Aer Lingus Fleet/Routes Discussion

Jamie2k9

Chances are 3-4 of the 8 will work European routes. In most cases they will depart DUB mostly between 13..00-17.00 and arrive back between 05.00-08.00.

Yes maintenance will be required but the reality is 15 aircraft will arrive within a 2 hour window and they all can't be looked after at the same time. The routes in question are pretty short block time and one doing JFK-DUB-LHR-DUB-XXX will have 3-4 hours on the ground between returning from LHR and flying again.

California Dreamer

Chances are they EI won't hire enough engineers again this time and just put it out on a wing and prayer and hope for the best!

Bussywussy

California Dreamer wrote: »

Chances are they EI won't hire enough engineers again this time and just put it out on a wing and prayer and hope for the best!

It's not that they won't,they can't and they treat their current ones like sh1t

kona

kevinandrew wrote: »

In which case they wouldn't be Aer Lingus' aircraft anyway. Far more likely to be under the LEVEL brand.

Why would they be under level?

basill

Chances are they EI won't hire enough engineers again this time and just put it out on a wing and prayer and hope for the best!

Some pilots to fly them when they are fixed would be good to.

kevinandrew

kona wrote: »

kevinandrew wrote: »

In which case they wouldn't be Aer Lingus' aircraft anyway. Far more likely to be under the LEVEL brand.

Why would they be under level?

Didn’t you suggest the aircraft might not come anywhere near Ireland? It’s possible but the Aer Lingus brand doesn’t work outside of Ireland, it’s been tried numerous times and all ended the same way. It also goes against the current Aer Lingus strategy and business plan which is why IAG ordered A321LR’s in the first place.


If for whatever reason the aircraft are diverted away from Ireland and based for Europe-North America, the LEVEL brand is far more likely as it’s the new “neutral” airline brand of choice by IAG.


I don’t think any of this will actually happen though, I have no doubt that Aer Lingus will take delivery of them, base them in Ireland to replace the 757’s and further expand in the USA and Canada as planned.

IE 222

JCX BXC wrote: »

What happens when there's a delay of say 8 hours in JFK due weather and the backlog isn't cleared for days or there's several cancellations? The current system of a little slack helps maintain on-time performance, jamming the schedule will cause mayhem in my view.

An 8 hour delay will cause issues regardless. You use the ones that have been allowed slack and ground time. Capping at 30 will keep 6 frames limited to 1 return T/A flight a day (assuming they get 12). Better scheduling throughout the day and short European legs for the remaining frames will cover most delays.

IE 222

kevinandrew wrote: »

Didn’t you suggest the aircraft might not come anywhere near Ireland? It’s possible but the Aer Lingus brand doesn’t work outside of Ireland, it’s been tried numerous times and all ended the same way. It also goes against the current Aer Lingus strategy and business plan which is why IAG ordered A321LR’s in the first place.


If for whatever reason the aircraft are diverted away from Ireland and based for Europe-North America, the LEVEL brand is far more likely as it’s the new “neutral” airline brand of choice by IAG.


I don’t think any of this will actually happen though, I have no doubt that Aer Lingus will take delivery of them, base them in Ireland to replace the 757’s and further expand in the USA and Canada as planned.

Could they not base most of them in the US and keep serving Dub from there.

zone 1

have IAG any plans for SH fleet A320s and 3 remaining A321s in service some seem to be getting old.

kevinandrew

IE 222 wrote: »

Could they not base most of them in the US and keep serving Dub from there.

Potentially, sure! Aer Lingus is no stranger to US bases, they had one for a few years in Washington Dulles for the United contract on Washington to Madrid but it wasn’t received well, either by unions or passengers!

Noxegon

IE 222 wrote: »

Could they not base most of them in the US and keep serving Dub from there.

That’s be nice.

Personally I would be thrilled if we had a slew of morning flights from the US to Ireland returning in the evening hours.

