Hello all, couldn't catch a similar topic, hope it fits in CivAv forum. Can someone explain me the logic of having two flights in a 737NG or 73M 20 minutes apart, against wet leasing a widebody jet and perform the flight with one aircraft / aircrew? I know CM has a "single type in the fleet" model ( or almost, with 73NG and 73Max ), but wouldn't save money to condensate this two almost simultaneous flights in one flight with a bigger aircraft ?

I'm sure there is a simple logic ( a "duhh!" is awaiting for me, that's for sure ! ), I'm aware the CM management has a much deeper knowledge than me about how to run the airline, but since I cannot discover this logic all by myself, I hope someone here can enlighten me.

Here's an example of the CM scheduled flights for a random day, but the two flights taking off at almost the same time are a daily schedule AFAIK.

http://shopping.copaair.com/?infants=0& ... &langid=en

Gonzalo wrote:

Hello all, couldn't catch a similar topic, hope it fits in CivAv forum. Can someone explain me the logic of having two flights in a 737NG or 73M 20 minutes apart, against wet leasing a widebody jet and perform the flight with one aircraft / aircrew? I know CM has a "single type in the fleet" model ( or almost, with 73NG and 73Max ), but wouldn't save money to condensate this two almost simultaneous flights in one flight with a bigger aircraft ?

I'm sure there is a simple logic ( a "duhh!" is awaiting for me, that's for sure ! ), I'm aware the CM management has a much deeper knowledge than me about how to run the airline, but since I cannot discover this logic all by myself, I hope someone here can enlighten me.

Here's an example of the CM scheduled flights for a random day, but the two flights taking off at almost the same time are a daily schedule AFAIK.

http://shopping.copaair.com/?infants=0& ... &langid=en

A widebody would only make sense if you've multiple routes to put it on. In this case, teh aircradr would have a daily downtime of approx 10 hours, not very efficient. Moreover, having two flights offers flexibility. If the market doesn't require the second flight at 01:49AM, you can just cancel it, or reschedule to a better time. Also don't forget that adding an additional type is not cheap. Not only do you need the aircraft, you need to train staff, hire pilots and other costs. If tehre aren't many routes supporting a widebody, you can better fly two 737s.

Same to daily services PTY-GRU.
2 of the services departs 5 minutes apart.

I also don't get the logic of it.

CM sees great demand to GRU and SCL. Since the North America to South America traffic is more high yielding at night, it makes sense to have back to back service to very high demand places especially when you only fly 737s. The US3 and their JV partners run very similar schedules in pairings with higher demand.

The answer is a big "duh."

Wing to wing services are nothing new. Look at NYC to Florida flights, major hubs to Orlando - Icelandair out of particular cities into KEF.

The times are chosen because of customer demands and flows. If you have the fleet and staffing available to do it, make money doing it yourself rather than pay someone else doing it.
Having wing to wing services allows say Copa Airlines to operate services with Copa Airlines services rather than having premium customers, whom are accustomed to Copa Airlines, suddenly have to put up with less than par service which might be provided on Bob's Airline's 767 - with their staff and services.
Having a 737 go tech or what have you is easier to mitigate with replacement services or swaps than Bob's Airline's 767 canceling and you have a larger number of passengers to reaccommodate etc. etc.

Just wait til you see a Starbucks across from a Starbucks.

This works for Copa because of the seasonal demand of these routes. Under CM's strategy it is more efficient to run 2 738 trips within 20 minutes of each other to SCL, GRU, PUJ, and I think CUN and EZE are the other routes with these types of schedules, specifically the peak seasons, because the year round demand does not warrant a widebody, and the extra costs of adding wide-bodies to CM's fleet, which would depress yields. Many other airlines use this strategy as well. CM is very conservative with its growth preferring to grow gradually as opposed other airlines in the region that quickly add and then cut routes. CM's one fleet strategy does have its limits in that by being a 737-only airline some of the routes that were previously served by E190's, the 73W's have too many seats to fill.

