nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Aer Lingus Fleet/Routes Discussion

JCX BXC

The seat map for the B767-200 being leased by EI next year are available on the Aer Lingus website, the seating is 2,3,2 in economy (As was suspected) and 2,2,2 in business

There are 189 economy seats and 12 Business seats making a total of the reported 201 seats.

Anyone know whether the B767 will be repainted, partially or entirely, in the EI colours for the 6 months that its leased for?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Mebuntu

Strumms wrote: »

Basically for the PR Aer Lingus would get

PR? I don't get it.

I doubt there is anyone out there who would be influenced to choose to fly with Airline X just because they saw a photo of Team Y or Celebrity Z getting onboard.

LXFlyer

Mebuntu wrote: »

PR? I don't get it.

I doubt there is anyone out there who would be influenced to choose to fly with Airline X just because they saw a photo of Team Y or Celebrity Z getting onboard.

So why do Aer Lingus and for example QANTAS bother sponsoring the rugby teams at all then?

MJohnston

Their sponsorship obviously has *some* positive effects, otherwise they (probably) wouldn't waste the money, but they're probably not for the benefit of Irish people. I'd say it has more about hitting the audience on the other side of the trips - London, Chicago, Paris, or wherever. Which would make it completely pointless for Aer Lingus to fly the team to a destination country that they don't normally fly to.

Locker10a

Mebuntu wrote: »

PR? I don't get it.

I doubt there is anyone out there who would be influenced to choose to fly with Airline X just because they saw a photo of Team Y or Celebrity Z getting onboard.

Why would any large company sponsor any sports club/team or any other event for that matter!? It creates brand awareness, it’s marketing, advertising and helps the brand become recognisable.

Mebuntu

Locker10a wrote: »

Why would any large company sponsor any sports club/team or any other event for that matter!? It creates brand awareness, it’s marketing, advertising and helps the brand become recognisable.

I wasn't talking about advertising as a policy.

Part of the discussion on here is about whether Aer Lingus might have "missed an opportunity" of good PR by not flying the team all the way to Japan. I'm simply saying that, imho, nobody really cares whether they did or did not and would not be influenced by the photocall. It would not come into the equation at all when people are buying tickets.

LXFlyer

Mebuntu wrote: »

I wasn't talking about advertising as a policy.

Part of the discussion on here is about whether Aer Lingus might have "missed an opportunity" of good PR by not flying the team all the way to Japan. I'm simply saying that, imho, nobody really cares whether they did or did not and would not be influenced by the photocall. It would not come into the equation at all when people are buying tickets.

Maybe not for YOU, but you're making some very sweeping statements about everyone else - clearly it may influence some people. They wouldn't do it otherwise.

We are all different. Applying your personal preferences as the same as everyone else is very presumptive.

Tenger

Corporate tie-is like this are hard to quantify. Obviously EI have done the maths and feel it is worth it for them.

Whether it influences customer choice is hard to say, but it's also hard to say it that doesn't. Different ppl are influenced by different things. Personally I'm shocked that my 3 sisters who are working professionals are influenced by recommendations by certain Instagram "influencers".

The IRFU deal may make EI a more premium option in certain ppls eyes.
And the images of the team leaving Dublin were certainly given a lot of social media coverage on the day.

Jack1985

lfc200 wrote: »

What is the general uptake like for it?
I was on my usual Heathrow - Cork flight last night and the Aer space seats at the front were all empty

As I said targetated routes. Your experience on one particular flight is not reflective of the new class of travel overall.

L1011

EI and DAA staff definitely need to be given more info on AerSpace. Fast track staff unaware, lounge staff not sure, onboard staff not sure about the food entitlement.

California Dreamer

Outside of an Airbus Jumbo Jet 737 that Joe Public sees do they have any real knowledge or really care who is taking the Irish rugby team anywhere?

liiga

Is A321neo ei-lrb still due TOMMORROW

flange888

liiga wrote:

Is A321neo ei-lrb still due TOMMORROW

Nope...most likely Tuesday

liiga

flange888 wrote: »

liiga wrote:

Is A321neo ei-lrb still due TOMMORROW

Nope...most likely Tuesday

Okay ðŸ‘

Van.Bosch

When is it going into service? There was a list a while back but can’t find it. Is it going to do the MSP route?

