Aer Lingus Fleet/Routes Discussion

Locker10a · 22-02-2015 12:04am

My question RE: the EI fleet is when will they actually commit to the 321NEO ? It has been rumored for what feels like years at this stage!!

JCX BXC · 22-02-2015 12:17am

Locker10a wrote: »

My question RE: the EI fleet is when will they actually commit to the 321NEO ? It has been rumored for what feels like years at this stage!!

It will take me a long time to get used to the idea of T/A 757's being replaced with A321's. A long time. The A320 family is very much seen as an inter-continental jet, using it on T/A doesn't seem right.

Sure we have the A318's from LCY to JFK and the 737's from DUB to YYT, but that's on a small scale, and a truely widescale operation still seems very unusual.

I would also be concered with the A321 NEO, as it has a shorter range and less seats than a 757, so in effect its not a true replacement. Sure its the closest we have ever gotton, but I think Airbus need to go just a little further with the A321NEO, make it a little longer and have a little further range.

Van.Bosch · 22-02-2015 12:17am

Tenger wrote: »

Well the new CEO ia very US-centric.

I cant see Mexico ever being an option for EI. Cancun would be seasonal at best, an relatively low yield compared to their East Coast routes.

I would hope to see 2-3 more routes to US/Canada in the next 3-4 years

Is that what you expect or would like to see? I think that is realistic but I would wonder if it is a case of standing still is going backwards/ missing an opportunity.

I'm not talking about 15 new routes but I would think 6/7 routes in that timeframe. Thinking about it that's 5/6 extra aircraft which does seem out of character

Locker10a · 22-02-2015 1:14am

Carnacalla wrote: »

It will take me a long time to get used to the idea of T/A 757's being replaced with A321's. A long time. The A320 family is very much seen as an inter-continental jet, using it on T/A doesn't seem right.

Sure we have the A318's from LCY to JFK and the 737's from DUB to YYT, but that's on a small scale, and a truely widescale operation still seems very unusual.

I would also be concered with the A321 NEO, as it has a shorter range and less seats than a 757, so in effect its not a true replacement. Sure its the closest we have ever gotton, but I think Airbus need to go just a little further with the A321NEO, make it a little longer and have a little further range.

Well that's what the 757 was designed for originally ! Transcontinental US flights and high capacity inter European flights, it's now a key transatlantic aircraft and has opened up huge markets . The 321NEO is set to simply continue the work the 757 has done which it ironically was never designed to do !! I think the 321NEO could be great for thinner US routes ex SNN for example and for adding frequency on other key routes like DUB - JFK in the future . I was certainly under the impression EI were interested in it maybe I'm wrong !? Anyone know ?

man98 · 22-02-2015 1:59am

I hope this fabled 4th 757 goes for daily Montreal Trudeau flights.

sully2010 · 22-02-2015 4:13am

Carnacalla wrote: »

It will take me a long time to get used to the idea of T/A 757's being replaced with A321's. A long time. The A320 family is very much seen as an inter-continental jet, using it on T/A doesn't seem right.

Sure we have the A318's from LCY to JFK and the 737's from DUB to YYT, but that's on a small scale, and a truely widescale operation still seems very unusual.

I would also be concered with the A321 NEO, as it has a shorter range and less seats than a 757, so in effect its not a true replacement. Sure its the closest we have ever gotton, but I think Airbus need to go just a little further with the A321NEO, make it a little longer and have a little further range.

Airbus have gone further with the LR and that pretty much wraps it up, it will open up a lot of potential new routes for airlines. 757 is history and Boeing have lost "the replacement" battle, as much as they dont want to admit it.

homerjay2005 · 22-02-2015 11:33am

Is 201 seats not a very low number for a 767???

would have expected at least 250 for these planes and to make business sense, surely they need more than 200 passengers on these planes.

man98 · 22-02-2015 11:47am

homerjay2005 wrote:

would have expected at least 250 for these planes and to make business sense, surely they need more than 200 passengers on these planes.

As it (correct if I'm wrong) for these smaller 767s that is the norm. I think I saw somewhere that Omni 767-200s are 216 economy seats, 12 | 189 just takes two rows out and changes to 2 - 2 - 2. I'd say it's nor worth their while making it better, I'd be surprised if these was IFE at all.

FridaysWell · 22-02-2015 11:48am

homerjay2005 wrote: »

Is 201 seats not a very low number for a 767???

would have expected at least 250 for these planes and to make business sense, surely they need more than 200 passengers on these planes.

With the right revenue and yield management, to match appropriate demand profiles, 201 seats for a transatlantic route is fine.

