Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Could The A318 PW6000 Be A Good Workhorse For SAS?  
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2754 posts, RR: 4
Posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8551 times:

Now before you start the flaming. Let me state that I know the chances are slim, but I have been thinking a bit about this for a while. SAS needs to cut capacity. SAS has a good working horse in the MD-80. But it has about 145 seats. If they took in the A318 as a replacement airplane they would reduce seating capacity with 20%. The problem with the 737-600 that SAS currently has is that the CFM56 engines are not optimiced for the short hops high cycle routes that makes up allot of SAS network. With the PW6000 they have an engine that is optimized for the short hops in the SAS network. For SAS this means taking out allot of seat, while maintaining the frequencies. For the customer it will be a huge comfort upgrade compared to the MD-80 that they currently uses. I am sure SAS would get a very good price from both Airbus as well as P&W. Just a thought. What do you think?

Edit: According to a source here on Airliners the A318 with PW6000 uses as little fuel as the 717 on a 500Nm flight.



[Edited 2009-02-06 00:31:23]


Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3423 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8520 times:

The 318 has the same problem as the 737-600, its too heavy and the CASM is to high. There is a reason why the 318 has proven to be such a unpopular aircraft among the airlines.

SAS Danmark (or soon to be SAS' CPH base) has solved this problem with their new CRJ-900 to be used on thin routes or routes that requires high frequencies, while flights/routes that requires larger aircrafts get the MD-80 or 319 and those needing even more capacity gets the 321.


User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3397 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8511 times:

Interesting proposal - I'm guessing that no decisions will be made until any possible take-over / merger activity is concluded.

Personally I'd love some more "baby-bus" sales but we'll have to see.


User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7078 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8455 times:

I think they are getting some more CRJs to fill that niche, I see higher chances for the EJet or CSeries then for the A318.
I really hope some European airline would settle for the MRJ.
Acording to a statement from Nico Buchholz they are/were involved in planning the MRJ and Superjet, but he also said that this does not mean they will order them.
Still the MRJ looks great at least it does not look like a completely EJet, A320 clone and I would be more than pleased to see them here in Europe, too.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 4, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8437 times:



Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
Edit: According to a source here on Airliners the A318 with PW6000 uses as little fuel as the 717 on a 500Nm flight.

As others mentioned, CRJ's are a much better option from a cost point of view. Furthermore, the 717 was not a big seller either, so even if the a318 compares favourably to the 717, it's still no match for the CR9 and soon the CR10 (again, from a cost point of view, pax will no doubt rather see the a318/736/717).

Quoting Columba (Reply 3):
Still the MRJ looks great at least it does not look like a completely EJet, A320 clone and I would be more than pleased to see them here in Europe, too.

So would I, but from what I understand, the MRJ is quite heavy. But I too hope for some nice sales for this aircraft.



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4401 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8425 times:

Is the passenger willing to pay 20€ more per ticket for a comfortable baby bus flight than for a sardine can CRJ?

User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2754 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8394 times:



Quoting Someone83 (Reply 1):
SAS Danmark (or soon to be SAS' CPH base) has solved this problem with their new CRJ-900 to be used on thin routes or routes that requires high frequencies, while flights/routes that requires larger aircrafts get the MD-80 or 319 and those needing even more capacity gets the 321.

But now they are placing 14 of them on the ground. wouldn't it be better to keep the frequencies, but with fewer seats? The A318 is still larger than the CRJ-900. IMO they complement each other  Smile

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 1):
The 318 has the same problem as the 737-600, its too heavy and the CASM is to high.

If the fuel burn is as low as on the 717 the CASM would not be far behind the 738 on short routes.

Quoting Columba (Reply 3):
I think they are getting some more CRJs to fill that niche, I see higher chances for the EJet or CSeries then for the A318.

IMO the A318 and CRJ complement each other. Look at Air France.

Quoting Kappel (Reply 4):
Furthermore, the 717 was not a big seller either, so even if the a318 compares favourably to the 717, it's still no match for the CR9 and soon the CR10 (again, from a cost point of view, pax will no doubt rather see the a318/736/717).

Valid point Kappel!



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2754 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8376 times:



Quoting Burkhard (Reply 5):
Is the passenger willing to pay 20€ more per ticket for a comfortable baby bus flight than for a sardine can CRJ?

On some routes they might. The routes with a large number of premium passengers. How much higher is the CASM on the A318 compared to the CRJ? It they can get them cheap, I know P&W might give them a very favorable deal, and the plane and engines are very reliable. And they could use the plane to LCY.



