Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
TAM Considers A318 Instead Of E190  
User currently offlineBrasuca From Brazil, joined Mar 2004, 717 posts, RR: 10
Posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2714 times:

I just came across this news:

"Linha do BNDES não garante compra de Embraer 190 por TAM" = The Brazilian state-owned Bank in charge of financing TAM new Jet orders, BNDES, does not give warranty they will necessarily chose an Embraer Jet.

The Bank says that TAM is evaluating which aircraft will fit their needs, that can be either the A318 or E190.

TAM is analysing the current F100 Market prospect, whether they will still need a 100-seat jets or not. In case they decide to operate larger aircraft, they will opt for new A319/A320/A321 orders instead, to set their narrow body fleet.

OTOH, if there will be demand for the 100-seat Jets, TAM will then face tradeoff between fleet commonality and E195 benefits. They will subsequently announce their decision, which is to be made in Nov.

BNDES say they can't meddle in the airline's decision. They are limited to offering a good deal on the national product by lower taxation rates, while TAM considers especially exchange rate stability.

I think TAM is under a trustworthy way of doing business. As we all know, they are conservative. Profit in first place.

The news summary, in Portuguese:

Quote:

"A linha que o BNDES prepara para financiar a venda de aviões Embraer a companhias aéreas no Brasil não garantirá a escolha da fabricante nacional pela TAM, que decidirá no final do ano qual aeronave substituirá os jatos Fokker 100 que ainda tem na frota"
"A empresa aérea terá que resolver se terá frota unificada, composta por equipamentos da européia Airbus, ou mista"
"Estamos olhando se o mercado hoje atendido pelo Fokker 100 justifica avião desse número de assentos ou maior (...) ou ficamos na simplicidade da família Airbus, o A318, ou vamos para uma complexidade de ter outro fabricante, o Embraer 190"


[Edited 2005-09-16 21:49:36]


Varig, Varig, Varig
16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineKL808 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1585 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2678 times:

Well, if they go for the 100 seater market, I would hope they would go for the A318's.

Thats my opinion.

Drew



AMS-LAX-MNL
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8974 posts, RR: 39
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2642 times:

So they are still considering both a/c, not one over the other.

It all depends on how many they want to order, IMO. Hope the E195 wins out.

Cheers



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineHiFi From Brazil, joined Apr 2005, 192 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2541 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 2):
It all depends on how many they want to order

I agree. If they're planning to order something above 20 to 30 a/c, commonality is not a big issue anymore, and they can go for the E90/95s, assuming they're more economical (I'm just trusting B6 that they are, I have no numbers here. Anybody?)

And yes, the thread title is kind of misleading...



no commercial potential
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2524 times:

Its seems as if there are two distinct questions:

First, does TAM require a 100 seat airliner?

Second, if TAM does require a 100 seater, will it be the A318 or E190 to replace the F100s?

So much depends on the routes that TAM has in mind for the 100 seat fleet - if it intends to simply replace the F100s with a newer aircraft and mainly fly shorter segments within Brazil and to nearby regional cities, doesnt the E190 offer superior economics? Commonality it nice, but we are talking about a large fleet of 25 or more aircraft so its not that vital......JetBlue decided against the A318 for these reasons. Does the A318 make sense on short hops of up to 1000 miles?


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25692 posts, RR: 85
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2482 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 4):
Does the A318 make sense on short hops of up to 1000 miles?

Short answer is "no".

Someone did a comparison of the A318 and the B717 and the advabtages of the A318 did not kick in until the trip length was over 1000 miles.

One reason that jetBlue didn't go for the A318 was that they did not need the range, and so the weight of the aircraft became an issue for them.

BUT -

There are other virtues. In hot and high situations, the A318 performs well, which is one reason why Mexicana went for the aricraft.

And Frontier.

And I don't know the TAM route map, but also I wouldn't dismiss commonality here, especially if there are long and thin routes.

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8974 posts, RR: 39
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2386 times:

WAIT a second!!

