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!
kevinandrew wrote: » In which case they wouldn't be Aer Lingus' aircraft anyway. Far more likely to be under the LEVEL brand.
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!
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?
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.
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.
IE 222 wrote: » Could they not base most of them in the US and keep serving Dub from there.
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!
have IAG any plans for SH fleet A320s and 3 remaining A321s in service some seem to be getting old.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
IE 222 wrote: » They won't be parking A321s around Europe overnight. They will be returning across the Atlantic overnight.
Kcormahs wrote: » A320s then?
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.
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)
Locker10a wrote: » That’s where the Ryanair interline agreement could work well
Kcormahs wrote: » Ryanair doesn't have any early departures from AMS neither CDG
