Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
heavymetal
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri May 08, 2015 3:37 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Fri Oct 25, 2019 2:39 pm

N757ST wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
It is widely regarded at B6 that the 190 vs 319 was a big mistake



No, it’s not. While the e90 has been a mixed bag and is now due for replacement, all the growth in Boston could not have happened without it. The e90 wasn’t a stellar success, but it wasn’t a failure either. The only people I have ever heard that said B6 should have ordered a319s instead of e90s are pilots.


It was, and is regarded as a mistake, and this sentiment is far more common at JBLU beyond the pilots. As you've alluded to this entire thread, the vast majority of the JetBlue E190 network could handle an A320. It's superior cost per seat would allow them to go down the fare structure and either stimulate new demand or capture more share of existing traffic. The very few routes that truly can't handle an A320, but have sufficient demand at a high enough fare for a smaller aircraft, should simply be operated on A319's. Much simpler for the operation and you extract a lot of fixed cost out of the system.

Ever wonder when JetBlue's CASM problem started, and why they haven't been able to shake it? It pretty clearly started exactly in 2005, with the introduction of the E190. There are lots of reasons why they haven't been able to shake it, but it's continued presence has played a big role in not being able to fix it. The A220 will have better unit economics than the E190, but it won't match the A320neo and they will still retain all of the complexity costs.

What's remarkable is that JetBlue didn't seem to learn the lesson of fleet complexity with the E190, instead opting for continued fleet complexity with the A220. In fact, for the entire early to mid 2020's they will increase the complexity in the fleet by operating 3 distinct families.
 
Deltran757
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 5:37 pm

Re: Spirit Airlines to announce major Airbus order

Fri Oct 25, 2019 2:48 pm

TwinStarRocket wrote:
SXDFC wrote:
Will the A319NEOs replace the A319CEOs? I also read in another article that NK will launch a new interior this year.


There was no mention of retiring 319's on the Q3 call. However, we are purchasing them off lease and that would give us greater flexibility to retire or sell them. But we're also still running them through the paint shop and at $150k a ship I can't see us spending that kind of money if they were going away soon. I just delivered 524 to GUS for paint and returned 531 to FLL with a shiny new coat of yellow.


Not to go off subject. Do you know how many 319’s and 320’s are left to be painted?
To see the world... One plane at a time
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20603
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Fri Oct 25, 2019 3:35 pm

heavymetal wrote:
N757ST wrote:
jfklganyc wrote:
It is widely regarded at B6 that the 190 vs 319 was a big mistake



No, it’s not. While the e90 has been a mixed bag and is now due for replacement, all the growth in Boston could not have happened without it. The e90 wasn’t a stellar success, but it wasn’t a failure either. The only people I have ever heard that said B6 should have ordered a319s instead of e90s are pilots.


It was, and is regarded as a mistake, and this sentiment is far more common at JBLU beyond the pilots. As you've alluded to this entire thread, the vast majority of the JetBlue E190 network could handle an A320. It's superior cost per seat would allow them to go down the fare structure and either stimulate new demand or capture more share of existing traffic. The very few routes that truly can't handle an A320, but have sufficient demand at a high enough fare for a smaller aircraft, should simply be operated on A319's. Much simpler for the operation and you extract a lot of fixed cost out of the system.

Ever wonder when JetBlue's CASM problem started, and why they haven't been able to shake it? It pretty clearly started exactly in 2005, with the introduction of the E190. There are lots of reasons why they haven't been able to shake it, but it's continued presence has played a big role in not being able to fix it. The A220 will have better unit economics than the E190, but it won't match the A320neo and they will still retain all of the complexity costs.

What's remarkable is that JetBlue didn't seem to learn the lesson of fleet complexity with the E190, instead opting for continued fleet complexity with the A220. In fact, for the entire early to mid 2020's they will increase the complexity in the fleet by operating 3 distinct families.

The issue with the E190 is the CASM 1 to 1.5 higher than the A320 and introducing it as the small market premium dropped (it is still there, but less). The A220 has a CASM in JetBlue configuration equal to the A320NEO thanks to the CFRP wing and electrical subsystems.

JetBlue, a high intensity operator without MRO experience learned a harsh lesson if the cost of being a launch operator. The E-Jets still have software issues due to the billing structure of the avionics vendor. JetBlue has the joy of finding problems first as the clear fleet leader. For the A220, Swiss, AirBaltic, Delta, KE, and Lufthansa are the lab rats.

The CF34-8 is not a good engine for maintenance. It overstressed inherited parts from the CF34-8 and the high spool met guarantee, but not promise. This resulted in higher engine temperatures than design with shorter overhaul intervals (met guarantee, not promise).

I believe JetBlue made the correct choice. If the A220 sells as well as I expect, JetBlue will benefit.


JetBlue already expanded their order to 80. A viable subfleet.

If Spirit had ordered 50+, a sub-fleet is the way to go. However, I cannot come up any scenario that ordered even 30.
Winter is coming.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Spirit Airlines to announce major Airbus order

Fri Oct 25, 2019 3:51 pm

nkops wrote:
Spirit is a 121 operator


Fair 'nuff.

Can I assume that outside of deadheading - there is no means of getting acceptable ratios of attendants vs. passengers via a paper derate of the cabin capacity?
 
Babyshark
Posts: 255
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: Spirit Airlines to announce major Airbus order

Fri Oct 25, 2019 4:21 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
nkops wrote:
Spirit is a 121 operator


Fair 'nuff.

Can I assume that outside of deadheading - there is no means of getting acceptable ratios of attendants vs. passengers via a paper derate of the cabin capacity?


No. Otherwise you wouldn't see them twist themselves in a pretzel to make the CRJ550.
 
tzadik
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:08 am

Re: Spirit Airlines to announce major Airbus order

Fri Oct 25, 2019 4:40 pm

TwinStarRocket wrote:
N757ST wrote:
WeatherPilot wrote:
It was probably more important for Spirit to strike while their competition is wounded (Max debacle) and the 319 NEO’s would probably get delivered faster than a batch of A220 while also allowing for commonality.


As far as I know the a319 line is the same as the A320. (Different then the a321)

I makes zero sense to choose an a319neo over an a320neo. Zero. And and the market agrees.


We operate the 319 exclusively into BUR and we do have routes where a 319 is more than adequate for capacity. As we continue to expand into mid size markets perhaps they thought the 319 was the better aircraft.


Not entirely true... the A320 is approved for BUR.
 
ODwyerPW
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Fri Oct 25, 2019 5:15 pm

Beechtobus wrote:
tphuang wrote:
[
you get A220-300, lower cost to operate and more seats.


