Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes  
User currently offlineAb1247 From Switzerland, joined Mar 2005, 27 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8940 times:

I just watched a very interesting little report done by SFDRS (German Swiss Media) about how LX is completely swamped on its NYC-ZRH/NYC-GVA routes. They were saying that LX lacks the planes to expand service significantly, with which I agree, but they also commented that there are no fitting aircraft on the market at the moment with which LX could bolster its fleet with. That is where I disagree. Why not finally transfer those two 332's from LH, knowing that they are oddballs in the LH fleet anyway. As far as I know, they fit the LX fleet with engine type (P&W), etc. They would just need the LX interior, and voila, instant fleet expansion! This way, LX could expand its EWR-ZRH flight currently contracted to Privat Air back to a full service flight, with oodles of Business class, if they so desired.

I remember that such an option has been discussed in the past, and generally thrown out due to the fact that the airline was still not on its feet. Now, as part of the LH group, things are headed up, including the European business side. So, what are they waiting for?

I also remember that LH at one point spoke of the possibility of two A343's for SWISS, as long as LX performed (kind of like candy for the naughty child, after it learned its lesson). It's been very quiet on this front...

Potentially a less orthodox solution, would it make any sense for LX to invest in a larger airframe? I would consider maybe four A340-600's to cover the NYC and potentially a Hong Kong flight. Pretty significant commonality would exist with the current A343's, so costs should not be that much of a problem.

Why is Swiss so afraid of the larger airframes? Its predecessor flew 747's, DC-10's, and MD-11's. And there is no shortage of pilots in Switzerland that wouldn't pilot those jumbo jets in a heartbeat.

German Only (sorry):
http://a1927.v9943d.c9943.g.vr.akama...?start=0:00:00.000&end=0:26:43.768

Adrian

42 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJFK998 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8902 times:

Swiss should consider a larger airframe and the whole idea of there not being a suitable aircraft on the market to use for its JFK routes is ridiculous. If they want to expand their JFK service and they want to stick to their Airbus', they should consider the A340-600 possibly for their JFK routes. However, I do not see that happening anytime soon. For now, I think the only solution for Swiss would be to either lease some A332s/A333s or A343s or to get their own from Airbus or maybe even Lufthansa just like Ab1247 said..

User currently offlineChiGB1973 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1619 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 8880 times:

With StarAlliance and their association/ownership or LH, their overcapacity is a misnomer. They would be automatically booked on a StarAlliance or LH flight if the system is working right.

It is not a problem unless this is not the case. I feel certain it is. There is not a need to transfer planes. They are at capacity, they are making money, LH and StarAlliance picking up the pieces.

Great going Swiss, keep up the good work!

M


User currently offlineILOVEA340 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 2100 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 8833 times:

I would love to see them pick up about four of the A340-600HGW's that it looks like Emirates will pass on for those NYC routes.

User currently offlineCRGsFuture From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 536 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 8761 times:

Thanks 340, that was what I was going to say.


Flying you to your destination; your girlfriend to her dreams.
User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5569 posts, RR: 35
Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 8671 times:

I saw the same TV broadcast on SF DRS "10vor10" and was also wondering about the statement, that it would not be possible to find proper aircrafts Swiss is looking for. I agree a 340-600 would perfectly fit on Swiss' NYC route. On TV they told that the flights are always booked out, specifically the high yield seats in C and F class. They also interviewed two famous F class passengers: Jeanne-Claude and Christo, the two artists (known for their Central Park performance).

[Edited 2006-03-23 04:48:53]

User currently offlineFLYYUL From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 5010 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 8642 times:

I suspect the capacity squeeze is in the summer only.

Swiss, like everyother airline, needs to make money 12 months of the year on their transatlantic routes. So incremental airplanes need to be justified on a year-round basis... there is but a handful of routes that Swiss could improve, given their new partnership with Lufthansa.