Begs the question why on earth Copa hasn't launched any other destinations in Chile? many people self-connect with buses. like, they take an overnight busride from Concepción, Temuco, Valdivia, Antofagasta, Puerto Montt (northern patagonia) to one of Santiago's two or three central intercity bus station and take another bus or taxi to SCL. In northern Chile it's common to bus to Tacna or even Lima overnight and take a plane there to USA or Europe... and just because i'm speaking intercity buses, were not necessarily talking about price-sensitive people, buses here are the only option there is on land, and it can be a deluxe one too! An overnight bus is perceived (hundreds run at night in each direction) are more reliable than self-connecting by plane on the same day. This is a reality, passengers from SCL come all over Chile and its simply wrong to think all demand from SCL is from Santiago+Valparaiso+Viña del Mar. It also a falsehood to perceive the rest of the country as poor, i'm just saying this because those butts filling those flights from Europe, USA, Caribbean and Oceania are also coming from outside and most likely very far away from Santiago metropolitan area. Just because Santiago is 40% of Chile's population doesn't mean Santiago is Chile. Before LA flew SCL-NQN/TUC to connect with their Australian flights, those people most likely bussed their way across the Andes before that flight existed, to then fly to Australia or NZ.

I wonder how a triangular PTY-ANF/IQQ/CJC could work, and no LA launching flights to PTY in response would not help because CP here would be offering northwards connections to Northern America. PS: One would have to convince the northern mining companies signing to Copa? because they use US3, Air Canada and LA
Many seats on CP's SCL-PTY are sold by tour operators to Mexico and the Caribbean. I flew three roundtrips SCL-PTY-USA-BRU on a United Airlines ticket over the years, even when UA was already flying IAH-SCL ( I adored each stop along the way). PTY-SCL is also the only option for most Haitian diaspora living in Chile, since Copa is offers connections to PAP.

I agree with a prev commenter saying that deep SA at night vv NA is more high-yielding
sorry for my english!

asuflyer wrote:

This works for Copa because of the seasonal demand of these routes. Under CM's strategy it is more efficient to run 2 738 trips within 20 minutes of each other to SCL, GRU, PUJ, and I think CUN and EZE are the other routes with these types of schedules, specifically the peak seasons, because the year round demand does not warrant a widebody, and the extra costs of adding wide-bodies to CM's fleet, which would depress yields. Many other airlines use this strategy as well. CM is very conservative with its growth preferring to grow gradually as opposed other airlines in the region that quickly add and then cut routes. CM's one fleet strategy does have its limits in that by being a 737-only airline some of the routes that were previously served by E190's, the 73W's have too many seats to fill.

CUN may be the best example. At times it gets up to three flights running around about 30 min departure time from PTY.

Something else to take into account, but mostly for the SA routes would be the premium demand. Now that CM offers lie flats on their 7M9 fleet, and flights to GRU, MVD and EZE (SCL is shifting more towards it but we see mostly the 738) are mostly operated by them, it may make sense to run more than one flight on a close schedule.

Cxtl1na wrote:

Begs the question why on earth Copa hasn't launched any other destinations in Chile? many people self-connect with buses. like, they take an overnight busride from Concepción, Temuco, Valdivia, Antofagasta, Puerto Montt (northern patagonia) to one of Santiago's two or three central intercity bus station and take another bus or taxi to SCL. In northern Chile it's common to bus to Tacna or even Lima overnight and take a plane there to USA or Europe... and just because i'm speaking intercity buses, were not necessarily talking about price-sensitive people, buses here are the only option there is on land, and it can be a deluxe one too! An overnight bus is perceived (hundreds run at night in each direction) are more reliable than self-connecting by plane on the same day. This is a reality, passengers from SCL come all over Chile and its simply wrong to think all demand from SCL is from Santiago+Valparaiso+Viña del Mar. It also a falsehood to perceive the rest of the country as poor, i'm just saying this because those butts filling those flights from Europe, USA, Caribbean and Oceania are also coming from outside and most likely very far away from Santiago metropolitan area. Just because Santiago is 40% of Chile's population doesn't mean Santiago is Chile. Before LA flew SCL-NQN/TUC to connect with their Australian flights, those people most likely bussed their way across the Andes before that flight existed, to then fly to Australia or NZ.

