Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A320 & 737 Maintenance Cost  
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (1 year 1 month 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 6850 times:

Leeham News has another post about A320 and 737 maintenance costs. This is based on Airbus response to earlier questions/posts.

The conclusion they make is:

Quote:
Instead of focusing on the “sweat spot” for the NG, data of the entire reporting period must be compared

Comparing different fleet ages is not leading the sensible results

Market forces e.g. competition have an impact on maintenance cost

The A320 airframe is better maturing than the NG and improvements on the A320 are showing tangible results.

And then they have a graph showing a big advantage to 737 for the first years of service but at about 11 years the advantage changes to A320.

I don't have enough data,knowledge and experience to validate the conclusions they make. I definitely see the need to normalize for the different age but what about the rest? Do the numbers make sense?

11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineGiblets From UK - England, joined Jun 2013, 30 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6603 times:

I read this article ( and the previous article on Boeing's statements), well worth a read.
The major problem is that no airline wants to give away it's figures on this as it relates to their performance and profitability against their competitors.

Airbus essentially comments that Boeing is using figures of 7 year old A320's and comparing them to new NG's. That as the A320 presence in North America increased, the maintenance cost decreased (increased competition and scale of numbers).

Leehams addy:
http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/


User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 2 hours ago) and read 6301 times:

Quoting Giblets (Reply 1):
Airbus essentially comments that Boeing is using figures of 7 year old A320's and comparing them to new NG's. That as the A320 presence in North America increased, the maintenance cost decreased (increased competition and scale of numbers).

I'm sure Airbus thinks just that. Both manufacturers will make the numbers say what they want to. There are lies, damned lies, and statistics... as they say.

That said, being a mechanic on both new and old 737s, I'm having a hard time agreeing that things get precipitously worse at 11 years. That hasn't been my experience.
Certain ATA chapters do see increased activity over time, but... such is life as machinery ages.


User currently offlineNeutronStar73 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 497 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 5957 times:

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 2):

That said, being a mechanic on both new and old 737s, I'm having a hard time agreeing that things get precipitously worse at 11 years. That hasn't been my experience.

I'm inclined to agree with your real world experience, because based on all these "studies" that says the A320 is so much better than the 737, then how in the world do airlines like Southwest, Ryanair, and Westjet make any money? Why would they buy a "maintenance hog" like the 737 is it were so much worse than the A320 series?


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30537 posts, RR: 84
Reply 4, posted (1 year 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 5900 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I recall it being posted on these forums that the design service life for many 737 parts are longer than the equivalent on the A320 and that helps reduce the maintenance bill for the 737.

The A320's newer design does bring maintenance benefits in certain areas, of course. The A320's FBW control system, for example, should be significantly lower maintenance when compared to the pulleys and cables used on the 737.


User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9488 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (1 year 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 5716 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
I recall it being posted on these forums that the design service life for many 737 parts are longer than the equivalent on the A320 and that helps reduce the maintenance bill for the 737.

Yes, that has been posted before:

A320 48000 Cycles/ 60000 Hours
737NG 75000 Cycles

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-11-15/html/2010-28363.htm

According to the FAA, the 737NG was designed to last longer, so it surprises me that as an airplane ages, the A320 has lower maintenance costs.

However each manufacturer claims they are better and has many charts to prove it. I guess when it comes to A vs B, enough assumptions can be made that any plane can be shown better than the others. With how clever marketing is nowadays, they probably could make a DC-8 look better on paper than either an A320 or 737NG for some obscure operating environment like 10% load factor over a 50 mile route with 100,000lbs in cargo off a 5000ft runway at 12000ft.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinegiblets From UK - England, joined Jun 2013, 30 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 5548 times:

I guess Boeing under designed in some areas and over designed in others when they put the bird together, the Airbus is heavier, as they had to incorporate more stringent safety measures, Ryanair et al tend to beat their aircraft up and then sell them early specifically before the maintenance charges increase.
Experience from the field also backs up some of the theory too:

Lufthansa Technik, %u201CLHT %u2013 Lufthansa Technik (%u2026) has found less significant corrosion or fatigue related fuselage structure work arising on A320s than on Boeing 737s of similar age.%u201D


User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9976 posts, RR: 96
Reply 7, posted (1 year 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5319 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NeutronStar73 (Reply 3):
then how in the world do airlines like Southwest, Ryanair, and Westjet make any money? Why would they buy a "maintenance hog" like the 737 is it were so much worse than the A320 series?

Of course this works the other way too, as it seems to me to be a given to most US posters that the A320 is less robust and needs more maintenance that a 737.

As each of their market shares appears to be robust, I'd suggest that the swings and roundabouts even up somewhere along the line..  

Rgds


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30537 posts, RR: 84
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 4803 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

leeham.net posted an article about this at http://leehamnews.wordpress.com/2013...ponds-to-boeings-form-41-reliance/

It looks like the 737NG enjoys lower maintenance costs up front, but as the airframe ages, the A320's superior fatigue properties means it's maintenance bills on older frames are lower.