Furthermore, routes such as BOS/YUL-ZRH go less than daily in the winter, due to lower yields despite increase F/J demand.

If the demand is really lacking on JFK-GVA/ZRH, then they can piece the aircraft from the NOOP days from ORD/YUL/LAX/ORD etc and fit them to fill in the gap on JFK-ZRH.. but we dont see this happening.


User currently offlineFLYYUL From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 5010 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 8629 times:

A340-600 makes no sense on a trans-atlantic route... its a high-unit cost airplane. It makes sense on longer-haul routes, and as such we see Lufthansa use this aircraft in that manner (i.e. SFO-MUC, FRA-BKK, FRA-KIX, etc)

From a pure trans-atlantic perspective year-round perspective, the A330 is the best you will get, and this is why Swiss has a good model with these airplanes.


User currently offlineCV990 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 8443 times:

Hi!

I think SWISS is going in the right way. First of all they had to come back strong and clear all the dust after the colapse of Swissair. I still remember during 2003 all those topics saying that SWISS would close, etc. etc. etc. Now that we see SWISS going well the issue of the fleet is...a no issue. I think SWISS have one of the neatest fleets around...maybe the only "outsider" the BAe RJ's but if they like the plane what can we do??? The Airbus narrow and wide body fleet it's great and the only thing I could see comming maybe in 2 or 3 years would be a COMPLETE return of the A340/A330's ( this from 2015 on of course...) and the adoption of A350....but that's only my point of view. At this moment if SWISS needs more capacity I'm sure they can get either 2nd. hand or brand new A330's!
Regards


User currently offlineFlying-Tiger From Germany, joined Aug 1999, 4166 posts, RR: 36
Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 8407 times:

That's exactly why they are getting on LH A300-600 over the summer period... to free up one A330-200 currently used on Africa routes to be then employed on Swiss-NYC routes.

Guys, Swissair was broke because they had too much capacity and had to dump it into the market - that's nothing LH will tolerate, for them Swiss has to be a profitable unit as every unit in the group.



Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
User currently offlineJohnnybgoode From Germany, joined Jan 2001, 2187 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 8241 times:

Quoting Ab1247 (Thread starter):
Why is Swiss so afraid of the larger airframes? Its predecessor flew 747's, DC-10's, and MD-11's.

yes, and the predecessor went down badly!
weren't the 743s in the SR fleet Combi aircraft? they would have had lower capacity then, compared to standard 743s.

Quoting Ab1247 (Thread starter):
Why not finally transfer those two 332's from LH, knowing that they are oddballs in the LH fleet anyway.

quite right that they're oddballs, but LH need them for themselves.

at one point, there were 2-3 ex SN and ex LH A332s parked at CGN which were believed to be heading to LX. also, they were rumored to go to Bluewings, but i believe they will be with a government soon. there's been lots of speculation, and I don't recall all the details anymore.

Quoting FLYYUL (Reply 7):
A340-600 makes no sense on a trans-atlantic route... its a high-unit cost airplane.

please explain to me, how you consider the A346s to be a higher unit-cost aircraft than LX's A343s (I take it this is implied by your statement)? granted, the A346s is a bit heavier and especially on short-haul routes would have worse economics than an A343. Nonetheless, the typical transatlantic route will surely provide for an A346 to operate viably, given that the loads are alright. bottom line: if LX can operate an A343 profitably to JFK, they probably can do it with an A346.

the question now is, are there in general enough routes with a load requiring an A346? it would not make sense to get an odd number of A346s for just a route or two, especially if this route would only have loads high enough half of the year.
so my humble opinion is that LX should keep away from larger aircraft. perhaps A333s would make sense downroad?



If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 30
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 8098 times:

Quoting Johnnybgoode (Reply 10):
weren't the 743s in the SR fleet Combi aircraft? they would have had lower capacity then, compared to standard 743s.

They had both, combi versions (HB-IGC, HB-IGD and HB-IGG) and full pax versions (HB-IGE, HB-IGF) side by side.

