ab1247
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 9:59 am

Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:40 am

I just watched a very interesting little report done by SFDRS (German Swiss Media) about how LX is completely swamped on its NYC-ZRH/NYC-GVA routes. They were saying that LX lacks the planes to expand service significantly, with which I agree, but they also commented that there are no fitting aircraft on the market at the moment with which LX could bolster its fleet with. That is where I disagree. Why not finally transfer those two 332's from LH, knowing that they are oddballs in the LH fleet anyway. As far as I know, they fit the LX fleet with engine type (P&W), etc. They would just need the LX interior, and voila, instant fleet expansion! This way, LX could expand its EWR-ZRH flight currently contracted to Privat Air back to a full service flight, with oodles of Business class, if they so desired.

I remember that such an option has been discussed in the past, and generally thrown out due to the fact that the airline was still not on its feet. Now, as part of the LH group, things are headed up, including the European business side. So, what are they waiting for?

I also remember that LH at one point spoke of the possibility of two A343's for SWISS, as long as LX performed (kind of like candy for the naughty child, after it learned its lesson). It's been very quiet on this front...

Potentially a less orthodox solution, would it make any sense for LX to invest in a larger airframe? I would consider maybe four A340-600's to cover the NYC and potentially a Hong Kong flight. Pretty significant commonality would exist with the current A343's, so costs should not be that much of a problem.

Why is Swiss so afraid of the larger airframes? Its predecessor flew 747's, DC-10's, and MD-11's. And there is no shortage of pilots in Switzerland that wouldn't pilot those jumbo jets in a heartbeat.

German Only (sorry):
http://a1927.v9943d.c9943.g.vr.akama...?start=0:00:00.000&end=0:26:43.768

Adrian
 
JFK998
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 11:39 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:54 am

Swiss should consider a larger airframe and the whole idea of there not being a suitable aircraft on the market to use for its JFK routes is ridiculous. If they want to expand their JFK service and they want to stick to their Airbus', they should consider the A340-600 possibly for their JFK routes. However, I do not see that happening anytime soon. For now, I think the only solution for Swiss would be to either lease some A332s/A333s or A343s or to get their own from Airbus or maybe even Lufthansa just like Ab1247 said..
 
ChiGB1973
Posts: 1394
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 6:39 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:57 am

With StarAlliance and their association/ownership or LH, their overcapacity is a misnomer. They would be automatically booked on a StarAlliance or LH flight if the system is working right.

It is not a problem unless this is not the case. I feel certain it is. There is not a need to transfer planes. They are at capacity, they are making money, LH and StarAlliance picking up the pieces.

Great going Swiss, keep up the good work!

M
 
ILOVEA340
Posts: 2064
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 1999 9:49 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:16 am

I would love to see them pick up about four of the A340-600HGW's that it looks like Emirates will pass on for those NYC routes.
 
CRGsFuture
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 12:04 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:01 pm

Thanks 340, that was what I was going to say.
Flying you to your destination; your girlfriend to her dreams.
 
ZRH
Posts: 4371
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 1999 11:32 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:42 pm

I saw the same TV broadcast on SF DRS "10vor10" and was also wondering about the statement, that it would not be possible to find proper aircrafts Swiss is looking for. I agree a 340-600 would perfectly fit on Swiss' NYC route. On TV they told that the flights are always booked out, specifically the high yield seats in C and F class. They also interviewed two famous F class passengers: Jeanne-Claude and Christo, the two artists (known for their Central Park performance).

[Edited 2006-03-23 04:48:53]
 
flyyul
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 11:25 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:56 pm

I suspect the capacity squeeze is in the summer only.

Swiss, like everyother airline, needs to make money 12 months of the year on their transatlantic routes. So incremental airplanes need to be justified on a year-round basis... there is but a handful of routes that Swiss could improve, given their new partnership with Lufthansa.

Furthermore, routes such as BOS/YUL-ZRH go less than daily in the winter, due to lower yields despite increase F/J demand.

