Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Ryanair: Single Fleet Rule No Longer Applies  
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 20516 times:

From Flightglobal:

"But if we have 150 Boeing and 150 Airbus aircraft, it is such a vast number that the incremental costs would be quite low." This could simply be a negotiating ploy. Millar says Ryanair's all-Boeing fleet means it is "in danger of a monster in the room" and he says it is important to "keep the other guy in the game".

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-fleet-rule-no-longer-applies.html



I could see low cost carriers like Ryanir going for a bigger aircraft 180-200 seats and smaller aircraft 130-150 seats. 1 Bigger aircraft type is OK when direct operating costs (fuel) are relatively low / stable like during the eighties, nineties.


42 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinetistpaa727 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 321 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 20445 times:

1) I think with a fleet the size of FR, there is room for two OEMs with distinct bases, etc.
2) I also think this boils down to MOL just mouthing off at his discontent the big OEMs won't give him what he wants.

Is this an opportunity to see a C-series? Could be. One could envision the Frontier or jetBlue route at Ryan. Larger capacity fleet (eg 738 currently flying) and a smaller capacity fleet (eg C-series).



Don't sweat the little things.
User currently offlinemogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 20265 times:

single fleet only makes sense up to a certain degree. here are some cons i can think of :

1. at thinner potential destinations, your choices are (a) no service, (b) less than daily service, or (3) suboptimal loads

2. at high-load destinations, you'll be upping frequencies to a point of increasing congestion (and screwing your own on-time performance metrics)

3. at slot-constrained airports, your revenue proposition is limited by how many customers you'll have to leave behind because the equipment is too small.

4. unless you have infinite slots to work around, it'll be hard to fine tune seasonality and peak travel seasons

5. and if loads drop below a certain threshold, your only realistic option is to drop the route completely if you insist daily service is a minimum


User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12400 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 20166 times:

Personally, I think this was coming for a long time; the basic fact is that many markets - particularly its home market - are suffering from the effects of recession and poor loads; for a 189 seat 737, many routes are not efficient. Furthermore, if another carrier (for example, Aer Lingus Commuter's ATR72s) comes onto the route and offers better frequency, the 738 - operated by any carrier - even FR, is going to have problems; you reach your breakeven a lot quicker on a 72 seater than you do on a 190 seater.

I can see EI going down this road, as well as others and FR must follow if it doesn't want to be shut out of markets.

I think it's also fair to say that when the aviation world has changed a lot since FR began its "pile them high, sell them cheap" operation; sure, FR is making a profit and a healthy one too, but it must allow its operation to evolve to meet new realities; when FR first launched the 738, back in 1998, the level of taxes on aviation were a fraction of what they are now; the whole business of finding a tenner in your back pocket and flying off to Gdansk or Esbjerg for the weekend is just not a runner anymore.

On top of all of this, there are many smaller markets which are inaccessible to 738s, because FR insists on a 6,000' runway; imagine if they had a 130 seat jet that could use 4,000 or 5,000' runways? That opens up a lot of new opportunities.


User currently offlineElbowRoom From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 177 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 20166 times:

I wonder what the subtext is here.

Is Ryanair getting concerned about competitors ordering the CSeries (or the NEO)?

When you are committed to one manufacturer, as they currently are, it can't be comfortable to see the other manufacturers investing in big steps in technology.

ER


User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9466 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 19955 times:

Ryannair has a very unique operating structure that makes them different. They do not flow their fleet through a limited number of hubs, but rather has many different bases. It is a segmented operation, which could lead to having multiple types more feasible.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 3):

On top of all of this, there are many smaller markets which are inaccessible to 738s, because FR insists on a 6,000' runway; imagine if they had a 130 seat jet that could use 4,000 or 5,000' runways? That opens up a lot of new opportunities.