I remember that JJMNGR said once that the only reason JJ has A319s is because the A320s cannot fly into SDU. So I don't see much love between TAM and long, thin routes. That's an upper hand for Embraer, but then it all depends on how many they want to order....

Also, no hot and high ops in Brazil. Hot, but not really high.

Cheers

[Edited 2005-09-16 23:53:22]


"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineBrasuca From Brazil, joined Mar 2004, 717 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2367 times:

Quoting Mariner (Reply 5):
And I don't know the TAM route map, but also I wouldn't dismiss commonality here, especially if there are long and thin routes.

These are the non-stop hops TAM currently operates with F100, most of the routes are operated with three/four cities per flight. So, I assume range is not an issue. None is over 1000 miles.

BSB-GYN ........ 102 mi
CWB-FLN ........ 153 mi
IGU-ASU ........ 191 mi

CPQ-CWB ........ 216 mi
GRU-CWB ........ 223 mi
CGH-GIG ........ 224 mi
GIG-CPQ ........ 248 mi

BEL-SLZ ........ 305 mi
THE-FOR ........ 309 mi
IGU-CWB ........ 332 mi
SAO-UDI ........ 336 mi
CGR-CGB ........ 345 mi
BSB-PMW ........ 384 mi
FOR-REC ........ 389 mi

SLZ-FOR ........ 402 mi
SAO-VIX ........ 465 mi

GRU-GYN........ 501 mi
SSA-VIX ........ 522 mi
BSB-GRU ........ 529 mi
BSB-CGB ........ 546 mi
GRU-CGR ........ 564 mi
BSB-VIX ........ 586 mi

SSA-GIG ........ 753 mi

MAO-BEL ........ 808 mi
BSB-FLN ........ 813 mi
BSB-THE ........ 819 mi

BSB-MCZ ........ 927 mi



Varig, Varig, Varig
User currently offlineMaersk737 From Denmark, joined Feb 2004, 717 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2323 times:

Then no A318.... If they are just a little clever  Wink

Cheers

Peter



I'm not proud to be a Viking, just thankfull
User currently offlineJJMNGR From Brazil, joined May 2004, 1018 posts, RR: 15
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2283 times:

PPVRA,

Yes you are right but A319 nor A320 can´t replace F100 where F100 operates, so A318 might be a possibility as so as E190 too. Still being under analisys.

Cheers.


User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13529 posts, RR: 100
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2263 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KL808 (Reply 1):
Well, if they go for the 100 seater market, I would hope they would go for the A318's.

Maybe another pw6000 customer?  hyper  Ok, don't shoot me down too quick, I can hope can't I?  cloudnine 

Quoting HiFi (Reply 3):
commonality is not a big issue anymore

Actually, 20 or 30 airframes isn't quite enough to overcome commonality. However, looking at the routes Brasuca posted, there doesn't appear to be a big need for "long thin" but instead just a smaller jet.

I have to admit I'm mixed on this order. In my opinion, TAM will end up going with the best business solution, so I'm very curious to see what they pick.

One question, what is the required delivery time frame? Although, I have a feeling both Airbus and Embraer can find this slots for this important order.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineBrasuca From Brazil, joined Mar 2004, 717 posts, RR: 10
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 6 days ago) and read 2221 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 6):
he only reason JJ has A319s is because the A320s cannot fly into SDU

Yep... I heard that too. And if the A320 was certified to operate into SDU, they would change their A319 for A320. However, this must have been their initial plans only, because they interestingly use the A319 in several other routes, all over the country.

JJMNGR,
Do you know if TAM's F100 replacement plan comprises TAM Mercosur fleet as well?

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 10):
Actually, 20 or 30 airframes isn't quite enough to overcome commonality.

TAM's CEO says that two manufactures is a complex task: "...ou vamos para uma complexidade de ter outro fabricante, o Embraer 190".
But they've done very well in over a decade, having both Fokker and Airbus. In addition, Embraer is just right on the corner.



