African operations possible with narrow body equipment

[teddybAIR]

Just to isolate this separate discussion...

[Desert Rat]

Yes of course, if you are based on a strategic location like, Tripoli, Tunis,Algiers,Casablanca...You are in between your European destination and your African's one, so, it's a big advantage you can create a hub and distribute your passenger from that hub...
Afriqiyah, RAM, Tunis Air,Air Algerie and even Egyptair are doing it...more to come in the future, with who knows some LCC....
Beside the fact that their base is at the right location, these north African carriers have a very good experience on how to deal with the business in black Africa...It is not anymore the exclusivity of some europeans carriers.
Out of Casa, with 320@168pax you can reach Lagos,Athens and Stockholm with a 77tons MTOW and with the 78 MTOW that will soon be available you can even reach Istanbul...

Off-topic, but I heard of a BIG project in Senegal...

[134flyer]

Although we're still going in circles, and I'm afraid it will be useless to continue, I would still like to come back to the following:

Luggage that does not fit into that volume can be sent with the next flight but it will only be in rare circumstances and it does not at all justify not starting such an operation.

Sure, it can be sent with the next flight, and what about the next flight's luggage, and the flight after that one? After only one week SN can start building a hangar at BRU just to store the left behind luggage...

For the example you gave of 19 bags for 5 passengers, it only means that there is 9 bags over the allowed amount, so you only have to hope that the flight is not full or that sufficient pax have only checked one or no bags at all.

Either way, this is an exception because not everyone has 4 arms and 4 legs to carry 4 luggage each, that maybe brought up a few hundred euro of additional revenues.

This case might be extreme, but excess luggage to AFI is not as unusual as you think!!

So what is your point?
The fact that these few hundred euros of additional revenues, or the mere fact that on less than 5% of such flights, less than 5% of the pax ( which brings us down to 5% of 5% or less than 0.25%) may have to come back to the airport at a later date to claim their luggage, is more important than actually serving routes that are not being served today?

It's not (only) about getting some extra revenue, which you are gladly rejecting...
The point is that you have a pax (who was a HIGH YIELD pax by the way) who has excess luggage, but she doesn't care; here only concern is to get it to Africa. She is WILLING AND ABLE to pay extra for it. Now, in your plan, SN has no other option to refuse the excess luggage, as there is NO ROOM for it on the A319 (and therefore can't take in the extra revenue as well). So what is the result? The pax is extremely p&ssed off, as she can't take all here luggage with here. So next time (even if she has no luggage at all), she will most probably NOT fly SN, as she had a bad experience with SN, whereas the competion will gladly welcome her (together with her excess luggage), and SN lost a high yield pax.

So this was actually my point: it is ten times harder to attract a new customer than to retain a customer. And even then, you've only replaced your lost customer... This is all very basic, which I didn't get from Google or Wiki, but learned from my studies and then aplied it in REAL LIFE situations.
NCB, you want the market to adapt to your plan, instead of adapting your plan to the market...

To conclude, the above is only a small part of the total operational constraints when operating A319's to AFI, as pointed out several times to you by tolipanebas and others...

[BrightCedars]

Indeed, you can make plans on operating the A320 or B737 family to and from Africa, the fact is that Brussels isn't exactly located nearest to the target continent. A lot of Europe-Africa traffic can better travel using a hub further South on either side of the Med. The thing is that geography would favor e.g. Italy against France in this perspective, or any country already on the opposite shore.

Brussels' position makes it difficult to operate such routes without restrictions, does not really allow combining an aircraft flying Continental and Intercontinental flights in the same day. Someone else using a narrow body with a better location will have the upper hand, someone else using a more modern widebody nearby will have the upper hand.

No market is sacred and Africa, with its market development, will be like the rest of the world. Business sense will prevail. When a reliable operation will no longer be a criteria because most decent airlines would be reliable, people will look at the price tag only. And like I have know flown between Brussels and Beirut using a dozen of hubs on the way, they will do the same between Europe and Africa.