Is it really lower cost though? 2 fleet types, 2 seniority lists, 2 different pools of pilots, 2 maintenance spares stockpiles, 2 different training and recurrency programs, etc....


exactly... it isn't...
learning never stops.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5474
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Fri Oct 25, 2019 5:18 pm

heavymetal wrote:
N757ST wrote:

No, it’s not. While the e90 has been a mixed bag and is now due for replacement, all the growth in Boston could not have happened without it. The e90 wasn’t a stellar success, but it wasn’t a failure either. The only people I have ever heard that said B6 should have ordered a319s instead of e90s are pilots.


It was, and is regarded as a mistake, and this sentiment is far more common at JBLU beyond the pilots. As you've alluded to this entire thread, the vast majority of the JetBlue E190 network could handle an A320. It's superior cost per seat would allow them to go down the fare structure and either stimulate new demand or capture more share of existing traffic. The very few routes that truly can't handle an A320, but have sufficient demand at a high enough fare for a smaller aircraft, should simply be operated on A319's. Much simpler for the operation and you extract a lot of fixed cost out of the system.

Ever wonder when JetBlue's CASM problem started, and why they haven't been able to shake it? It pretty clearly started exactly in 2005, with the introduction of the E190. There are lots of reasons why they haven't been able to shake it, but it's continued presence has played a big role in not being able to fix it. The A220 will have better unit economics than the E190, but it won't match the A320neo and they will still retain all of the complexity costs.

What's remarkable is that JetBlue didn't seem to learn the lesson of fleet complexity with the E190, instead opting for continued fleet complexity with the A220. In fact, for the entire early to mid 2020's they will increase the complexity in the fleet by operating 3 distinct families.


Yet they decided to go with A220-300 over A319/A320. E90 is a high CASM aircraft, A220 is not. A220 is going to replace a320 on many routes.

By JetBlue's own numbers. E90 CASM is 20% higher than A320 in stage length adjusted basis. In fact total operating cost of A220 is about the same as E90 despite the extra FA + 40 extra passengers. A220 CASM is 30% lower than E90. So if E90 CASM is 1.2, then A320 is 1 and A220-300 would be 0.84. So A220-300 CASM is 16% lower than 150 seat A320. Even if a 162 seat A320NEO have 10 to 15% lower CASM than A320CEO of 150 seats, it would still have higher CASM than A220-300 while having to fill extra 22 seats. Simple math that shows why B6 will never take another A320, but will likely pick up all 60 A220 options. In fact, a hypothetical A220-500 would have CASM close to A321NEO.

My guess is E90 will stick around past 2025. So B6 will most likely be operating 3 types for a while. AS is operating multiple types of aircraft, they are managing their cost pretty well. The few % point of higher CASM from extra types is compensated by the higher RASM of completely paid for E90 on those short routes and the very low CASM of A220.
 
ODwyerPW
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Fri Oct 25, 2019 5:22 pm

Everyone assumes a route can jump from 140pax to 165pax just because you bought a bigger plane and then absorb the incremental costs? Spirit knows what they are doing. If you save $50million over 5 years flying 5 A319NEOs instead of 5 A320NEOs on routes that don't support the additional capacity... then you have $50million dollars to spend on other things... like paying down 20% of your new headquarters... or opening new crew bases.... or expanding into another airport.... Why throw that money into more plane than you need? Use it for other parts of the business. I think people forget the value of money..... those incremental savings can be used elsewhere and can be a significant boost to the business/moral....
learning never stops.
 
767driver
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 3:42 pm

Re: Spirit Airlines to announce major Airbus order

Fri Oct 25, 2019 5:34 pm

tzadik wrote:
TwinStarRocket wrote:
N757ST wrote:

As far as I know the a319 line is the same as the A320. (Different then the a321)

I makes zero sense to choose an a319neo over an a320neo. Zero. And and the market agrees.


We operate the 319 exclusively into BUR and we do have routes where a 319 is more than adequate for capacity. As we continue to expand into mid size markets perhaps they thought the 319 was the better aircraft.


Not entirely true... the A320 is approved for BUR.


The A320 for NK is NOT approved per ops spec into BUR
 
LOT767301ER
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 2:14 am

Re: Spirit Airlines to announce major Airbus order

Fri Oct 25, 2019 5:38 pm

tzadik wrote:
TwinStarRocket wrote:
N757ST wrote:

As far as I know the a319 line is the same as the A320. (Different then the a321)

I makes zero sense to choose an a319neo over an a320neo. Zero. And and the market agrees.


We operate the 319 exclusively into BUR and we do have routes where a 319 is more than adequate for capacity. As we continue to expand into mid size markets perhaps they thought the 319 was the better aircraft.


Not entirely true... the A320 is approved for BUR.


Only recently and on paper. Future flying is a different matter.

The A320 for NK is NOT approved per ops spec into BUR


You are not correct. Stop spreading false information.

Not to go off subject. Do you know how many 319’s and 320’s are left to be painted?


If youre talking about a non-yellow livery its 1 or 2 319s and 12 or so 320s.
 
tzadik
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:08 am

Re: Spirit Airlines to announce major Airbus order

Fri Oct 25, 2019 6:03 pm

767driver wrote:
tzadik wrote:
TwinStarRocket wrote:

We operate the 319 exclusively into BUR and we do have routes where a 319 is more than adequate for capacity. As we continue to expand into mid size markets perhaps they thought the 319 was the better aircraft.


Not entirely true... the A320 is approved for BUR.


The A320 for NK is NOT approved per ops spec into BUR


The only NK aircraft type not permitted into BUR is the A321.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/NKS ... /KLAS/KBUR
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20603
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:00 pm

tphuang wrote:
heavymetal wrote:
N757ST wrote:

No, it’s not. While the e90 has been a mixed bag and is now due for replacement, all the growth in Boston could not have happened without it. The e90 wasn’t a stellar success, but it wasn’t a failure either. The only people I have ever heard that said B6 should have ordered a319s instead of e90s are pilots.


It was, and is regarded as a mistake, and this sentiment is far more common at JBLU beyond the pilots. As you've alluded to this entire thread, the vast majority of the JetBlue E190 network could handle an A320. It's superior cost per seat would allow them to go down the fare structure and either stimulate new demand or capture more share of existing traffic. The very few routes that truly can't handle an A320, but have sufficient demand at a high enough fare for a smaller aircraft, should simply be operated on A319's. Much simpler for the operation and you extract a lot of fixed cost out of the system.

Ever wonder when JetBlue's CASM problem started, and why they haven't been able to shake it? It pretty clearly started exactly in 2005, with the introduction of the E190. There are lots of reasons why they haven't been able to shake it, but it's continued presence has played a big role in not being able to fix it. The A220 will have better unit economics than the E190, but it won't match the A320neo and they will still retain all of the complexity costs.

What's remarkable is that JetBlue didn't seem to learn the lesson of fleet complexity with the E190, instead opting for continued fleet complexity with the A220. In fact, for the entire early to mid 2020's they will increase the complexity in the fleet by operating 3 distinct families.


Yet they decided to go with A220-300 over A319/A320. E90 is a high CASM aircraft, A220 is not. A220 is going to replace a320 on many routes.