737-800s operate on runways as short as 4300ft with the optional short field performance package that is used in Brazil.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 19468 times:

Quoting tistpaa727 (Reply 1):
there is room for two OEMs with distinct bases
Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 2):
single fleet only makes sense up to a certain degree
Quoting kaitak (Reply 3):
I think this was coming for a long time
Quoting ElbowRoom (Reply 4):
When you are committed to one manufacturer,..., it can't be comfortable
Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 5):
which could lead to having multiple types more feasible

WTF everybody agrees!   
..
he is just taking another route to deep discounts after O'Leary insulted everybody!


User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 6997 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 18994 times:

Quoting ElbowRoom (Reply 4):
When you are committed to one manufacturer, as they currently are, it can't be comfortable to see the other manufacturers investing in big steps in technology.

Airbus pioneered cockpit commonality to ensure that a family of a/c was offered to keep the customer with one manufacturer, is the general consensus that after Airbus became largest supplier of commercial that somehow one of their primary tenents was not a factor and should be discarded?

We always here Boeing supporters talking about the number of units where it becomes irrelevant, but I have never heard Airbus tout the same, wonder why.


User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5384 posts, RR: 30
Reply 8, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 18616 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 7):
We always here Boeing supporters talking about the number of units where it becomes irrelevant, but I have never heard Airbus tout the same, wonder why.

Crew integration is just one aspect of aircraft commonality. Mechanic taking can take significantly longer and cost more than pilot training. Essentially, most cockpits have variations of the same controls. Systems on the other hand, can vary widely.

There is also the question of parts and supplies, dealing with a whole separate logistics model.

It is not something to be done lightly but after a certain number of planes, (which varies with the airline), the benefits outweigh the costs.



What the...?
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30437 posts, RR: 84
Reply 9, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 18552 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The man very much wants to buy another 200 737 Next Generation frames from Boeing, so he certainly isn't mad about the price or disappointed with the performance.

If the rumors that what's holding up the deal is the ability to seamlessly re-sell his frames are true, it may be a sign that he expects Boeing to launch a 737neo or an all new narrowbody in the "near future" and wants to be able to re-sell his existing airframes while they're still at the peak of their value.

[Edited 2010-12-13 13:45:26]

User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 10, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 18394 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 7):
Airbus pioneered cockpit commonality to ensure that a family of a/c was offered to keep the customer with one manufacturer

I keep thinking that one day I will wake up to the news that Boeing and BBD have agreed to a joint venture to develop Cseries with cockpit commonality to B737.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15693 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 18088 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
"But if we have 150 Boeing and 150 Airbus aircraft, it is such a vast number that the incremental costs would be quite low."

That's nothing we didn't know before.

Quoting keesje (Reply 6):
he is just taking another route to deep discounts after O'Leary insulted everybody!

The economy isn't like it was back in the early 2000s. Manufacturers aren't just looking to keep the line moving.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offliner2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2552 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 17433 times:

Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 2):
1. at thinner potential destinations, your choices are (a) no service, (b) less than daily service, or (3) suboptimal loads

And in this case, FR chooses option b), less than daily service. And perhaps due to this they may be missing out on PAX that would fly the route if they could do so on the day they want. They've certainly lost me as a pax a few times due to this.


User currently offlineGarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2604 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 17082 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 7):
Airbus pioneered cockpit commonality

Actually, they didn't. They just took a pre-existing idea and took it further, refined it even.
The 757 and 767 both share the same cockpit and type rating and were in service before the A320.
DC-9s share(d) the same cockpit and I believe the MD 80s and 90s are based on those cockpits also
And the there are older jets that have similar cockpits to each other but we digress.

It's well known that after a fleet exceeds a certain size, aircraft commonality from flightdeck to spares because less important.

That said, it doesn't mean MOL will immediately go and buy a fleet of A320s. He'll buy whatever he can get for the cheapest. So far, A and B has shown him the door. Berhaps BBD will be more receptive. I'm sure they'd love a 50 to 100 aircraft order to keep the C series going.

