A330 - Why So Popular for Short Haul In Asia And Rare Elsewhere?

thepinkmachine · Mon Apr 25, 2016 11:35 am

I've been wondering why the A330 is so ubiquitous in Asia, especially on short- and medium-haul routes, whereas in Europe it is pretty rare and serving mostly longhaul flights...

Why does European market prefer smaller planes, ie. 320/737, while Asian market goes for the 330, even on short legs? How does the 330 compare in operating cost per seat to say 320/321?

USAirALB · Mon Apr 25, 2016 11:47 am

Outside of Asia, there just isn't a market for widebody aircraft on short haul routes, except hub to hub flights. In Asia, the market permits airlines to provide both a high frequency service while operating high capacity aircraft at the same time. Asian carriers have no need for shorthaul narrow-body twins, as having an all widebody fleet allows for better fleet utilization....SQ can turn a A330 from NRT straight down to AKL. They couldn't do that with a 737.

Most Asian carriers only have one major hub and they have to feed an incredible amount of passengers through that hub to make connections. If AA only had a hub in DFW, I'm sure you would see frequent widebody service to SFO/NYC/BOS to be able to feed the hub.

Back to the A330, it can handle pretty well on short to medium hops. AA flies the A330 on CLT-PHL/BOS/MCO usually a couple times during the year. Again, if SQ were to have gotten say the 753 instead for high-capacity short haul flights (CGK, for example), they still would likely be buying the A333 for long haul. Why not just buy one aircraft type and use it across a wide range of routes?

[Edited 2016-04-25 04:50:23]

SpaceshipDC10 · Mon Apr 25, 2016 11:49 am

Quoting thepinkmachine (Thread starter):
whereas in Europe it is pretty rare and serving mostly longhaul flights...

Due to frequencies over size. Same in North America where widebodies were very common at a time.

sassiciai · Mon Apr 25, 2016 12:21 pm

Tha Asian airports that I know are not overly dominated by widebody aircraft on regional flights, there are shedloads of A32x/B737 at all the ones I have visited.

I think it is more due to scheduling of flights, so as an example, Cathay can send a B747 to Manila and back between 2 long haul flights, or Cebu an A330 to HKG between successive Middle East rotations. Better to misuse a widebody regionally than to have it sit for 10 hours "at home" before its next long haul flight

It is also not evident to me that the "not popular elsewhere" is at all accurate. The A330 is active and numerous in every well-populated continent on Earth, IMHO

[Edited 2016-04-25 05:26:14]

smi0006 · Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:00 pm

Not just Asia, but QF and VA love theirs. VA may only have 6, but QF have 28 , 10- 300s & 18 -200s.

Previously the QF ones were dedicated to domestic, then they took delivery of a small amount for Asian routes, also used on AKL-LAX. Now they will all be reconfigured for dual international and domestic missions. Giving greater flexibility especially post mining boom where domestic demand isn't as strong, and international will be stronger.

VA only use theirs MEL/SYD-PER and once weekly SYD-NAN. But one would think they may start a new route with them... See what happens with their ownership.

Scorpio · Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:12 pm

Quoting thepinkmachine (Thread starter):
in Europe it is pretty rare and serving mostly longhaul flights...

The A330 isn't anywhere near 'rare' in Europe, most flag carriers use it: Lufthansa, Air France, SAS, Finnair, Brussels Airlines, Alitalia, KLM, Aer Lingus, Iberia, TAP Portugal, Swiss, they've all got it. Plus quite a few charter and low cost airlines. It's probably the most widely used widebody in Europe.

N14AZ · Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:14 pm

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 5):
The A330 isn't anywhere near 'rare' in Europe, most flag carriers use it: Lufthansa, Air France, SAS, Finnair, Brussels Airlines, Alitalia, KLM, Aer Lingus, Iberia, TAP Portugal, Swiss, they've all got it.

Yes, but Pinkmachine's Point is, that they are not used for domestic or European flights and I think that's correct. Only in exceptional cases (start of the holidays, trade fair etc.).

sassiciai · Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:18 pm

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 6):

Yes, but Pinkmachine's Point is, that they are not used for domestic or European flights

Sorry, that is not what the thread title says!

Amend the thread title " Why so popular for short haul ......." and then you are correct (and the thread will have less erroneous visits!

LH748 · Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:20 pm

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 5):

plus CSA, Turkish, Air Serbia, Aeroflot

I'd say the 330 is the most common widebody in Europe.
Also America has a substantial amount of A330: Delta, American, Air Canada, Avianca, TAM, Azul

I really don't see how anyone could regard the A330 as a rare aircraft in non-Asian markets.

N14AZ · Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:22 pm

Quoting sassiciai (Reply 7):
Amend the thread title " Why so popular for short haul ......." and then you are correct (and the thread will have less erroneous visits!

Hmmm, I am very often in Asia and when I saw the thread title I knew exactly what he means. I have the same perception, in particular in Hanoi but also in Guangzhou. There you see all major Asian carriers taxiing arround with A330s, it's really noticeable.

But you are correct, the thread title might be confusing.

[Edited 2016-04-25 06:26:51]

migair54 · Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:37 pm

I think it's because of cargo uplift, operating the widebody allow most of the airlines to move a lot of cargo without needing to have a dedicated cargo fleet. Then they can offer very good fares an try to fill up the cabin.

Some of the routes in Asia are also longer that we might think, much longer than most intra Europe or USA-Canada.

Anyway the A330 is popular in some trunk routes but not in the whole Asia. Asia is so full of narrow-bodies also that Airbus open the first line in Tianjin just to supply that market.

Add to the list of European airlines operating Air Europa, Virgin Atlantic, Wamos, Edelweiss, SATA, WOW and even flying to Europe we can consider MEA, Egyptair, Tunisair.

jfk777 · Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:51 pm

Quoting thepinkmachine (Thread starter):

I've been wondering why the A330 is so ubiquitous in Asia, especially on short- and medium-haul routes, whereas in Europe it is pretty rare and serving mostly longhaul flights...

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 5):
The A330 isn't anywhere near 'rare' in Europe, most flag carriers use it: Lufthansa, Air France, SAS, Finnair, Brussels Airlines, Alitalia, KLM, Aer Lingus, Iberia, TAP Portugal, Swiss, they've all got it

The distances in Asia and the Atlantic to the US east coast north of Washington are not so different. Singapore to Tokyo is 3,3XX miles while Boston to LHR is 3,2XX miles. These are both 6 hour flights but the perception is when its within Asia is has to be shorter. One to Two hour flights within Europe would kill an A330, Air Inter tried that and its A330-300 went to Aer Lingus shortly after. An A330 is best when used in short haul on flights of about three hours. Some airlines like Thai and Cathay Pacific average them out with longer sectors. The A330 is a very versatile plane but not in short haul European service, A3321 are best for that.

[Edited 2016-04-25 07:01:19]

col · Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:52 pm

We could always do with a few more A330's in Asia/Pacific, they are versatile and beat hands down flying on cramped 738's, which we have far too many in KUL.

airbazar · Mon Apr 25, 2016 1:56 pm

Quoting thepinkmachine (Thread starter):

Why does European market prefer smaller planes, ie. 320/737, while Asian market goes for the 330, even on short legs? How does the 330 compare in operating cost per seat to say 320/321?

The obvious answer is population size.
How many European cities do you know with more than 5 million people? 1 or 2 only. In Asia that's called a village

BestWestern · Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:17 pm

Also, ground transportation isn't an option between most Asian capitals.

Distances here are bigger - HKG SIN clocks in at just under four hours, which is something similar to LHR Moscow.

cheeken · Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:30 pm

Because this:

OA412 · Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:42 pm

Quoting cheeken (Reply 15):

This. Also bear in mind that distances in Asia are huge when compared to Europe, and even North America. While feasible to make trips between many large cities in Europe and North America by car or train, it just isn't feasible to do so with respect to Asia. NRT-SIN is over 7 hours; NRT-BOM over 9 hours. Outside Hawaii, I can't think of any North American routes that long and certain no intra-Europe routes. As a result, most travel between large cities in Asia will be via air rather than other modes of transportation.

zeke · Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:49 pm

Quoting cheeken (Reply 15):

ding ding

1/3 of the worlds population would not fit in all of narrow body aircraft in Europe and North America combined.

william · Mon Apr 25, 2016 3:50 pm

Having grown up in the age of L1011s and DC1s flying domestic routes, I find it interesting the A330 has not found a home on more US domestic routes. Yes, I know crew costs are higher, and the whole frequency argument. I guess the A321 has in essence replaced the Dc10s and L1011s role in US domestic service.

cheeken · Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:04 pm

Quoting OA412 (Reply 16):
This. Also bear in mind that distances in Asia are huge when compared to Europe, and even North America. While feasible to make trips between many large cities in Europe and North America by car or train, it just isn't feasible to do so with respect to Asia. NRT-SIN is over 7 hours; NRT-BOM over 9 hours. Outside Hawaii, I can't think of any North American routes that long and certain no intra-Europe routes. As a result, most travel between large cities in Asia will be via air rather than other modes of transportation.

This is also very true. To add on to this, the population is so huge, that even in countries like Japan and China which have a decent amount of high speed rail connectivity (and trains are quite filled!), widebodies still form a very significant part of 1-2 hour short haul flights eg. HND-ITM. The world's densest 777-300s belonging to ANA regularly flies short haul domestic flights!

Another point to note is that some of these short haul flights on widebodies are utilisation flights to minimise ground time between long hauls, where demand is appropriate!

TheRedBaron · Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:22 pm

Quoting william (Reply 18):
Having grown up in the age of L1011s and DC1s flying domestic routes, I find it interesting the A330 has not found a home on more US domestic routes. Yes, I know crew costs are higher, and the whole frequency argument. I guess the A321 has in essence replaced the Dc10s and L1011s role in US domestic service.

It has to do more with airlines competing, using smaller and therefore less risky equipment in $$$$ and expenses.

For example the MEX-LAX route is a 4 hour affair, it was flown in 727 for years and in the 70´s Western Airlines, Mexicana and Aeromexico used Dc10´s ALL OF THEM for that route, on the other side MIA JFK and Houston was used with same aircraft plus Tristars and A300, even occasional 742. on hops of 3 to 5 hours.

Then they used the big guys on longer routes and the MEX-LAX was a 722 A320 and MD83 deal, for Years, occasionally DL 757´s, Mexicana and AM used 752, nowadays there are a lot more flights but almost all of them in small aircraft and even in SSJ100, Embraers en Rj´s... for flights to SAT etc... tons of flights on smaller aircraft.

AM is flying the 788 to LAX with good loads finally after 20 years of 738 and Mad Dogs.... I guess on this side of th pond, airlines prefer 3 flights in smaller aircraft and have better frequency than using a larger aircraft once a day..the market works this way and that is why big aircraft is seldom used on transcons for example...

TRB

Stitch · Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:26 pm

Quoting william (Reply 18):
Having grown up in the age of L1011s and DC1s flying domestic routes, I find it interesting the A330 has not found a home on more US domestic routes. Yes, I know...the whole frequency argument.

"the whole frequency argument" pretty much answers the question, in general.

That being said, we do see occasional widebody services between domestic hubs and even hubs and major spokes (UA used to fly a 767 between LAX and SEA during peak summer season, for example).

vinniewinnie · Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:38 pm

Quoting LH748 (Reply 8):
plus CSA, Turkish, Air Serbia, Aeroflot

TK uses it's A330 fairly extensively in Europe.

Distance plays a major role in this I believe (3+ hours) BA also uses it's 767's on such flights (Greece, Cyprus and up till recently I believe Istanbul)

So it's a question of distance, number of hubs and frequency preferences.

airbazar · Mon Apr 25, 2016 4:49 pm

Quoting vinniewinnie (Reply 22):
Distance plays a major role in this I believe

There isn't any route in Europe flown by the A330 that is outside the range of the A320/737 from IST. The main factor is the same as for Asia: Istanbul is the largest city in Europe. About 2x larger than London by population. They fly A330's because demand is huge. In addition to that IST is very congested so more frequencies is not really an easy option.

Freshside3 · Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:10 pm

Quoting william (Reply 18):
Having grown up in the age of L1011s and DC1s flying domestic routes, I find it interesting the A330 has not found a home on more US domestic routes. Yes, I know crew costs are higher, and the whole frequency argument. I guess the A321 has in essence replaced the Dc10s and L1011s role in US domestic service.

Especially on TransCon and Hawaii trips.

N14AZ · Mon Apr 25, 2016 5:17 pm

Quoting william (Reply 18):
I guess the A321 has in essence replaced the Dc10s and L1011s role in US domestic service.

If I would still be an active plane spotter, I now - after reading this statement - would become a train spotter...

Who would have thought like this back in the days of the DC10/L1011..

irelayer · Mon Apr 25, 2016 6:15 pm

I'll answer this question in non-av terms:

Population of China: ~1.4 billion
Population of Southeast Asia: 618 million
Population of Korea/Japan/Taiwan: ~200 million

Combined population of "East Asia" region: ~2.2 billion

Population of the USA/Canada/Mexico: ~470 million
Population of Europe: ~750 million (this includes Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and most of Russia!)
Population the Middle East: ~400 million
Population of South America: ~400 million

Combined population of 4 distinct aviation markets: 2 billion

I think the numbers tell that story.

-IR

Navigator · Mon Apr 25, 2016 6:15 pm

Quoting airbazar (Reply 13):
How many European cities do you know with more than 5 million people?

That would be:

1. Istanbul 14,4 million
2.Moscow 12, 2 million
3. London 8,2 million
4. St Petersburg 5,2 million

But I think you should rather think about cities with much air travel

william · Mon Apr 25, 2016 6:29 pm

Quoting N14AZ (Reply 25):
If I would still be an active plane spotter, I now - after reading this statement - would become a train spotter...
Who would have thought like this back in the days of the DC10/L1011..

LOL...........So, true, never would have thought that one day DL , UA and AA would replace their widebodies with 737-900s (would have never thought there would a be 737ng at that time either) or A321s (which at the time, the A320 was a new comer on the scene, let alone a derivative of it being a widebody replacement).

Train spotting is just as boring over here, locomotives are all GEs its seems like.

LAX772LR · Mon Apr 25, 2016 6:36 pm

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 1):
Asian carriers have no need for shorthaul narrow-body twins

Since when? About the only-ones who don't, are the types based in current/former city-states (e.g. SQ, EK, CX, etc).

Quoting airbazar (Reply 13):
The obvious answer is population size.

Is it? There's more to it than that....

Quoting airbazar (Reply 13):
How many European cities do you know with more than 5 million people? 1 or 2 only. In Asia that's called a village

Sure, but then again, the overwhelming majority of them probably couldn't afford bus fare, let alone air fare.

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 14):
Also, ground transportation isn't an option between most Asian capitals.

The *international* road system (and arguably, rail) between major Asian population centers often aren't as developed as Europe and N.America, so less transportation (especially for cargo) on either... going a long way to encourage widebody usage,.

jmchevallier · Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:02 pm

Yes, WB aircraft and A330 in particular are widely used for short/medium haul flights over East Asia, but the NB A321 is also very popular in 4 to 6 hours flights and when looking at the ATM mix at major airports, it is not so different there and in Western Europe.

The difference in East Asia is a greater flexibility in WB/NB allocation to a given destination, depending upon the week day or the hour.

rbavfan · Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:21 pm

Quoting sassiciai (Reply 7):
Amend the thread title " Why so popular for short haul ......." and then you are correct (and the thread will have less erroneous visits!

Read the whole title. Its not confusing he's stating its used for sort haul in Asia but rare elsewhere. If you need to add to it so it says "rare for short haul elsewhere" to understand, Sorry.

rbavfan · Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:29 pm

Quoting migair54 (Reply 10):
Asia is so full of narrow-bodies also that Airbus open the first line in Tianjin just to supply that market.

Tianjin line is ONLY to support China's need, not Asia's. If they had not done that line China would have ordered more Boeings. If ou don't believe that then ask why did Boing open a 737 finishing line in China, Surprisingly announced right before a huge Boeing order from China. Boeings facility appears to be China only as well.

Note also Airbus opened a line in the US to support that market as well. A lot of it has to do with change rates right now as well. The US line supplies the US airlines because doing so from Europe right now looses more money for Airbus due to Euro vs Dollar exchange rates.

crazyof380 · Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:49 pm

Also, TK manages to schedule their widebodies to long-haul and short-haul pretty well. Below is my observation for how TK manages their widebodies for both int'l and domestic flights.

1) A plane lands to Istanbul from Asia flight early in the morning. (Day 1)
2) Plane makes one or two short-haul rotations. (Day 1)
3) Plane flies to Continental America. (Day 1-2)
4) Plane Flies Back and lands at Istanbul in the afternoon. (Day 2)
5) Plane makes one or two short haul rotations. (Day 2)
6) Plane departs for Asia flight late at night. (Day 2/Day 3)
7) Plane flies back to Istanbul (Day 3)
8) Goes back to step 1.

Please keep in mind that Instead of flying to Continental America, TK also manages pretty well to fly widebodies to medium-haul routes at day and use the plane back for Far-East flights.

Coming back to your question:
TK basically matches the demand with the plane type. Therefore, they use widebodies where they are bounded with frequency, which is the case for domestic rotations from Istanbul to Ankara and Izmir, which sees high demand during morning and at evening since there are a lot of daily travelers from those cities to Istanbul for work, as well as congested European airports such as LHR.

bx737 · Mon Apr 25, 2016 10:54 pm

EI uses the A330s on services from DUB-AGP daily during the Summer. DUB-FAO also sees the A330 once a week during the Summer. Rarely in the event of disruption recovery they may send the A330 on DUB-LHR.

HELyes · Mon Apr 25, 2016 11:20 pm

Quoting migair54 (Reply 10):
I think it's because of cargo uplift, operating the widebody allow most of the airlines to move a lot of cargo without needing to have a dedicated cargo fleet.

Thats's the reason Finnair uses widebodies to BRU and LHR 2-3 times a week, more often A350 nowadays but also A333/343.

AY A333 in LHR:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

jah718 · Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:44 am

The exact same argument could be made about the 777. Why is it regularly used on short haul flights by airlines in Japan, Korea, China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore etc.

The simple fact of the matter is that this tends to be the norm in Asia, where the population tends to be higher. Some of the busiest air corridors in the world are in Asia. For example:

Seoul - Jeju
Tokyo - Fukuoka
Beijing - Shanghai
Tokyo - Osaka
Hong - Kong - Taipei
Tokyo - Okinawa

7 out of the top 10 busiest routes in the world are in Asia. That is why they not only commonly use the A330, but also 777, 747, A340, 767.

sassiciai · Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:37 am

Quoting rbavfan (Reply 31):
Quoting sassiciai (Reply 7):
Amend the thread title " Why so popular for short haul ......." and then you are correct (and the thread will have less erroneous visits!

Read the whole title. Its not confusing he's stating its used for sort haul in Asia but rare elsewhere. If you need to add to it so it says "rare for short haul elsewhere" to understand, Sorry.

The original title was as follows:

"A330 - Why So Popular In Asia And Rare Elsewhere?"

As a result of my suggestion, the OP amended the title, then you came along and read the thread! So it's just a timing issue, no problem!

vinniewinnie · Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:00 am

Quoting airbazar (Reply 23):
There isn't any route in Europe flown by the A330 that is outside the range of the A320/737 from IST. The main factor is the same as for Asia: Istanbul is the largest city in Europe. About 2x larger than London by population. They fly A330's because demand is huge. In addition to that IST is very congested so more frequencies is not really an easy option.

That is not the point I was making.

I said the longer the distance for a short haul destination, the more likely a widebody will be used. That is why the TK A330 is often scheduled on a London or Paris run, but not on an Athens run.

Overall in Europe, you will see more widebodies on medium long destinations which are comparable in distance to Asian ones. (for example: London - Athens, London -Larnaca, London - Cairo, London - Tel-Aviv, London - Istanbul)

Obviously anyone can find exceptions...

rbavfan · Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:03 am

Quoting sassiciai (Reply 37):

Ok thanks for clearing that up.

Francoflier · Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:09 am

Asia's air traffic structure is completely different to that of Europe and North America.

Not only is the population immense, but most of them live in a handful of mega-cities.
Most traffic happens between these huge hubs. The direct air network between secondary cities in Asia is still very much underdeveloped.

It's not hard to imagine A330s and other widebodies serving between two cities with 20 million inhabitant each if narrowbodies do the same in cities a tenth of the size in the West.

migair54 · Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:16 am

Quoting HELyes (Reply 35):
Thats's the reason Finnair uses widebodies to BRU and LHR 2-3 times a week, more often A350 nowadays but also A333/343.

Also IB and BA run widebodies between MAD and LHR, usually in the evening flights to take all the cargo the have in both hubs.

If we consider Israel with Europe, TLV has plenty of widebodies daily also.

Carpethead · Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:08 pm

Also in some cases, a large body of water separates city pairs in Asia.
Not much in the form of alternative travel options.

airbazar · Tue Apr 26, 2016 2:28 pm

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 29):
Since when? About the only-ones who don't, are the types based in current/former city-states (e.g. SQ, EK, CX, etc).

Even those all do in some way: SQ has SilkAir and TigerAir. EK helped establish and cooperates very closely with FlyDubai and both are owned but the same people. CX has Cathay Dragon.

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 29):
Sure, but then again, the overwhelming majority of them probably couldn't afford bus fare, let alone air fare.

Irrelevant. 10% of 3 billion people is still a huge market. And more importantly, the middle class is growing.

Quoting francoflier (Reply 40):
Not only is the population immense, but most of them live in a handful of mega-cities.

The problem with this statement is that a small city in Asia is larger than a European "mega city"

Tkfan · Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:40 pm

Quoting vinniewinnie (Reply 38):
I said the longer the distance for a short haul destination, the more likely a widebody will be used. That is why the TK A330 is often scheduled on a London or Paris run, but not on an Athens run.

IST-ATH for a period A340 and 77W was schudeled. Now with 4 dailies and Aegaen codeshare you still see some widebodies ocasionally.

TLV (2h) had also multiple daily widebodies, now with 9 dailies only one daily is A330 scheduled. Occasionally and depending on demand there may be multiple daily widebodies.

OTP (1.5h), VIE (2h) each one daily A330 scheduled.

Due to the congestion at IST more than two dozen cities within 3h distance have at least one daily scheduled widebody service.
Its also perfect utilisation of these A/C inbetween longhaul flights.

AirlineCritic · Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:00 pm

Quoting cheeken (Reply 15):
Because this:

Wow. That is amazing. I hadn't realised.

drgmobile · Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:16 pm

Wow. So some pretty basic stuff. Look at a map of Europe, then at Asia. Europe is smaller, much more close together geographically and not separated by bodies of water. Short haul is shorter haul in Europe, the distances are greater in Asia and in Asia there aren't trains in competition for the traffic outside of mainland China. While things are changing, low cost carrier penetration in most parts of Asia also isn't anywhere near what it is in Europe.

a380787 · Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:27 pm

Quoting jah718 (Reply 36):

Seoul - Jeju
Tokyo - Fukuoka
Beijing - Shanghai
Tokyo - Osaka
Hong - Kong - Taipei
Tokyo - Okinawa

I'm still impressed by how many people fly HND-ITM considering the prevalence and convenience of Shinkansen.

ps : not to be a nitpicker but you forgot one of the largest one - HND-CTS

sassiciai · Tue Apr 26, 2016 7:29 pm

Quoting drgmobile (Reply 46):
While things are changing, low cost carrier penetration in most parts of Asia also isn't anywhere near what it is in Europe.

Are you really sure about that?

I see in Asian airports a flood of A32x/B73x flights from many LCC companies and also from the established so-called legacy carriers. VietJet, Cebu Pacific, Air Asia, Hong Kong Airlines, Lion Air, Indigo, and a myriad of other airlines in Indonesia, in India, and elsewhere about which I know zero, to name but a handful, are powering ahead in their local markets (and in some not-so-local as well) using single aisle aircraft.

Your premise that the LCC is a European thing is just so wrong! Just try the fares on offer from some of the carriers I mentioned!

Freshside3 · Tue Apr 26, 2016 8:29 pm

Quoting vinniewinnie (Reply 38):
I said the longer the distance for a short haul destination, the more likely a widebody will be used. That is why the TK A330 is often scheduled on a London or Paris run, but not on an Athens run.

Actually, they do use the A330 and the 777 on the IST-ATH run during the peak summer season.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net