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineLH4116 From Sweden, joined Aug 2007, 1714 posts, RR: 18
Reply 8, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8376 times:

They could use the A318 for the LCY route? Since there's a big demand of business traffic, so the A318 will have a larger amount of seats. On the other hand, the A318 can take muck more cargo than the CRJ, so is that a good source of profit for them?

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
I am sure SAS would get a very good price from both Airbus as well as P&W. Just a thought. What do you think?

Didn't they also get that on the B736, which had proved to be very uneconomical.



SAS Plus is Business Class made faux!
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2754 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8352 times:



Quoting LH4116 (Reply 8):
They could use the A318 for the LCY route?

Yes, the A318 is approved for steep approach on LCY.



Quoting LH4116 (Reply 8):
On the other hand, the A318 can take muck more cargo than the CRJ, so is that a good source of profit for them?

On some routes it might. Although the cargo door i smaller on the A318 compared to the A320.

Quoting LH4116 (Reply 8):
Didn't they also get that on the B736, which had proved to be very uneconomical.

They did get them very very cheap. But the CFM56 engine is not optimized for as short hops.The PW6000 will use less fuel on short sectors.

http://www.airbus.com/store/photolibrary/AIRCRAFT/AIRBUS/A320/att00000814/media_object_image_lowres_709X473_A318_D.jpg



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2754 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8344 times:

http://www.airbus.com/store/photolibrary/AIRCRAFT/AIRBUS/A320/att00000815/media_object_image_lowres_709X473_A318_G.jpg

Just to make the thread look good  Silly All pictures are from www.airbus.com



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7078 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8344 times:



Quoting OyKIE (Reply 6):
IMO the A318 and CRJ complement each other. Look at Air France.

I don´t know but AF seems to be the only airline that has chosen this way other airlines have not shown any interest in the A318 at all, even Lufthansa that has operated nearly every Airbus aircraft ever produced.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineDALCE From Netherlands, joined Feb 2007, 1705 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 8250 times:

I think SK should not add another (sub)type to the fleet, they already operate too many types of aircraft in their European/Regional fleet.


flown: F50,F70,CR1,CR2,CR9,E75,143,AR8,AR1,733,735,736,73G,738,753,744,77W,319,320,321,333,AB6.
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2754 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 8201 times:



Quoting Columba (Reply 11):
I don´t know but AF seems to be the only airline that has chosen this way other airlines have not shown any interest in the A318 at all, even Lufthansa that has operated nearly every Airbus aircraft ever produced.

Good point, but if they would reduce seats on the short haul routes the story might have been different?

Quoting DALCE (Reply 12):
I think SK should not add another (sub)type to the fleet, they already operate too many types of aircraft in their European/Regional fleet.

Of course my idea is to replace both the MD-80 and MD-87 with the A318 in order to reduce the number of eats. The CRJ900 has only 88 seats, so that would have been a massive reduction. Even the CRJ1000 has only 100 seats. That would shrink the SAS business too much. The A319 and A321 is already in the fleet.



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7078 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 8129 times:



Quoting OyKIE (Reply 13):
Good point, but if they would reduce seats on the short haul routes the story might have been different?

LH has said several times that they are not interested in the A318 as it is too heavy and it would not bring any benefits, they wanted the 717-300 to replace the 737-500 but Boeing was not interested, they have chosen the CSeries and E195 to fill the segment around 100 seats.

I am very sure that the only orders the A318 will get over the next few years are business jets only -and even here it is difficult. Airbus was very sure to win the German Air Force for some A318s next to their A319 ACJs but they have chosen the Bombardier Global 500 instead.

The A318 is a niche aircraft and the niche will get smaller with the CSeries on the horizon and the E195 winning major airlines. The biggest blow for Airbus might have been loosing Jetblue to Embraer.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2754 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 8088 times:



Quoting Columba (Reply 14):
The A318 is a niche aircraft and the niche will get smaller with the CSeries on the horizon and the E195 winning major airlines.

The Cseries would fit perfect in the SAS route structure. Now my idea was that SAS needs a change now. Not in 2013/14. Instead of reducing frequencies, they should reduce the plane size.



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 8060 times:



Quoting Columba (Reply 11):
I don´t know but AF seems to be the only airline that has chosen this way other airlines have not shown any interest in the A318 at all, even Lufthansa that has operated nearly every Airbus aircraft ever produced.