I am veering off topic but my conclusion is that SN should focus on making the core European operation a profitable system, and connect into the owner, partners, and alliance hubs for most of the rest. That is unless they get a firm commitment that they will be the European hub to Africa for all regional carriers. Which I doubt, and which would end the day a large Middle Eastern carrier joins the alliance for Asia-Africa connections, and is already be ending with US carriers now entering the Africa market.

[MH53]

Each route and each market should be treated individually and is there fore not 1:1 comparable with any other route. Everybody who works in the aviation world knows that Africa is a different chapter where different rules apply in any aspect. Comparing USA-EU narrow body flights with possible(?) EU - African flights is comparing apples with oranges.

On most long haul routes a combination of pax and cargo is necesserary to make a flight profitable. On these flights the difference between flying with or without cargo is the difference between loss and profit.

Anybody who has got experience in cargo and aviation in general knows that the amount of cargo possible in the belly of a narrow body plane is negligible.

All the theories you mention NCB sound maybe nice in theory but in practice they would not work with the EU -African market. You seem to know a lot of facts within the aviation sector, though you should not underestimate the value of people who work within the aviation business and speak of real life experience like tolipanebas. You should actually thank tolipanebas for these free lectures of aviation.

There are some really nice books about aviation management on the market regarding fleet management, airline and airport business. And in case you want to go further try Cranfield University in the United Kingdom, they got some nice experts over there who can tell you more about the interesting and complex world of aviation

Kind regards,

MH53,

Bachelor degree in International Logistics and Aviation Management
Specialized in Air Cargo

[NCB]

I have no lecture to receive from Tolipanebas nor from aviation management universities where teachers have either never worked in the industry or do work in the industry but have no awareness of what's happening around them. There are exceptions, but not many, Been there, seen that.

Actually if you were working in this industry you would know very well that there's too many people who don't belong here and are still here. What, did you think that I was working as a butler somewhere? I get a headache from such people all the time, and find it very funny to see the same kind of people here.

Tolipanebas is a pilot if I'm not mistaken.
A smart pilot can get to know alot about operations but alot of pilots never progress beyond their checklist, charts and cockpit. Many like to hang out their smart asses and try to make other people look ridiculous.
But have many really ever bothered calculating the true economics of their flight? I can answer, it's no.

There's nothing like theory or practice in aviation, there's only reality.
Aviation is not medicine, it's an exact science.

Africa is so different... Nothing sounds more ridiculous.

Airline operation is about pax and cargo... true for A333's flying in 265 configurations in a triangular operation, not true for A319 operating hub to spoke from BRU.

I will give you a pessismistic look at what is involved:
Let's see, A319 operational cost per hour on longer flight = about 2200EUR.
7 hour sector operating cost = 15 400EUR
Fixed costs of dispatch of a flight: handling, operation, accommodation for crew, landing fees: 2000EUR
Total cost of flight: 17 400EUR.
At a yield and load factor healthy average 80 % load factor, required average fare price for break-even 200EUR.
Sell for 550 EUR on average (combined Y and J), 400EUR average fare + 100EUR "airline fees") + 50EUR taxes.
-> Reasonable pricing, average earning 500EUR - 200EUR cost = 300EUR per pax, at 80% average load factor, average earning per sector 25 000EUR. 2 sectors per day, 50 000EUR earnings.
15 aircraft x 50 000EUR = 750 000EUR earning per day A319 fleet and I have been on the pessimistic side on calculations.
Do the math on a yearly basis and you'd realise that all your cargo talks are pointless.

This is pure expansion by a simple fleet replacement B737 to A319, and by bringing back the stored Bae's, including the Air DC's to cover for the shorthaul capacity.

This is not the hardest math out there, and I'm proud to see that those who are knowledgeable are not messing around. Truly I don't care about those who post those unthought and uncalculated comments, those who later when proved wrong blame their ignorance to my lack of knowledge and experience.

I'm sorry, I used you to optimise this proposal and it helped illustrate the not so illuminated area's of the proposal to those who care less about making a reputation on an internet forum but realise what SN is missing.

Off-topic, but I heard of a BIG project in Senegal...