Locker10a

When does SNN get the a321neo ? And anyone know will there be a new route ex SNN as the NEO is going to do the early LHR rotation leaving the regular 320 free in the morning?

LXFlyer

No confirmation of any new route out of SNN as of yet.

Van.Bosch

LXFlyer wrote: »

No confirmation of any new route out of SNN as of yet.

It would be a pretty small window too right? So options would be limited.

JCX BXC

Van.Bosch wrote: »

It would be a pretty small window too right? So options would be limited.

Anything that could be back by 11:45am, so a flight leaving around 6am shouldn't have too small a range.

kevinandrew

Van.Bosch wrote: »

When is it going into service? There was a list a while back but can’t find it. Is it going to do the MSP route?

MSP is down as a 5 weekly A332 service next summer so doesn’t look like it’s going there anytime soon.

The last update from Routes Online;

SNN-BOS 27OCT19
DUB-IAD 29OCT19
DUB-PHL 01NOV19

This is from the June update so is possibly out of date.

The next A321LR route is still over a month away so EI-LRB will either join EI-LRA on Hartford or sit in the hanger for a few weeks.

Locker10a

Van.Bosch wrote: »

It would be a pretty small window too right? So options would be limited.

They could technically fit in a MAD/BCN to tie into IAG connections, BCN could also serve as a leisure route.
Possibly a German or French city too

kevinandrew

The second A321LR is currently on its first test flight after completing its taxi and RTO tests this morning.

Looks like it’s west of Berlin at the moment and heading back north towards Hamburg.

x567

Locker10a wrote: »

They could technically fit in a MAD/BCN to tie into IAG connections, BCN could also serve as a leisure route.
Possibly a German or French city too

My guess would be either another UK destination to try to feed their T/A flights - maybe LGW or Manchester - albeit that both have competition on the routes already and LGW might cannibalise their own LHR demand; or a near-ish sunshine route. BCN or MAD would be lovely though...

HTCOne

x567 wrote: »

My guess would be either another UK destination to try to feed their T/A flights - maybe LGW or Manchester - albeit that both have competition on the routes already and LGW might cannibalise their own LHR demand; or a near-ish sunshine route. BCN or MAD would be lovely though...

I’d think they’d want to fill the J cabin, best way to do that is transfers. Uf they even launch a new route at all I’d guess CDG.

Van.Bosch

Locker10a wrote: »

They could technically fit in a MAD/BCN to tie into IAG connections, BCN could also serve as a leisure route.
Possibly a German or French city too

But the A321LR is going to do Heathrow, which frees up the A320. So the gap is only for a LHR sector length, unless there was a buffer in its schedule to begin with?

Locker10a

Van.Bosch wrote: »

But the A321LR is going to do Heathrow, which frees up the A320. So the gap is only for a LHR sector length, unless there was a buffer in its schedule to begin with?

The first LHR departs SNN at 7:30am, I’d they set a 6am departure like they do in DUB and ORK bases they’d have an extra 90mins to go further.

LXFlyer

Van.Bosch wrote: »

But the A321LR is going to do Heathrow, which frees up the A320. So the gap is only for a LHR sector length, unless there was a buffer in its schedule to begin with?

Completely incorrect.

There is plenty of room for a longer flight.

Look at when the first flight from Shannon to Heathrow departs - it’s dictated by the slots at Heathrow and is substantially later than an alternative flight would need to be.

Van.Bosch

LXFlyer wrote: »

Completely incorrect.

There is plenty of room for a longer flight.

Look at when the first flight from Shannon to Heathrow departs - it’s dictated by the slots at Heathrow and is substantially later than an alternative flight would need to be.

So “completely incorrect” is a bit harsh! I said unless there is a buffer in the schedule already, which there is.

liiga

It might do the first London Heathrow flight on 1st October

LXFlyer

Van.Bosch wrote: »

So “completely incorrect” is a bit harsh! I said unless there is a buffer in the schedule already, which there is.

Fair enough but to be fair it had already been mentioned that it would need to be back by about 11:45. By any measure that leaves room to go a lot further than LHR!

Jack1985

The intention is to use the 320 in SNN to do FAO/AGP in the morn with the later LHR’s in the afternoon freeing up room for capacity growth out of DUB and ORK.