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

EICVD

man98 wrote: »

Is this because of Business class refitting resulting in a TATL fleet shortage? Or unexpected maintenance?

Saturday's flight never made it back from BOS, think it was the aircraft that diverted to Bangor.

JCX BXC

EICVD wrote: »

Saturday's flight never made it back from BOS, think it was the aircraft that diverted to Bangor.

It diverted to bangor, and made it to BOS at 9pm local time, and the flight from BOS-DUB was cancelled for some strange reason.

EICVD

Carnacalla wrote: »

It diverted to bangor, and made it to BOS at 9pm local time, and the flight from BOS-DUB was cancelled for some strange reason.

That explains why the Titan was needed yesterday so, why that rescheduled flight at 1750 yesterday was cancelled too is the big question now.

JCX BXC

EICVD wrote: »

That explains why the Titan was needed yesterday so, why that rescheduled flight at 1750 yesterday was cancelled too is the big question now.

The titan didn't arrive till after 6:30.

EICVD

Carnacalla wrote: »

The titan didn't arrive till after 6:30.

Thought that was the reason, bad planning by EI then to reschedule a flight without knowing they were certain they had an aircraft to operate it.

arubex

EICVD wrote: »

EI were hoping Titan would operate this flight yesterday evening but was cancelled

Very unusual for Titan to scrub a sub; reputations in the short-notice ACMI market are built on dependability.

EICVD

arubex wrote: »

Very unusual for Titan to scrub a sub; reputations in the short-notice ACMI market are built on dependability.

I was only getting the info 3rd hand, my girlfriend's friends brother & his family were flying home. The rescheduled cancelled flight was up on the departure boards, wether the problem was EI or Titan who knows.

Strumms

The replacment could have been scheduled in good faith but ever so often the stars align to create a cluster **** on top of a another one... Maybe the replacment aircraft was green to go but one of the available crew members went sick, or the replacment aircraft was AOG due to a fault discovered at the last minute with no parts to hand etc... Just an alternative perspective.. We had 3 birds on the deck at one point a few years ago... 1 grounded due to a flaps problem.. Replacment from CDG arrived with fuel leak discovered by F/O during walk around and a replacment which was happily in good nick arrived but with crew out of hours on arrival.... Following evening minimum staff and 2 aircraft to turn around within 18 mins (original airframe was out of service for 4 days or so after).

Tenger

Strumms wrote: »

.....every so often the stars align to create a cluster **** on top of a another one........... We had 3 birds on the deck at one point a few years ago... 1 grounded due to a flaps problem.. Replacment from CDG arrived with fuel leak discovered by F/O during walk around and a replacment which was happily in good nick arrived but with crew out of hours on arrival......

They weren't Bae146's by any chance?

I can remember from my time in EI a decade ago Operations knew not to park a 146 beside a tech (sick ) one....they seemed to infect each other!!

Strumms

Tenger wrote: »

They weren't Bae146's by any chance?

I can remember from my time in EI a decade ago Operations knew not to park a 146 beside a tech (sick ) one....they seemed to infect each other!!

Not 146s nope a collection from the Airbus Family, that was a fun night for all not.

donvito99

Not strictly 2015 but fleet discussion nonetheless.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/aer-lingus-deal-for-new-planes-sealed-as-profits-hit-72m-31020407.html

Aer Lingus has inked a deal to buy nine new Airbus aircraft that will eventually enable it to replace its existing long-haul fleet. ... Aer Lingus said the new aircraft it will take delivery of in the coming years will allow it to expand its long-haul services in the future.

The airline will launch a service to Washington this year, and is likely to relaunch a Dublin-Los Angeles service next year.

The new Airbus A350 aircraft it has ordered will have 30 business class seats and 330 seats in total.

Aer Lingus will also introduce a premium economy service on long-haul flights when it starts taking delivery of the new aircraft.

Premium Economy has been talked about. But 330 seats total on the A350 surprises me. I would've imagined that they'd have followed present practice and go above the manufacturer/legacy carrier configuration. On a trivial level, the 350 is as long and wider than the 330, but perhaps additional rows of J class (in a less sparse 1-2-2 config) and Premium Economy has forced their hand.

L1011

Rumours in the US that the "perimeter rule" at La Guardia is to be lifted.

IF this happens, EI have a unique opportunity (as LGA is unlikely to ever get customs) to offer TATL in there. The runways are within spec for an MTOW 752, its within range and they can clear the flights here.

There'd be plenty of people willing to connect at DUB to arrive cleared and at LGA.

I can't find any suspected runway performance data for the 321LR though which could be a problem.

Preset No.3

I would rather get the now defunct $15 fung wah bus to Boston and fly home that have to go anywhere near the delapadated, run down, cramped airport that is LGA.

lord lucan

Tbh if the rules are amended I think it'll be more a case of allowing trans continental flights to SFO and LAX than international flights.

JCX BXC

lord lucan wrote: »

Tbh if the rules are amended I think it'll be more a case of allowing trans continental flights to SFO and LAX than international flights.

But International flights are possible with pre-clearence. Transatlantic may be stretching it a little but I'd expect Toronto to be added.

L1011

Carnacalla wrote: »

But International flights are possible with pre-clearence. Transatlantic may be stretching it a little but I'd expect Toronto to be added.

Already has Toronto, its within perimeter. And Montreal and Ottawa.

Vancouver and some Caribbean destinations with CBP would be most likely to appear, if slots were available. Just removing the perimeter doesn't fix the fact that the airport's full but there's some really questionable slot sitting by Delta in particularly so there's definitely slots to be bought.

roundymac

L1011 wrote: »

Rumours in the US that the "perimeter rule" at La Guardia is to be lifted.