You heard that too?
North America-Africa / Europe-Africa / Europe-South America are the markets aimed at.
That's exactly what I'm talking about... why SN must act now.

[Vinnie-Winnie]

I have no lecture to receive from Tolipanebas nor from aviation management universities where teachers have either never worked in the industry or do work in the industry but have no awareness of what's happening around them. There are exceptions, but not many, Been there, seen that.

Been where done what? The people you are talking about are the same people that if they decide to switch to industry become general managers in the most specialised business units of every airline, such as yield management, route development, operations...

Not quite sure where you got that info from but it is just wrong what you are saying!

IActually if you were working in this industry you would know very well that there's too many people who don't belong here and are still here. What, did you think that I was working as a butler somewhere? I get a headache from such people all the time, and find it very funny to see the same kind of people here.

Give me a break here. You probably admire reckless people such as Wolfgang Prock-Schauer which according to your theory are people that belong to the aviation industry whereas people which are a bit more cautious do in your opinion not belong to the industry.

Read a management book you'll what drives people to take decisions which may or may not end up being fatal for their business!
Also if you really one day want to work in aviation which I asusme you do, better not sell your love for the industry! Why because they know you won't have a realistic down to earth approach to problem solving. You'll think with your passion and you won't delver according to the company's expectations.

Really would love to know your background a little more because I really don't understand how you can do such outrageous comments

Tolipanebas is a pilot if I'm not mistaken.
A smart pilot can get to know alot about operations but alot of pilots never progress beyond their checklist, charts and cockpit. Many like to hang out their smart asses and try to make other people look ridiculous.
But have many really ever bothered calculating the true economics of their flight? I can answer, it's no.

I disagree sometimes with Tolipanebas, but I know that he has access to a wealth of data that you and I don't have.

There's nothing like theory or practice in aviation, there's only reality.
Aviation is not medicine, it's an exact science. .

Wrong! Tell me how do you forecast your demand in a few months. How do you adapt your pricing mechanism not to price people off. Theory, assumptions, quantitive analysis, marketing... Do you call that an exact science?

There is nothing exact about transportation let me tell you.

Airline operation is about pax and cargo... true for A333's flying in 265 configurations in a triangular
I will give you a pessismistic look at what is involved:
Let's see, A319 operational cost per hour on longer flight = about 2200EUR.
7 hour sector operating cost = 15 400EUR
Fixed costs of dispatch of a flight: handling, operation, accommodation for crew, landing fees: 2000EUR
Total cost of flight: 17 400EUR.
At a yield and load factor healthy average 80 % load factor, required average fare price for break-even 200EUR.
Sell for 550 EUR on average (combined Y and J), 400EUR average fare + 100EUR "airline fees") + 50EUR taxes.
-> Reasonable pricing, average earning 500EUR - 200EUR cost = 300EUR per pax, at 80% average load factor, average earning per sector 25 000EUR. 2 sectors per day, 50 000EUR earnings.
15 aircraft x 50 000EUR = 750 000EUR earning per day A319 fleet and I have been on the pessimistic side on calculations.
Do the math on a yearly basis and you'd realise that all your cargo talks are pointless..

Good beginning but laughable assumptions:

- 80% load where did you get that figure from? Every thought about travel patterns, seasonality...
- What about company overhead costs, depreciation, investment, maintenance, crew cost, layover facilities...

It's way way more complex than you think no matter what you want to believe!

[shockcooling]

Euhm NCB,

Are you autistic?

SC

[MH53]

I have no lecture to receive from Tolipanebas nor from aviation management universities where teachers have either never worked in the industry or do work in the industry but have no awareness of what's happening around them. There are exceptions, but not many, Been there, seen that.

That is very funny, because if there is ONE person who is only talking theoratical stuff without taking the practical/operational situation in account, it is YOU, NCB

You assume that university teachers have got no experience... sorry but we are not talking about primary school teachers. Instead we are talking about people/teachers who have been successfull within the aviation industry and do know what they are talking about...

Actually if you were working in this industry you would know very well that there's too many people who don't belong here and are still here. What, did you think that I was working as a butler somewhere? I get a headache from such people all the time, and find it very funny to see the same kind of people here.