Only practical for the east coast (and maybe ORD at a pinch) but it would get rid of the purgatory of the transatlantic night.

kona

kevinandrew wrote: »

Didn’t you suggest the aircraft might not come anywhere near Ireland? It’s possible but the Aer Lingus brand doesn’t work outside of Ireland, it’s been tried numerous times and all ended the same way. It also goes against the current Aer Lingus strategy and business plan which is why IAG ordered A321LR’s in the first place.


If for whatever reason the aircraft are diverted away from Ireland and based for Europe-North America, the LEVEL brand is far more likely as it’s the new “neutral” airline brand of choice by IAG.


I don’t think any of this will actually happen though, I have no doubt that Aer Lingus will take delivery of them, base them in Ireland to replace the 757’s and further expand in the USA and Canada as planned.

I said they may not come near ireland. Aer lingus flys half of europe to the states fed by the short haul operation. Id imagine they will jist cut out the transfers.
the aircraft would operate under a level aoc if they are level aircraft which has nothing to do with aer lingus.

Jamie2k9

kevinandrew wrote: »

Potentially, sure! Aer Lingus is no stranger to US bases, they had one for a few years in Washington Dulles for the United contract on Washington to Madrid but it wasn’t received well, either by unions or passengers!

Nobody cares what unions think but I can't see why passengers were not happy. They were United passengers not EIs.

Anyway, cost and union (US unions) don't make the prospect of US bases appealing to EI management.

have IAG any plans for SH fleet A320s and 3 remaining A321s in service some seem to be getting old.

SH needs to pay for itself first so suspect no rush for a few more years.

IE 222

Noxegon wrote: »

That’s be nice.

Personally I would be thrilled if we had a slew of morning flights from the US to Ireland returning in the evening hours.

Only practical for the east coast (and maybe ORD at a pinch) but it would get rid of the purgatory of the transatlantic night.

It can easily be done and would really open up short haul for expansion or add more potential with the Ryanair deal.

Base 8 - 10 A321 in BOS and allocate all BOS, JFK & ORD flights to A321 for DUB & SNN. With earlier and later departures both sides of the Atlantic some EI could easily get 3 legs a day from the frames. SNN could get an ORD flight and there would be room to look at offering Cork or even Belfast a JFK or BOS flight.

IE 222

kevinandrew wrote: »

Potentially, sure! Aer Lingus is no stranger to US bases, they had one for a few years in Washington Dulles for the United contract on Washington to Madrid but it wasn’t received well, either by unions or passengers!

The United contract was different. This will be Are Lingus working for Are Lingus.

kevinandrew

kona wrote: »

I said they may not come near ireland. Aer lingus flys half of europe to the states fed by the short haul operation. Id imagine they will jist cut out the transfers.
the aircraft would operate under a level aoc if they are level aircraft which has nothing to do with aer lingus.

So skip Ireland altogether and just operate direct, say Paris-New York or Amsterdam-Boston? If that's what you mean it goes against the entire business model Aer Lingus has built its current success around. 

Level doesn't have its own AOC, it uses IAG member airlines and operates as a neutral brand. The current operation is using Iberia's AOC and the recently created Vueling Austria. 

IE 222 wrote: »

kevinandrew wrote: »

Potentially, sure! Aer Lingus is no stranger to US bases, they had one for a few years in Washington Dulles for the United contract on Washington to Madrid but it wasn’t received well, either by unions or passengers!

The United contract was different. This will be Are Lingus working for Are Lingus.

This is all hypothetical... 

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

kevinandrew wrote: »

Potentially, sure! Aer Lingus is no stranger to US bases, they had one for a few years in Washington Dulles for the United contract on Washington to Madrid but it wasn’t received well, either by unions or passengers!

Nobody cares what unions think but I can't see why passengers were not happy.  They were United passengers not EIs.

Anyway, cost and union (US unions) don't make the prospect of US bases appealing to EI management.