IF this happens, EI have a unique opportunity (as LGA is unlikely to ever get customs) to offer TATL in there. The runways are within spec for an MTOW 752, its within range and they can clear the flights here.

There'd be plenty of people willing to connect at DUB to arrive cleared and at LGA.

I can't find any suspected runway performance data for the 321LR though which could be a problem.

Would suit my missus grand, her sister lives just down the road from LGA.

Tenger

L1011 wrote: »

Rumours in the US that the "perimeter rule" at La Guardia is to be lifted.

IF this happens, EI have a unique opportunity (as LGA is unlikely to ever get customs) to offer TATL in there. The runways are within spec for an MTOW 752, its within range and they can clear the flights here. .....

Cant see that happening at all.

EI have lots of connecting traffic at JFK with Jetblue and United. Why would they serve a mostly Delta smaller airport?
Business pax want to go to JFK, better transport links from JFK-Manhattan.
LGA is the 3rd airport serving NYC metro area for a reason. EWR would be served before LGA.....and that is not going to happen either.

L1011

Tenger wrote: »

Cant see that happening at all.

EI have lots of connecting traffic at JFK with Jetblue and United. Why would they serve a mostly Delta smaller airport?
Business pax want to go to JFK, better transport links from JFK-Manhattan.
LGA is the 3rd airport serving NYC metro area for a reason. EWR would be served before LGA.....and that is not going to happen either.

LGA is where the premium pax want to go, though.

If they're looking at a third NYC daily from DUB, a 757 to LGA is what I'd want to add if the option was available.

donvito99

L1011 wrote: »

LGA is where the premium pax want to go, though.

And you know this how? Proximity? The premium pax aren't going to jump ship (all the other carriers would seemingly have to move also, seeing as it's where the premium pax want to go, allegedly) because part of the reason they're considered premium is that they're tied into FFPs run by carriers operating out of the larger hubs (in our case, international ones) which are well worn now after decades of patronage. La Guardia is choc-a-bloc-ful of established domestic routes, it would be stupid for EI to send a 757 or similar. As far as I know the Newark expedition back in the day didn't go all to well, and EI should be consolidating, building on the T5 experience and connectivity, building their frequency (as they are, sending the 3rd daily NYC anywhere other than Kennedy is silly).

L1011

donvito99 wrote: »

And you know this how? Proximity? .

Its the case with any within-perimeter routes in the US - the United PS and American A321T transcons are out of range which is why they're JFK.

As the main TATL carrier from the only country in Europe that can send flights to non-FIS airports its definitely something that should be looked at - if the rumours are true.

As goes FFPs - I wouldn't be at all surprised if the new FFP promised for next month in the financial report is Avios. Particularly as they're promising a tiered FFP with financial partners etc all of which you'd imagine would have leaked out if its not just wholesale using an existing system.

Even if the permeter was dropped tomorrow there'd be a nightmare getting slots, which would have to be considered too.

donvito99

L1011 wrote: »

Its the case with any within-perimeter routes in the US - the United PS and American A321T transcons are out of range which is why they're JFK.

As the main TATL carrier from the only country in Europe that can send flights to non-FIS airports its definitely something that should be looked at - if the rumours are true.

As goes FFPs - I wouldn't be at all surprised if the new FFP promised for next month in the financial report is Avios. Particularly as they're promising a tiered FFP with financial partners etc all of which you'd imagine would have leaked out if its not just wholesale using an existing system.

Even if the permeter was dropped tomorrow there'd be a nightmare getting slots, which would have to be considered too.

And if IAG do takeover EI the idea of a them being over at LGA doesn't make much sense at all, unless IAG's supposed for DUB as a reliever for LHR strategy was amended substantially to target premium paying business travellers who supposedly want to be a few kilometres closer to upper Manhattan than the rest of us.

L1011

donvito99 wrote: »

And if IAG do takeover EI the idea of a them being over at LGA doesn't make much sense at all, unless IAG's supposed for DUB as a reliever for LHR strategy was amended substantially to target premium paying business travellers who supposedly want to be a few kilometres closer to upper Manhattan than the rest of us.

On the contrary, I'd actually see the LCY-SNN-JFK service be moved to LGA as soon as they could get their hands on slots. They're unlikely to ignore the advantages of it, considering they have their own equivalent in London with the sizeable BACF operation.

JCX BXC

What are the chances of the SNN-LHR route changing to an A320? (Especially after the IAG takeover?)

[Deleted User]

Carnacalla wrote: »

What are the chances of the SNN-LHR route changing to an A320? (Especially after the IAG takeover?)

That will happen as Aer Lingus are ditching the 319.

JCX BXC

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That will happen as Aer Lingus are ditching the 319.

Thats still a few years out.

When do you think it the A319 will be removed.

highlydebased

Completely gone by.2017. One or two per year til then I think

JCX BXC

highlydebased wrote: »

Completely gone by.2017. One or two per year til then I think

AFAIK its 1 in 2016 and 3 in 2017.

My badly phrased question was mesnt to look more like -when will the a319 be removed from Shannon?

Also, anyone have any idea whether there will be a B767 leased by EI in 2016?

Tenger

Carnacalla wrote: »

.....
Also, anyone have any idea whether there will be a B767 leased by EI in 2016?

If this summers operation is a success I see no reason for EI not to do it again next year.

arubex

I see the status of Virgin Little Red ( "I'm not dead!" "Yes he is!" ) has finally been officially confirmed; their slots are up for grabs from Winter 2015:

http://www.acl-uk.org/latestNews.aspx?id=183

I assume the A320s freed from that lease will be displacing the A319s?