If the demand is really lacking on JFK-GVA/ZRH, then they can piece the aircraft from the NOOP days from ORD/YUL/LAX/ORD etc and fit them to fill in the gap on JFK-ZRH.. but we dont see this happening.
 
flyyul
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 11:25 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:01 pm

A340-600 makes no sense on a trans-atlantic route... its a high-unit cost airplane. It makes sense on longer-haul routes, and as such we see Lufthansa use this aircraft in that manner (i.e. SFO-MUC, FRA-BKK, FRA-KIX, etc)

From a pure trans-atlantic perspective year-round perspective, the A330 is the best you will get, and this is why Swiss has a good model with these airplanes.
 
CV990
Posts: 4224
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 3:49 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:59 pm

Hi!

I think SWISS is going in the right way. First of all they had to come back strong and clear all the dust after the colapse of Swissair. I still remember during 2003 all those topics saying that SWISS would close, etc. etc. etc. Now that we see SWISS going well the issue of the fleet is...a no issue. I think SWISS have one of the neatest fleets around...maybe the only "outsider" the BAe RJ's but if they like the plane what can we do??? The Airbus narrow and wide body fleet it's great and the only thing I could see comming maybe in 2 or 3 years would be a COMPLETE return of the A340/A330's ( this from 2015 on of course...) and the adoption of A350....but that's only my point of view. At this moment if SWISS needs more capacity I'm sure they can get either 2nd. hand or brand new A330's!
Regards
CV990, the Maserati of the skies!
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:14 pm

That's exactly why they are getting on LH A300-600 over the summer period... to free up one A330-200 currently used on Africa routes to be then employed on Swiss-NYC routes.

Guys, Swissair was broke because they had too much capacity and had to dump it into the market - that's nothing LH will tolerate, for them Swiss has to be a profitable unit as every unit in the group.
Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
 
johnnybgoode
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:59 pm

Quoting Ab1247 (Thread starter):
Why is Swiss so afraid of the larger airframes? Its predecessor flew 747's, DC-10's, and MD-11's.

yes, and the predecessor went down badly!
weren't the 743s in the SR fleet Combi aircraft? they would have had lower capacity then, compared to standard 743s.

Quoting Ab1247 (Thread starter):
Why not finally transfer those two 332's from LH, knowing that they are oddballs in the LH fleet anyway.

quite right that they're oddballs, but LH need them for themselves.

at one point, there were 2-3 ex SN and ex LH A332s parked at CGN which were believed to be heading to LX. also, they were rumored to go to Bluewings, but i believe they will be with a government soon. there's been lots of speculation, and I don't recall all the details anymore.

Quoting FLYYUL (Reply 7):
A340-600 makes no sense on a trans-atlantic route... its a high-unit cost airplane.

please explain to me, how you consider the A346s to be a higher unit-cost aircraft than LX's A343s (I take it this is implied by your statement)? granted, the A346s is a bit heavier and especially on short-haul routes would have worse economics than an A343. Nonetheless, the typical transatlantic route will surely provide for an A346 to operate viably, given that the loads are alright. bottom line: if LX can operate an A343 profitably to JFK, they probably can do it with an A346.

the question now is, are there in general enough routes with a load requiring an A346? it would not make sense to get an odd number of A346s for just a route or two, especially if this route would only have loads high enough half of the year.
so my humble opinion is that LX should keep away from larger aircraft. perhaps A333s would make sense downroad?
If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
 
gerardo
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 6:22 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:48 pm

Quoting Johnnybgoode (Reply 10):
weren't the 743s in the SR fleet Combi aircraft? they would have had lower capacity then, compared to standard 743s.

They had both, combi versions (HB-IGC, HB-IGD and HB-IGG) and full pax versions (HB-IGE, HB-IGF) side by side.

Quoting Johnnybgoode (Reply 10):
at one point, there were 2-3 ex SN and ex LH A332s parked at CGN which were believed to be heading to LX. also, they were rumored to go to Bluewings, but i believe they will be with a government soon. there's been lots of speculation, and I don't recall all the details anymore.

