Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Ryanair and cargo

  • 11-11-2010 5:44pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭


    This post has been deleted.


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    Wrong.
    To carry freight would immediately screw up their tight turnaround times, as extra equipment and manpower would be required this would increase the cost base.

    Also a full 'system ' would be required to handle freight,like terminals, staff etc.


    If O'Leary thought he could make money out of it, he would, that's probably the most sensible answer.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,576 ✭✭✭donkey balls


    The only equipment FR would need for cargo ops on the ramp would be belt loaders which they all ready have,As FB stated they would need a dedicated cargo terminal with x-ray equipment(which costs about 250k) then they would have to get DOT security clearance which costs a few quid.
    Then the training of staff and costs associated with that like marketing of the service which would also be limited to the size of cargo(due to hold size) and dangerous goods etc.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 351 ✭✭globemaster1986


    If O'Leary thought he could make money out of it, he would, that's probably the most sensible answer.

    I think that sums it up perfectly!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 251 ✭✭Ald


    If O'Leary thought he could make money out of it, he would, that's probably the most sensible answer.

    I don't know if I agree. I was wondering about it like the OP. I think there's certainly potential on certain key routes to be flying cargo by night like Jet2.com. Could convert a couple 737's. There's plenty of cargo that needs hauling. I was watching a programme on how Morocco produces the majority of tomatoes for U.K. They are transported by road! How about filling those holds up from Morocco?! Keep it small and tight to start. Find key products and supply lines that would be easy to start off with and not hold up aircraft. For instance, how about only having cargo on first and last flights of day to keep turn around times tight during the day?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 226 ✭✭McNulty737


    Getting any kind of a reasonable turnaround done in morocco is challenging enough without stuffing the holds full of tomatos.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 251 ✭✭Ald


    Getting any kind of a reasonable turnaround done in morocco is challenging enough without stuffing the holds full of tomatos.

    I think there definitely is potential. Even it it was only employed on certain routes and only for key customers. Say, for instance, fruit from Spain to Northern European big aiports(Dublin, London, etc. etc.) and add 10 minutes onto turnaround time. Have it tight still but maybe it might be worth the compromise...


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,380 ✭✭✭derry


    I talked to a airport worker who packed and unpacked Planes in the USA and he confirmed for me that on average no frills airlines have bigger cargo loads than higher cost airlines

    My suspion was that low frill airliners can cover more of their costs with carrying more cargo

    The logic is that the newwer more modern planes carry a lot less fuel to go the same distance than planes of the 1970 and 1990 era which allows them to carry more cargo

    Even better is if the passengers dont carry heavy stuff more chances to carry more cargo

    Cargo is best I can see often the easiest to off load as it is in these airline containers boxes so slide in slide out quickly than pasenger cases which are hand packed

    Logic dicates that the new A380 plane which can carry as much cargo as a 737 cargo plane and still carry ~800PAX ad get more than ~90MPG per gallon per passenger seat strongly suggests that passengers are merly extra money on top of the very lucritive cargo .EG the cargo pays the total costs of the flight meaning that any passengers are pure profit

    Thats why I think he A380 landing at Shannon a few years back was done and was O Leary there ? to see if wanted it for his new found interest in long range Atlantic flights.
    Break even nearly garenteed just from the cargo and passenger are profits is my theory

    Derry


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,576 ✭✭✭donkey balls


    Have you ever been in the hold of a B738 i have and believe me its small;) the 737&757 dont have a facilty for these containers commoly known as ULD (unit loading device).
    On most large wide body acft both pax&freighter these ULD'S both carry freight&pax lugage with some acft having a hold for loose cargo aft of the acft.
    As for the A380 been able to carry more frieght in the lower deck than a 737 the likes of the B777F & MD11-30F can carry more or less the same cube of freight as the 737F.


Advertisement