By JetBlue's own numbers. E90 CASM is 20% higher than A320 in stage length adjusted basis. In fact total operating cost of A220 is about the same as E90 despite the extra FA + 40 extra passengers. A220 CASM is 30% lower than E90. So if E90 CASM is 1.2, then A320 is 1 and A220-300 would be 0.84. So A220-300 CASM is 16% lower than 150 seat A320. Even if a 162 seat A320NEO have 10 to 15% lower CASM than A320CEO of 150 seats, it would still have higher CASM than A220-300 while having to fill extra 22 seats. Simple math that shows why B6 will never take another A320, but will likely pick up all 60 A220 options. In fact, a hypothetical A220-500 would have CASM close to A321NEO.

My guess is E90 will stick around past 2025. So B6 will most likely be operating 3 types for a while. AS is operating multiple types of aircraft, they are managing their cost pretty well. The few % point of higher CASM from extra types is compensated by the higher RASM of completely paid for E90 on those short routes and the very low CASM of A220.

You make some good points. The A220 costs will drive many (most?) A320 operators to more A321s.

If there was an A220-500, one would have expected a different NK order. But there isn't.

As much as I am a fan of the A220-300, there is a simplicity cost advantage. It seems NK didn't need that many small aircraft.

JetBlue did. The fact there is near cost parity for the A220-300 and E190 does not bode well for the later.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
Beechtobus
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Sat Oct 26, 2019 2:48 am

TwinStarRocket wrote:
Beechtobus wrote:
N757ST wrote:
They are entitled to order any any aircraft they want, I’m pointing out that I don’t see any “hot high” advantage to the a319neo vs the a320neo. Yes, I fly the aircraft, I know it’s capabilities, the a319 had some advantages over the a320 into certain unique airports, but the a320neo isn’t the a320. It’s far more capable, and I don’t see an example of a route where the a319neo performance would be warranted. Maybe it is and I just don’t see it.


I think what needs to be kept in mind is that a ULCC like Spirit will operate their fleet much closer to the aircrafts MTOW because of their higher seating densities. Small differences in range and takeoff performance make a big difference when closer to the aircrafts MTOWs for reasons like higher seating densities. With higher seating densities an airline will get to the point where they have to trade payload for fuel (range). For example, I’m sure AA would have no problem launching a full A320neo from BOG to ORD or B6 launching one from BUR to BOS but I’m not so sure that Spirit could do the same with a full A320neo based on their increased payload due to their higher seat density. These routes may be possible on Spirit, though, in a full A319neo.

Range numbers and takeoff distance data that manufacturers advertise are generally based on a typical airlines (like AA or LH) seating density and not a ULCC like NK or F9. With higher seat densities, range will be lower and takeoff runs/stage 2 climbs will be longer.

Notice there is no mention of the 321LR being ordered for Spirit. The 321LR With simply longer range due to added fuel tanks and no increase to MTOW would make no sense for Spirit as they would have to trade payload for fuel due to their higher seat density. Other airlines wont typically have to make this tradeoff due to lower seating densities. Now the 321XLR may be a different story for Spirit in the future as it is getting an MTOW increase.

Long story short, where a 320neo and 319neo may be very similarly capable for an airline with a standard seating density, the performance differences may be notable for one with a higher seating density, thus the A319neo order from Spirit.


I don't mean to be rude but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

I have never, ever, been close to MTOW in any flight that I've operated for NK over the last five years. Only about 50% of the time are we departing over our max landing weight which is nothing more than an inspection if we have to do an overweight landing.

NK hauls zero cargo. ZERO. Our cargo hold contains passenger bags and COMAT, if any, and that's it. Our bellies are mostly empty save for US to Latin America flights. AA, DL, and UA are probably heavier than we are as they fly cargo.

The 320 NEO was specifically called out in the Q3 call for being able to do SKBO to FLL without having to block out seats or be weight restricted as we currently are.

Your statements may be true for other airlines but you couldn't be more wrong with them regarding NK.


So you’ve clearly never done PHL-LAX in the winter with a distant alternate in an A320. Or SPJC-FLL In a 319 with an alternate. It doesn’t happen often but stick around NK another 7-8 years champ, it does happen. Next time you’re in the front of another airlines full airbus, typically they will be lighter for a similar city pair. Sure, there are exceptions, But I’m saying typically. And I may have wrongly assumed that it was implied that I was referring to future routes NK may open. Deep South America-Florida, SKBO-ORD, BUR-EWR, Quito-LAX, etc where a 319 might be preferred for performance.

I don’t have A319neo performance data in my manuals, nor do you, but at some point it appears that we will. There clearly is a performance and/or economical advantage to the A319neo that Spirit Is currently privy to.
 
LOT767301ER
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 2:14 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Sat Oct 26, 2019 3:29 am

^NK didnt option the 31N for that reason though..
 
tphuang
Posts: 5474
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Sat Oct 26, 2019 8:17 pm

lightsaber wrote:
tphuang wrote:
heavymetal wrote:

It was, and is regarded as a mistake, and this sentiment is far more common at JBLU beyond the pilots. As you've alluded to this entire thread, the vast majority of the JetBlue E190 network could handle an A320. It's superior cost per seat would allow them to go down the fare structure and either stimulate new demand or capture more share of existing traffic. The very few routes that truly can't handle an A320, but have sufficient demand at a high enough fare for a smaller aircraft, should simply be operated on A319's. Much simpler for the operation and you extract a lot of fixed cost out of the system.

Ever wonder when JetBlue's CASM problem started, and why they haven't been able to shake it? It pretty clearly started exactly in 2005, with the introduction of the E190. There are lots of reasons why they haven't been able to shake it, but it's continued presence has played a big role in not being able to fix it. The A220 will have better unit economics than the E190, but it won't match the A320neo and they will still retain all of the complexity costs.

What's remarkable is that JetBlue didn't seem to learn the lesson of fleet complexity with the E190, instead opting for continued fleet complexity with the A220. In fact, for the entire early to mid 2020's they will increase the complexity in the fleet by operating 3 distinct families.


Yet they decided to go with A220-300 over A319/A320. E90 is a high CASM aircraft, A220 is not. A220 is going to replace a320 on many routes.

By JetBlue's own numbers. E90 CASM is 20% higher than A320 in stage length adjusted basis. In fact total operating cost of A220 is about the same as E90 despite the extra FA + 40 extra passengers. A220 CASM is 30% lower than E90. So if E90 CASM is 1.2, then A320 is 1 and A220-300 would be 0.84. So A220-300 CASM is 16% lower than 150 seat A320. Even if a 162 seat A320NEO have 10 to 15% lower CASM than A320CEO of 150 seats, it would still have higher CASM than A220-300 while having to fill extra 22 seats. Simple math that shows why B6 will never take another A320, but will likely pick up all 60 A220 options. In fact, a hypothetical A220-500 would have CASM close to A321NEO.