JCX BXC · 22-02-2015 1:14pm

man98 wrote: »

As it (correct if I'm wrong) for these smaller 767s that is the norm. I think I saw somewhere that Omni 767-200s are 216 economy seats, 12 | 189 just takes two rows out and changes to 2 - 2 - 2. I'd say it's nor worth their while making it better, I'd be surprised if these was IFE at all.

To clarify, you are mostly correct. It is a 767-200 which is smaller than the usual 767-300 therefore has less seats.

Each economy seat has personal TV screens BTW.

Tenger · 22-02-2015 2:49pm

I think the 1-2 new T/A routes a year is a realistic expansion plan for EI. Looks at SFO, 4 weekly last year,up to daily today. This is reflected by the 2xdaily DUB-ORD being scaled back to 11 weekly. A new route will have an impact on existing ones. Launching a route is easy, making it viable and successful is another question. I can see some routes launching with the B757...then after 2 years being upgraded to the A330 if successful.

Locker10a wrote: »

My question RE: the EI fleet is when will they actually commit to the 321NEO ? It has been rumored for what feels like years at this stage!!

Well the end of the B757 has been in view for a few years now. There has been constant debate about its replacement for probably a decade now. (Production stopped in 2004)
Once the A320neo program launched it raised the question about a B757 replacement. At the same time the axing of the B787-3 and the spec on the B737-MAX showed that Boeing wasn't going for a direct replacement.
This debate has only been quietened 2 months ago with the official announcement of the A321neo-LR version.

While this doesn't truly replace the B757 it covers (along with the A321neo and the B737-9MAX) approx 90% of current B757 missions. You have many internet experts talking about this gap, but in reality you are talking about a market of approx 100-200 airframes. So would you alter your design just to gain 100 extra orders? This alteration would impact on the efficiency of your design.(of which you plan to get 1000+ orders)

man98 · 22-02-2015 11:05pm

The 321N-LR (congrats to me I found a name for it) does the 100 extra miles needed, and is licenced to take 240. It's the closest replacement anyone will churn out, as well as piggy backing on EI (along with most B752 carriers) using A320 the family, higher parts commonality I presume.

Tenger · 22-02-2015 11:12pm

man98 wrote: »

The 321N-LR (congrats to me I found a name for it) does the 100 extra miles needed, and is licenced to take 240. It's the closest replacement anyone will churn out, as well as piggy backing on EI (along with most B752 carriers) using A320 the family, higher parts commonality I presume.

But Airbus already have a name for it!
The A321neo-LR will be a altered version of the planned A321neo. It will have reduced cargo capacity due to the fitting of extra fuel tanks.

So pretty much 100% parts compatibility with A320neo/A321neo.
While it doesn't have the full range of the B757 Airbus historically improves range/payload as production ramps up..I would expect a similar weight loss/engine PiP for this aircraft.

L1011 · 22-02-2015 11:46pm

Tenger wrote: »

There has been constant debate about its replacement for probably a decade now. (Production stopped in 2004)

Unfortunately (as someone who'd prefer to be back in 2005...), while there has been debate since production ended,........

It would probably have been earlier except for the 757-300 sales push, at that.

EI really need to decide on their large narrowbody craft for the future, longhaul or not, as the 321s they have are old and have had a heavy enough life. If the economy continues on its current track and traffic figures match they're likely to need more for the existing shorthaul schedule; and under IAG they'll almost certainly be using them to LHR to allow elimination of the BA rotations.

JCX BXC · 22-02-2015 11:48pm

If only United started the transatlantic 757 revolution a few years earlier.

L1011 · 22-02-2015 11:56pm

2004 Tenger

Its odd to think that the A300 even managed to outlive it in production despite being nearly a decade older; but the reality is that the 757 was far too much plane for 95% of what it was ever used for; TATL is a tiny fraction of what it does even now.

Tenger · 22-02-2015 11:57pm

Carnacalla wrote: »

If only United started the transatlantic 757 revolution a few years earlier.

I thought it was Continental who started using B757-200's T/A. But this was after production ended.
The use of the B757 actually came about due to the post-9/11 downturn. New aircraft were not bought and airlines had to make existing routes more efficient. So the B757 started to replace B767's on some less profitable routes....

L1011 wrote: »

2004 Tenger ...

I really should check Wikipedia more often!!

Time for bed for me then....

JCX BXC · 23-02-2015 12:00am

L1011 wrote: »

TATL is a tiny fraction of what it does even now.

I doubt that, Alot of the american beasts are replacing their domestic 757's with A320/A321's and 737's. Soon Id say that TATL will be the main use of 757's

L1011 · 23-02-2015 12:00am

Tenger wrote: »

I thought it was Continental who started using B757-200's T/A. But this was after production ended.