So tell me, what is your background then? I haven't only studied aviation but I also got actual working experience on EACH level within the industry.

Tolipanebas is a pilot if I'm not mistaken. A smart pilot can get to know alot about operations but alot of pilots never progress beyond their checklist, charts and cockpit. Many like to hang out their smart asses and try to make other people look ridiculous.
But have many really ever bothered calculating the true economics of their flight? I can answer, it's no.

One more reason that you should appreciate that Tolipanebas is thinking further than his cockpit, compared to the average pilot which you are assuming he is.

There's nothing like theory or practice in aviation, there's only reality.
Aviation is not medicine, it's an exact science.

Practice=reality! Wake up and have a look in the real world!

Africa is so different... Nothing sounds more ridiculous.

What can I say..... e.g. does the word infrastructure perhaps ring a bell to you?

Airline operation is about pax and cargo... true for A333's flying in 265 configurations in a triangular operation, not true for A319 operating hub to spoke from BRU.

Again you are comparing apples with oranges. I am wondering if you know what the difference is between HUB & SPOKE and O/D, difference between Full Service and Low Cost carriers and where they get their revenues from. Besides it is totally unrealistic to expect you will only carry pax with a limitation of 20kg p.p. to African destinations like mentioned before, weren't you talking about REALITY... Dream on!

I will give you a pessismistic look at what is involved:
Let's see, A319 operational cost per hour on longer flight = about 2200EUR.
7 hour sector operating cost = 15 400EUR
Fixed costs of dispatch of a flight: handling, operation, accommodation for crew, landing fees: 2000EUR
Total cost of flight: 17 400EUR.
At a yield and load factor healthy average 80 % load factor, required average fare price for break-even 200EUR.
Sell for 550 EUR on average (combined Y and J), 400EUR average fare + 100EUR "airline fees") + 50EUR taxes.
-> Reasonable pricing, average earning 500EUR - 200EUR cost = 300EUR per pax, at 80% average load factor, average earning per sector 25 000EUR. 2 sectors per day, 50 000EUR earnings.
15 aircraft x 50 000EUR = 750 000EUR earning per day A319 fleet and I have been on the pessimistic side on calculations.
Do the math on a yearly basis and you'd realise that all your cargo talks are pointless.

This calculation is to simple to be taken seriously, you have got no idea what you are talking about. And in case you got a 80% loadfactor, where will you leave all the luggage of the PAX?

This is not the hardest math out there, and I'm proud to see that those who are knowledgeable are not messing around.

That is exactly what is worrying me; that you think it isn't the hardest math... In real life it is a bit more complex than an afternoon googling some figures from the net....

[cnc]

why is the A321 not an option? i'm not talking about NBO now but closer AFI destionations and SN could also use it for its israel or european flights when the demand for seats is high. i would configure it to 180 pax in 2 class config so everyone has some comfort + this leaves a bit more room for cargo and/or extra bags so you don't always have to fear to exceed the MTOW or MLAW
A fully loaded A321 should get as far as 5000km atleast so there should be some good new destinations in that range no? upgrade to A330 in the future is always possible if they get one and the demand is there

[NCB]

That is exactly what is worrying me; that you think it isn't the hardest math... In real life it is a bit more complex than an afternoon googling some figures from the net....

This forum is not only for aviation professionals working in yield management. As such, everyone shall be given the chance to understand and overcomplex calculations shall be simplified.
Still some of your mates like Winnie can't figure that hourly operating cost includes hourly maintenance cost and leasing expenses (that he describes as depreciation) and that overhead cost is not going to be affected by having a fleet of 15 x A319 compared to the actual mix of A319 and B73G's. Too bad you didn't recognise that and pointed it to him, so you are either an amateur looking for a momet of fame or frustration is eating on your objectivity.

You are telling me who is teaching at universities? I know 14 people teaching in aerospace and aviation. I tell you, there are some real good guys, but there is alot of guys who don't have a clue what they're teaching about. Alot of guys who can show you 2 meter long formula's to explain some irrelevant stuff can't answer simple questions about something relevant.
I also know and work with professionals who don't have a good awareness of aviation but are the first to brag about the fact that they work for an airline, as if that was cool in anyway...