My guess is E90 will stick around past 2025. So B6 will most likely be operating 3 types for a while. AS is operating multiple types of aircraft, they are managing their cost pretty well. The few % point of higher CASM from extra types is compensated by the higher RASM of completely paid for E90 on those short routes and the very low CASM of A220.

You make some good points. The A220 costs will drive many (most?) A320 operators to more A321s.

If there was an A220-500, one would have expected a different NK order. But there isn't.

As much as I am a fan of the A220-300, there is a simplicity cost advantage. It seems NK didn't need that many small aircraft.

JetBlue did. The fact there is near cost parity for the A220-300 and E190 does not bode well for the later.

Lightsaber


I've definitely become an A220 fanboy since B6 kind of announced to the world how low the cost is.

It's kind of interesting that because JetBlue has already undertaken the move of adding a second type, they were willing to stick with 2 types (or maybe even 3 if E90 doesn't retire for a while) when deciding between E2, A220 and A319. Whereas since NK and WN have always been single type fleet, the cost of moving away from that seems to be greater. Haven't thought about that before.

Seems like there are two different costs here:
the cost of adding a new type and also the cost of moving away from single fleet type.

So based on my calculation, the total cost of A320CEO with 3 FA is about 25% higher than the total cost of operating E90 and A220. Given that there is minimal capital cost for E90, they still make sense going forward for certain shuttle routes unless the cost of maintaining them gets exponentially higher. From that, I would estimate the cost of A320NEO with 4 FA to be somewhere around 20% higher (assuming 16% fuel efficiency of NEO over CEO). And the total cost of 737-800 with 4 FA to be around 32% higher (based on 2% higher total cost of 737-800 over A320 along with 2 to 3% extra cost of FA. 1.25 * 1.055 around 1.32). If we assume 40% of total cost of a flight to be fuel (that's what B6 used when calculating cost of A220) and that fuel efficiency of MAX over NG is 14%, then total cost of 7M8 would be 1.32 * (0.6 + 0.4 * 0.86) = 1.246.

So using that for B6, let's say for simplicity total cost of 140 seat A220 is 140. Then the per seat cost of E90 would be 1.4 or 40% higher. The per seat cost of 162 seat, 4 FA A320CEO would be 140 * 1.27 / 162 = 1.097 or 9.7% higher. The per seat cost of 165 seat, 4 FA A320NEO would be 1.02 or 2% higher. Of course, the RASM for A220 with fewer seat to fill and wider/more comfortable interior would bring in much higher margins.

NK is a little more interesting. They can probably fill 150 seat for 3 FA or 160 seat for 4 FAs. Let's say they go for a more compact layout of 160 seat and the total cost add 3% in cost with the extra FA and luggage. For simpliity let's estimate total cost of 160 seat A220 to be 160. Then the per seat cost of A320NEO would be 160 * 1.2 / 1.03 / 182 = 1.024. (1.03 is for the 3% added cost) So I still estimate cost of A320NEO per seat to be higher. If they go with 150 sat. Then the per seat cost of A320NEO would be 150 * 1.2 / 182 = 0.989, or slightly less than 150 seat A220. Of course, if you add the extra cost of additional type, the calculation changes. So for NK, the need for an extra FA on a more dense A220 may make it less attractive.

And then WN. Let's say WN go for a 143 seat A220 since they may be able to squeeze in another half row vs B6 due to fewer Y+ seats. And let's say for simplicity total cost 143 seat A220 is 143. Then the per seat cost of 175 seat 7M8 would be 143 * 1.24 / 175 = 1.013. So again, on a standalone basis, A220 would have lower cost than 7M8. I'm not privy to how much it would cost WN to move away from single fleet type so this is just calculation without factoring that in.

Either way, seems strange to me that not more people are picking up A220s given its economics. And that doesn't even factor in possible higher RASM from the comfortable interiors.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20603
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Sat Oct 26, 2019 10:00 pm

tphuang wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
tphuang wrote:

Yet they decided to go with A220-300 over A319/A320. E90 is a high CASM aircraft, A220 is not. A220 is going to replace a320 on many routes.

By JetBlue's own numbers. E90 CASM is 20% higher than A320 in stage length adjusted basis. In fact total operating cost of A220 is about the same as E90 despite the extra FA + 40 extra passengers. A220 CASM is 30% lower than E90. So if E90 CASM is 1.2, then A320 is 1 and A220-300 would be 0.84. So A220-300 CASM is 16% lower than 150 seat A320. Even if a 162 seat A320NEO have 10 to 15% lower CASM than A320CEO of 150 seats, it would still have higher CASM than A220-300 while having to fill extra 22 seats. Simple math that shows why B6 will never take another A320, but will likely pick up all 60 A220 options. In fact, a hypothetical A220-500 would have CASM close to A321NEO.

My guess is E90 will stick around past 2025. So B6 will most likely be operating 3 types for a while. AS is operating multiple types of aircraft, they are managing their cost pretty well. The few % point of higher CASM from extra types is compensated by the higher RASM of completely paid for E90 on those short routes and the very low CASM of A220.

You make some good points. The A220 costs will drive many (most?) A320 operators to more A321s.

If there was an A220-500, one would have expected a different NK order. But there isn't.

As much as I am a fan of the A220-300, there is a simplicity cost advantage. It seems NK didn't need that many small aircraft.

JetBlue did. The fact there is near cost parity for the A220-300 and E190 does not bode well for the later.

Lightsaber


I've definitely become an A220 fanboy since B6 kind of announced to the world how low the cost is.

It's kind of interesting that because JetBlue has already undertaken the move of adding a second type, they were willing to stick with 2 types (or maybe even 3 if E90 doesn't retire for a while) when deciding between E2, A220 and A319. Whereas since NK and WN have always been single type fleet, the cost of moving away from that seems to be greater. Haven't thought about that before.

Seems like there are two different costs here:
the cost of adding a new type and also the cost of moving away from single fleet type.

So based on my calculation, the total cost of A320CEO with 3 FA is about 25% higher than the total cost of operating E90 and A220. Given that there is minimal capital cost for E90, they still make sense going forward for certain shuttle routes unless the cost of maintaining them gets exponentially higher. From that, I would estimate the cost of A320NEO with 4 FA to be somewhere around 20% higher (assuming 16% fuel efficiency of NEO over CEO). And the total cost of 737-800 with 4 FA to be around 32% higher (based on 2% higher total cost of 737-800 over A320 along with 2 to 3% extra cost of FA. 1.25 * 1.055 around 1.32). If we assume 40% of total cost of a flight to be fuel (that's what B6 used when calculating cost of A220) and that fuel efficiency of MAX over NG is 14%, then total cost of 7M8 would be 1.32 * (0.6 + 0.4 * 0.86) = 1.246.

