DeltaMD11 From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 1701 posts, RR: 37 Posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3646 times:
I was talking with a friend of mine today, and the issue of HP A318's was brought up. I was wondering, when are these birds slated for delivery, and also as to why their delivery was pushed back? I just checked the Order Book on Airbus.com and HP still has order in for 15 of the baby buses. I remember reading about the PW 6000's that the A318 is equipped with were posing a bit of a problem so I suspect that this may be the reason as to why all A318 deliveries have been pushed back. Can anyone add some insight?
Too often we ... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. - John Fitzgerald Kennedy
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7719 posts, RR: 17 Reply 5, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3365 times:
I really think that the America West A318 order is still in jeoparady though. With the Freedom Air CRJ-900s coming into the system soon it makes the A318s future gloom. If passengers and frequent fliers accept the aircraft on the routes that it will be flying, which are not too different from what the 737-200/A318 (will)fly then it seems somewhat silly to bring a new aircraft into the fleet with poorer economics and labor costs than the big CRJ. I'd be willing to bet that at some point HP will convert those 318s to 319s/320s instead. Especially if PW cannot get the kinks worked out of the 6000.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
Sllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6 Reply 7, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3263 times:
For example, MESA's CASM is 14 cents a mile (using only RJ's). Frontier's CASM on the A319 is below 8 cents a mile.
Is this for Mesa in general, for specifically for Freedom and the CRJ-900's? I think the cost breakdown on the CRJ-900's operated by the non-union Freedom Airlines that will determine the direction HP takes on the smaller aircraft.
Also, an interesting comparison would be the cost differential between the A319 and the A318. If the 318 doesn't have significantly better operating ecomonmics (and thus has virtually the same costs as a 319 but with 20% fewer seats), that's going to pretty much dissuade HP and virtually anyone else from operating the 318 over the 319.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 23922 posts, RR: 87 Reply 8, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3234 times:
The 14 cents was taken was taken from MESA's website, and the latest quarterly report. It is not broken down by airline.
However, Horizon, which flies RJ's, has a CASM of 16 cents (taken from their website). This is higher than MESA in part because of the Bombardier Q's in the Horizon fleet.
The present consensus is that the A318 CASM will be somewhere between 5% and 12% lower than the A319. I said "slightly lower" because I didn't have the figures to hand and I was giving the RJ the benefit of the doubt.
We can't know for sure until it flies paying passengers with a particular airline and that particular airline's cost structure.
What we do know is that Frontier confirmed it's order for the A318 after the prototype had flown, which suggests that the plane was living up to expectations. Because of the PW situation, Frontier had the opportunity to wait for the PW, convert to A319's or change to the CFM's. They chose the latter.
I follow HP's finances some, but not as closely as I follow Frontier.
The advantage for Frontier is that on a lower performing route they can switch from the A319 to the A318. Or they can do it on different days - high load days versus low load days.
For HP it's a different ball game. They are concentrating on getting through a difficult time and they are constrained by the terms of the deal with the ATSB from getting much - if anything - in the way of new aircraft.
This is another reason why they can go to MESA for the RJ's. They "get" aircraft at no capital cost.
Hopefully, by the time they need to make a final decision on the A318 (keep or convert to A319's, whatever), they'll be in much better financial shape and can concentrate on the future shape of their overall fleet.
In such a fleet, I've no idea if the A318 may or may not have a role.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7719 posts, RR: 17 Reply 11, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3162 times:
Hmmmm... very interesting. I'd still like to see costs of the Freedom Air CRJs vs. the rest of the Mesa CRJ operation. It seems odd, though I will take your word, that even with the dirt cheap labor rates they get for RJ drivers the CASM would be so high.