I guess, you mean those A332, which were first parked at CGN, then at ZRH. They go to TAP, as far as I know.

Quoting Johnnybgoode (Reply 10):
the question now is, are there in general enough routes with a load requiring an A346? it would not make sense to get an odd number of A346s for just a route or two, especially if this route would only have loads high enough half of the year.

Exactly! Add to that the increased costs of operating a new small subfleet, instead of sticking with the two fleets they have (A332, A343)

Gerardo
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
 
StarGoldLHR
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:29 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:03 pm

Quoting Ab1247 (Thread starter):
Why is Swiss so afraid of the larger airframes? Its predecessor flew 747's, DC-10's, and MD-11's. And there is no shortage of pilots in Switzerland that wouldn't pilot those jumbo jets in a heartbeat.

Maybe its because they learnt their lessons from last time, not every country in europe can be a major long haul carrier.. if they did it'd end up just like the US with over capacity and bankrupt airlines.
So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
 
CV990
Posts: 4224
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 3:49 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:16 pm

Hi!

Yesssssss, those 3 A330-200's that used to be parked at CGN are now "in TAP hands"...we got the first one already (CS-TOF) and we will get the 2nd. until the end of this week and the last one...well...maybe in April! TAP is FLYING CS-TOF DAILY LIS/ORY/LIS/FOR/LIS...and I tell you, that plane looks awesome in TAP livery!
Regads
CV990, the Maserati of the skies!
 
HBIHLtoEZE
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:50 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:40 pm

SR's demise had probably more to do with their hunter policy than their choice of aircraft...

In the NZZ of last Saturday it was reported that LH might give them additional planes (the referred to them as A340 - sp probably A340-300s) when the new general contract is negotiated with the pilots (more working hours desired).

Until then the only 'new' bird is that one:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sören Klinger



- a novelty, by the way, SR and its successor have now operated all Airbus family aircraft (as the 380 is not yet in service  fight  Wink
Our battered suitcases were piled on the sidewalk again; we had longer ways to go. But no matter, the road is life.
 
flyyul
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 11:25 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 12:14 am

The A340 is a higher-unit cost airplane than the A330.. that is a given. And given that the A340-600 has underachieved in the marketplace vs. the 777-300 we can see the large reason for the differential.

We do not see Swiss operating A340's on Trans-atlantic other than LAX and JFK 2/7 but that is due to aircraft rotation anyway. There is a logical reason for this, and most of it revolves around cost efficienct aircraft on medium stage lengths.
 
Qantas744er
Posts: 1149
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 4:36 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:04 am

Quoting HBIHLtoEZE (Reply 14):
- a novelty, by the way, SR and its successor have now operated all Airbus family aircraft (as the 380 is not yet in service    

Sorry but your wrong they have never flown the A318...
Happiness is V1 in Lagos
 
johnnybgoode
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:11 am

Quoting FLYYUL (Reply 15):
The A340 is a higher-unit cost airplane than the A330..

the A343 has likely higher unit costs than the A332s.
In your initial post, however, you referred to A346 as high-unit cost planes, whereas it is quite a safe bet to say the A346s have lower unit costs than an A332s due to its increased capacity (in relation to marginally higher operating costs due to higher weight). It certainly has higher total operating costs but that's a whole other story.

But I agree, A332 beats A343, as long as its the right mission for the A332.

Quoting FLYYUL (Reply 15):
And given that the A340-600 has underachieved in the marketplace vs. the 777-300 we can see the large reason for the differential.

Sorry, but I fail to recognize how that affects the unit costs of an A343.

rgds
daniel
If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
 
HBIHLtoEZE
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:50 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:33 am

Quoting Qantas744ER (Reply 16):
Sorry but your wrong they have never flown the A318...

well, yeah my formulation was wrong: they will have operated all families of Airbus, not every Airbii type.