Nobody cares what unions think... until there's the threat of strike. It's always worth being wary of union upset. A

s for passengers not being happy, I was referring more to the regular bad reviews of crew which were all American based, trained and hired by Aer Lingus at the time.

kona

kevinandrew wrote: »

So skip Ireland altogether and just operate direct, say Paris-New York or Amsterdam-Boston? If that's what you mean it goes against the entire business model Aer Lingus has built its current success around. 

Whats their business model? Because my idea of it doesnt seem to match yours. Aer lingus are a value carrier.

kevinandrew

kona wrote: »

kevinandrew wrote: »

So skip Ireland altogether and just operate direct, say Paris-New York or Amsterdam-Boston? If that's what you mean it goes against the entire business model Aer Lingus has built its current success around. 

Whats their business model? Because my idea of it doesnt seem to match yours. Aer lingus are a value carrier.

The official mission statement is;

Aer Lingus' mission is 'To Connect Ireland to The World' by providing customers with convenience, choice, comfort, value and seamless transfer options - making Aer Lingus the smart choice. 

The focus of recent years has been the building of a sustainable and attractive hub at Dublin using Ireland's geographic advantage for transatlantic connections. The A321LR was ordered to continue this. Flying from European cities to North American gateways goes against this and would be a sudden shift in strategy.

Kcormahs

kevinandrew wrote: »

The official mission statement is;

Aer Lingus' mission is 'To Connect Ireland to The World' by providing customers with convenience, choice, comfort, value and seamless transfer options - making Aer Lingus the smart choice. 

The focus of recent years has been the building of a sustainable and attractive hub at Dublin using Ireland's geographic advantage for transatlantic connections. The A321LR was ordered to continue this. Flying from European cities to North American gateways goes against this and would be a sudden shift in strategy.

Agree 100%

But what was speculated was basing those 321LR in markets like AMS CDG only for the parking spaces and then fly to Ireland early in the morning, providing earlier connections for passengers. FCO for example only lands around 1.30pm right now and it misses a lot of connections. When its delayed its a chaos .
Could even be parking the 320s abroad and opening new stands for the 321lr

kevinandrew

Kcormahs wrote: »

kevinandrew wrote: »

The official mission statement is;

Aer Lingus' mission is 'To Connect Ireland to The World' by providing customers with convenience, choice, comfort, value and seamless transfer options - making Aer Lingus the smart choice. 

The focus of recent years has been the building of a sustainable and attractive hub at Dublin using Ireland's geographic advantage for transatlantic connections. The A321LR was ordered to continue this. Flying from European cities to North American gateways goes against this and would be a sudden shift in strategy.

Agree 100%

But what was speculated was basing those 321LR in markets like AMS CDG only for the parking spaces and then fly to Ireland early in the morning, providing earlier connections for passengers. FCO for example only lands around 1.30pm right now and it misses a lot of connections. When its delayed its a chaos .
Could even be parking the 320s abroad and opening new stands for the 321lr

Agreed! I think eventually Aer Lingus will need to consider basing aircraft in continental Europe for earlier arrivals in addition to bolstering frequencies throughout the day on the Atlantic. I was responding to Kona's suggestion that the aircraft "may no come near Ireland" which confused me.

kona

kevinandrew wrote: »

The official mission statement is;

Aer Lingus' mission is 'To Connect Ireland to The World' by providing customers with convenience, choice, comfort, value and seamless transfer options - making Aer Lingus the smart choice. 

The focus of recent years has been the building of a sustainable and attractive hub at Dublin using Ireland's geographic advantage for transatlantic connections. The A321LR was ordered to continue this. Flying from European cities to North American gateways goes against this and would be a sudden shift in strategy.

So what do you say to the majority of ta pax being transfers onto the shorthaul.

Aer lingus business plan is to make lots of ****ing money.

kevinandrew

kona wrote: »

kevinandrew wrote: »

The official mission statement is;

Aer Lingus' mission is 'To Connect Ireland to The World' by providing customers with convenience, choice, comfort, value and seamless transfer options - making Aer Lingus the smart choice. 