I suppose HPs final decision would be based heavily on the operational experience of Frontier, seeing as they run similiar operations. If it works well for Frontier, America West would likely follow suit. Without a 737-200 replacement there would be a significant gap between the CRJ-900 and A319.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
MasseyBrown From United States of America, joined Dec 2002, 4981 posts, RR: 7 Reply 12, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3085 times:
Expressjet (Continental's regional) reported a CASM of 14.89 cents for their all Embraer fleet for the first quarter of the year. Utilization was about 7.25 hours; improving that not-so-great number should also improve CASM.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 23922 posts, RR: 87 Reply 18, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2707 times:
It is true that a number of orders for the A318 have been converted to other Airbus types, such as the A319, but I suggest there are other factors at work.
"...its CASM is actually signficantly higher than the A319"
Flying for which airline? CASM is more airline specific than aircraft specific.
For example, a 319 flying for UAL has a significantly higher CASM than a 319 flying for Frontier.
CASM also changes all the time. Frontier's CASM has dropped by at least 2 cents since they started taking delivery of new aircraft (this would have been true if the new planes were Boeing or Airbus).
Of course, CASM can be projected. But then other things, such as intended route length come into play.
But my interest is not so much in the plane as the airline. Specifically, Frontier.
Frontier's management are much better at running an airline than I am. They've done the studies and believe that the plane's economics work. That's good enough for me, until and unless circumstances prove they were wrong.
If the A318 economics don't work for other airlines, hey, that's their business. There are plenty of other aircraft out there.
Brons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 2981 posts, RR: 5 Reply 19, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2686 times:
It only makes sense that a smaller airplane (less seats) will cost more per available seat mile than a larger airplane (more seats) with the same engines and close to the same weights. Do the math, there's no way in hell the A318 will have lower CASM than the A319 if all other cost factors remain the same.
Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 23922 posts, RR: 87 Reply 20, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2664 times:
I can only say that I have studied the A318 fairly intently, and the conclusions listed above about CASM are not mine, but those of people whose opinion I trust.
My only comment on your post would be that you say a "larger airplane" - implying, unless I'm being particularly dense, a plane that weighs more. This weight would, in itself, be an added cost not a reduced one.
Thus - I have also come across many, many comments claiming a perceived "weight problem" weight the A318, so I've put some effort into studying this.
There is a belief that the A318 is designed (perhaps because it is smaller) as a short range plane. This is not so. It has a similar range to the A319.
For short hops, the B717 wins hands down - but the B717 hasn't sold all that well, either.
As the stage length increases, the disparity goes away, until eventually it disappears - given that the B717 doesn't have the range of the A318.
Howsumever, I seem to be turning into an advocate of the A318, which is not my intention (althougn I do think it's a snazzy little thing).
My concern, again as I said above, is purely with Frontier. It ends right there. From past experience with F9's management, I trust them. I have listened to what they have said, and studied the information they've provided, and am satisfied they have made a decision that is right for them.
Kellmark From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 678 posts, RR: 8 Reply 21, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2603 times:
Bottom line. The A318 is at a too short end of the spectrum with its legacy weight of the original structure and wing of the A320-319 to make a good economical airplane with a decent CASM with such a short fuselage. It may have a decent plane mile number, but the cost per seat is still going to be higher than its larger brethren. This is why the B717, which weighs 20,000 lbs less, is more competitive over the shorter stage lengths. The 717s main problem is the lack of commonality with other Boeing products. But the A318 is really the worst design that Airbus has come up with. This is why a number of airlines have been converting to the A319, which is a much more sensible airframe.
Sllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6 Reply 22, posted (10 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2568 times:
The things I see working against the A318 as compared to the A319 are the following:
1) requires same number of flight crew. Both a 318 and 319 will require 3 flight attendants as they have more than 100 and less than 150 passengers in virtually any configuration.
2) It weighs a mere 3,000 pounds less than an A319
3) It only has 85% of the seating capacity of a 319.
So how is this going to be CHEAPER to operate per seat mile than a 319? It won't be. It'll have a slightly lower net cost, of course, so for thinner routes it'll still yield a slight advantage, but much like the 737-600, it's going to be a niche aircraft.