Cheers
Our battered suitcases were piled on the sidewalk again; we had longer ways to go. But no matter, the road is life.
 
flyyul
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 11:25 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:36 am

The point of my original post, was to correct the going assumption that the A340-600 would be a good aircraft for Swiss. Given that Swiss does not have privilege to the type of network flows that Lufthansa has... and the mere fact that Lufthansa is drawing from MUCH larger market sizes, Swiss would have a difficult time justifying enough frames to make the fleet efficient. Furthermore, I doubt that Swiss has many market in the network that can support the A346 on a 12-month basis.

Higher unit cost as a reference to fuel burn. With all due respect, the A340-600 fuel burn per seat is at best on par with the A343. Given that the A330-200/300 model is the preferred trans-atlantic airplane, we can not prove that the A346 has better unit costs than the 332. If this indeed was the case, then A346 would have been much more popular.

To suggest that the 346 would provide better unit costs than the A330-200, would then imply that the A340-600 as the preferred aircraft for high volume trans-atlantic routes. If this is the case, then we would see higher utilization of this aircraft across the atlantic by established carriers.

I then tried to demonstrate the A346's high-unit cost reputation, by comparing with the a competitive model. When comparing the A346 vs the 773, given the comparative sales of both models in the marketplace, it is clearly easy to see that the unit cost of a 773 vs 346 is in favor of the 773.
 
ab1247
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 9:59 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 2:05 am

Quoting HBIHLtoEZE (Reply 14):
SR's demise had probably more to do with their hunter policy than their choice of aircraft...

Thank you for pointing this out! I was just about to make this comment. SR's demise had little to do with its operations, but much with its failed "let's buy a large non-controlling share of a dozen decrepid airlines" strategy. SR had overcapacity at the time of bankruptcy , but nothing out of the ordinary for the airline market at that time.

As far as capacity goes, Swiss is well-booked on their NYC flights, even in the winter. Full planes, relatively low fares in Jan/Feb, but I would say, above the profit line. They are currently flying 85% seat-load factor on all routes, and as far as I have seen on the NYC flights, full to last seat at all times of the year (including C & F classes). LX has an incredibly large business customer base on its North American flights, which flows more steadily throughout the year.

I agree that the 346 would be a far throw for just one market point, just an incredibly tempting thought.

I like the idea of long-term strategy pointing towards the A350 in the long run. Their widebodies are pretty young at the moment, so this would be at least 10 years into the future, as pointed out by CV990. But right now, they need planes, so A332's it is! Where from, is another question...
 
flyyul
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 11:25 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 2:20 am

But where would Swiss expand to?

Perhaps introduction of EWR-ZRH.. while rumours suggest that LAX-ZRH is unprofitable.
 
Josh12815
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 8:48 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 2:59 am

Maybe if they switched to Boeing they may have a better Solution to the problem, Such as the 777-240LR or some 744's..
 
bjornstrom
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:54 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:12 am

I did ZRH-DAR a week ago on a 332 and the crew informed me that this plane is flying ZRH-NYC (not sure about JFK/EWR) this summer with Hapag-Lloyd taking of the DAR-route.

I was impressed with the service and food in business class - only the seats and IFE was inferior to leaders within Star Alliance.
Eurobonus Gold | BMI Gold | http://my.flightmemory.com/bjornstrom/
 
ZRH
Posts: 4371
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 1999 11:32 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:24 am

Quoting Bjornstrom (Reply 23):
I was impressed with the service and food in business class - only the seats and IFE was inferior to leaders within Star Alliance.

Yes, the 332 have still the old business class seats. The 343 have new angled lie flat seats like many other airlines.
 
flyyul
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 11:25 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:48 am

"777-240LR or some 744's"

-More high unit cost airplanes  Smile
 
calvin99
Posts: 180
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2001 5:20 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:51 am

Quoting Josh12815 (Reply 22):
Maybe if they switched to Boeing they may have a better Solution to the problem, Such as the 777-240LR or some 744's..

why would they need an aircraft with the range of 777-200LR and the capacity of 744 while most ppl here already suggesting that they can hardly fill an A346??
 
flyyul
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 11:25 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 4:33 am

"hardly fill an A346??"