So using that for B6, let's say for simplicity total cost of 140 seat A220 is 140. Then the per seat cost of E90 would be 1.4 or 40% higher. The per seat cost of 162 seat, 4 FA A320CEO would be 140 * 1.27 / 162 = 1.097 or 9.7% higher. The per seat cost of 165 seat, 4 FA A320NEO would be 1.02 or 2% higher. Of course, the RASM for A220 with fewer seat to fill and wider/more comfortable interior would bring in much higher margins.

NK is a little more interesting. They can probably fill 150 seat for 3 FA or 160 seat for 4 FAs. Let's say they go for a more compact layout of 160 seat and the total cost add 3% in cost with the extra FA and luggage. For simpliity let's estimate total cost of 160 seat A220 to be 160. Then the per seat cost of A320NEO would be 160 * 1.2 / 1.03 / 182 = 1.024. (1.03 is for the 3% added cost) So I still estimate cost of A320NEO per seat to be higher. If they go with 150 sat. Then the per seat cost of A320NEO would be 150 * 1.2 / 182 = 0.989, or slightly less than 150 seat A220. Of course, if you add the extra cost of additional type, the calculation changes. So for NK, the need for an extra FA on a more dense A220 may make it less attractive.

And then WN. Let's say WN go for a 143 seat A220 since they may be able to squeeze in another half row vs B6 due to fewer Y+ seats. And let's say for simplicity total cost 143 seat A220 is 143. Then the per seat cost of 175 seat 7M8 would be 143 * 1.24 / 175 = 1.013. So again, on a standalone basis, A220 would have lower cost than 7M8. I'm not privy to how much it would cost WN to move away from single fleet type so this is just calculation without factoring that in.

Either way, seems strange to me that not more people are picking up A220s given its economics. And that doesn't even factor in possible higher RASM from the comfortable interiors.

You did a good analysis that has a slightly higher cost for the A320NEO and MAX than I estimate.

For the E190, your maintenance costs seem low. There is also a cost to missed dispatches as it never hit the same reliability as the others.

I also believe fir B6 there is a value in TCON range.

The real cost difference will be if Airbus extends tge LOV of the A220. The current hours are low and my review of the structure is that it should be good for 50%+ more life.
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
tb727
Posts: 2239
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:40 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Sun Oct 27, 2019 1:20 am

TwinStarRocket wrote:
Beechtobus wrote:
N757ST wrote:
They are entitled to order any any aircraft they want, I’m pointing out that I don’t see any “hot high” advantage to the a319neo vs the a320neo. Yes, I fly the aircraft, I know it’s capabilities, the a319 had some advantages over the a320 into certain unique airports, but the a320neo isn’t the a320. It’s far more capable, and I don’t see an example of a route where the a319neo performance would be warranted. Maybe it is and I just don’t see it.


I think what needs to be kept in mind is that a ULCC like Spirit will operate their fleet much closer to the aircrafts MTOW because of their higher seating densities. Small differences in range and takeoff performance make a big difference when closer to the aircrafts MTOWs for reasons like higher seating densities. With higher seating densities an airline will get to the point where they have to trade payload for fuel (range). For example, I’m sure AA would have no problem launching a full A320neo from BOG to ORD or B6 launching one from BUR to BOS but I’m not so sure that Spirit could do the same with a full A320neo based on their increased payload due to their higher seat density. These routes may be possible on Spirit, though, in a full A319neo.

Range numbers and takeoff distance data that manufacturers advertise are generally based on a typical airlines (like AA or LH) seating density and not a ULCC like NK or F9. With higher seat densities, range will be lower and takeoff runs/stage 2 climbs will be longer.

Notice there is no mention of the 321LR being ordered for Spirit. The 321LR With simply longer range due to added fuel tanks and no increase to MTOW would make no sense for Spirit as they would have to trade payload for fuel due to their higher seat density. Other airlines wont typically have to make this tradeoff due to lower seating densities. Now the 321XLR may be a different story for Spirit in the future as it is getting an MTOW increase.

Long story short, where a 320neo and 319neo may be very similarly capable for an airline with a standard seating density, the performance differences may be notable for one with a higher seating density, thus the A319neo order from Spirit.


I don't mean to be rude but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

I have never, ever, been close to MTOW in any flight that I've operated for NK over the last five years. Only about 50% of the time are we departing over our max landing weight which is nothing more than an inspection if we have to do an overweight landing.

NK hauls zero cargo. ZERO. Our cargo hold contains passenger bags and COMAT, if any, and that's it. Our bellies are mostly empty save for US to Latin America flights. AA, DL, and UA are probably heavier than we are as they fly cargo.

The 320 NEO was specifically called out in the Q3 call for being able to do SKBO to FLL without having to block out seats or be weight restricted as we currently are.

Your statements may be true for other airlines but you couldn't be more wrong with them regarding NK.


Man, I was just barely under MTOW twice just this month in a 320ceo. Once was from tankering gas, it was nice to have the gas, but it was a lot of gas!
Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!
 
Babyshark
Posts: 255
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:14 am

Either way, seems strange to me that not more people are picking up A220s given its economics. And that doesn't even factor in possible higher RASM from the comfortable interiors.


Because the cost of running a second small fleet wasnt calculated nor the acquisition timeline and maintenance issues of the 220.
 
heavymetal
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri May 08, 2015 3:37 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Sun Oct 27, 2019 9:10 pm

tphuang wrote:
Either way, seems strange to me that not more people are picking up A220s given its economics. And that doesn't even factor in possible higher RASM from the comfortable interiors.


Don't get me wrong, the A220-300 is a step in the right direction for smaller aircraft, and it's a large advantage for Airbus to have the best-in-class aircraft for the 100-150 seat segment.

That said, I don't think it has the economics you think it does. Nothing I've seen, including data directly from the OEMs, suggests it has an all-in CASM competitive with an A320neo or 737 MAX 8. Its CASM still comes in higher, though the gap of an A220-300 vs. an A320neo is significantly smaller than the E190 vs. A320.

That would explain why the market hasn't broadly adopted it yet. Combine that with the fact that there is no -500 yet, so if you're an airline that needs to upgauge, it requires a second type and all the complexity that comes with that, and it's easy to see why carriers are staying with the A320neo family vs. moving to a dual-type fleet with the A220-300 fulfilling the smaller end.
 
tphuang
Posts: 5474
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Oct 28, 2019 5:31 pm

heavymetal wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Either way, seems strange to me that not more people are picking up A220s given its economics. And that doesn't even factor in possible higher RASM from the comfortable interiors.


Don't get me wrong, the A220-300 is a step in the right direction for smaller aircraft, and it's a large advantage for Airbus to have the best-in-class aircraft for the 100-150 seat segment.

That said, I don't think it has the economics you think it does. Nothing I've seen, including data directly from the OEMs, suggests it has an all-in CASM competitive with an A320neo or 737 MAX 8. Its CASM still comes in higher, though the gap of an A220-300 vs. an A320neo is significantly smaller than the E190 vs. A320.