Varig, Varig, Varig
User currently offlineGhost77 From Mexico, joined Mar 2000, 5236 posts, RR: 51
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2112 times:

A318s @ TAM! Would be nice to see the short bussssses with them!!!


ghost77



Ricardo Morales - flyAPM - ¡No es que maneje rapido, solo estoy volando lento!
User currently offline797 From Venezuela, joined Aug 2005, 1906 posts, RR: 27
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2101 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 2):
Hope the E195 wins out.

Yeah me too. It would look nicer, a brazilian airline with brazilian airliners.

But isn't the E195 more economic to operate than the A318?



Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous!
User currently offlineLipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11459 posts, RR: 58
Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1941 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

One important issue (and probably JJMNGR will agree). If the credit line from BNDES grant to TAM the advantage of a Brazilian currency debt (Airbus means leasing in US$) with reasonable interest and leasing rates, as at least 80% of all TAM's income are BR currency, i doubt TAM will choose the A318. And even with the complexity of other manufacturer, remember that it's Embraer with HQ just 100 miles far from TAM HQ (no problems for spare parts and maintenance could be made in Sao Jose dos Campos) and also, imagine the appeal with Brazilians and also the strong marketing it will allow to fix their brand as a Brazilian Airline using Brazilian Planes.

IMO, just another issue, if TAM uses E195 or E190, it could allow to use E170 for city's dropped in the past like Sao Jose dos Campos, Juiz de Fora, Marilia (where TAM has been created), and several other city's. Airbus does not offer something like that.

Good finance shape is very important and i think it's the biggest advantage of E-Jets. Debts and Incomes in R$. If BRL vs US$ rate goes UP (like 3,92 in 2002), TAM E-jets installments just remain the same while Gol, Tam (for Airbus fleet) and RG leasing will be increased (in R$).

Felipe



New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8974 posts, RR: 39
Reply 15, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1914 times:

Quoting 797 (Reply 13):
But isn't the E195 more economic to operate than the A318?

Yes, but the A318 can fly further and carry more payload (due to being a shortened version). The E90/95 definately fit TAMs needs best according to the numbers above, IMO.

Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 14):
Good finance shape is very important and i think it's the biggest advantage of E-Jets.

That and the lower CASM.

Cheers



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineErikwilliam From Brazil, joined Mar 2004, 2152 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (9 years 3 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1871 times:

Quoting Mariner (Reply 5):

100% agreed.
one big reason for B6 was also the CASM on each aircraft, and the E-190 preved to be cheaper.
And also, how it´s a lighter aircraft, landing and operating fees are cheaper.
that represents a lot, if you consider the amount of flights each aricraft will do daily.
If JJ takes a reasonable decison, Embraer will have the order



Dida, Cafu, Lucio, Roque Junior, Roberto Carlo, Emerson, Ze Roberto, Ronaldinho, Kaka, Adriano, Robinho, Ronaldo
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
B6: Why The EMB190 Instead Of The A318? posted Tue Feb 1 2005 04:09:08 by QuestAir
BA Orders A321 Instead Of A318! posted Fri Dec 13 2002 13:28:02 by AIR MALTA
BA Sending 767 Instead Of 747 To PHL posted Tue Oct 24 2006 07:39:02 by VikingA346
HF: Flying From EDRZ Instead Of SCN posted Mon Oct 9 2006 14:30:52 by A300605R
OS Considers Closing/reduction Of MEL + SYD posted Wed Jul 19 2006 10:02:53 by Macc
Why Order 744F Instead Of 748F? posted Fri Jun 23 2006 01:34:36 by TWAtwaTWA
Pax Returning Home, Ends Up At MHT Instead Of MAN posted Thu Jun 8 2006 03:34:22 by Kearnet
SkyEurope From D-pier Instead Of H-pier (AMS) posted Wed Apr 26 2006 12:10:38 by Joost
EK Pushes For A346 Enhanced Instead Of HGW Variant posted Fri Mar 17 2006 12:00:29 by Leelaw
Why So Many Cargo Airlines Use 742 Instead Of 744F posted Tue Mar 14 2006 22:07:18 by F.pier