Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Emirates And Its Fleet  
User currently offlineFlyTUITravel From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 723 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4185 times:

Hi there,

Just another one of my questions...
How come Emirates, and also other carriers like Etihad and Qatar, use widebodies on their shorter routes like AUH/DXB/DOH - BEY/JED/RUH/AMM/BAH/MCT/SAH/THR? I would have thought these were the more thinner routes and generally carry lower passengers, but it seems they all use A330s on their thinner routes... Do they depend on cargo or could any airline do things like this?


FLYTUITRAVEL.

21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMIgAiR54 From Spain, joined Jun 2007, 1910 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4134 times:

not sure but cargo, very cheap fuel prize, and business and first class passenger must be the answer,

not everybody do that Qatar operates A320 in some of these routes.

IMO more frequencies with smaller planes would be a better option, but they like big planes,

Emirates has nearly 50 A380 and they are talking about 100 787 or 350 so maybe you will see them flying routes like JED, BAH or even AUH from DXB  Cool , what are they going to do with them???


User currently offlinePlaneHunter From Germany, joined Mar 2006, 6939 posts, RR: 77
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4103 times:

Quoting FlyTUITravel (Thread starter):
I would have thought these were the more thinner routes and generally carry lower passengers, but it seems they all use A330s on their thinner routes... Do they depend on cargo or could any airline do things like this?

Traffic rights and cargo are important reasons.

Quoting MIgAiR54 (Reply 1):
very cheap fuel prize

Just because there's a lot of oil in the Middle East it doesn't mean that airlines such as EK enjoy low fuel prices.

Quoting MIgAiR54 (Reply 1):
IMO more frequencies with smaller planes would be a better option, but they like big planes,

Emirates prefers adding frequencies with widebody equipment and you can be sure they know what they're doing. Anyone with doubts should check their profits.

Quoting MIgAiR54 (Reply 1):
what are they going to do with them???

Flying...


Here's an interesting article which can answer some questions (fuel costs, strategy, network etc):
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/busin...chive/2005/10/01/8359251/index.htm


PH



Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
User currently offlineImpacto From Canada, joined Mar 2007, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4097 times:

One reason might be because all of EK's flights are International and there might be a possibility of huge load factor connecting through Dubai. The UAE might also be too small for domestic flights, making it quite unnecessary to acquire narrow-bodied aircrafts. QR though operates the A319LR and some A320s.

There are many other airlines that fly short hops with wide-bodies e.g CX, SQ, TG etc.


User currently offlinePlaneHunter From Germany, joined Mar 2006, 6939 posts, RR: 77
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4097 times:

Quoting MIgAiR54 (Reply 1):
even AUH from DXB

The distance is only 71,9 miles.


PH



Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
User currently offlineOHLHD From Finland, joined Dec 2004, 3962 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4084 times:

Quoting FlyTUITravel (Thread starter):
How come Emirates,

They don´t have any narrow bodies  Smile

As for the others: These planes are full most of the times and aloso have a lot of space for cargo. Shifting cargo in these areas is very important.


User currently offlineEmirates029 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2007, 179 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3966 times:

Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 4):
The distance is only 71,9 miles.

There used to be flights between AUH and DXB before, not any more though..


User currently offlineMIgAiR54 From Spain, joined Jun 2007, 1910 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3923 times:

i know that emirates is doing very well, and they are very aggressive and successful, they know what they are doing of course, but not only emirates, IMO all the country is an example of management and huge infrastructures.

i know they have cheap fuel prizes. this is only part of their success, they have a wonderful product, new planes, very good service, non-stop innovation............... one of the best and improving.

flying i know flying, understood.


about AUH it was a joke.  banghead  sorry about that.


User currently offlinePlaneHunter From Germany, joined Mar 2006, 6939 posts, RR: 77
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3603 times:

Quoting Emirates029 (Reply 6):

There used to be flights between AUH and DXB before, not any more though..

Yes, but these flights continued to or originated at another destination. They have never flown just DXB-AUH-DXB.