That would explain why the market hasn't broadly adopted it yet. Combine that with the fact that there is no -500 yet, so if you're an airline that needs to upgauge, it requires a second type and all the complexity that comes with that, and it's easy to see why carriers are staying with the A320neo family vs. moving to a dual-type fleet with the A220-300 fulfilling the smaller end.


Keep in mind that A220-300 would have lower pay rates amongst the pilots and one fewer FAs as part of its fixed cost compared to A320. And from what I hear, the purchase cost of A220 is still pretty low.

I'm not sure what data you've looked at, but the Jetblue claims on this are pretty conclusive.

Even after accounting for the intro cost of introducing A220-300 into their fleet + whatever it costs to support an additional type, they are anticipating their 2020 CASM to go down by 0.5 to 2.5%. They have publicly said that A220-300 costs the same to operate per trip as an E90 and that matches their claim of A220-300 unit cost being 70% that of E90. They have also publicly said on stage length adjusted basis, E90 cost is 20% higher, so A320CEO unit cost is about 84% than E90. And they backed up these words with their action of not ordering any more A320s. And they are not the only operator who have both A320/B737 and A220 and not the only operator that's replacing some A320s with A220-300.

Most recently, Czech air decided to convert their orders to 4 220-300 + 3 A321XLR rather than sticking with A320NEOs. That's a pretty big endorsement of A220-300 over A320NEO if you ask me.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Spirit Airlines to announce major Airbus order

Mon Nov 04, 2019 9:56 am

Babyshark wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:
nkops wrote:
Spirit is a 121 operator


Fair 'nuff.

Can I assume that outside of deadheading - there is no means of getting acceptable ratios of attendants vs. passengers via a paper derate of the cabin capacity?


No. Otherwise you wouldn't see them twist themselves in a pretzel to make the CRJ550.


If, say, in a 6AB aircraft, the middle seat could be folded flat (locked up/down by crew prior to boarding) to form a table... then would it be counted as not a seat. Surely?

Taking a Spirit A319, removing the "Big Front" seats and replacing with standard economy, you could have:
- 25x rows @6AB for a 150 seat cabin
- 25x rows @4AB with middle table for a 100 seat cabin
- anywhere in between depending on yield for premium seats

Or more to the point, taking an A320
- 31x rows @6AB for a 186 seat cabin
- 13x rows @6AB and 18x rows @4AB for a 150 seat cabin
- 31x rows @4AB for a 124 seat cabin
- again, anywhere in between depending on yield for premium seats

So depending on where your running during the day, it might be worthwhile re-configuring the interior to be able to drop off a crew member.

Might be something for the seat makers to look at.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Nov 04, 2019 10:18 am

Oh and its clear that an A220/A320 split fleet makes no sense for Spirit as they would be looking so few A220. But to be clear, that is not the main argument here (which is why would they consider an A319 at all).
 
Woodreau
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2001 6:44 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Nov 04, 2019 11:59 am

You can’t fold the seats down. The seats are simply a barely padded single piece molded plastic school cafeteria lunchroom chair that passengers still find a way to break.

I don’t think spirit would want to install 140+ sets of a heavier more complicated seat with moving parts for passengers to break just to save one flight attendant that they’d have to figure out how to reroute when they don’t need the extra flight attendant.
Last edited by Woodreau on Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Bonus animus sit, ab experientia. Quod salvatum fuerit de malis usu venit judicium.
 
JonesNL
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:40 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Nov 04, 2019 11:59 am

tphuang wrote:
heavymetal wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Either way, seems strange to me that not more people are picking up A220s given its economics. And that doesn't even factor in possible higher RASM from the comfortable interiors.


Don't get me wrong, the A220-300 is a step in the right direction for smaller aircraft, and it's a large advantage for Airbus to have the best-in-class aircraft for the 100-150 seat segment.

That said, I don't think it has the economics you think it does. Nothing I've seen, including data directly from the OEMs, suggests it has an all-in CASM competitive with an A320neo or 737 MAX 8. Its CASM still comes in higher, though the gap of an A220-300 vs. an A320neo is significantly smaller than the E190 vs. A320.

That would explain why the market hasn't broadly adopted it yet. Combine that with the fact that there is no -500 yet, so if you're an airline that needs to upgauge, it requires a second type and all the complexity that comes with that, and it's easy to see why carriers are staying with the A320neo family vs. moving to a dual-type fleet with the A220-300 fulfilling the smaller end.


Keep in mind that A220-300 would have lower pay rates amongst the pilots and one fewer FAs as part of its fixed cost compared to A320. And from what I hear, the purchase cost of A220 is still pretty low.

I'm not sure what data you've looked at, but the Jetblue claims on this are pretty conclusive.

Even after accounting for the intro cost of introducing A220-300 into their fleet + whatever it costs to support an additional type, they are anticipating their 2020 CASM to go down by 0.5 to 2.5%. They have publicly said that A220-300 costs the same to operate per trip as an E90 and that matches their claim of A220-300 unit cost being 70% that of E90. They have also publicly said on stage length adjusted basis, E90 cost is 20% higher, so A320CEO unit cost is about 84% than E90. And they backed up these words with their action of not ordering any more A320s. And they are not the only operator who have both A320/B737 and A220 and not the only operator that's replacing some A320s with A220-300.

Most recently, Czech air decided to convert their orders to 4 220-300 + 3 A321XLR rather than sticking with A320NEOs. That's a pretty big endorsement of A220-300 over A320NEO if you ask me.


Do you have a link to the claims of Jetblue?
 
Woodreau
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2001 6:44 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:22 pm

tphuang wrote:
Keep in mind that A220-300 would have lower pay rates amongst the pilots and one fewer FAs as part of its fixed cost compared to A320.


Maybe for jetBlue but for Spirit, an A220-300 pilot is paid the same as an A320 pilot so there are no costs savings as far as pilot labor costs for an A220 over an A320.
Bonus animus sit, ab experientia. Quod salvatum fuerit de malis usu venit judicium.
 
N757ST
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 6:00 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:58 pm

There aren’t any real cost savings at jetblue for pilots either, the a220-300 pays within 2% of the A320/321.
 
KlimaBXsst
Posts: 906
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:14 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Nov 04, 2019 6:01 pm

Could these ORDERS and DELIVERY SPOTS, be considered an ASSET or

are they truly to still to far out as I assume them to be?
Aesthetically the A 340 got it right!
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Nov 04, 2019 7:10 pm

Woodreau wrote:
You can’t fold the seats down. The seats are simply a barely padded single piece molded plastic school cafeteria lunchroom chair that passengers still find a way to break.


Really? Your kidding me. [/sarcasm]


Woodreau wrote:
I don’t think spirit would want to install 140+ sets of a heavier more complicated seat with moving parts for passengers to break just to save one flight attendant that they’d have to figure out how to reroute when they don’t need the extra flight attendant.