Maintenance costs on the A320 have also dropped as more MROs have come online. The 737NG inherited the more extensive 737 Classic MRO base at launch, which helped keep maintenance costs lower early on in the program's life.


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31667 posts, RR: 56
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4618 times:

No data to back the same, but speaking with folks from the purchase department of Airlines operating Both types...The explanation is that the Airbus costs cheaper but the spares are more expensive, the Boeing goes the otherway around ie Spares cheaper initial cost higher.


Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12860 posts, RR: 100
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4365 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 8):
Maintenance costs on the A320 have also dropped as more MROs have come online. The 737NG inherited the more extensive 737 Classic MRO base at launch, which helped keep maintenance costs lower early on in the program's life.

That is key. The 737 also started with lessons learned from the classic and 731/2. Airbus eventually built up that lessons learned data base.

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 5):
Yes, that has been posted before:

A320 48000 Cycles/ 60000 Hours
737NG 75000 Cycles

See slides 13+ for the "Extended Service Goal". The A320 is going to 60k cycles, 120k hours
MRO%20Trends_%20OEM%20Update.pdf" target="_blank">http://events.aviationweek.com/html/...y_MRO%20Trends_%20OEM%20Update.pdf


Looking into details of the new Extended Service Goal
http://www.ageingaircraft.com.au/fil...es/Buchweitz%2025th%20S9%20P12.pdf

Reduce A320 maintenance to current service goal (30% per slide #30)


What I couldn't find is confirmation of the ESG certification. I thought it was nearly done. Anyone have a link?

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8861 posts, RR: 75
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4359 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 5):
A320 48000 Cycles/ 60000 Hours

That is the original design datao, the lead A320 was around 48000 cycles/80000 hours in 2011. They already have in place ESG1 which gives the air frame 60000 cycles/120000 hours. Most A320s would be around 25 years old reaching that value, and probably scrapped.

ESG2 was being worked on, it maybe approved already, 90000 cycles, 180000 hours.

Some indication of how maintenance savings are being realised are in this fair use excerpt http://www.asianaviation.com/article...4/Airbus-plans-A320-life-extension

"A320s are subject to industry-standard MSG-3 provisions, under which historic %u2018A%u2019 and %u2018C%u2019 maintenance check intervals have become flexible. Tasks now carry FC, FH, or calendar-time maximum intervals that permit operators to optimise MRO planning, with the A- and C-check labels still used generically.

According to Airbus, A320 operators adjust maintenance intervals to suit their own schedules. For example, one has adopted a 20-month C-check cycle, distributing six-year tasks between 60- and 80-month checks to ensure maximum aircraft availability, while another operator uses 24- month C checks to save one heavy-maintenance shop visit every six years.

Good "in-service experience feedback" from operators has contributed to the introduction of extended A320 scheduled-task intervals that Airbus says have reduced maintenance costs by up to 70 percent since service entry in 1988. For example, FH intervals for C-check equivalent work have grown by a third, while the frequency of heavy-maintenance shop visits has fallen by half and the typical period between A-check equivalent jobs has increased by 70 percent.

Specifically, maintenance tasks scheduled in the original 350-FH A-check may now be performed at any time up to maximum intervals of 600 FH, 750 FC, or 100 days. Likewise, the 15-month C-check interval has become a 20-month, 6,000-FH, or 4,500-FC minimum frequency and permitted intervals between heavy checks have grown from four and eight years to six and 12 years.

A further 25 percent increase in A-check intervals (to 750 FH, 750 FC, or 120 days, or a combination) has been agreed by the A320 Industry Steering Committee (ISC), while airworthiness authorities %u2013 led by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) %u2013 have approved the Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR) adopting the longer intervals, which now appear in the A320 maintenance-planning document.

The ISC launched "an evolution exercise" in 2009 under which it might extend C-check intervals by a further 20 percent this year. The resulting 24-month/7,500-FH/5,000-FC interval, if subsequently approved, would enable maintenance planners to synchronise such activity with the existing six- and 12-year heavy-check intervals."



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic A320 & 737 Maintenance Cost
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Help-Aging Aircraft Maintenance Cost posted Tue Jun 9 2009 14:22:28 by Sayem55
A320/737 Operation Into Florence posted Thu Sep 11 2003 21:54:43 by Vasi
A320/737-type Aircraft Stall Recovery posted Mon Mar 19 2001 01:59:50 by Widebody
A320 Or 737-800 posted Sun May 27 2012 13:35:17 by FlyIndia
Typical Cost Components For A 320 Or 737 (%) posted Wed Apr 27 2011 01:38:52 by edoca
How Much Does It Cost To Paint A 737? posted Thu Jul 1 2010 13:26:21 by eugegall
CFM56 On A320 Vs 737 - Difference? posted Wed Jun 23 2010 20:25:40 by JohnClipper
Cessna Caravan Startup Airline:cost & Maintenance? posted Thu May 27 2010 10:37:28 by TropicalSQ744
A320 And 737-700 Question posted Wed Jan 27 2010 09:28:22 by MetJetCEO
Life Maintenance Costs: > Or < Than Purchase Cost? posted Sat Jan 23 2010 02:32:55 by Faro

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format