BA originally ordered A318s to replace their 735s, but after the PW6000 delay, shifted their order to A319s I think.
Now, of course, they've ordered transatlantic A318s!



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineCRJ900 From Norway, joined Jun 2004, 2205 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 8046 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
The problem with the 737-600 that SAS currently has is that the CFM56 engines are not optimiced for the short hops high cycle routes that makes up allot of SAS network. With the PW6000 they have an engine that is optimized for the short hops in the SAS network.

I thought SAS use their aircraft on all routes in the system, so that the B736 also fly longer routes to Southern Europe...? Braathens flew their B735s nonstop to the Canary islands - do SAS still fly them there?

Fellow A.nutter Lamox wrote in another thread that the CRJ900 will be the longer range version (LR) so that the aircraft can serve most destinations in Europe from CPH in addition to those short hops in Scandinavia.

How does the PW6000 perform on longer flights, then? A 126-129-seat A318 flying OSL-LPA might not be more expensive than a 15-year-old B735 with 125 seats...?



Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2754 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 7991 times:



Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 16):
BA originally ordered A318s to replace their 735s, but after the PW6000 delay, shifted their order to A319s I think.
Now, of course, they've ordered transatlantic A318s!

Will the A318 for BA have the PW6000 engine?

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 17):
Fellow A.nutter Lamox wrote in another thread that the CRJ900 will be the longer range version (LR) so that the aircraft can serve most destinations in Europe from CPH in addition to those short hops in Scandinavia.

I remember he said that. Me for one hope that SAS will fulfill the CRJ900 options and order some more. There are allot of potential routes for that airplane.  Silly

And it would supplement the A318 very well  Smile

I wonder how the fuel economy compare between the 736 and the CRJ900. SAS must have the answer by now.



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13259 posts, RR: 100
Reply 19, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 7748 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
SAS has a good working horse in the MD-80. But it has about 145 seats. If they took in the A318 as a replacement airplane they would reduce seating capacity with 20%.

As much as I hate to recommend against Pratt's sole single isle engine...

For SAS, the CRJ-900 and E190/E195 make far more sense as a replacement.

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 1):
The 318 has the same problem as the 737-600, its too heavy and the CASM is to high. There is a reason why the 318 has proven to be such a unpopular aircraft among the airlines.

 checkmark  Its sole 'standout' route is all J trans-Atlantic.  Sad

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 1):
SAS Danmark (or soon to be SAS' CPH base) has solved this problem with their new CRJ-900 to be used on thin routes or routes that requires high frequencies,

 checkmark  Although from a customer perspective, I would like to see E-jets.

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 18):
Will the A318 for BA have the PW6000 engine?

No  cry 

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 17):
A 126-129-seat A318 flying OSL-LPA might not be more expensive than a 15-year-old B735 with 125 seats...?

On longer routes, the PW6000 does well. But it cannot overcome the A318's weight.
I love engines, but no engine can overcome too much excess weight nor a poor wing (e.g., too high of a wing loading).

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2754 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 7399 times:



Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 19):
As much as I hate to recommend against Pratt's sole single isle engine...

For SAS, the CRJ-900 and E190/E195 make far more sense as a replacement.

When it comes from you I see that my idea is dead on arrival.  Silly Thank you for replying Lightsaber! I now remember why you are on my RR list  Smile

Even if my idea was based on the A318 being the perfect seat number, I still believe it would be a good strategy for SAS to buy smaller planes than the MD-80 and replace them fast. That way they can keep the current frequencies or increasing them. Rather than cutting down on frequencies, they should buy smaller like JAL does. IIRC they have ordered the E170 as a MD-80 replacement. Would an order for CRJ900/1000 combined with ordering some 73G or A319 makes some sense from SAS?

Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 19):
Although from a customer perspective, I would like to see E-jets.

Sure, but according to those who I have talked with the new SAS CRJ900 Next Gen's are quite comfortable. But my dad complained about bending his neck while walking through the aisle. I don't know how that would compare to the E-jets though.



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineTheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3630 posts, RR: 29
Reply 21, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6273 times:

Just let them add another type (and new engine) to the narrowbody-fleet. Would really fit SAS  Wink

User currently offlineB747forever From Sweden, joined May 2007, 17079 posts, RR: 10
Reply 22, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5976 times:

It is a really nice idea, but I highly doubt it will happen. SAS has to many problems right now to add yet another type. The CRJ900 will fit them perfect. If they would need anything bigger, their is always the CRJ1000


Work Hard, Fly Right
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13259 posts, RR: 100
Reply 23, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5383 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting OyKIE (Reply 20):
I still believe it would be a good strategy for SAS to buy smaller planes than the MD-80 and replace them fast. That way they can keep the current frequencies or increasing them.

