Will Ryanair reverse the go slow policy?

18MonthsaSlave

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2381206/Ryanair-pilots-ordered-fly-slower-planes-turned-billboards-bid-reverse-fall-profits.html
Planes go slower to save fuel.

http://www.iata.org/publications/economics/fuel-monitor/Pages/price-analysis.aspx
Fuel prices have decreased considerably.

They're only averaging about 4 flights per day per plane
http://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/33353-ryanair-to-lease-seven-additional-jets-in-2015-oleary

There must be a couple of routes they can arrange where
they can increase the cruise speed so that they fit in 6 flights per day on a plane.

It isn't as though they set their departure or arrival times to suit customers(based on how many times they've already adjusted my next flight's departure time)

If a plane isn't in the air it isn't earning money.

18MonthsaSlave

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2381206/Ryanair-pilots-ordered-fly-slower-planes-turned-billboards-bid-reverse-fall-profits.html
Planes go slower to save fuel.

http://www.iata.org/publications/economics/fuel-monitor/Pages/price-analysis.aspx
Fuel prices have decreased considerably.

They're only averaging about 4 flights per day per plane
http://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/news/33353-ryanair-to-lease-seven-additional-jets-in-2015-oleary

There must be a couple of routes they can arrange where
they can increase the cruise speed so that they fit in 6 flights per day on a plane.

It isn't as though they set their departure or arrival times to suit customers(based on how many times they've already adjusted my next flight's departure time)

If a plane isn't in the air it isn't earning money.

Their aircraft don't fly one route they are scheduled to fly W routes let's say DUB-LPL-FAO-MAN etc so saying they are "only" getting 4 flights is probably a network average. Some will get more some will get less.

They may stay slow if it's saving them more money than it would make them. Depends on what price they hedged the fuel at etc.

Jack1985

I would go as to say averaging four flights a day per aircraft, is a hyper efficient use of the fleet. Aer Lingus averages 3.2 sectors per day for its aircraft, more efficient when compared with BA/LH/KL/AF etc.

Also its not necessarily a good use to have say aircraft to block fly 12 sectors in a day (6 flights), if it goes tech on its 4th sector - and there is a delay in a replacement a/c if there is one available - More than likely sectors are going to be cancelled. By planning an aircraft to fly again for example, eight sectors a day you reduce that risk and associated costs.

18MonthsaSlave

Hyper-efficient or not on the routes I'm flying with them based on the cruise speed of a 737 and the actual distance between the points they could be going faster.
I wonder how flexible their modelling software is and to what extent they can alter cruise speed when calculating whether they can fit another flight in to each workday. They can only sell so many coffees and sausage rolls to the captive audience so adding more passengers/hungry mouths probably equals more profit.

Jawgap

No, it wouldn't have any impact on the bottom line.

I'll bet they're hedging like crazy at the moment though.

highlydebased

What mach decimal do RYR cruise at now? I doubt it really has any huge impact on flight times anyway

Jack1985

The use a CI of 6 more than a preferred mach.

http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1957.pdf

18MonthsaSlave

Having the planes available to an agressive airline in expansionary mode is valuable to them even if they are not making money. Throw the plane on to a route, cover costs and wipe another carrier on the same route or similar route out.

Tenger

Its not as easy as "just throwing a plane" on a route. You need a market to fill the planes too.
Averaging 4 sectors a day means on some short hops its more than 4 per day. And if these stats are recent then it based on the winter schedule. I note that this mentions sectors, not flight hours per day, which is a fr better indicator of fleet usage.

Aircraft requires more maintenance the more they fly, so more flying doesn't always mean more profits (and as Jack pointed out you need some slack in the system for disruptions)


As regards the price of fuel dropping. FR (and most airlines) have their fuel hedged well in advance as agree upon prices. So any drop in price now will mostly affect their fuel costs in 12-24 months. And why would they stop aiming for efficient fuel burn just because the price has dropped recently. Their whole ethos is to keep costs down so prices can stay below their competiton.