I know you are tempted to know what I do and where I work, but I am actually involved in several activities in different sectors from training to operations and maintenance.
I do not think that it's prudent to mention details here seen your behaviour towards me, no doubt that you would be tempted to attack my credentials and I'm not going to let that happen.
Who are you anyway to have so much interest in me? Do I know you and are you giving me a hard time for that?
Otherwise it's sad that aviation is full of macho guys like you who can't stand that other people have idea's that you don't have. You are able to attack people, which anyone can do, but you have not shown your creative side.
A little piece of advice: grow up, get mature or your posts will go unread... people don't enjoy your whining posts, people enjoy to read about new/other idea's as the number of reads on the 5th A330 thread show. You can help on that front if you have the background you claim to have and make this forum a better place.

A321 could work if it's a newer airframe with higher gross weight and as you say, in a low density of say 24J and 154Y. That would add 1 hour of range which could make many routes viable within 5000km great circle distance from BRU.
My only hesitation would be that it would give a mixed fleet which is not very flexible and brings additional operating cost, a risk that SN may not be able to afford right now. Also, filling 178 seats from the first day of operating the route is very hard. Building awareness and a customer base for business class takes time, therefore I would favour smaller capacity A319.
Once established on each routes and some breathing space is created on the financial side, the lower CASM of the A321 would be handy. A321NG with winglets and GTF engines would be ideal but it's not expected to EIS until 2015. Upgrade to A330 once the demand is there, and you have the perfect Africa expansion plan.

Boeing also has some nice products like B737-700ER, B737-900ER but they don't have ULD capability which is not handy to carry cargo or alot of luggage. Also, seen that SN doesn't operate B737NG's right now, it would be more logical to go for A320 family.

[ballisticz]

NCB,

yet again you go to a 'do as I say, don't do as I do' attitude.
I believe no one here ever criticized you for bringing new ideas or concepts whilst you like to give lessons to people.

I showed you (only partly) in 2 different posts with FACTS and FIGURES why your idea was actually a no-go.
These facts are 'no-go' facts, no items that could/should/would be solved with a bit of goodwill.
Have a look in particular at my forelast post of yesterday in the original thread (bags volume etc ...).
You simply keep repeating 'it is feasible, it is feasible' whilst not replying when people come with hard facts !
If you simply do not want to take the others views into account, then simply write your ideas on a plain sheet of paper and read it every night and keep believing YOUR idea is just so great ... but do not pollute the forum by repeating the same stuff over and over again.

Today again, you come up with unfounded facts ... dispatch of a flight (handling, crew layovers etc) according to you would be round 2000 EUR ... Have you any idea of the REAL costs of :
- handling in BRU
- handling in African outstations
- CAA costs
- Asecna and others costs (runway lights, landing etc ...)
- crew hotac and transportation
- overflying fees
- etc...

Dude, you show a lot of 'I mean, I say, ... I don't know' as they say in anglophone Africa.
The real amount for all this is far beyond 2000 EUR. But this is just one more item amongst many others that I isolate.

Everyone has the right to defend his own ideas but if you expect people to respect your ideas, respect them in return when they provide you with commonly accepted facts and figures instead of doing childish by repeating the same stuff again and again whilst ignoring the other's comments.

Good nite to all.

[134flyer]

This is slowly getting ridiculous; you are lucky that this forum is very tolerant, at other forums you would already have been suspended a long time ago NCB…

A little piece of advice: grow up, get mature or your posts will go unread... people don't enjoy your whining posts...

You are now giving advice to yourself, aren’t you…

I know you are tempted to know what I do and where I work, but I am actually involved in several activities in different sectors from training to operations and maintenance.

The question is what kind of activities? Not suggesting you are one, not at all, so don't take me wrong, however, a janitor working in that environment can also claim that he is involved in several activities in different sectors from training to operations and maintenance. I'm just saying...

You can help on that front if you have the background you claim to have and make this forum a better place.