Quoting Johnnybgoode (Reply 10):
at one point, there were 2-3 ex SN and ex LH A332s parked at CGN which were believed to be heading to LX. also, they were rumored to go to Bluewings, but i believe they will be with a government soon. there's been lots of speculation, and I don't recall all the details anymore.

I guess, you mean those A332, which were first parked at CGN, then at ZRH. They go to TAP, as far as I know.

Quoting Johnnybgoode (Reply 10):
the question now is, are there in general enough routes with a load requiring an A346? it would not make sense to get an odd number of A346s for just a route or two, especially if this route would only have loads high enough half of the year.

Exactly! Add to that the increased costs of operating a new small subfleet, instead of sticking with the two fleets they have (A332, A343)

Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineStarGoldLHR From Heard and McDonald Islands, joined Feb 2004, 1529 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7978 times:

Quoting Ab1247 (Thread starter):
Why is Swiss so afraid of the larger airframes? Its predecessor flew 747's, DC-10's, and MD-11's. And there is no shortage of pilots in Switzerland that wouldn't pilot those jumbo jets in a heartbeat.

Maybe its because they learnt their lessons from last time, not every country in europe can be a major long haul carrier.. if they did it'd end up just like the US with over capacity and bankrupt airlines.



So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
User currently offlineCV990 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7946 times:

Hi!

Yesssssss, those 3 A330-200's that used to be parked at CGN are now "in TAP hands"...we got the first one already (CS-TOF) and we will get the 2nd. until the end of this week and the last one...well...maybe in April! TAP is FLYING CS-TOF DAILY LIS/ORY/LIS/FOR/LIS...and I tell you, that plane looks awesome in TAP livery!
Regads


User currently offlineHBIHLtoEZE From Switzerland, joined Aug 2004, 282 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7889 times:

SR's demise had probably more to do with their hunter policy than their choice of aircraft...

In the NZZ of last Saturday it was reported that LH might give them additional planes (the referred to them as A340 - sp probably A340-300s) when the new general contract is negotiated with the pilots (more working hours desired).

Until then the only 'new' bird is that one:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sören Klinger



- a novelty, by the way, SR and its successor have now operated all Airbus family aircraft (as the 380 is not yet in service  fight  Wink



Our battered suitcases were piled on the sidewalk again; we had longer ways to go. But no matter, the road is life.
User currently offlineFLYYUL From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 5010 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7797 times:

The A340 is a higher-unit cost airplane than the A330.. that is a given. And given that the A340-600 has underachieved in the marketplace vs. the 777-300 we can see the large reason for the differential.

We do not see Swiss operating A340's on Trans-atlantic other than LAX and JFK 2/7 but that is due to aircraft rotation anyway. There is a logical reason for this, and most of it revolves around cost efficienct aircraft on medium stage lengths.


User currently offlineQantas744ER From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1296 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7680 times:

Quoting HBIHLtoEZE (Reply 14):
- a novelty, by the way, SR and its successor have now operated all Airbus family aircraft (as the 380 is not yet in service    

Sorry but your wrong they have never flown the A318...



Happiness is V1 in Lagos
User currently offlineJohnnybgoode From Germany, joined Jan 2001, 2187 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7618 times:

Quoting FLYYUL (Reply 15):
The A340 is a higher-unit cost airplane than the A330..

the A343 has likely higher unit costs than the A332s.
In your initial post, however, you referred to A346 as high-unit cost planes, whereas it is quite a safe bet to say the A346s have lower unit costs than an A332s due to its increased capacity (in relation to marginally higher operating costs due to higher weight). It certainly has higher total operating costs but that's a whole other story.

But I agree, A332 beats A343, as long as its the right mission for the A332.

Quoting FLYYUL (Reply 15):
And given that the A340-600 has underachieved in the marketplace vs. the 777-300 we can see the large reason for the differential.