[Edited 2010-12-13 15:06:24]


arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30437 posts, RR: 84
Reply 14, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 16534 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Garpd (Reply 13):
He'll buy whatever he can get for the cheapest. So far, A and B has shown him the door.

MOL has publicly stated that he felt the price Boeing offered for his requested 200-frame tender was acceptable to him. It was other conditions of the contract (believed to be related to how quickly FR could re-sell delivered airframes) and probably fears of how the GFC would impact traffic that resulted in no deal being made - at this time.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19290 posts, RR: 58
Reply 15, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 15735 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 6):

WTF everybody agrees!

I know right? This doesn't feel like the A.net I know and love. It's all creepy and stuff.  

No matter how you slice it, there are advantages to having a single type fleet. For one thing, all of your pilots are interchangeable. Adds a certain amount of flexibility, especially in irrops. There's simply no advantage to having two fleets of, say A320's and 737's with the same seat counts.

But I do think that FR could benefit from having two fleets of different sizes, much like B6 does with the A320 and the Embraers.

We all agree that MOL is mouthing off. Then again, ANY time the man opens his mouth, he shoots it off. He makes Airbus's Leahy seem downright tactful.


User currently offlineEagleboy From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1791 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 15554 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
If the rumors that what's holding up the deal is the ability to seamlessly re-sell his frames are true, it may be a sign that he expects Boeing to launch a 737neo or an all new narrowbody in the "near future" and wants to be able to re-sell his existing airframes while they're still at the peak of their value.

I like this conspiracy theory. We know that MoL and FR are looking at 3-5 years down the road. And FR are constantly selling off their older B738s.............

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
There's simply no advantage to having two fleets of, say A320's and 737's with the same seat counts.

But I do think that FR could benefit from having two fleets of different sizes, much like B6 does with the A320 and the Embraers.

Well everyone agrees because its makes sense. MoL may be loud and mouth but he is very smart. A big/small fleet mix makes sense when you want to be able to flood the entire market and capture as much traffic from the legacies/majors in Europe. And as you point out B6 have shown that it can work very well.


User currently offlineplanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6079 posts, RR: 34
Reply 17, posted (3 years 7 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 15294 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
I know right? This doesn't feel like the A.net I know and love. It's all creepy and stuff.

OK... in the spirit of xmas I'll try to make it less creepy   ....

Quote:
Despite Ryanair's all-Boeing fleet, Millar is very complimentary of Airbus. He highlights the advantage of the A320's engine choices, compared with the sole-supplier on the 737.

He says: "The A320 is far superior [to the 737] in terms of electronics and avionics. It is a more modern aircraft, with a bigger cabin. The A320 came along 10-15 years after the first 737, so the technology is newer."

At the same time, he believes that investment in the A320NEO would be better spent on an all-new aircraft, giving Boeing an advantage.

I think that Millar is an aircraft expert!!!!!!    



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineYXXMIKE From Canada, joined Apr 2008, 308 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 12988 times:

The title of this thread should be, "Is MOL OK?"

He has been doing something very weird of late; he's been talking more sense about the industry then he usually does. Makes me wonder how he's doing health wise or if he's just getting a little less hostile in his older years. Maybe the dead tiger has got him thinking a bit more as well....

I'd like to say that MOL and the gang are in Montreal right now discussing a future C-Series order over a couple of beers and things are going well. BBD gives them away, Canadian tax payers foot the bill for FR and the world continues turning as it has. However I think FR is going to get stuck if it orders 200 Boeing's and they know it, the world economy can't handle that kind of dumping of A/C at the prices he wants. So what is he to do? I think he's just posturing a bit more and using the media to get some CEO's thinking....

Anyway that's just my two cents this evening. Back to my winter ale  


User currently offlineparapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1548 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 11623 times:

"MOL has publicly stated that he felt the price Boeing offered for his requested 200-frame tender was acceptable to him. It was other conditions of the contract (believed to be related to how quickly FR could re-sell delivered airframes) and probably fears of how the GFC would impact traffic that resulted in no deal being made - at this time."