Do you have the background you claim to have?

I have no lecture to receive from Tolipanebas nor from aviation management universities

Hmmm, earlier you wrote this:

I like to take my time for this kind of stuff because I learn from it as well

If SN can raise some healthy cash (with 15 A319's flying red-eyes instead of 4xA319's & 11 B737's sleeping at night, 100 million euro profit per year is possible) by expanding quickly with A319 capacity, they will not be laughed at when in a few years they go to ILFC and ask for 20 A350XWB's and/or B787's.

OK, so you first want to start operations with A319’s, after which you want to operate a fleet of 20 A350’s/B787’s. Where’s the market for that, even in 10 years time? How do you want to fill all those widebodies? After all:

Operating with A319's is better than operating with imaginary A330's full of fish and fruit.

NCB, you had your moment of fame. You had the opportunity to show a creative plan (I even said I appreciated your out of the box thinking), but after many who DO know what they are talking about come with valid arguments and hard facts to prove that your plan doesn’t make sense, you still stubbornly hold on to it. You are always ignoring most of these arguments and facts, and come up with new arguments/figures which don’t make sense, after which the whole circus starts again…

[regi]

Maybe NCB choose the wrong airplane to make a proposal to fly African destinations.
Turkmenistan Airlines flies Frankfurt-Bangkok with a B757. ( and fuel stop in between at Alma Ata , where the most horrifying stories exist about )
Same with Air Astana who does long haul with B757.
The B757 is a narrow body airplane, but designed to fly longer routes than the B727 & B737.

Problem for the idea is that the B757 is a completely outmoded model, out of production, and doesn't fit at all in the SNBA configuration.
Older passenger B757's are converted into cargo planes ( so your cargo problem is solved , dear NCB ) but that is already well known by DHL...

Thomas Cook uses B757 . What BMI concerns, I think that with the troubles they are getting rid off them.

And no, don't do the effort to see if Thai, Lufthansa, Polish Air, Austrian or Swiss ( some Star Alliance partners ) has not some stock of left over B757 has standing iddle in the dessert.
Yes, maybe some from United ?

[LX-LGX]

NCB,

To understand the importance of your posts and the realism of your plans, we really should know your position in the entire aviation-related business. You don't have to identy yourself, just mention the level please.

[NCB]

I don't feel pressed to tell you but you should definitely learn to respect people for their idea's and not based on their position in a hierarchy. I started at the bottom of the ladder, and got disappointed by the stupidity of many superiors, I have learned not to estimate people based on who they are as opposed to what they are.
What are you into, LX? My nose smells that you're one of the younger guys working in the operational section for Brussels Airport, not that I care much about it.

Back to topic.
My A319 proposal is a risk-less proposal with good chances of a steady expansion at minimal investment.
If it doesn't work, you reconfigure the cabin and use the A319 in Europe only, kick some B73G's out of the fleet. So it's definitely worth a try.

There's always challenges, otherwise everyone would be doing it. Finding a 5th A333 and starting BRU-ACC-OUA-BRU is alot more challenging, not efficient and it will take several months to build a market for 400 seats per day and cargo. The flights will be flying almost empty in the first days.
It would not be a smart move as it will no doubt negatively impact SN's financial position at the beginning of 2011, when LH are pretending that they may go for a bid for SN's full control.

If SN try the A32X ops and it proves successful, the shareholders will have a very strong weapon to negotiate against LH for a good bid. LH could then be very interested to further expand on this untraditional model. It will create new jobs at the airline and at BRU, mark the way for a new era. LH may then consider ordering some widebodies for SN.
Vague industry projections are that LH will be ordering in 2011, around 100 x A350XWB and if launched, A320NG's for deliveries starting 2015. They will look at where they stand financially and fleet-wise after the round of consolidation and see if Boeing will deliver as promised on the B748i.

BRU is not an ideal position range-wise. Someone wrote that Italy would be better and I agree. I am in favour of AZ operating to Africa using their new higher gross weight A320's in a similar lay-out. But the Italian culture towards Africa and partial AF involvement form a big iron curtain that will not crumble today or tomorrow.

