goingnowhere wrote: » A320 went tech in CDG and Milan over the weekend
Locker10a wrote: » Are they still painfully short of engineers?
Jack1985 wrote: » Painfully short of everyone..
cson wrote: » Any former WOW staff on the market I wonder?
Locker10a wrote: » I get the impression EI like running it tight, that it works out cheaper for them to be on the limit/slightly understaffed and buy a few days off from staff here and there rather than be over staffed/have a healthy complement of staff
billy few mates wrote: » Show me an airline that isn't run like this....
theguzman wrote: » Why do Aer Lingus operate the JFK-SNN flights at such anti-social hours? EI110 landed in Shannon this morning at 04:48 having departed JFK at 18:20 for a flight time of 5hrs 20 mins. I think it absolutely ridiculous, EI111 does not leave Shannon until 12:45 giving alot of time on the ground. Is this Aer Lingus's typical second class citizen treatment of SNN airport or what is causing it? That flight should be scheduled to depart JFK at 10pm and arrive into SNN at 9pm to 10pm, a respectable time for people to collect relatives, allowing people to finish work in NY and go straight to JFK after. Instead you arrive into Shannon, everything is closed, you would have at least an hours wait or more for public transport and heaven help the poor lads like me who is after driving anywhere in the Western Seaboard from Donegal Sligo to West Cork for the Shannon catchment area. I myself left Kerry at 3:30am for a 2hrs 15mins drive, the flight was in early and the baggage handlers had not even arrived and no shops or restaurants open, this first restaurant I found on my way home open was in Killarney. There is no need for such stupid red-eye flights into under utilised Shannon, lets take your american tourist you arrive into Shannon wrecked tired and you can't check into your hotel room until 2-3pm unless you book a day earlier, and due to the early departure of EI110 you have to sacrifice one day of your annual 10 days vacation. Its no wonder there is such light loads because EI are behaving with their services in Shannon like CIE with the Railways they would rather get rid of the serivce than make a fair go of it and do it properly.
Locker10a wrote: » The vast majority of US east coast to Europe transatlantic flights operate the same way, it’s pretty standard across the industry
theguzman wrote: » Newark - Shannon leaves around 10pm and arrives into SNN around 9pm, much more sociable hours, would slot time restriction in the NY region airports be responsible? Or is Shannon just given the short straw due to its low volume pax numbers.
theguzman wrote: » Why do Aer Lingus operate the JFK-SNN flights at such anti-social hours?
Das Reich wrote: » Why so many flights to San Francisco or other western usa cities and no flight to São Paulo that is even shorter and have a lot of Brazilians here? Had to spend over 1.000 € with other companies and stopping many hours in Lisbon and Madrid. Aer Lingus could be making money if started to operate a direct flight to there.
cson wrote: » That's a very price sensitive route. SF on the other hand has a lot of big tech that love to fly J which leads to higher yields. I doubt you'll ever see EI metal direct to Brazil, irrespective of the size of the community here.
Das Reich wrote: » What you mean by "price sensitive"? All the people I know had paid at least 800 € with a return, way more than what cost to fly to SF, despite having high tech or not. And how Ethiopian Airlines makes money in a much longer flight that stops in Addis Abeba? And all flights to Brazil are always full. And how a flight to Minneapolis would travel more passengers? Its not a touristic city. Aer Lingus is just missing here an opportunity.
theguzman wrote: » Aer Lingus as a former state owned or semi-state would probably be gone to Brazil now, if nothing more than to fly the flag and build relations.
Graham wrote: » And that’s how you run an airline into the ground financially speaking.
theguzman wrote: » I have often thought myself what if Aer Lingus was still state owned, effectively subsidise tourism here with cheap flights, look at what the UAE have achieved through Etihad and Emirates, obviously not on the same level. Every tourist who comes in spends a fortune in hotels, food, transport etc. We dump billions into huge wasteful projects every year, €18 bn to the HSE, a public and civil service which should be gutted from the inside out with 100-200k redundancies etc. Imagine fantasy Aer Lingus bringing planes in from all over on cheap tickets, effectively maybe as a non-profit or losing €2bn to €3bn per year, the tourism uptick and additional employment might actually balance it out.
alancostello wrote: » Living in the US has changed my perspective on connecting, it's almost a requirement here. Funny thing is though it's very rare I see a European connecting flight be cheaper than EI or FR.
L1011 wrote: » Not only is there the made point that they've grown hugely under private owners, this would breach EU state aid rules and additionally not be acceptable in the US which is where we'd be connecting most pax to
theguzman wrote: » Aer Lingus as a former state owned or semi-state would probably be gone to Brazil now, if nothing more than to fly the flag and build relations. EI is now British Airways slave dog, and Dublin is effectively being use to decongest Heathrow by connecting regional British cities to the US instead of e.g. Newcastle to Heathrow overland and onto San Fran, Newcastle -DUB-San Fran. When IAG pulled the A350 order it shows they don't care for Aer Lingus and EI is just a rebadged BA now.