It is all - all about this. A deal has fallen through based on re-sale of existing aircraft and they (Ryan) are not happy. They are now throwing their toys out of the pram in frustration.It was (sic) only yesterday when the boss said (of the fallen through deal) that they did not want them anyway and this was a new (non expansion) chapter for Ryanair. Now "No2" says " well we do want them really" - but they could be someone elses planes... Oh come on this is not rocket science stuff!

The whole NEO thing whether it be A or B is going to cause resale issues.Fact. But they cannot have it both ways.No NEO no problem on resale but higher fuel consumption.Get a NEO - then resale issues.

We all know what they really want (all of them) it's a new aircraft from A or B.Well they ain't getting it - period. Having said that there is a new aircraft "The C".It's been sitting there for ages.So if they really, really wanted a new aircraft they could have one.Apparently not "that" one. Oh poor dears.Better throw another toy out of the pram then - cos Mummy is not going to give them exactly what they want - when they want it. Too bad.

Get over it guys,stop talking to the press and anyone who will listen and make a decision - whatever is best for you.But making all this stuff up is fooling nobody. BTW if they "now" love "A" so much they should have stopped Napoleon O Leary having fun stamping on their nuts just a short while ago.Bit late now old boy.You have cried your wolf.


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4379 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 11197 times:

Quoting ElbowRoom (Reply 4):
Is Ryanair getting concerned about competitors ordering the CSeries

Ryanair is about price and nothing else. So if Ryanair is looking for a plane, they look for a CASM that is below the one they have and nothing else. The only plane I know that offers a better CASM than the 738 and isn't the B739ER is the A321.


User currently offlineGarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2604 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 11013 times:

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 20):
they look for a CASM that is below the one they have and nothing else

Nope. As has been already stated, they look for the overal deal. Cheap planes, cheap spares, cheap support and good terms for resale, etc. CASM is a part of it, but not the deal breaker. They'd have ordered the A321 long ago if CASM was the only concern.

[Edited 2010-12-14 02:11:45]


arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlinef4f3a From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2004, 246 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 10452 times:

Commonality is far more than a/c spares and crew training.

Ryanair runs its airline by keeping things as basic as they come. Operationally it is very easy for them since they operate the same type. If an a/c goes tech they can replace it with another which is identical. For example if a tenerife goes tech with 189 paxs its easy to fix you just find a spare a/c

if you have a mix of sizes ie 150 and 189 then this becomes more difficult.

You also have the cost of converting all your pilots and cabin crew onto a new type and time with them away from the line.
In ryanair also the tricky question who pays for this. Also you need 2 sets of Operations manuals and have twice training staff to deal with it

Im sure MOL will find some kind of a/c to fill his needs but he needs to do this soon. Boeing and airbus know this so theyve kind of got the upper hand which is quite funny


User currently offlineexcalibur From France, joined Dec 2007, 56 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 10275 times:

Quoting Garpd (Reply 13):

Airbus aircraft commonality go beyond the cockpit look. The flight handling characteristics, thanks to the FBW, make the entire Airbus family feel alike in some way. So there is really some pioneering from Airbus.
I hope some Airbus driver could explain that better than me...



McDonnell-Douglas MD11 - Boeing 747-400
User currently offlinebj87 From Netherlands, joined Jun 2009, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (3 years 7 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 9452 times:

A mixed fleet compiling of several derivatives of a single plane (A219/A320/A321 for example) would make sense, pilots can easily fly more than one type and the parts are largely identical as are the cockpit procedures.

So if fleet diversity at Ryanair is going to happen it is either going to consist of several 737 derivatives or A320 derivatives. I doubt they will go for a mixed fleet of 737 and A320.