First 757s TATL were charter airlines in the 80s, Continental started in the mid 1990s with a few routes, as did BA and AA.

It was the winglet retrofit which came out after production ended that really pushed the TATL routes though; brought the range up enough to change a lot of routes from marginal to possible most days.

JCX BXC · 23-02-2015 12:01am

Tenger wrote: »

I thought it was Continental who started using B757-200's T/A.

Sorry you are correct, with Continental merging into United I mixed the names.

L1011 · 23-02-2015 12:03am

Carnacalla wrote: »

I doubt that, Alot of the american beasts are replacing their domestic 757's with A320/A321's and 737's. Soon Id say that TATL will be the main use of 757's

9 to 14% of 757s are used for TATL. Its going to grow but its really not a huge market, or even what the bulk of them will be used for.

The 737-900 is the main replacement on US domestic longhauls but it hasn't got the range or the runway performance for some of it, e.g. getting out of LGA is troublesome at best with it.

JCX BXC · 23-02-2015 12:03am

L1011 wrote: »

First 757s TATL were charter airlines in the 80s, Continental started in the mid 1990s with a few routes, as did BA and AA.

It was the winglet retrofit which came out after production ended that really pushed the TATL routes though; brought the range up enough to change a lot of routes from marginal to possible most days.

After 9/11, Continental had the hardest push with the 757's and so they are credited with starting the major 757 TATL operations.

As an alternative to the A321 Neo, could Aer Lingus look into buying a few 767-200ER's? Unlikely, but its something to consider.

L1011 · 23-02-2015 12:06am

Carnacalla wrote: »

As an alternative to the A321 Neo, could Aer Lingus look into buying a few 767-200ER's? Unlikely, but its something to consider.

Cost-wise there's little if any advantage; they may as well just get 332s if they're going to go larger at all. There's not many 762s left anyway, probably 20 or so flyable, even though you can order them new - if you're insane. 767 line is open due to the freighters and tankers; some passenger 763s were delivered last year I think.

JCX BXC · 23-02-2015 12:09am

L1011 wrote: »

Cost-wise there's little if any advantage; they may as well just get 332s if they're going to go larger at all. There's not many 762s left anyway, probably 20 or so flyable, even though you can order them new - if you're insane. 767 line is open due to the freighters and tankers; some passenger 763s were delivered last year I think.

My thoughts are Shannon and thin routes from Dublin. Would an A332 be too much plane for shannon outside of the summer months?

L1011 · 23-02-2015 12:12am

Carnacalla wrote: »

My thoughts are Shannon and thin routes from Dublin. Would an A332 be too much plane for shannon outside of the summer months?

It was before, but a 762 isn't enough less in terms of costs. Even if they found some decent ones you're looking at a 15 year old bird (with a 30 year old design) at best. Smaller plane doesn't directly equal smaller operating costs.

I know they're using one this summer but that's basically a case of what's available - the Tristar and MD11 definitely weren't economic to be new introductions to a fleet when they used them in the early 2000s for instance.

arubex · 23-02-2015 7:07am

For 767-200ER vs A330-200, just as a paper exercise, I found this report from the time of the USAF tanker selection:

https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/files/Boeing_KC-X_Fuel_Costs_Report_2007-11.pdf

Even though it paints the A330 in the worst possible light ( it was part of the Boeing bid ) it still shows the A330 having 30% more passenger capacity for 24% more fuel consumption.

When you add in the extra cargo capacity of the A330 ( and it can take LD3s, the 767 cannot ) then the gap will widen even more.

The only 767 that came close to the A330-200 was the -400; Delta's published figures put the two of them very close together. But it's not available on the leasing market.

Most airlines now pick the A330-300 though, since iterative improvements have given it much of the range that originally led to the -200 but with yet more capacity.

Preset No.3 · 23-02-2015 12:47pm

Titan operating EI2139 today to BOS

Tenger · 23-02-2015 7:56pm

Carnacalla wrote: »

My thoughts are Shannon and thin routes from Dublin. Would an A332 be too much plane for shannon outside of the summer months?

I think so, probably for the foreseable future there will be no more EI A330's ex-SNN.
EI B757:~165 seats, Omni B762: ~205, EI A332: 267 seats.
A321neo-LR will be around 190-200 seats.

EICVD · 23-02-2015 8:09pm

Preset No.3 wrote: »

Titan operating EI2139 today to BOS

EI were hoping Titan would operate this flight yesterday evening but was cancelled, pax can't have been happy having 2 flights cancelled & departing a day late!

man98 · 23-02-2015 8:46pm

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

Aer Lingus Fleet/Routes Discussion

Comments