Those are plans only... But in order to survive they need newer planes so it seems logical even if their choice of aircraft are peculiar as usual. They badly need LH expertise because they are still running into bad decisions in my opinion.
joost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3128 posts, RR: 4 Reply 6, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 17736 times:
Quoting Mortyman (Thread starter): How the hell is SAS going to be able to buy this many new aircraft ?
Bank loans? Manufacturer financing? Financial lease?
Quoting Navigator (Reply 3): But in order to survive they need newer planes so it seems logical even if their choice of aircraft are peculiar as usual.
What's so strange about them considering the C-series?
So far, one of the main issues why the C-series lacks interest, is the size of the aircraft in relation to scope clauses at many airlines, mainly North American. Especially when the difference in costs between mainline flying and regional flying is significant, the C-series becomes unattractive.
When the scope clause is at 100 seats (like at quite some airlines), it's not interesting to fly an aircraft with just over 100 seats. The CASM for a 110-seat CS100 might exceed that of a 99-seat E190, simply because the flight and cabin crew need to be paid more.
The CS100 is just on the edge for many airlines, the CS130 is clearly a mainline aircraft. But as the CS130 is the biggest so far, you're quite unable to have benefits from commonality.
In that respect, the combination of CRJ or E-jets, together with 737s or A320s seems more attractive: one fleet type for regional flying, one type for mainline flying.
Now, SK doesn't seem to have such a scope clause, considering that SK flies the CRJ900s themselves. When there is no sudden hike in wages, the C-series might actually be a very good aircraft to them.
Quoting Navigator (Reply 3): They badly need LH expertise because they are still running into bad decisions in my opinion.
You're refering to the airline who was the launch customer of this very same C-series, right?
If you have been reading their annual reports it says that they are very intersted in buying the Bombardier. This just firms up their annual reports. If SAS can get the same deal from Bombardier as Republic, then finance will not be a problem. SAS can commit, without any risks. IMO the Cseries will be a perfect fit for the SAS business modell. And finally a good DC-9 replacement.
SAS is in desperate need of simplifying their fleet. This order will help them achieve some of this. But it is quite a gamble for SAS to go for a plane that is not certified yet while desperatly needing to get down their number of airplantypes. SAS need to simplify NOW. Can they afford to wait for the new Cseries? It might be delayed if we look at other new airplane development. An airline in perfect health can afford to wait for new airplanes. Can SAS?
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
joost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3128 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 17490 times:
Quoting OyKIE (Reply 8): SAS is in desperate need of simplifying their fleet. This order will help them achieve some of this. But it is quite a gamble for SAS to go for a plane that is not certified yet while desperatly needing to get down their number of airplantypes. SAS need to simplify NOW
In what way does simplifying the fleet help SAS on the short term? Where do the benefits come from?
joost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3128 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 17184 times:
Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 10): How much re sale value do the existing aircraft have.
Last January, Allegiant bought 13 MD-82/83s and 5 MD-87s from SAS for a total of around $28.3 Million, so that makes about $1.57 Million per aircraft. Additionally, Allegiant expected to spend around $4 Million per aircraft to prepare them for service (I expect they were due for heavy maintenance). But second-hand value of such old air frames isn't particularily high.
garynor From Norway, joined Oct 2010, 35 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 16883 times:
Although some headscratching might be in place, this could be a good move by SAS. It's an excellent opportunity to start restructuring the fleet.
Would it be logical to get rid of the CRJs as well when fazing in the C-series? Keep the efficient turboprops (get more?) for the shorter/thinner routes, use the C-series on medium capacity routes and choose either the 737 or 320 (NEO) series for high capacity routes? Brings the short/medium haul fleet types down from 6 (?) to 3 (might be hard to find takers for the -600 though...)
joost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3128 posts, RR: 4 Reply 14, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 16503 times:
Quoting garynor (Reply 13): Would it be logical to get rid of the CRJs as well when fazing in the C-series?
Not at all, the CRJs are under 2 years old, and seat considerably fewer passengers.
Quoting garynor (Reply 13): Keep the efficient turboprops (get more?) for the shorter/thinner routes
SK don't fly any turboprops anymore since the Q400 troubles. Within the SAS group, only Wideroe still flies turboprops. I don't see SK to return to the turboprops anytime soon.
joost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3128 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 16338 times:
Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 12): Once again SK's fleet planning has me scratching my head...they drop two frame types but add another....too much aquavit I guess.