Moving parts? Which would consist of two pins at the armrest root around which the upper back rotates and further two holes on each side of the frame which are fastened via pin to the armrest frame immediately forward of the rotating pin.

You are talking a whole net weight growth in terms of a couple hundred grammes. Even if it were 0.5kg per seat that is just 80kg per plane or for an A320 an OEW increase of 0.2% - ghastly. The cost of flying 80kg 1000nm is around 6.5kg of fuel or about £5/$6.50.

Wonder what the likes of Spirit would make by being able to sell an extra seat due to the flexibility. Or by being able to reduce crew members on a flight by configuring for <150 seats*.

I'd think its more than a fiver.



*BTW - I'm not talking about flexibility on the hop adjusted flight to flight depending on demand for that particular fligt - I mean you configure your A320 at max capacity for the peak time flights (6am-10am and 5pm-9pm, if it flies half full, it flies half full with 4x FA) then reconfigure down to reduced capacity away from those times to <150 for 3FA. So you are scheduling your crewing around that and you know ahead of time that's the plan.

Another benefit would be - during off-peak, you are offering a USP that other carriers aren't, so may see that reflected in improved load-factors and/or yield.
 
Woodreau
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2001 6:44 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Nov 04, 2019 9:25 pm

Looks like you need to start working in the FAA to change the certification requirements then if you want airlines to even begin to start thinking about something like this.
Bonus animus sit, ab experientia. Quod salvatum fuerit de malis usu venit judicium.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Nov 04, 2019 9:44 pm

Woodreau wrote:
Looks like you need to start working in the FAA to change the certification requirements then if you want airlines to even begin to start thinking about something like this.


If its a fixed table (for that flight), its clearly not a seat.

The requirement linked earlier by JoseSalazar (recreated below) clearly notes seats:

14 CFR § 121.391 - Flight attendants.....
(3) For airplanes having a seating capacity of more than 50 but less than 101 passengers - two flight attendants.

(4) For airplanes having a seating capacity of more than 100 passengers - two flight attendants plus one additional flight attendant for each unit (or part of a unit) of 50 passenger seats above a seating capacity of 100 passengers.


To me that is fairly evident - you cannot put a passenger on a table - therefore the seating capacity is reduced by as much as you want it to be reduced.
 
VV
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Tue Nov 05, 2019 8:09 am

Woodreau wrote:
tphuang wrote:
Keep in mind that A220-300 would have lower pay rates amongst the pilots and one fewer FAs as part of its fixed cost compared to A320.


Maybe for jetBlue but for Spirit, an A220-300 pilot is paid the same as an A320 pilot so there are no costs savings as far as pilot labor costs for an A220 over an A320.


Is that true? I din't know.

Do you mean for Spirit an A320 pilot is as badly paid as a C Series pilot?
 
Woodreau
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2001 6:44 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:59 am

Yes the 320 pilot is paid at the 220 rate which is the same hourly rate as the one I pay my hooker $245/hour which is about $40 below industry standard. Everyone else pays their 320 pilot $280/hr
Bonus animus sit, ab experientia. Quod salvatum fuerit de malis usu venit judicium.
 
nws2002
Posts: 921
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:04 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:33 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
Woodreau wrote:
Looks like you need to start working in the FAA to change the certification requirements then if you want airlines to even begin to start thinking about something like this.


If its a fixed table (for that flight), its clearly not a seat.

The requirement linked earlier by JoseSalazar (recreated below) clearly notes seats:

14 CFR § 121.391 - Flight attendants.....
(3) For airplanes having a seating capacity of more than 50 but less than 101 passengers - two flight attendants.

(4) For airplanes having a seating capacity of more than 100 passengers - two flight attendants plus one additional flight attendant for each unit (or part of a unit) of 50 passenger seats above a seating capacity of 100 passengers.


To me that is fairly evident - you cannot put a passenger on a table - therefore the seating capacity is reduced by as much as you want it to be reduced.


The FAA doesn't interpret the regulation that way. If you have 200 seats installed on an aircraft, you must have at least 4 flight attendants onboard. It doesn't matter if they are occupied or not. They've granted deviations in the past for special circumstances (like evacuating aircraft from costal areas during hurricanes), but that's it.
 
Beechtobus
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Tue Nov 05, 2019 9:21 pm

[list=][/list]
Woodreau wrote:
Yes the 320 pilot is paid at the 220 rate which is the same hourly rate as the one I pay my hooker $245/hour which is about $40 below industry standard. Everyone else pays their 320 pilot $280/hr


Actually you’re quite a bit off, everyone else does not pay their 320 pilots $280/hr. Yes, top Captain pay at the largest legacies (AA and UA) is about 285/hr. DL is about 275/hr.

When you look at comparable airlines To Spirit like Jetblue, Alaska, Hawaiian, Frontier, the story changes. Hawaiian pays their top 321 CAs 254/hr, AS and WN(737) 266/hr, F9 245/hr, G4 227/hr, and Sun Country 189/hr (737 at 12 years- they have a 14 year pay scale which tips out at 202/hr).

Plus you have to add about $5 per hour to the top pay at Spirit for 321 override which is paid to all pilots regardless of how much of their flying is in the 321. So top Spirit CA pay is roughly 247/hr, pretty close to middle of the pack for similarly sized, similarly missioned airlines.

Sure, there are many other factors to take into account. We can look at profit sharing (which Spirit doesn’t get) and other pay overrides (different amongst all airlines, all get some but none get all). We also have to look at work rules, quality of life, ability to work for premium pay (200 percent flying is very easy to pick up and abundant at Spirit). Hard to get a pulse on the whole picture as there is so much to take into account. Spirit overall doesn’t lag when you look at its peer airlines.
 
User avatar
tb727
Posts: 2239
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:40 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Tue Nov 05, 2019 9:36 pm

Woodreau wrote:
Yes the 320 pilot is paid at the 220 rate which is the same hourly rate as the one I pay my hooker $245/hour which is about $40 below industry standard. Everyone else pays their 320 pilot $280/hr


Those are SDQ, tie you to the bed rates!
Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Wed Nov 06, 2019 8:44 am

nws2002 wrote:
The FAA doesn't interpret the regulation that way. If you have 200 seats installed on an aircraft, you must have at least 4 flight attendants onboard. It doesn't matter if they are occupied or not. They've granted deviations in the past for special circumstances (like evacuating aircraft from costal areas during hurricanes), but that's it.


If you have 198 seats at 6am - but that becomes 132 seats and 66 tables at midday then its not 198 seats installed.


I suppose it is not an interpretation that has been tested - but the definition of a seat is "a thing made or used for sitting on" (Oxford) or "a piece of furniture or part of a train, plane, etc. that has been designed for someone to sit on" (Cambridge).