-Any airline can fill the A346, but at the question becomes at what price?
 
rootsair
Posts: 4012
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 3:25 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 4:37 am

It would really be amazing if Swiss used the 343 from GVA to JFK. Then again it wuld be great to see another US carrier use GVA-JFK, such as CO does with GVA-EWR
A man without the knowledge of his past history,culture and origins is like a tree without roots
 
ChrisZRH
Posts: 404
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 7:09 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:06 am

there are some routes which are not profitable for sure.., like any other airline has too. i remember AOM had routes with loads of 100%, but they had to have over a 120% load to get it profitable, so loads really say nothing at all.
i read a good article about BA today stating they make 18% of their sales volume in africa / india and middle east, but it's more than 40% of it's profit!

flights to malabo, nairobi, dar es salaam, don't need even need a load near 70% to be profitable i guess, same goes to jeddah. but those are the destinations providing profit and subsidise a loss making MIA route for example. nowadays i don't know if any airline makes profit on a JFK route... :S

chris
Christian Galliker - AirTeamImages
 
ZRH
Posts: 4371
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 1999 11:32 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:25 am

Quoting ChrisZRH (Reply 29):
flights to malabo, nairobi, dar es salaam, don't need even need a load near 70% to be profitable i guess, same goes to jeddah. but those are the destinations providing profit and subsidise a loss making MIA route for example. nowadays i don't know if any airline makes profit on a JFK route... :

Actually on this TV broadcast on "10vor10" they said that the F and C class to JFK are always full and because of this they make profit on this route. I think on many routes you only can make profit with F and C and not with Y class.
 
johnnybgoode
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:47 am

FLYYUL, first of all, I fully agree with your entire first paragraph of your reply #19.
but still...

Quoting FLYYUL (Reply 25):
777-240LR or some 744's"

-More high unit cost airplanes

I really don't wanna be annoying or offending, and I get it that you were joking about it. but i've got the impression that you are not entirely familiar with the nature of unit costs. actually, the larger aircraft are, the lower their unit costs. hence the A380. a 744 will have lower unit costs than a CRJ. lower trip costs? well, certainly not.

unit costs in the sense of seat costs. it's not unit = aircraft. it's about what airlines sell, and that's seats. unit costs = seat costs.

Quoting FLYYUL (Reply 19):
Higher unit cost as a reference to fuel burn. With all due respect, the A340-600 fuel burn per seat is at best on par with the A343.

I understand that it's not sound to found an analysis on one source only, but let me still provide you some figures from LH. you are welcome to verify them by taking a look at

http://konzern.lufthansa.com/en/html...downloads/publikationen/index.html

and downloading the pdf-file 'Balance Facts and Figures' (2004 are the latest available stats).

it shows the following:
airline/type/average fuel (l) consumption per 100 RSK.

DLH A330-200 4,29
TCX A330-200 2,67
DLH A330-300 4,19
DLH A340-300 3,99
DLH A340-600 4,12

Please note the table states consumption per RSK, not ASK, which puzzles me, as the figures would be even lower when compared to ASK.

Clearly, both the A346 and A343 boast better economics than the LH A332 and A333.

Interestingly, the A332s of Thomas Cook UK have the lowest consumption which is likely owing to the fact of their dense configuration of, let me guess, something close to 400 seats.

Also, average fuel consumption depends on the stage lengths of flights (amongst others) which probably explains why the A343s have an even lower consumption than the A346, which really surprised me. they must have been operating longer routes or in general they had a higher load factor (as this table measures in RSK).

Quoting FLYYUL (Reply 19):
Given that the A330-200/300 model is the preferred trans-atlantic airplane, we can not prove that the A346 has better unit costs than the 332. If this indeed was the case, then A346 would have been much more popular.

as above, the A346 has better unit costs. however, the shorter the route, the cost advantage shifts to the advantage of an A330, the longer the route, the costs favor an A346. it's pretty much like comparing apples and oranges.

it pretty much depends on the mission an aircraft flies, this impacts the unit costs a lot. I have already stated that in my first post.

Quoting FLYYUL (Reply 19):
To suggest that the 346 would provide better unit costs than the A330-200, would then imply that the A340-600 as the preferred aircraft for high volume trans-atlantic routes.

well yes. if it's high volume route, then certainly. but i agree, if a flight operated by an A332 has got a healthy fare mix, and the A346 would fly around with lots of empty seats, it doesn't make sense to operate the A346. in such a case, clearly, it's the wrong plane in light of the costs it incurs.

It would be interesting to see exact results, given a standard and healthy fare mix on all compared flights, at which point an A346 becomes more economical than an A332 and vice versa.

However, while being unable to prove this, I'm quite sure that every transatlantic route, even the shorter ones (East Coast), would allow an A346 to operate more economically than an A333 or A332, if loads and fare mix are comparable. I don't think that in general, an A346 would not be viable on routes of, say, less than 5500km. but that's just an educated guess.

best regards
daniel
If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
 
buckieboy
Posts: 269
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 1:31 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:02 am

Quoting FLYYUL (Reply 21):
But where would Swiss expand to?

An obvious place in my opinion, with the types of planes mentioned in this thread would be to go back to Shanghai:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Lu



I don't know whether they (I mean LX, now) kept a Shanghai slot (or anything about the shift of intercontinental traffic from SHA to PVG), however, even with LH's frequent schedule, I've struggled to get back to Europe when I've had to reschedue on Star Alliance.

I'm sure if LX flew to PVG, perhaps alternate days from OS, they would make money. Also, I've taken the HKG/ZRH route and that has been a busy plane. I am amazed that a European airline (other than BA, for historical reasons, I acknowledge) favours HKG over SHA (PVG) and PEK!

I believe that SR also flew to PEK; a quick search on the photo database yielded nothing and I am too lazy to search elsewhere.  Wink

Just my 5 Rappen and very predictable given my other posts!

Cheers

Buckieboy
I'm taking orders from bottles of wine
 
ZRH
Posts: 4371
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 1999 11:32 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:11 am

Quoting Buckieboy (Reply 32):
I believe that SR also flew to PEK

Yes, SR flew to PEK for a long time. Long before they introduced their PVG route.
 
DeltaWings
Posts: 1234
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 4:06 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:12 am

LAX-ZRH would be good with the A346  cool 

The loads always seem to be great
Homer: Marge, it takes two to lie. One to lie and one to listen.
 
runway23
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 2:12 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:21 am

Quoting ZRH (Reply 24):
Yes, the 332 have still the old business class seats. The 343 have new angled lie flat seats like many other airlines.

And from the latest news those angled "lie" (rather slip down) seats are to be replaced with new ones (on A343s no news about 332s). There have been reports of Swiss asking their most valued customers to try them out. Swiss is also considering getting rid of First class.
 
johnnybgoode
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:26 am

Quoting Runway23 (Reply 35):
Swiss is also considering getting rid of First class.

Are you sure? I highly doubt it as whenever LH people are asked about LX they say it will remain as a high-quality, top-notch carrier. Given the healthy business market in Switzerland and lots of customers willing to pay high fares, I doubt they would even think of getting rid of First Class.
If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
 
ZRH
Posts: 4371
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 1999 11:32 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:32 am

Quoting Johnnybgoode (Reply 36):
Are you sure? I highly doubt it as whenever LH people are asked about LX they say it will remain as a high-quality, top-notch carrier. Given the healthy business market in Switzerland and lots of customers willing to pay high fares, I doubt they would even think of getting rid of First Class.

I agree. On some routes they make most money with F class and on some not. For this not all 332 have F.
 
ab1247
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 9:59 am

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Rout

Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:44 am

Yes, LX has been toying with the idea of getting rid of F class for a while now. A part of their 332's are already C/Y only.

LX seems to be doing something with its 332 seats. A picture posted not too long ago on A.net shows that they are at least replacing the somewhat tattered seat surfaces. The fact that they're not removing the seats leads me to believe that a C seat replacement is not on the horizon for the 332's in the near future. Frankly, I think a replacement would make their product just that much more solid. You would know what you get when you book LX C class, no nasty surprises when you walk up to the gate to see a 332 instead of a 343...

http://photos.airliners.net/photos/photos/4/2/6/0958624.jpg
 
IberiaA319
Posts: 574
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 5:40 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:18 am

Quoting Bjornstrom (Reply 23):
this summer with Hapag-Lloyd taking of the DAR-route.

The schedules loaded on Amadeus already show Hapag Lloyd's Airbus 300 operating different LX African routes for the next summer like SSG, DLA, NBO or DAR.

I'm quite surprised to see this on Amadeus (info for example for LX272 to SSG):

AIRCRAFT OWNER HAPAGFLY
COCKPIT CREW HAPAGFLY
CABIN CREW HAPAGFLY
OPERATED BY HAPAGFLY

Probably most of the passengers won't care, but some may be disappointed (if they expect a Swiss plane with Swiss crew or even PTVs in Y).
 
HBIHLtoEZE
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 10:50 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Fri Mar 24, 2006 8:53 am

Quoting IberiaA319 (Reply 39):
Probably most of the passengers won't care, but some may be disappointed (if they expect a Swiss plane with Swiss crew or even PTVs in Y).

Yes, my first reaction was rather a negative surprise. However, after thinking about the A300 (and the fact that it is going to be operated by Hapag) and having found out that it is only a temporary solution, I'd argue that it is not unwise - leasing costs are not that high and the A300-600R does well exactly on routes with the length like ZRH-NBO.

They'll find something else for the longer term - wishful thinking is a (couple of) A340-600(s) of course (anyway it is allowed to dream at this hour).

cheers n' good night
Our battered suitcases were piled on the sidewalk again; we had longer ways to go. But no matter, the road is life.
 
Knightsofmalta
Posts: 1665
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 10:51 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Sun Mar 26, 2006 5:28 am

Quoting Buckieboy (Reply 32):
I don't know whether they (I mean LX, now) kept a Shanghai slot (or anything about the shift of intercontinental traffic from SHA to PVG), however, even with LH's frequent schedule, I've struggled to get back to Europe when I've had to reschedue on Star Alliance.

I'm sure if LX flew to PVG, perhaps alternate days from OS, they would make money. Also, I've taken the HKG/ZRH route and that has been a busy plane. I am amazed that a European airline (other than BA, for historical reasons, I acknowledge) favours HKG over SHA (PVG) and PEK!

I believe that SR also flew to PEK; a quick search on the photo database yielded nothing and I am too lazy to search elsewhere.

SR did fly to both PEK and SHA. With SR going bancrupt, the SHA flights stopped but PEK remained on the LX schedule for about a year or so.

LX holds slots for both PEK and PVG. Unfortunately though, they've come to the conclusion that the flights would be too expensive to produce to ever operate profitably.

As for HKG, if you ask me, LX could probably easily fill two A. 340-300 a day on that route. It's amazing. The flight is nearly always fully booked despite the fact that LX has a monopoly on the route and charges accordingly. I remember when CX stopped flying to ZRH, they said it was due to an aircraft shortage and that they'd resume the flights after a short interruption. Can't really see that happening now though. It's been 5 years since they left ZRH.
 
daron4000
Posts: 604
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 12:17 pm

RE: Swiss In Capacity Squeeze On Its New York Routes

Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:53 am

Well from Flyertalk, some news about Swiss includes the fact that Swiss is testing a new, flat seat for C to first be implemented on their A330's, which would be a very good thing. Also, LX 8/9, the ORD-ZRH flight, is becoming 2-class the same day as the start-up of the 2nd JFK-ZRH flight, so I'm wondering if it will go back to 3-class in the summer with the Hapag A300 taking over the route to Africa, or if a new route will start etc.