So that's one simplicication. What else should they do? The CRJ900 has 88 seats, the 736 has 123. The 73G and A319 have 141 seats.
What should they do between 88 and 141 seats? Order more 737-600s? Doesn't sound like too good an idea to me. It's quite a gap between the CRJ900 and the 737-700/A319.
For the 737-600s, they'll probably just fly them until either fuel or maintenance become to expensive, and then park them.
55 C-series aircraft won't be delivered all at one day, but such a delivery can be stretched over many years. By 2019, the first 737-600s are already 20 years old and can be replaced by C-series.
What is very interesting: will it be possible to cross-rate pilots on both CRJ900 and CS110/130?
JoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5045 posts, RR: 29 Reply 21, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 14458 times:
I am sure they are talking with BBD about the CSeries and on paper, it seems like a good fit. I wonder what kind of assurances Bombardier would have to give SK to get them to try another all new type.
windshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2309 posts, RR: 11 Reply 23, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 14343 times:
Quoting joost (Reply 22): and not due for replacement any time soon?
Both yes and no... I think they could review the A340s performance compared to other alternatives... Like something that has two engines instead of four.
But I was mostly asking because I would expect that they needed more heavies for expanding their offers on long haul destinations... Since they are not planning this expansion I guess, LH wish to take over that part of the service?
Boaz.
"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26723 posts, RR: 83 Reply 24, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 14200 times:
The CSeries makes more sense as a 737-500 and MD-82 replacement then getting more 737-600s from Boeing or adding the A318-100 from Airbus. I'm also interested to know how the CRJ-900 and CSeries cockpits are in terms of commonality.
Additional 73G or 738 models can be added to replace the 737-400s.
As for widebodies, a nice 10 frame 787-9 order to replace the A330-300s and A340-300s when they are ready for retirement would allow SK the flexibility to use the same plane on any route, which should make scheduling a bit easier.
25 davs5032: I had wondered the same thing. Does anyone have any information on this?
26 JoeCanuck: I have been looking around and I don't think there is very much commonality between the CSeries and CRJ's. CSeries; Courtesy Flight Global CRJ; Court
27 joost: And then, what? Spend money on replacing 9-year old frames, rather than replacing 20+ year old frames? Besides that, the A340 isn't that bad at all.
28 KiwiRob: SK only stopped flying Fokker 50's a couple of months ago, I was happy to see the back of it, the Widerø Q400 is much nicer and knocks a few miuntes
29 Lightbug: I am surprised that SK even considers this right now in the wake of trying to be a takeover target. Not sure how hard they have tried so far, but the
30 columba: SAS future fleet: CSeries A32xNEO 787-9 All sizes they need not dependent on one manufacturer ?
31 Lightbug: Is Wideroe flying the Q400 between these two destinations? I thought it may have been a Dash-8-300 with similar capacity to the F-50.
32 RoseFlyer: It would amaze me if they actually go for the C Series instead of A320/737. They already have a mixmatched fleet. Operating every narrowbody out there
33 JoeCanuck: I don't know if they would go for the E-jets since they seem to keep buying the competing CRJ's.
34 windshear: Yeah you are right... Who am I to throw in theories or thoughts on this forum... You're the expert here I guess. Boaz.
35 kiwiandrew: When I first saw the headline I thought "Where are SK going to find 55 different models that they can order 1 of each" , I think the comment someone
36 planemaker: Here is a list of their active NB fleet: Airbus A319-100 4 Airbus A321-200 8 Boeing 737-400 4 Boeing 737-500 9 Boeing 737-600 28 Boeing 737-700 19 Bo
38 OyKIE: As others have noted, SAS has too many airplane types. This requiers more pilots, f/a's, mechanics, spares etc. Than The competition. Simplifying the
40 DocLightning: Oh, that sucks. A glut of 736's? Yeah, time to get some new NB's. Boy, WN has stated that they'd be interested in a re-engined 737 or maybe an A320-N
41 MillwallSean: I'm not a big fan of SK, but modernising the narrowbody fleet seems to be a very needed and natural move. The 737 isnt working in Sweden or Denmark, w
42 KiwiRob: You better tell Norwegian, every flight I've been on with them this year has been on a half empty 737-800, it appears to work for them.