PH



Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9229 posts, RR: 76
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3526 times:

Quoting MIgAiR54 (Reply 1):
very cheap fuel prize,

Jet fuel in the middle east is fairly expensive in terms of the world market, generally the jet fuel that is used in the middle east comes form Singapore.

The reason why I think they use wide bodies is they have gaps in their schedule, and the margin cost of operating them is small, and I guess this is another reason why they are looking at buying a fleet of ATR turboprops.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4865 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3271 times:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 9):
Jet fuel in the middle east is fairly expensive in terms of the world market, generally the jet fuel that is used in the middle east comes form Singapore.

Yeah coz the quality of the oil in the Middle East is actually crap compared to many other parts of the world... they just have a lot of it... high sulphur contents etc...
I wouldn't go so far to say that fuel prices are "fairly expensive"...more average... there are less fuel taxes etc there to balance out other factors which add to the price.



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineSkyyMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3256 times:

IIRC, I read recently where Etihad was looking at getting some 320's for gulf region flights. I'll say it for the 1,473rd time, EK is going to wake up one day and realize they have an enormously excessive amount of capacity on their hands and not enough pax to fill it. Flame me, go ahead, but it's going to happen sooner or later.

User currently offlineFlyingKangaroo From Australia, joined Apr 2004, 532 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3234 times:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 9):

The reason why I think they use wide bodies is they have gaps in their schedule, and the margin cost of operating them is small, and I guess this is another reason why they are looking at buying a fleet of ATR turboprops.

Exactly. Since EK, EY, QR, SQ and CX (even though they're not in the Middle East, they still can be used for my example) exclusivly operate international flights, primarily to long haul destinations, their fleets call for aircraft that can transport large numbers of passangers and cargo long distances. Since the the majority of the airline's flights are long haul, the costs of operating these large aircraft short distances outweighs the cost of purchasing a fleet of smaller aircraft to be used exclusively on these short haul routes.

flyingKangaroo



QANTAS-- The Spirit of Australia
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 26005 posts, RR: 22
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3197 times:

Quoting SkyyMaster (Reply 11):
IIRC, I read recently where Etihad was looking at getting some 320's for gulf region flights. I'll say it for the 1,473rd time, EK is going to wake up one day and realize they have an enormously excessive amount of capacity on their hands and not enough pax to fill it.

Gulf Air at one time also had nothing but widebodies and used them on short sectors. They added some A320s a few years ago for more efficient use on regional routes.


User currently offlinePlaneHunter From Germany, joined Mar 2006, 6939 posts, RR: 77
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3070 times:

Quoting SkyyMaster (Reply 11):
I'll say it for the 1,473rd time, EK is going to wake up one day and realize they have an enormously excessive amount of capacity on their hands and not enough pax to fill it. Flame me, go ahead, but it's going to happen sooner or later.

They have been very well able to fill their planes until now - so why should they have ordered any smaller aircraft?


PH



Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2829 posts, RR: 42
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3063 times:

Quoting PlaneHunter (Reply 14):
They have been very well able to fill their planes until now - so why should they have ordered any smaller aircraft?

To avoid what happened to Pan Am in the 70/80s. As soon as competition started flying the same routes, with greater frequency but smaller plane sizes, even Pan Am's most lucrative routes were kaput.

EK has never seen a large aircraft that they didn't order. (Jury still being out on the 748i). You can't just add capacity endlessly and expect that the market will always be there for the birds. Remember that EK has already committed to a huge build out even before the latest 10 frame additions.

EK seems to think that the law of gravity doesn't apply to then. But sooner or later fragmentation will kill their ability to maintain pricing control with large seat counts.


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25693 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3048 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 15):
As soon as competition started flying the same routes, with greater frequency but smaller plane sizes, even Pan Am's most lucrative routes were kaput.