I wonder how a triangular PTY-ANF/IQQ/CJC could work, and no LA launching flights to PTY in response would not help because CP here would be offering northwards connections to Northern America. PS: One would have to convince the northern mining companies signing to Copa? because they use US3, Air Canada and LA
Many seats on CP's SCL-PTY are sold by tour operators to Mexico and the Caribbean. I flew three roundtrips SCL-PTY-USA-BRU on a United Airlines ticket over the years, even when UA was already flying IAH-SCL ( I adored each stop along the way). PTY-SCL is also the only option for most Haitian diaspora living in Chile, since Copa is offers connections to PAP.

I agree with a prev commenter saying that deep SA at night vv NA is more high-yielding
sorry for my english!

Couldn't agree more, specially regarding the case of Antofagasta, where I live. We have direct flights to Cali, Lima, and I think Bogotá, due to the higher income in average ( more people going to Caribbean resorts ), but also due to the enormous quantity of colombians living in northern Chile and specially Antofagasta. Last year I took the flight SCL-PTY and there were a very high number of people coming from other cities of Chile ( easy to find out due to airline/bus tags on the baggage ), many of them going back to visit their families in Colombia or Venezuela, plus others going on vacation. I myself had to fly earlier that day from Antofagasta to catch the CM flight. I'm sure a CM flight ANF-PTY would work, maybe not daily but 2 or 3 times per week, specially considering that CM flies from PTY to many places that LA doesn't fly from LIM ( CUR,SXM, AUA, Jamaica and Port au Prince, HAV, just to mention a few ).

Its also the hub-and-spoke banks working perfectly. CM has found its better to run a flight at 9:15PM and 9:35PM, for example, instead of one at 8:00PM and one at 9:15PM. And then take a look at the NORTHBOUND flights - could be that the 9:35PM flight sticks around on the ground longer to maximize onward connections. Honestly I'm not sure where lese this works outside of DXB & PTY where flights run this close together.

I'm not sure what the Chile/Panama bilateral looks like, but it could be that CM can't fly to Antofagasta, and I'm pretty sure PMC is out of reach of the Max fleet (although that airport did surprise me - how busy it was for its size!). I'm also curious why BRC doesn't have nonstop to PTY.

Just one word: Flexibility.

Copa can manage the flight with demand. When the demand is high, increase the frequencies. Demand low, reduce.

In GRU sometimes happen it. In 2015/2016 crisis, Copa reduced the frequencies and increased when the things better.

Have widebody may fit with demand? Maybe, but means another pilot training, another type in the maintenance, more landing fees and widebody would be restricted to some routes, even with higher demand.

Copa is going to MAX-9, I don't remind If has MAX-10 on order.

Copa is a hug e connector of NA and SA. So the 2 flights manage to feed the same bank in PTY.
It all comes down to where the connections are headed.

stewartg wrote:

asuflyer wrote:

This works for Copa because of the seasonal demand of these routes. Under CM's strategy it is more efficient to run 2 738 trips within 20 minutes of each other to SCL, GRU, PUJ, and I think CUN and EZE are the other routes with these types of schedules, specifically the peak seasons, because the year round demand does not warrant a widebody, and the extra costs of adding wide-bodies to CM's fleet, which would depress yields. Many other airlines use this strategy as well. CM is very conservative with its growth preferring to grow gradually as opposed other airlines in the region that quickly add and then cut routes. CM's one fleet strategy does have its limits in that by being a 737-only airline some of the routes that were previously served by E190's, the 73W's have too many seats to fill.