43 planemaker: Well, if you look at this quote from the article... "The airline plans to phase out 37 older 737s and Boeing MD-80s over the next few years while add
44 jox: What do you mean with "isnt working in Sweden"? I fly LLA-ARN ARN-LLA 1-2 times per week, and the planes (M82, 736, 73G and 738) are more or less alw
45 MillwallSean: the problems isnt in Norway, as stated the Norweigian government havent invested in infrastructure like its two brothers have. SAS Norway is also pro
46 jox: I agree with you about the financial performance, my objection was to your comment about the 737 (explicitly) "isnt working in Sweden"...
47 cuban8: I think I may be among the few here who doesn't think the CSeries is a good deal for SAS. As people have mentioned, bringing a new type of plane with
48 OyKIE: This is a spot on observation. I have been wondering about this my self. It seems like SAS fleet purchase seems to be a few years early if they want
49 Maersk737: You could be spot on.... If that's what SAS is planning? It's not as stupid as it sounds Get rid of MD-80' an classic 737' in 2 to 4 years. And a rep
50 Lightbug: Can they afford it right now? I know SK has taken delivery of an occasional 737-700 or -800 lately, but I'm not sure if they are able to secure finan
51 JoeCanuck: The advantage of keeping them is that they are paid for. The disadvantage of selling them is that they really aren't worth very much. I think the que
52 OyKIE: That is a good question indeed. What is SAS planning? It seems that their timing might be a bit of. This is a question I have no good answer for. The
53 planemaker: FYI, almost half are not paid for. 10 of the MD82's are leased and 1 of the MD87's is leased.... so it would be relatively easy to get rid of the MD8
54 LN-KGL: The illustration above shows the current SAS Group fleet. It must indeed be a nightmare for at least one airline within the group. The number of diff
55 JoeCanuck: Nicely thought out and interesting. Thanks.
56 OyKIE: Interesting summary LN-KGL! You illustrate in a good way, why SAS has trouble being competitive. Even if their employees is paid less they will still
57 LN-KGL: This is the only place I have written this summary.
58 OyKIE: I'll just have to link to this site, then. Sort of on topic. The article says SAS will grow 4-6%. I believe that they are talking about this growthra
59 rlwynn: How would pilots or maintenance differ between the 600, 700 and 800. Not very much I would think
60 Maersk737: It has to be annualy, or else it gives no meaning... Peter
61 LN-KGL: Acccording to pilots I have spoken with, it is very easy to notice the difference between the -600 and the -800 from the cockpit. The -800 is a much m
62 SAS-A321: Looks like it will not be a good idea for SAS to get the Cseries, as the A320NEO carrries the same amount of passengers, offers a wider cabin, with th
63 JoeCanuck: The 320NEO isn't a competitor for the CSeries. The 319 is the closes Airbus offering that may be, and it won't come around until 2017 at the earliest
64 SR4ever: C10 looks indeed quite promising on paper, but frankly, going primarily for Airbus would trigger major benefits in terms of fleet consistency, as SK l
65 davs5032: Excellent post. That second graph illustrates (much better than I've been able to do) the situation where I think the Cseries would be a good move fo
66 davs5032: Please tell me you don't actually believe this... ..Think carefully about who is making that statement and how he might be looking to benefit by peop
67 SAS-A321: I only said it looks like. Of course Airbus will have to come with some performance figures to prove this. It is a very dangerous tactic to come with
68 BlueSky1976: ...and do not forget that Bombardier is touting that the middle seat in the three-seat section will be a whole inch wider compared to A320 and TWO in
69 OyKIE: Do you have the number of airporst, where the 737-800 would be too large? The A320 is almost as heavy, and I was not aware that it needed less runway
70 EBGflyer: Yes...the good old Mad Dogs But you are right, I like the 2+3 seat configuration as well, which is the reason why I'm sad to see SK let go of their M
71 SR4ever: 2+3 abreast is doubtless something nice, but going for 3+3 proven jets will be easier for SK, especially given its tricky current situation. There rem
Sponsor Message: 
From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3229 posts, 
From Luxembourg, joined Mar 2010, 766 posts, 
From Finland, joined Mar 2009, 612 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 1032 posts, 
From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1710 posts, 
From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5045 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3128 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 6363 posts, 
But i guess they have to leave the fleet sometime...
From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 4977 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2309 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26723 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