Sorry, but I fail to recognize how that affects the unit costs of an A343.

rgds
daniel



If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
User currently offlineHBIHLtoEZE From Switzerland, joined Aug 2004, 282 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7374 times:

Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 16):
Sorry but your wrong they have never flown the A318...

well, yeah my formulation was wrong: they will have operated all families of Airbus, not every Airbii type.


Cheers



Our battered suitcases were piled on the sidewalk again; we had longer ways to go. But no matter, the road is life.
User currently offlineFLYYUL From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 5010 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7345 times:

The point of my original post, was to correct the going assumption that the A340-600 would be a good aircraft for Swiss. Given that Swiss does not have privilege to the type of network flows that Lufthansa has... and the mere fact that Lufthansa is drawing from MUCH larger market sizes, Swiss would have a difficult time justifying enough frames to make the fleet efficient. Furthermore, I doubt that Swiss has many market in the network that can support the A346 on a 12-month basis.

Higher unit cost as a reference to fuel burn. With all due respect, the A340-600 fuel burn per seat is at best on par with the A343. Given that the A330-200/300 model is the preferred trans-atlantic airplane, we can not prove that the A346 has better unit costs than the 332. If this indeed was the case, then A346 would have been much more popular.

To suggest that the 346 would provide better unit costs than the A330-200, would then imply that the A340-600 as the preferred aircraft for high volume trans-atlantic routes. If this is the case, then we would see higher utilization of this aircraft across the atlantic by established carriers.

I then tried to demonstrate the A346's high-unit cost reputation, by comparing with the a competitive model. When comparing the A346 vs the 773, given the comparative sales of both models in the marketplace, it is clearly easy to see that the unit cost of a 773 vs 346 is in favor of the 773.


User currently offlineAb1247 From Switzerland, joined Mar 2005, 27 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7132 times:

Quoting HBIHLtoEZE (Reply 14):
SR's demise had probably more to do with their hunter policy than their choice of aircraft...

Thank you for pointing this out! I was just about to make this comment. SR's demise had little to do with its operations, but much with its failed "let's buy a large non-controlling share of a dozen decrepid airlines" strategy. SR had overcapacity at the time of bankruptcy , but nothing out of the ordinary for the airline market at that time.

As far as capacity goes, Swiss is well-booked on their NYC flights, even in the winter. Full planes, relatively low fares in Jan/Feb, but I would say, above the profit line. They are currently flying 85% seat-load factor on all routes, and as far as I have seen on the NYC flights, full to last seat at all times of the year (including C & F classes). LX has an incredibly large business customer base on its North American flights, which flows more steadily throughout the year.

I agree that the 346 would be a far throw for just one market point, just an incredibly tempting thought.

I like the idea of long-term strategy pointing towards the A350 in the long run. Their widebodies are pretty young at the moment, so this would be at least 10 years into the future, as pointed out by CV990. But right now, they need planes, so A332's it is! Where from, is another question...


User currently offlineFLYYUL From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 5010 posts, RR: 51
Reply 21, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7018 times:

But where would Swiss expand to?

Perhaps introduction of EWR-ZRH.. while rumours suggest that LAX-ZRH is unprofitable.


User currently offlineJosh12815 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6692 times:

Maybe if they switched to Boeing they may have a better Solution to the problem, Such as the 777-240LR or some 744's..

User currently offlineBjornstrom From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 329 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6579 times:

I did ZRH-DAR a week ago on a 332 and the crew informed me that this plane is flying ZRH-NYC (not sure about JFK/EWR) this summer with Hapag-Lloyd taking of the DAR-route.

I was impressed with the service and food in business class - only the seats and IFE was inferior to leaders within Star Alliance.



Eurobonus Gold | BMI Gold | http://my.flightmemory.com/bjornstrom/
User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5569 posts, RR: 35
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6496 times:

Quoting Bjornstrom (Reply 23):
I was impressed with the service and food in business class - only the seats and IFE was inferior to leaders within Star Alliance.