Compare this dynamic with a European carrier that used to send the double deckers to the US during summer and 767s and A330s in winter. Were the double deckers redeployed or parked for 6 months?

which airline? AF? KL?

What is the make-up of this flight by passenger segment?

usxguy wrote:

Its also the hub-and-spoke banks working perfectly. CM has found its better to run a flight at 9:15PM and 9:35PM, for example, instead of one at 8:00PM and one at 9:15PM. And then take a look at the NORTHBOUND flights - could be that the 9:35PM flight sticks around on the ground longer to maximize onward connections. Honestly I'm not sure where lese this works outside of DXB & PTY where flights run this close together.

I'm not sure what the Chile/Panama bilateral looks like, but it could be that CM can't fly to Antofagasta, and I'm pretty sure PMC is out of reach of the Max fleet (although that airport did surprise me - how busy it was for its size!). I'm also curious why BRC doesn't have nonstop to PTY.

PMC is most certainly out of MAX range,I mentioned it in my post because many people bus overnight from there to SCL. Actively opting NOT to connect with airlines PMC-SCL.
Chile-Panama specifically? I don't know... but Chile does have very open skies, any airline can come here and start domestic flights (Amaszonas Bolivia, Aerolíneas del Sur, AirComet Chile, AeroContinente Perú Pluna Uruguay). It's also not a hassle to open international flights to secondary cities in Chile. But a big problem is that secondary intl airports have only one or two passport controls. That was Sky's reason to cancelling ANF-LIM about 5 years ago, passengers were unhappy immigration would take two hours for a single flight, so they opted away from that flight. Current terminal expansions at IQQ, CJC, ANF, CCP and ZCO are accounting for this issue.

planemanofnz wrote:

What is the make-up of this flight by passenger segment?

Many seats are sold by tour package operators; Venezuelan-Chileans, Colombian-Chileans, RDominican-Chileans and Haitian-Chileans visiting their home countries or coming to move to Chile. I can imagine US-Chileans who are FFs of United opt for Copa (UA still sells US-PTY-SCL on CP). Chilean tourists (to Mexico, Costa Rica, US, Caribbean and northern SA)and VFR. I don't know or cant imagine which corporate segment takes Copa from SCL.

Cxtl1na wrote:

usxguy wrote:

Its also the hub-and-spoke banks working perfectly. CM has found its better to run a flight at 9:15PM and 9:35PM, for example, instead of one at 8:00PM and one at 9:15PM. And then take a look at the NORTHBOUND flights - could be that the 9:35PM flight sticks around on the ground longer to maximize onward connections. Honestly I'm not sure where lese this works outside of DXB & PTY where flights run this close together.

I'm not sure what the Chile/Panama bilateral looks like, but it could be that CM can't fly to Antofagasta, and I'm pretty sure PMC is out of reach of the Max fleet (although that airport did surprise me - how busy it was for its size!). I'm also curious why BRC doesn't have nonstop to PTY.

PMC is most certainly out of MAX range,I mentioned it in my post because many people bus overnight from there to SCL. Actively opting NOT to connect with airlines PMC-SCL.
Chile-Panama specifically? I don't know... but Chile does have very open skies, any airline can come here and start domestic flights (Amaszonas Bolivia, Aerolíneas del Sur, AirComet Chile, AeroContinente Perú Pluna Uruguay). It's also not a hassle to open international flights to secondary cities in Chile. But a big problem is that secondary intl airports have only one or two passport controls. That was Sky's reason to cancelling ANF-LIM about 5 years ago, passengers were unhappy immigration would take two hours for a single flight, so they opted away from that flight. Current terminal expansions at IQQ, CJC, ANF, CCP and ZCO are accounting for this issue.

How is PTY-PMC out of MAX range when it is <200 miles farther than PTY-EZE that is flown on the 737-800?