18MonthsaSlave

Deleted User wrote: »

Depends on what price they hedged the fuel at etc.

Seems hedging is falling out of favour and even if there were hedges there is nothing to stop them buying fuel on the open market over and above what they committed themselves to in hedges.
http://blogs.platts.com/2014/09/01/us-airlines-hedging/

smurfjed

Interesting to see a fixed cost index across all routes, that isn't the way that its supposed to work They may as well just use LRC or even MRC and forget the cost index concept.

0lddog

From : http://www.ryanair.com/doc/investor/2014/q2_2014_result_doc.pdf

4. Fuel

Ryanair remains 90% hedged for FY’14 at $980 per tonne (approx.
$98 p.bl). We have taken advantage of recent weakness in oil prices and
the US dollar to extend our FY15 hedges to 60% at approx. $94 p.bl.
which at current market rates should deliver a unit cost fuel reduction
of approx. 4% in FY15.

Tenger

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

Seems hedging is falling out of favour and even if there were hedges there is nothing to stop them buying fuel on the open market over and above what they committed themselves to in hedges.
http://blogs.platts.com/2014/09/01/us-airlines-hedging/

1 blog does not a trend make

roundymac

The other problem with this story is that it is from the the Daily Mail/Fail.

18MonthsaSlave

Tenger wrote: »

1 blog does not a trend make

He quotes multiple carriers

L1011

Tenger wrote: »

1 blog does not a trend make

There was some fairly hefty quoting from various airlines on airliners.net a week or so ago about hedging - it does seem to be dying out. Wait til prices start rising again though...

18MonthsaSlave

L1011 wrote: »

There was some fairly hefty quoting from various airlines on airliners.net a week or so ago about hedging - it does seem to be dying out. Wait til prices start rising again though...

If the reasons for the price drops are correct which is OPEC trying to set supply at just close enough to the price at which non-conventional extraction technoligies are not cost effective then prices won't be rising any time soon.

18MonthsaSlave

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

Seems hedging is falling out of favour and even if there were hedges there is nothing to stop them buying fuel on the open market over and above what they committed themselves to in hedges.
http://blogs.platts.com/2014/09/01/us-airlines-hedging/

ALL carriers only hedge a percentage of total fuel required for this very reason, it's a bit like locking in your mortgage at a fixed rate do you gamble for only 1,3,5 or 10 years that rates will be low/high.

For every carrier named in sure that their is 10 still hedging (that would require each named carrier to have actually gone away from hedging, I doubt that would be made public knowledge).

eatmyshorts

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

There must be a couple of routes they can arrange where
they can increase the cruise speed so that they fit in 6 flights per day on a plane.
.

Increasing cruise speed isn't going to make that amount of extra time available. Especially on short routes like FR's.

For example, I just did a flight which took 9h 15m at ECON cruise (about M0.83). At top of climb, I played around with the cost index and cruise speeds to see if we could make up anytime as we were running late.
Increasing to cruise at M0.85, only shaved about 11 minutes off the total flight time, with burn increasing by about 1,000kgs. Going up to M0.87 saved about 17 minutes, but put the burn through the roof!

APM

Today in our A320 on a 2hr flight at 32,000ft I changed the cost index from 17 to 50. It cost 250kgs of fuel but saved us 10mins and we landed in Hong Kong on time, landing on time means far more to our company than 200kg of fuel as we carry a lot of connecting pax and the cost of rerouting/paying for a hotel due to our lateness is far more important. Our SOP is to speed up in all phases of flight to make back delays.

Depends on the company, regardless of the fuel price I believe the CI6 in FR and the descent speed of 245kts has a lot to do with management wanting a lot of the energy taken out of the descents and 245 is a speed at which they can take flap (=a lot of drag) immediately if needed.

basill

It's such a delightful experience following these professional aviators who are scared of their own shadows as the rest of us are radar vectored across the sky with the spoilers deployed for most of the descent. Our customers just love it, especially the nervous fliers. It's a rattle and hum experience.