Yes, the 332 have still the old business class seats. The 343 have new angled lie flat seats like many other airlines.


25 Post contains images FLYYUL : "777-240LR or some 744's" -More high unit cost airplanes
26 Calvin99 : why would they need an aircraft with the range of 777-200LR and the capacity of 744 while most ppl here already suggesting that they can hardly fill
27 FLYYUL : "hardly fill an A346??" -Any airline can fill the A346, but at the question becomes at what price?
28 RootsAir : It would really be amazing if Swiss used the 343 from GVA to JFK. Then again it wuld be great to see another US carrier use GVA-JFK, such as CO does w
29 ChrisZRH : there are some routes which are not profitable for sure.., like any other airline has too. i remember AOM had routes with loads of 100%, but they had
30 ZRH : Actually on this TV broadcast on "10vor10" they said that the F and C class to JFK are always full and because of this they make profit on this route
31 Post contains links Johnnybgoode : FLYYUL, first of all, I fully agree with your entire first paragraph of your reply #19. but still... I really don't wanna be annoying or offending, an
32 Post contains links and images Buckieboy : An obvious place in my opinion, with the types of planes mentioned in this thread would be to go back to Shanghai: View Large View MediumPhoto ©
33 ZRH : Yes, SR flew to PEK for a long time. Long before they introduced their PVG route.
34 Post contains images DeltaWings : LAX-ZRH would be good with the A346 The loads always seem to be great
35 Runway23 : And from the latest news those angled "lie" (rather slip down) seats are to be replaced with new ones (on A343s no news about 332s). There have been
36 Johnnybgoode : Are you sure? I highly doubt it as whenever LH people are asked about LX they say it will remain as a high-quality, top-notch carrier. Given the heal
37 ZRH : I agree. On some routes they make most money with F class and on some not. For this not all 332 have F.
38 Post contains links and images Ab1247 : Yes, LX has been toying with the idea of getting rid of F class for a while now. A part of their 332's are already C/Y only. LX seems to be doing some
39 IberiaA319 : The schedules loaded on Amadeus already show Hapag Lloyd's Airbus 300 operating different LX African routes for the next summer like SSG, DLA, NBO or
40 HBIHLtoEZE : Yes, my first reaction was rather a negative surprise. However, after thinking about the A300 (and the fact that it is going to be operated by Hapag)
41 Knightsofmalta : SR did fly to both PEK and SHA. With SR going bancrupt, the SHA flights stopped but PEK remained on the LX schedule for about a year or so. LX holds
42 Daron4000 : Well from Flyertalk, some news about Swiss includes the fact that Swiss is testing a new, flat seat for C to first be implemented on their A330's, whi
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...
How Are AA Doing On Their New Irish Routes? posted Sun May 29 2005 13:12:47 by EI321
How Will HP Do On Their New LAX Routes. posted Thu Mar 18 2004 18:53:41 by Socalatc
Info On Aserca's New US Routes? posted Sat Oct 20 2001 21:04:23 by MAH4546
China Airlines' First Class On Its New A343! (Pic) posted Sun Apr 29 2001 05:35:04 by Wolfy
NY Times Article On Plane Spotting In New York posted Sun Aug 10 2003 00:22:38 by JBLUA320
Long-term Expansion Of Airports In New York City? posted Mon Oct 23 2006 05:47:53 by CoolGuy
Heads Up At Bradley BDL - Brand New BBJ On Its Way posted Mon Oct 9 2006 18:02:18 by RobK
JetBlue's Success On New E190 Routes posted Sun Aug 13 2006 16:11:20 by JetBluefan1
Delta JetSet Summer In New York (Tonight) posted Tue Jun 13 2006 20:19:41 by Alitalia744
Spotting Article In The New York Times posted Sun Jun 11 2006 14:03:37 by BigPhilNYC