That said I wish them the best of luck getting a supplier. Airbus saw Boeing getting screwed the last time so they aren't jumping for his order and neither is Boeing, they pretty much threw his rear end out during the last negotiations. So with neither manufacturer willing to turn around and bend over for MOL it is going to be difficult for him to get that rock bottom deal he wants.

That said if they do order new planes I sure hope they do something about that interior. The last time I flew on them I thought I was sitting in a giant flying yellow highlighter!


25 Garpd : I am aware the commonality goes beyond the "look". To pioneer means to be first. Airbus were not the first with cockpit commonality, they simply took
26 keesje : Not so long ago I saw an interview with MOL explaining making noise is part of his job as LC carrier CEO. Howard Millar probably is the good guy and M
27 Post contains images 328JET : Hmmm, do not tell that to Swiss, please... And our pilots jump from B737s to B767s...
28 seabosdca : DL has common pilot pools for its 757s and 767s, except the 767-400 (which has a somewhat different cockpit).
29 Garpd : Hence why I said:
30 AirNZ : So will every other airline, so could you possibly list any for me who you imply never mind paying higher for their aircraft? i would also suggest yo
31 Garpd : My bad. My writing style can be somewhat clumsy at times. Always in a rush! I am not condemning Ryanair, far from it. If anything I am acknowledging
32 330guy : Correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I'm aware DL groups pilots in the following groups (domestic 75, domestic 76, int'l 75 & int'l 76) a DL Pil
33 keegd76 : FR was operating perfectly well from the 6,000ft runway at BHD, but when the airport started talking about increasing the length of the runway FR wer
34 Post contains links and images keesje : A few years back O'Leary said they'll never order Airbus again.
35 CFBFrame : MOL seems to complain often about the fees associated with his business. Could his current concern be more associated with the recent air traffic cont
36 Dash9 : I think the same. Boeing has the financial, manufacturing and marketing strength that BBD lacks. BBD has most of its engineering resources focused on
37 BrouAviation : I'd say it's more logical for Airbus to look for a Chinese/Japanese partner, rather than to start a JV with Embraer.
38 AADC10 : This is just negotiation. As an all Boeing airline, FR was negotiating with itself. By opening the door to Airbus, it can get competing bids and it pu
39 CFBFrame : So why is WN buying -800s now? The model works until new market opportunities are not able to fit in the old strategy. The point you are missing is t
40 Post contains links planemaker : "We think we could still do our turnarounds in 25 minutes with 199 passengers. If someone made this aircraft, we would operate it," says Millar. http:
41 parapente : So much has been said about the "threat" of the "C" but today we hear that for Ryanair the optimum capacity is 199. I can see that.This must (roughful
42 r2rho : Somebody does make that a/c, it's called the A321. Whether you could turn that around in 25min is another matter, I'd say definitely not.
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...
UA To IAD-LOS-ACC No Longer Selling? posted Sun Jan 3 2010 20:54:51 by Flyyul
BA No Longer To Sell Openskies posted Sat Dec 12 2009 06:22:33 by BALHRWWCC
LH 494/495 No Longer A340-300 posted Sun Oct 25 2009 15:27:41 by DIESEL1337
FL: YX No Longer "Hometown Airline" posted Thu Oct 22 2009 06:42:21 by Yeogeo
UA No Longer Shows Arrival Videos? posted Sat Aug 8 2009 20:37:52 by United Airline
Tony Tyler (CX CEO) On CX Fleet Plans, No A380 Yet posted Thu Jul 30 2009 23:18:13 by Lutfi
757 No Longer Working For AA posted Wed Jul 15 2009 15:55:58 by ArniePie
SIA 747-412s No Longer Mega Tops? posted Wed Jul 15 2009 00:29:02 by JohnClipper
When Is An A/C No Longer Considered New? posted Fri May 15 2009 19:26:13 by SXDFC
Will The HKG-TPE Route No Longer Be 'Golden' posted Sun May 3 2009 00:46:29 by FilAmAirlines