I can promise you that on the Pacific routes, at least from Oz/NZ, that wasn't the problem with Pan Am.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2829 posts, RR: 42
Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3045 times:

Quoting Mariner (Reply 16):
I can promise you that on the Pacific routes, at least from Oz/NZ, that wasn't the problem with Pan Am.

My reference on that statement is from "Skygods"


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25693 posts, RR: 85
Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3034 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 17):
My reference on that statement is from "Skygods"

I can only reiterate my comment about Oz/NZ/Pacific. No one was flying anything smaller - American and Continental tried the DC-10's at some point, but both went away.

I can't remember what NWA used, but they were only there briefly as well.

And I think that for the longest time, Qantas only had 747's?

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2829 posts, RR: 42
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3029 times:

Quoting Mariner (Reply 18):

I am willing to grant that the Oz routes might be different, if for no other reason then geographical challenges. However, the point still stands that carriers came in and flooded Pan Am routes, and made it impossible to simultaneously fill the seats, and keep a decent margin on them.


User currently offlinePlaneHunter From Germany, joined Mar 2006, 6939 posts, RR: 77
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3025 times:

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 15):
To avoid what happened to Pan Am in the 70/80s. As soon as competition started flying the same routes, with greater frequency but smaller plane sizes, even Pan Am's most lucrative routes were kaput.

EK has always been in direct competition with European and Asian carriers and a few years ago QR and EY entered the market - but EK has expanded further and increased profits. PA's structure and network were different.

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 15):
EK has never seen a large aircraft that they didn't order. (Jury still being out on the 748i).

What do you mean with "large aircraft"? Widebodies?

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 15):
You can't just add capacity endlessly and expect that the market will always be there for the birds.

I don't think they are naive and don't realize the risks. But you can bet they have clauses in the contracts which other carriers don't...

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 15):
EK seems to think that the law of gravity doesn't apply to then.

Time to hire a "real" MBA?  Wink

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 15):
But sooner or later fragmentation will kill their ability to maintain pricing control with large seat counts.

EK will continue add secondary gateways to its network and offer even more connections throughout the world. In Germany alone, STR, CGN, TXL/SXF or NUE could be new destinations - which can't expect so many other long haul airlines anytime soon.


PH



Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25693 posts, RR: 85
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2978 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 19):
However, the point still stands that carriers came in and flooded Pan Am routes, and made it impossible to simultaneously fill the seats, and keep a decent margin on them.

That may be true, at least in part. But I think it ignores many of the other things that were happening at that time, and I don't think you can dump it on the big planes. Were they not flying A300's or A310's by the end?

Yet Qantas was profitable with all all 747 fleet. I never flew on anything other than a 747 with profitable Singapore.

While Mr. Gandt may have been there, I would not call his view of things entirely objective. I remember being told - with some force - by a Pan Am Captain why Qantas must fail and Pan Am can only succeed.

I would rather say that Pan Am was a woefully mis-managed company.

mariner



aeternum nauta
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...
Emirates Expanding Its Fleet Yet Again posted Fri Feb 21 2003 15:08:11 by N79969
Etihad Airways And Its Cargo Fleet posted Sun Dec 10 2006 05:06:32 by Werkur767
AA's MD-80 Fleet and its future, thoughts? posted Tue Jun 27 2006 00:48:34 by Thering
DL And The Future Of Its Fleet (Other Airlines Too) posted Sat Oct 1 2005 17:03:20 by DeltaGuy767
Britannia (nordic) And Its 757 Fleet. posted Fri Jun 14 2002 09:59:05 by Tg 747-300
KLM And Its European Fleet posted Tue Aug 14 2001 10:39:54 by YOERI1970
Emirates And Kosher Food--Issue Resolved? posted Fri Jun 1 2007 16:58:46 by RJpieces
AeroMexico To Reduce Its Fleet By 10 Frames! posted Sat May 12 2007 20:55:46 by Ghost77
Air Niugini Expands Its Fleet posted Fri Jan 26 2007 10:02:31 by AMSSFO
Emirates And Heraklion (HER) posted Tue Jan 16 2007 15:24:10 by 1981