The focus of recent years has been the building of a sustainable and attractive hub at Dublin using Ireland's geographic advantage for transatlantic connections. The A321LR was ordered to continue this. Flying from European cities to North American gateways goes against this and would be a sudden shift in strategy.

So what do you say to the majority of ta pax being transfers onto the shorthaul.

Aer lingus business plan is to make lots of ****ing money.

So you think they'd make more money going non-stop from European cities? Putting themselves in direct competition with home nation airlines like Air France, Lufthansa or KLM? 

Those transfer pax have chosen to fly via Dublin with Aer Lingus for a reason whether it be the lower fares or pre-clearance advantage neither of which are guaranteed with a non stop. It totally eliminates the unique selling point of Aer Lingus.

IE 222

Kcormahs wrote: »

Agree 100%

But what was speculated was basing those 321LR in markets like AMS CDG only for the parking spaces and then fly to Ireland early in the morning, providing earlier connections for passengers. FCO for example only lands around 1.30pm right now and it misses a lot of connections. When its delayed its a chaos .
Could even be parking the 320s abroad and opening new stands for the 321lr

They won't be parking A321s around Europe overnight. They will be returning across the Atlantic overnight.

Kcormahs

IE 222 wrote: »

They won't be parking A321s around Europe overnight. They will be returning across the Atlantic overnight.

A320s then?

IE 222

Kcormahs wrote: »

A320s then?

Possibly but it might not be necessary. The bulk of A321s are going to offer increased frequency on current routes meaning arrival and departure times will spread out throughout the day. I'd imagine some current departure times will change to reflect this. Its not going to be a case of an additional 10 A321s come charging into DUB at 4am.

There is plenty of options available to EI. They will also have quicker turn around times and some will do morning short haul legs or head back state side with an early morning departure which will remove the need of taking of stand to park so an A320 can load up as they will be doing some of the A320 work.

Kcormahs

IE 222 wrote: »

Possibly but it might not be necessary. The bulk of A321s are going to offer increased frequency on current routes meaning arrival and departure times will spread out throughout the day. I'd imagine some current departure times will change to reflect this. Its not going to be a case of an additional 10 A321s come charging into DUB at 4am.

There is plenty of options available to EI. They will also have quicker turn around times and some will do morning short haul legs or head back state side with an early morning departure which will remove the need of taking of stand to park so an A320 can load up as they will be doing some of the A320 work.

With earlier departures to the States, most of the connections from Europe and UK won’t be able to book those flights as they all land after 11am+ mostly (possibly apart from LHR (ei149/151) and maybe early inbounds MAN/BHX)

Bussywussy

Would like to see the EI 103 early JFK back

Locker10a

Kcormahs wrote: »

IE 222 wrote: »

Possibly but it might not be necessary. The bulk of A321s are going to offer increased frequency on current routes meaning arrival and departure times will spread out throughout the day. I'd imagine some current departure times will change to reflect this. Its not going to be a case of an additional 10 A321s come charging into DUB at 4am.

There is plenty of options available to EI. They will also have quicker turn around times and some will do morning short haul legs or head back state side with an early morning departure which will remove the need of taking of stand to park so an A320 can load up as they will be doing some of the A320 work.

With earlier departures to the States, most of the connections from Europe and UK won’t be able to book those flights as they all land after 11am+ mostly (possibly apart from LHR (ei149/151) and maybe early inbounds MAN/BHX)

That’s where the Ryanair interline agreement could work well

Kcormahs

Locker10a wrote: »

That’s where the Ryanair interline agreement could work well

Ryanair doesn't have any early departures from AMS neither CDG

marno21

Kcormahs wrote: »

Ryanair doesn't have any early departures from AMS neither CDG

Sure, but it does have early morning arrivals from LBA/EMA/LTN/STN/BTS/MAN/EDI/LPL/BRS/BHX/GLA all of which wold have less transatlantic services (or in some cases none) and would be ripe for EI to pick up transatlantic connecting pax