same.
I prefer the 717, the 321neo has no legroom at all. It’s a disaster to have to fly on a 321neo!
Long term I expect interisland flying to be contracted out to Sky West, and flown on E-175s. Seems like an easy way for Alaska to cut costs and offload higher earning pilots. Again this isn’t what I want, but what I expect.
I don’t care which aircraft I fly on inter island since the flights are very short. I just want to arrive safely!
This is great news, because it now changes commute options in our favor. Even if I’m just flying from Lihue over to Kona and have wifi, it makes my commute work day even better. I’d pick HA over SWA for that reason alone.
I just tried to book an interisland flight on both the Hawaiian and Alaska websites, and when I put in the airport codes of HNL and OGG I get a response, “This doesn’t match any airports in our network.” What the heck?! I hate this merger.
I got that too
The merger has been a nightmare! I often fly to Honolulu and back in the same day. Since the merger, I am unable to check in for the 2nd leg of my flight 24 hours in advance. I have to do it at the airport every time now! Don’t get me started on my Hawaii miles trouble!
I am fine with either aircraft. However, we rarely fly inter-island; we usually fly Bay Area (SJC when possible) to Lihui non-stop on Alaska (preferred) or Southwest.
Thje A321neo? The loudest plane I’ve ever been aboard in 60 years of air travel. Sitting in Delta First it was surreal when the flight attendant handed us these cheap little ear buds to watch a movie. The noise level was so bad you couldn’t hear the soundtrack. The A319 is just as bad as were were on both planes this trip.
If you’re only aboard for 30 minutes on an inter-island flight you can probably tolerate the noise. However, if you’re headng to the mainland on either of these Airbuses don’t forget to pack high-quality noise cancelling headsets.
I am currently writing to you from aboard an airborne Hawaiian mainland to Hawaii Airbus 321neo (using Starlink)(Amazing). My first trip on the 321neo and I’m not impressed. Cramped, lousy seats, misaligned windows, difficult overhead storage. Extra comfort is anything but. Good luck boarding all the short hauls in a timely manner. At least the inter-island flights are short.
It’s starting to feel like Hawaii Interisland flights will become part of the Alaska Enbraer 175 (previously Horizon Air) mission. Smaller planes, short haul.
That won’t happen. Alaska Airlines has a scope clause like the other legacy airlines that caps the number of 76-seat planes flown by contractors. That’s why there are no more EMB-175’s coming after the 4 remaining are delivered.
So beyond those 4 any additional ones would have to be flown by Alaska Airlines pilots, whose ranks will soon include Hawaiian Airlines pilots (and you can be as sure as the sun rises in the east they won’t allow interisland to be flown by Horizon or anybody else.
In any case, Alaska Air Group isn’t going to operate smaller planes as it would devastate their cargo business.
Amazing. I would swap a ride on an A321 versus a 717 any day of the week. A lot of nostalgia going on here. While I, I love the 717, it is cramped, seats do not recline and the interior of the A321 is far superior. Do you realize it’s operating costs are way beyond the 717. Cheers.
The 717 is far from cramped, and on a 25 minute flight, how badly does anyone need seats to recline?
On the Kona-Honolulu route, only 1 of the 15 daily flights is being substituted by an A321. This is a non-story.