lanperu
Posts: 602
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2001 1:17 pm

Less Density For More Cargo Profitable?

Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:15 pm

If you were to deploy a plane in a strong O&D market (Like LAX) , on a route where cargo is more prominent and consistant than premium traffic, in this case LIM (Lima, Peru).

Would it be profitable/economically sensical to configure an aircraft in a single class (All-Economy/low-density) lay-out that would mean less pax, so therefore less baggage and therefore freed up weight for cargo?

The route I was thinking of is:

LAX-LIM 3621nm
8h35m

This route is flown up to twice daily by a A340/767 which have healthy loads..

My concept is either a 767-300ER or 777-200ER with respective configurations:

767-300ER
219 pax
2-3-2
38"

Crew:
Flight: 3 (1 Capt. 2 F.O.)

Cabin:
1:33 = 7 (2 Lead FA - 5 FA)

AVOD System


777-200ER
273 pax/304 pax
3-3-3 / 3-4-3
38"

Crew:
Flight: 3 (1 Capt. 2 F.O.)

Cabin:
1:33 = 273 pax 8 (2 Lead FA - 6 FA)

Now, I chose LAX-LIM because it is a fairly consistant route with loads and cargo, but for the sake of my original question:

The viability of this operation.

If this plane where deployed on any route where O&D is strong, but the flight time/arrivals etc. are not as important as the fare you are paying, would it make economic sense? For example like JFK-SJU or MIA-SJU?, where loads are pretty healthy?

Well that is a general overview of the route, configuration...I pretty much guessed on the crew requirements such as the crew:pax ratio and the flight deck crew. Any insight or adjustments to the flight crew or FA assignments to maximize cost-saving is welcome. So for example if I can legally go with less cabin crew or flight crew please let me know.

Well thank you for your time, I always find a lot of insight on this board, maybe!

LanPeru
 
blueflyer
Posts: 3634
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

RE: Less Density For More Cargo Profitable?

Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:31 pm

Don't have specific numbers in front of me, but I'd use the A330 if I were you. Performance is so good a HKG based carrier (either CX or KA) was using their pax version at night to move cargo without a single passenger.
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has no clothes.
 
lanperu
Posts: 602
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2001 1:17 pm

RE: Less Density For More Cargo Profitable?

Mon Mar 16, 2009 10:40 pm

I am assuming this is the A330-300? It's super efficient and very capable.

On a route that is about 3621nm, the A330-300 with a range of 5650nm seems like it would have a lot of payload flexibility, exactly what does this translate to?

Are these operations where a passenger cabin flies almost empty profitable in the long-run?
 
lanperu
Posts: 602
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2001 1:17 pm

RE: Less Density For More Cargo Profitable?

Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:08 pm

I was also thinking that with less passengers you already have an automatic decrease in the amount of luggage that will be on any given flight.

What inspired me for this was People Express, making low-cost work on a large scale.

Basically you have the travellers that really don't care about getting there on a certain carrier but rather the price tha they pay. I dont know if I am being ignorant by making this assumption, but for example, although my family loves LAN when the price is right, they have taken

Copa, TACA/LACSA, Delta or even CO.. They travel often, they travel in groups, so if the costs are lower and that translates into lower fares, a $30-50 can make a difference....
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9606
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Less Density For More Cargo Profitable?

Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:20 pm



Quoting LanPeru (Thread starter):

Would it be profitable/economically sensical to configure an aircraft in a single class (All-Economy/low-density) lay-out that would mean less pax, so therefore less baggage and therefore freed up weight for cargo?

The seats themselves do not weigh that much and on larger planes where they are serving meals, widebodies are rarely staffed at minimum levels. By maintaining capacity, you can use the plane on normal high density routes, and then just restrict the number of passengers for destinations that have a higher cargo yield.

I honestly think that if there is no yield premium, then low density economy is never a good idea. If you want fewer passengers, just put in more business class seats.

If you want to restrict the number of passengers, I would think you would have a business class. Even if demand is low, you can dump upgrades and reward tickets on the route. It's better to get $400 more with someone upgrading than to just waste the cabin space on giving low fare economy passengers more room.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
lanperu
Posts: 602
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2001 1:17 pm

RE: Less Density For More Cargo Profitable?

Tue Mar 17, 2009 6:32 pm

I was thinking the same as far as possibly having a "Cabin" although more of a "Plus" cabin, increased width, so maybe 1 or 2 less pax pero row for a few rows, but wouldn't the cost of providing lounge access, a seperate product, etc etc be more expensive?

My thinking was this, for example if I wanted "flexibility" on a route like LAX-LIM you are looking at a fare between Y and J of about $2500-3000, what if I don't care about all these perks and just want to be able to change my flight last minute, I won't care about a lounge since I want to spend every last minute possible with my fam as it is...

I remember flying LAX-LIM in J with LAN and I had an invite to go to the lounge, but I felt so bad leaving my family that came to bid me farewell at LAX...I literally peeked into the lounge and left...the same story at LIM when coming back. I think I spent no more than 30mins in there and even then, I was more anxious to get home...

So therefore all pax get more comfort across, but for those that want flexibility and more FF credits ETC, would have the choice to tag these on....

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AerolineasAR343, rta and 17 guests