I 100% agree. But as long as the CASM, aircraft resale (or lease rates), and other factors make sense.

I do thank you for putting me on your RU list, but also do realize I don't mind being corrected! That's how I learn on a.net.

As excited as I have been about the PW6000... Its 'market window' is tiny now.  Sad Business jets and trans-Atlantic all J are the only two markets that make sense to me in 2009. Sigh... It really is a neat engine. But that doesn't overcome economics.

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 20):
But my dad complained about bending his neck while walking through the aisle. I don't know how that would compare to the E-jets though.

 rotfl  I have... issues with CRJ's. I wish someone would fly more E-jet's out West! (I've yet to try one, but my friends like them.)

Oh... one correction. The A318 has a fine wing. It has too much weight. I was talking about, in general, a good engine cannot overcome a poor wing design (e.g., too high of wing loading on the MD-90 trying to nurse a design one stretch too many...).

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineDEVILFISH From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4879 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4757 times:



Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 23):
Business jets and trans-Atlantic all J are the only two markets that make sense to me in 2009.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andre Oferta



Quoting Lightsaber (Reply 23):
Oh... one correction. The A318 has a fine wing. It has too much weight.

I wonder if Airbus would, in the near future, do a structural redesign of the A318's wing and fuselage (to shed as much weight as possible, while keeping its cross section and optimizing aerodynamics) and then hang GTFs on it, to maintain their presence in the 100-seat market (if they have a desire to do so)? I think this could be a quick, economical development approach. It would also be a good pioneering application for a higher-thrust geared turbofan. They might be reserving CFRP or a combination for their next generation A320.



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
25 OyKIE : Of course the CASM and resale value is something to calculate in when buying planes. With the DC-9-41 SAS had a plane that fitted perfectly in their
26 DEVILFISH : That doesn't seem like it would do the trick. They would have to look at the plane's entire structural frame and calculate the stresses on each membe
27 Alessandro : Exactly my opinion, especially since the A318 is a proven airframe, MRJ isn´t flying yet the C1000-series isn´t certified yet.
28 Post contains images Andaman : Airbus tried to sell A318 to AY also before E170/190 were chosen. I can understand why the E-jets but I still like the sympathetic look of A318. A318
29 DocLightning : Yes, not optimized, but they already have them. Makes no sense to buy a whole new type for that.
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...
Could CMH Be A Good Hub For Airtran? posted Sat Dec 6 2003 23:15:18 by 727LOVER
Could The Y1 Offering Be A New Sonic Cruiser posted Tue Jan 8 2008 21:28:31 by CygnusChicago
Could The 747-800 Be The Last Of The 747 Series? posted Sat Jan 7 2006 17:24:21 by JAM747
Could The 757 Ever Be A Tanker? posted Fri Nov 21 2003 00:16:50 by GalvanAir777
Could The A380 Still Be A Failure? posted Thu May 29 2003 05:35:20 by United777
PW6000 Engines To Be Offered On The A318 Elite. posted Tue Jan 24 2006 19:38:43 by WINGS
Will The A318 Be Certified For London City Airport posted Fri Sep 9 2005 22:08:19 by EI321
Will It Be Good For The Industry? posted Tue Jan 11 2005 05:43:21 by JohnBerg
Easyjet Could Be Getting A B747 For The Summer posted Tue May 25 2004 01:06:46 by 777ER
What Could Be A Dc-9 Replacement For NWA? posted Sun Sep 14 2008 16:28:30 by AndyDTWnwa7
Could The 757 Ever Be A Tanker? posted Fri Nov 21 2003 00:16:50 by GalvanAir777
Could The A380 Still Be A Failure? posted Thu May 29 2003 05:35:20 by United777
PW6000 Engines To Be Offered On The A318 Elite. posted Tue Jan 24 2006 19:38:43 by WINGS
Will The A318 Be Certified For London City Airport posted Fri Sep 9 2005 22:08:19 by EI321
Will It Be Good For The Industry? posted Tue Jan 11 2005 05:43:21 by JohnBerg
Easyjet Could Be Getting A B747 For The Summer posted Tue May 25 2004 01:06:46 by 777ER
What Could Be A Dc-9 Replacement For NWA? posted Sun Sep 14 2008 16:28:30 by AndyDTWnwa7