A table is not a seat - even if it can be later reconfigured on ground to become a seat.
 
dopplerd
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Wed Nov 06, 2019 4:18 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
nws2002 wrote:
The FAA doesn't interpret the regulation that way. If you have 200 seats installed on an aircraft, you must have at least 4 flight attendants onboard. It doesn't matter if they are occupied or not. They've granted deviations in the past for special circumstances (like evacuating aircraft from costal areas during hurricanes), but that's it.


If you have 198 seats at 6am - but that becomes 132 seats and 66 tables at midday then its not 198 seats installed.


I suppose it is not an interpretation that has been tested - but the definition of a seat is "a thing made or used for sitting on" (Oxford) or "a piece of furniture or part of a train, plane, etc. that has been designed for someone to sit on" (Cambridge).

A table is not a seat - even if it can be later reconfigured on ground to become a seat.


It doesn't work that. A table that is convertible into a seat is a seat. Since the FAA isn't inspecting these airplanes before they leave the gate if it can be a seat, regardless of current configuration, it is a seat. It would be one of the great joys of my life to watch someone try to explain this system to the FAA using a dictionary definition of what a seat is. Any system that is as easy to convert as you claim from seat to table is a seat by the fact of its easy conversion. Also flight attendants aren't that expensive, only a few hundred dollars per flight.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:11 pm

dopplerd wrote:
It doesn't work that. A table that is convertible into a seat is a seat. Since the FAA isn't inspecting these airplanes before they leave the gate if it can be a seat, regardless of current configuration, it is a seat.


Do you have FAA documentation that states that?

Airlines paper derate MTOW for landing fees. Doesn't require the FAA to load the aircraft and put it on the weighing scales...

[I have to confess, I'm not sure if there is a limit on how often said airline could update that paperwork to adjust MTOW - there may be a limit on that.]
 
dopplerd
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Wed Nov 06, 2019 6:31 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
dopplerd wrote:
It doesn't work that. A table that is convertible into a seat is a seat. Since the FAA isn't inspecting these airplanes before they leave the gate if it can be a seat, regardless of current configuration, it is a seat.


Do you have FAA documentation that states that?

Airlines paper derate MTOW for landing fees. Doesn't require the FAA to load the aircraft and put it on the weighing scales...

[I have to confess, I'm not sure if there is a limit on how often said airline could update that paperwork to adjust MTOW - there may be a limit on that.]


I don't know what else to tell you, man. If a particular assemblage of plastic, metal and foam is FAA certified as a seat it is a seat, even if it is in "table config." Folding it doesn't decertify the equipment. There is a TSO # for certified seats which I don't remember. Feel free to look it up.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Wed Nov 06, 2019 7:28 pm

dopplerd wrote:
I don't know what else to tell you, man. If a particular assemblage of plastic, metal and foam is FAA certified as a seat it is a seat, even if it is in "table config." Folding it doesn't decertify the equipment. There is a TSO # for certified seats which I don't remember. Feel free to look it up.


The 737-max200 is supposed to contain 200 seats.

Even if that is 197 - this means jump seats are not included as part of overall seating capacity.

Therefore a potential seat is not necessarily a seat.

14 CFR § 121.391 - Flight attendants.....
(3) For airplanes having a seating capacity of more than 50 but less than 101 passengers - two flight attendants.

(4) For airplanes having a seating capacity of more than 100 passengers - two flight attendants plus one additional flight attendant for each unit (or part of a unit) of 50 passenger seats above a seating capacity of 100 passengers.



... and I believe the 737-800 has 5 jumpseats, assuming the 737-max200 is the same and is certified for 200 passengers, its not an irrelevant point as it means the 5th jumpseat is not considered as an available seat.
 
Moonship
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 1:29 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Wed Nov 06, 2019 8:08 pm

Jumpseats are not considered passenger seats; they are for crew. Even commuting pilots and FA's who sit in a jumpseat are considered crew. As to your idea to constantly change a seating capacity, the airplane is certified to that configuration and capacity. Even if you MEL xxx number of seats to go below the capacity for an a lesser number of FA's, they are still required because the airplane has the certified capacity to seat that many. Each airline in their OpSpecs specifies the capacity for that airline/config and spells out the FA's requirements.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27313
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Dec 23, 2019 10:36 pm

Starting to hit the financial wires that they have firmed their MoU - 100 frames with 50 options.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19300
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Dec 23, 2019 10:47 pm

Stitch wrote:
Starting to hit the financial wires that they have firmed their MoU - 100 frames with 50 options.


Airbus’s annual December rush of orders and deliveries is in full swing! They must be getting close to 1,000 gross orders for the year.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20603
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Dec 23, 2019 10:50 pm

scbriml wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Starting to hit the financial wires that they have firmed their MoU - 100 frames with 50 options.


Airbus’s annual December rush of orders and deliveries is in full swing! They must be getting close to 1,000 gross orders for the year.

To think Airbus still has the 5th quarter. :duck:

Seriously, there is a delay between confirmation and listed orders. This makes Airbus annual presentation always fascinating.
Excellent news for NK.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
UnMAXed
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2019 9:55 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:12 pm

What is it now? Close to 7400 NEOs orders+commitments so far?
That is 300 more than the 737NG garnered throughout its life!
Crazy stuff.
 
SanDiegoLover
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:24 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:21 pm

Looks to be 100 firm plus 50 options to be delivered through 2027 and includes Neos of A319 / A320 /A321s.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-spir ... SKBN1YR22H


Details will be listed on their final 10K for 2019. Looks to be roughly 13 aircraft per annum. I imagine the plans for retirement of old Airbus vs expansion will be dictated on the economy, allowing SAVE flexibility to right size their aircraft, fleet, and seat mile costs.
Last edited by SanDiegoLover on Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
SanDiegoLover
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:24 am

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:28 pm

Today, in addition to their firming of the Airbus order, Spirit closed on their new corporate headquarters real estate for $32 million. (Just south of FLL). Spirit will build out their new $250 million, 500,000 sq ft complex, which may I nclude apartments and condos for its employees and lodging onsite for their staff in town training. Pretty unique corporate headquarters compared to most US airlines.

https://therealdeal.com/miami/2019/12/2 ... -beach-hq/
Last edited by SanDiegoLover on Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
 
astuteman
Posts: 7184
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Updated: NK Announces Upcoming Order of 100 Airbus A320neo Family Aircraft plus Purchase Options for a further 50

Tue Dec 24, 2019 1:01 am

scbriml wrote:
Stitch wrote:
Starting to hit the financial wires that they have firmed their MoU - 100 frames with 50 options.


Airbus’s annual December rush of orders and deliveries is in full swing! They must be getting close to 1,000 gross orders for the year.


End of November figures were 940 gross and 718 net.

Since then we've had at least

50 x A321 for UA
15 x A32X for Cebu
60 x A220 for AF
100 x A32X for Spirit

Barring any cancellations that makes

1,165 gross
943 net.

Feels like a 1,000 net year is on the cards

Rgds

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos