Brussels Airlines fleet renewal: announcement next summer.

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

sn-remember
Posts: 848
Joined: 13 Sep 2004, 00:00
Location: Jodoigne/Geldenaken
Contact:

Post by sn-remember »

tolipanebas wrote: 5 wide bodies at MINIMUM from the same manufacturer as the narrow bodies

If they come up with a fleet composition which is largely different from this, it means they plan to keep on operating with regional jets to places like BRS, BERLIN, GVA, etc and they will be eaten alive when Easyjet (or any other european low cost) settles in Brussels.
Agreed with all - except for the 5 wide- bodies !
These are the money makers and imhv should be given top priority for development and expansion.

Personnally I would see min 10 to 15 wide-bodies by 2010 to compensate for the short-haul low yields routes.
Focus on Africa (main target) and N-Atlantic (nyk, bos,yul before it's too late)
6 to 10 daylies to Africa and 3 to 6 daylies to America (indeed 2 daily flights to same E-coast desti is imv possible and desirable provided the necessary patnership is set up)

Short-hauls come as 2nd priority as feeder of l/hauls.
However I fully share your accurate analysis concerning the s/haul fleet renewal requirements.
I would indeed consider the 130-150 module to compete equallyv with the LCCs, however giving preference to the 150 seat A320 because of better revenue potential.


Never forget the fantastic example of Aer Lingus successfully competing in Dublin with FR thx to professional management initiated by W.Walsh.

They wisely opted for the 150+ seating range A320 as s/haul fleet backbone (around 25 instances).

Plus 6 180+ seats A321 (on LHR maily).

And a fleet of A332/333 to cover the N-Atlantic (4 destis currently, 8 destis in the very near future, lots more by 2010)

User avatar
TWA
Posts: 606
Joined: 04 Oct 2003, 00:00
Location: Thalahassee, FL -- Sint-Truiden, BE
Contact:

Post by TWA »

Besides Aer Lingus, Swiss is also becomming a success-story thx to focussing on LongHaul operations, why not SN?

ERICAIRLINES
Posts: 154
Joined: 16 Nov 2003, 00:00

Post by ERICAIRLINES »

Nyc route is by far too buzy now with AA,DL,CO and now 9W (one EWR starting next sunday and then more to come to JFK in 2008)...

Though forget NYC...
Boston is a good bet,Sabena was doing very well on this route before...but they lost 6 years ..

YUL is still possible ,as only TS fly there and only three times a week during the summer..but Yields are low (vfr)...

YYZ,PHL,IAD,ATL,CHI,DTW...too late

IAH,MIA,LAX(soon 9w),SFO,SEA,MPL,DEN etc..no market at all ...


Bos and yul are the two remaining gateways...

ERICAIRLINES
Posts: 154
Joined: 16 Nov 2003, 00:00

Post by ERICAIRLINES »

maybe DFW....

Captain Remi
Posts: 68
Joined: 19 Apr 2007, 11:52
Location: Machelen, Belgium

Brussels Airlines fleet renewal

Post by Captain Remi »

Guys,
There are a lot of misunderstandings here.
At first regarding the Sukhoi jet. Sukhoi cannot have a "bad reputation" as some stated as it is their first commercial aircraft aside from a turboprop that performs well. They used to make only fighter aircraft.
Furthermore, The SSJ is a 49-51% joint venture between Finmeccanica (Alenia of Italy) and Sukhoi.
Boeing largely assists the program as do a LOT of Western suppliers.
Many airlines as Brussels Airlines, KLM-AirFrance, Aeroflot, SAS etc. have also been involved in the program as Sukhoi asked their opinion on several features and decissions regarding the plane's design and planned performance.

If I should name a weak point in the Sukhoi SSJ program, as in most "Russian built aircraft", it is the servicing after the sale.
They are for sure building a great aircraft. Their main concern is to keep it flying afterwards. They should seek partnerships and maintenance centres around the globe to service the aircraft once delivered and operational.

That's why 14 months prior to the introduction of the first aircraft into commercial service, they are seeking a solution to this "problem".
This is even done in collaboration with Boeing as well.
SO, the SSJ should be a good option for Brussels Airlines if maintenance can be guaranteed.

A reminder to all who have previously posted some comments that are mostly based on prejudgement instead of facts...please, if you are not a pilot, mechanic or whatsoever, go visit shows like Le Bourget, read Flight International articles (there was an issue entirely devoted to the SSJ program) and come with facts and figures instead of prejudgement.

I'm sure many of you that have comment on "Russian built airframes" drive a Korean car like a Huyndai or KIA although you and many of your friends and relatives used to judge those cars differently, or even laugh with them at sight, a small decade ago.
Things do change you know...
And if you want to have a look at facts and figures, please keep in mind that plane crashed involving Russian built planes are largely caused by a lack of maintenance, crew training, procedures, infrastructure etc. and not due too bad conception of the aircraft themselves.
Something that you should also keep in mind is that a lot more Boeings and Airbusses crash in former hIS countries compared to the number of crashes in Europe or the US. THis also proves weak infrastructure, procedures etc. in those countries. If not, you should be making the same reflection on Airbusses and Boeings.
Furthermore...didn't Boeing have a huge problem when a valve in the rudder made about 3-4 737's crash, killing all on board? Heard any stories like that on Russian built jets?

The SSJ will be a solid and great plane because it is as Western as is the 787 a global project. Even the engines are a joint venture between French Snecma and a Russion engine builder.
So they shouldn't be too fuel consumptive either which will also be a very important feature if you want to sell new planes in the market of the 737-600, A318, Embraer 170-175-190-195 and new Bombardier C -series (the announced project, not the CRJ family which is too small except for the CRJ900).

And last but not least, KLM-Air France is seriously looking at the SSJ as well and SAS (Scandinavian) is even supposed to be close to closing a deal! And in contrary to what has been posted here previously, there is already a first Western buy signed. ItaliAir bought 20 SSJ's to replace MD-80's and 328Jets...

sn-remember
Posts: 848
Joined: 13 Sep 2004, 00:00
Location: Jodoigne/Geldenaken
Contact:

Post by sn-remember »

yul, bos, ... and imv nyk.

True NYC is already served (by DL I did'nt know) and will continue to develop with other carriers.
However these carriers have their own market and I am confident sn can capture their own market as well on this premium destination.
I would certainly support a strategic partnership with a US carrier (legacy and/or low cost) while stepping there.

I see the recapture of some market shares on the N-Atlantic as strategic to put bru's airport back as a european hub.
It's imv one of the conditions of sn survival.
And this should have been put forward already yrs ago.
Now is the very last limit to take the right steps.

I would not be as final as you are concerning the sfo trafic opportunities.
I tend to believe they are rather good (I don't know where I read that it was an important destination for belgians) and I hope that 9W will open a link there in the very near future (in parallel with lax, flights from del/bom crossing at bru would make sense)

MIA was much discussed lately and is still open.
IAH could be considered in parallel with MIA or DFW although I suppose that these routes would require some feeding efforts.
Last edited by sn-remember on 30 Jul 2007, 14:41, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
tolipanebas
Posts: 2442
Joined: 12 May 2004, 00:00

Post by tolipanebas »

sn-remember wrote: Agreed with all of you tolipanebas- except for the 5 wide- bodies!
These are the money makers and imhv should be given top priority for development and expansion.

Personnally I would see min 10 to 15 wide-bodies by 2010 to ompensate for the short-haul low yields routes: Focus on Africa (main target) and N-Atlantic
I can see your point and to some extend I can agree with it, although the North Atlantic would never be such a great money maker than Africa for SN and taking into account the limited resources SN has at its disposal, I drew not what I'd call my WISH LIST, but rather a MUST DO plan for the fleet renewal, hence I've left it out.

The MUST DO list for the fleet renewal at SN is:
Minimum 5 factory new A330s to serve around 15 African destinations with reasonable frequencies and without the frequent AOGs.
25 or so Airbus/Boeing narrow bodies to compete with the LCC on the European trunk routes without seat mile cost handicap.
10 to 15 regional jets to serve the low volume routes where no competition is expected and yield is still okay.

Additional expansion would indeed in my view best be oriented towards the long haul sector, notably North America, but only AFTER the above minimum fleet structure is guaranteed, because it is vital SN takes on a fleet structure which is suitable for a carrier in its position.

SN is a long haul niche operator with a European network which will soon see fierce LCC competition on all but a handfull of its routes, just like EI indeed as you have pointed out and just like EI, SN can not be safeguared from them with a too small fleet of old wide bodies (with the lowest dispatch reliability of all Airbus A330 operators BTW) and a huge fleet of high CASM regional jets. It is a scenario for disaster as it will put the airline in a constant disadvantaged cost position throughout their fleet, forcing it to scale back the network in response to competition without end in sight, but total annihilation.

Some people here will think I am just talking out of my neck, but I strongly hope SN realises they will not be able to compete with any LCC on their European routes with a fleet of regional planes, whether their old AVROs or new Sukois or Embraer jets because these planes all have the handicap they come with a CASM 30 to 50 % higher than the A319/737-7 used by the LCC (increasing even against the A320/738 ) and with the LCC settling at BRU, SN must concentrate their attention on the larger planes for it to have an equal chance, but for now, the signals I am getting indicate they are still stuck in yesterday's thinking (100 seaters are the best) and thus look for the best plane in that class...

WRONG in my view: that way SN will get itself yesterday's best fleet and find itself with an unsuitable fleet (operating cost wise that is) in 5 years from now, just like they do today.

Rather than do this fleet renewal plan inhouse, maybe they sould get some external help from reputated fleet planning consultants (SQ has the facility and I know LH too helps with consultancing), because I fear their is not enough skills at SN to fully see the big picture which is awaiting them:

Some figures to wake up to:
last year, yield on European routes dropped with 5% at LH and LH expect the same to happen over then next year too... and the year after...
Knowing how thin the margins are at SN, I hope this helps to see why planes with the lowest CASM will become greatly important over time even if it means they offer slightly more seats which require to be filled through low pricing, aggressive promotion etc, rather that just settle for the 'best 100 seater'...
Oh, and LH do know what they are talking about and how to run an airline, as they have just posted half year results: 1BN euro profit over the first 6 months. :shock:

Captain Remi
Posts: 68
Joined: 19 Apr 2007, 11:52
Location: Machelen, Belgium

Post by Captain Remi »

Regarding 10 or more widebodies in the B.Air's fleet...
If the African airline becomes operational with for instance the 6 BAE's, there will not be a need for an enormous number of widebodies as an African hub will allow more flights to that continent with the same number of planes. 5 A330's will do in that case...
If you use a hub and spoke network, you don't actually need so many widebodies.
Then regarding the Embraer, this seems to be one of the best options. A318's are quite expensive and not really the best planes for the job in B.Air's case.
The Embraer is also well constructed offering easy maintenance (easily accessible hatches etc. for technicians for instance), and low time on the ground between flights (praised by many airlines already). It's weight is also lower than the A318's.
Belgian aviation industry with Sonaca and ASCO are also involved in building some parts for the Embraers. Do remind that these things also play politically in decissions as the fleet renewal.
And Turboprops are gaining market share as well as many have now realised that they are not so much slower than jets and prove to be quicker on certain routes as their time on the ground between flights is low and their speed is close to that of a jet.
Flybe is even replacing the Embraers again by Q400's on some routes... Furthermore ATR and Bombardier are selling more and more turboprops again and Bombardier is even considering a stretch of the Q400!
So on some routes, this wouldn't be a bad option...
Have you already noticed that sooo many seats remain open, even in the RJ85's? You just have to look at the number of seats you are actually selling and the number you plan to sell on each route in the next couple of years, taking that into account on the fleet renewall plan.

Basically it all comes down to common sense looking at the number of seats needed and the development of some routes, time on the ground, maintenance and training costs, TBO (time between overhaul), fuel consumption and fleet commonality (as much aircraft of the same family possible to lower training and maintenance costs and dependance).

ERICAIRLINES
Posts: 154
Joined: 16 Nov 2003, 00:00

Post by ERICAIRLINES »

sfo will not be served by 9W ...only via Shangai normaly not via bru

Air Key West
Posts: 1107
Joined: 23 Jun 2007, 20:51
Location: BRU

Post by Air Key West »

I honestly don't know which would the best new aircraft for SN's European routes. My preference would go to Embraer, but Sukhoi doesn't seem to be a bad choice (and Sukhoi will probably be the cheapest to buy, but will it be the cheapest to operate ?).
As to the African network, I don't understand why SN is not copying the British Airways (BA) initiative which is to use A321ER aircraft with Business class sleeper seats and a regular economy cabin on the London-Dakar route. Why isn't SN considering to use the same aircraft on shorter African destinations in order to offer more frequencies, also to have a better occupancy rate and the investment would be less than for A330s.
As regards possible operations to the US, I think the only wise decision would be to operate flights to Miami with current code share partner American Airlines. MIA is an important hub for AA, with good connections to many Carribean and Central American destinations.
In favor of quality air travel.

User avatar
TWA
Posts: 606
Joined: 04 Oct 2003, 00:00
Location: Thalahassee, FL -- Sint-Truiden, BE
Contact:

Post by TWA »

Air Key West wrote:As regards possible operations to the US, I think the only wise decision would be to operate flights to Miami with current code share partner American Airlines. MIA is an important hub for AA, with good connections to many Carribean and Central American destinations.
I still remember the almost always overbooked Citybird's to MCO and MIA just before they went bankrupt.

thofman2
Posts: 21
Joined: 09 Jan 2007, 10:32

Post by thofman2 »

As to the African network, I don't understand why SN is not copying the British Airways (BA) initiative which is to use A321ER aircraft with Business class sleeper seats and a regular economy cabin on the London-Dakar route. Why isn't SN considering to use the same aircraft on shorter African destinations in order to offer more frequencies, also to have a better occupancy rate and the investment would be less than for A330s.
I desagree, because the principal source of income on the African network comes from freight . SN would have more interests to use a wide bodies with a very large cargo charge. I have read in an few years ago they have studied the possibility to use 747 on the African network not for the pax but to increase the cargo capacities. They have forgotten this eventuality because the cost was to many expensive. I think that the choice of the wide bodies will be very influenced by the fret capacities.

Jacob330
Posts: 43
Joined: 28 Aug 2006, 15:03

Post by Jacob330 »

thofman2 wrote: I desagree, because the principal source of income on the African network comes from freight . SN would have more interests to use a wide bodies with a very large cargo charge.
I read on this forum some time ago that Dakar is an exception when it comes to freight because Dakar is especially a tourist-destination. In that case an A321 could do well. That would create room for one or more extra Africa-destinations with an A330.
Image

sn-remember
Posts: 848
Joined: 13 Sep 2004, 00:00
Location: Jodoigne/Geldenaken
Contact:

Post by sn-remember »

Maybe SN is not carrying much freight on the Dakar route.
If this is the case, I ask myself why ?
LH have a strong freight link to Dakar operated with MD11 freighters.
Why not SN or others ?

This being said, for carriers not wanting to get involved in the freight sector, indeed I believe the A321ER example you mention is worthy.
For instance, starting or reshuffling a new carrier in DLA with this type of a/c for routes to Europe would imv make sense, however with a range limitation. I don't think that DLA-BRU would be feasable in normal ops or would it ?