Now if they advised ATC of their planned descent speed well in advance the rest of us who are planning on something significantly greater than 245kts would duck down earlier than planned and be well out of their way. But alas they don't want to do that either for fear of falling out of sequence.

eatmyshorts

basill wrote: »

It's such a delightful experience following these professional aviators who are scared of their own shadows as the rest of us are radar vectored across the sky with the spoilers deployed for most of the descent. Our customers just love it, especially the nervous fliers. It's a rattle and hum experience.

Now if they advised ATC of their planned descent speed well in advance the rest of us who are planning on something significantly greater than 245kts would duck down earlier than planned and be well out of their way. But alas they don't want to do that either for fear of falling out of sequence.

267 kts ECON descent....."just changing that to M0.84/320. Confirm?”....

IngazZagni

If Ryanair increased their speeds from the current speeds to something close to max speed, you are talking of a 10 to 15 minute saving on a 2 hour flight. Nothing dramatic and certainly nothing close to being able to fit in another 2 flights over an 18 hour period.

basill wrote: »

It's such a delightful experience following these professional aviators who are scared of their own shadows as the rest of us are radar vectored across the sky with the spoilers deployed for most of the descent. Our customers just love it, especially the nervous fliers. It's a rattle and hum experience.

Now if they advised ATC of their planned descent speed well in advance the rest of us who are planning on something significantly greater than 245kts would duck down earlier than planned and be well out of their way. But alas they don't want to do that either for fear of falling out of sequence.

ATC, especially competent ATC controllers like in London know full well what the company standard descent speeds are, especially for large airlines like FR. I've never heard any RYR aircraft complain about being asked to speed up. But also there are other airlines that also fly as slow. It would create too much nuisance calls on the already busy frequencies to be giving expected descent speeds. If ATC want it then they can ask it. After all it's easier for them to ask the guy in front to speed up than to vector the guy behind around and in front or under as you say.

18MonthsaSlave

http://corporate.ryanair.com/news/news/150202-ryanair-reports-q3-profit-of-49m-guidance-rises-to-840m-850m/?market=en

Effects of hedging mentioned at the bottom and how those who haven't hedged are in a better position to exploit low fuel costs.#

35% hedged for 2017.

Fuel savings will be passed on resulting in lower fares as Ryanair appear to be all about increasing passenger numbers.

Cookiemunster

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

http://corporate.ryanair.com/news/news/150202-ryanair-reports-q3-profit-of-49m-guidance-rises-to-840m-850m/?market=en

Effects of hedging mentioned at the bottom and how those who haven't hedged are in a better position to exploit low fuel costs.#

35% hedged for 2017.

Fuel savings will be passed on resulting in lower fares as Ryanair appear to be all about increasing passenger numbers.

Is that not basically what every airline is about?

18MonthsaSlave

No.

Preset No.3

******BREAKING NEWS******

Ryanair make sweeping ridiculous statement that guarantees them media coverage and their name in the media for the smallest investment ever!!!

Stay tuned for more on this breaking bull**** story!!!!!

L1011

Cookiemunster wrote: »

Is that not basically what every airline is about?

No, some (actually, probably most) airlines value yield over passenger numbers

18MonthsaSlave

Breaking news:
Ryanair release guidance to market which happens to contain noteworthy information which Ryanair Hater mislabels as publicity seeking.

Ryanair are hugely successful and profitable. They will do whatever it takes to stay like that. No blogger of daily fail journalist knows better than Ryanair how to manage their fleet optimally.

Preset No.3

18MonthsaSlave wrote: »

Breaking news:
Ryanair release guidance to market which happens to contain noteworthy information which Ryanair Hater mislabels as publicity seeking.

Never been a ryanair hater in my life. They are well known for their press releases to gain column space.