Cartman
Posts: 153
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 00:00
Location: BRU

Post by Cartman »

Don't be too enthousiast about the Embraer. Small holds and difficult to keep within trim limits. This is a serious limitation on the amount of baggage and certainly the amount of cargo and mail that can be transported...
I'm in love with my lust, burning angelwings to dust, I wish I had your angel tonight...
www.myrre.be

SierraFoxtrotMike
Posts: 140
Joined: 21 Oct 2003, 00:00
Location: In a cockpit...

Post by SierraFoxtrotMike »

Jacob330 wrote:
thofman2 wrote: I desagree, because the principal source of income on the African network comes from freight . SN would have more interests to use a wide bodies with a very large cargo charge.
read on this forum some time ago that Dakar is an exception when it comes to freight because Dakar is especially a tourist-destination. In that case an A321 could do well. That would create room for one or more extra Africa-destinations with an A330.
*** Dakar is one of the biggest destinations of Africa in freight, with Kinshasa and Entebbe and in tourists as well !***

Have a nice evening !

*** = Censored

spotter1102

Post by spotter1102 »

ERICAIRLINES wrote: IAH,MIA,LAX(soon 9w),SFO,SEA,MPL,DEN etc..no market at all ...

Jet Airways also plans to fly to Houston and Miami ? throughout BRU ?

Jacob330
Posts: 43
Joined: 28 Aug 2006, 15:03

Post by Jacob330 »

SierraFoxtrotMike wrote:
Jacob330 wrote:
thofman2 wrote: I desagree, because the principal source of income on the African network comes from freight . SN would have more interests to use a wide bodies with a very large cargo charge.
read on this forum some time ago that Dakar is an exception when it comes to freight because Dakar is especially a tourist-destination. In that case an A321 could do well. That would create room for one or more extra Africa-destinations with an A330.
Dakar is one of the biggest destinations of Africa in freight, with Kinshasa and Entebbe and in tourists as well !

Have a nice evening !
Allright then... :oops: I can only say what i read on this forum before. Anyway, i'm happy for SN that they 're doing good business on that route :wink:
Image

LX-LGX
Posts: 2004
Joined: 20 Jan 2004, 00:00
Location: ANR

Post by LX-LGX »

bit off topic perhaps:

Last Friday, AF / KLM has ordered 20 x E-Jets for Régional and KLM Cityhopper. They've also placed a not confirmed order for 18 x E170/175's and E190/195's. Ten of the firm E190 orders and nine of non confirmed E190 orders will be for KLM Cityhopper. Régional, already using the E-190, will get another six E-170's and four E-190's. Value of the deal: probably some 657 mio USD.

Reason for choosing the Embraers: "prijs, prestaties, werkmethodieken, passagierservaring, verlaging van de kosten per eenheid en een kleinere belasting van milieu en klimaat." : price, technical specifications, operational methods, experiences from pax, lower costs per unit because of synergy Cityhopper-Régional, better for envirmonment.

Please do correct if I haven't translated correct. Trust KLM/AF will soon put an English translation of their press release on their website.

source: http://www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl/news/?id=21415

User avatar
Bruspotter
Posts: 2067
Joined: 04 Sep 2004, 00:00
Location: (Antwerp/Belgium)
Contact:

Post by Bruspotter »

Hi

TWA
Besides Aer Lingus, Swiss is also becomming a success-story thx to focussing on LongHaul operations, why not SN?
If I'm not mistaking that's also something that Brussels Airlines (ex SN) does (or at least DID in the time it still was SNBA) on the routes to Africa.

Certainly in the beginning that saved the airline they say.


Anyway, they should indeed keep investing a lot in long-haul routes, the short-haul routes will follow automatically. Lots of long-haul routes brings lots of code-share pax from other airports to your airport.


Best regards: Yannick ;)

Post Reply