Desert Rat, about the new DKR ops, were you refering to SN or a new start-up?
I have heard from a guy who worked at Air Senegal about a group of industrial investors who are building a new, modern and very ambitious airline. Short-term they want to connect Africa with Europe, long-term they want to connect Africa and North America, and be a hub connecting Europe with South America.
Makes alot of sense to me. They are also looking at a significant A320 order, possibly A330's.

SN has no time to lose, I'm telling you.

[LX-LGX]

I started at the bottom of the ladder, and got disappointed by the stupidity of many superiors, I have learned not to estimate people based on who they are as opposed to what they are.

Actually, I was more asking in which branch you are working. Because it really can't be aviation - your replies are too far away from reality for being an aviation professional.

What are you into, LX? My nose smells that you're one of the younger guys working in the operational section for Brussels Airport.

Contrary to you apparently, I was allways professionally linked to aircraft and aviation for the last 25 years.

I have learned not to estimate people based on who they are as opposed to what they are.

Well, you could show it here by accepting posts from people who fly aircraft or who have university qualifications.

"Back to topic" for me means : tell us what your credits in aviation are, so that we can understand why you want to fly medium and long haul with aircraft that are not built for it.

[Vinnie-Winnie]

Your plan would probably bankrupt SN to be honest. I thing there are a lot of costs which you are totally forgetting. Not only that but who would provide the financing? And which leaser would allow SN to rent a plane for 6 months then swap it for a bigger model? Though A333 are not perfect to start-up a route, they are definately more versatile than your A319. SN A333 already serve a few african destinations per week, and that is what a 5th A333 would do as well.

No appart from the technical and operational issues that have been outlined many times (I'm no expert and I admit, rely on good faith on Toliplenas and common sense), how would you integrate yet another sub-fleet into SN's fleet.

From what I read, SN's A333 are often swapped when they go Tech. Now if an A333 goes tech, do you swap it with the A319? not practical for many reasons I believe.

Now your thinking goes that in the first few months it doesn't make much sense to fly an half empty A333. Well if u see what SN is doing you'll see that they cautiously start different markets at the same time with 1 A333 to test the waters. Makes a lot of sense. Also I'm not sure about how much it cost to lease an A333 but I reckon it must be about 2,5 times the price of an A333. So not only do you get more value with 1 A333, you also don't need to hire as many personal as u would if u were to expand massively as you are proposing.

So all in all it makes a lot of business sense to develop slowly using more versatile A333. A319 flying long haul is a niche that is way too expensive.

I find your general smug attitude fairly surprising for a person that claims to have many years of experience in business. Feels like you've had a rough patch in your career and therefore allow yourself the right to criticise business people, airline employees, academics and fellow Luchtzakkers. Sorry but that certainly doesn't enhance your credentials in this group.

Before criticizing something you need to understand it first. Not what you'r doing with Brussels Airlines, and though you are attempting for the A319 feels like you'r forgetting a variety of things...

[134flyer]

I had once again a look at some of your older posts, which gave me a good laugh...

I quoted them, otherwise you will (wrongly) accuse me of lying again...

Actually I think that this 5th A333 itself is a daydream. SN is losing money, if they couldn't afford to expand when they were making money, what are they trying to achieve now at the worst of everything?

So they should start some wild adventure with flying A319’s to Africa??

Africa's high yields could be no more by 2014, what will SN do then with a handful of old A330's?

Actually, they will start to have another fleet of new widebodies by then:

If SN can raise some healthy cash (with 15 A319's flying red-eyes instead of 4xA319's & 11 B737's sleeping at night, 100 million euro profit per year is possible) by expanding quickly with A319 capacity, they will not be laughed at when in a few years they go to ILFC and ask for 20 A350XWB's and/or B787's

Also:

I don't want to see Sabena Part II in a few more years.

Well, an eventual fleet of 20 A350’s/B787’s sounds rather like Sabena Part II to me…

I also had another look at your plan:

Simulation:
BRU 16:00 - AAA 22:30
AAA 23:30 - BRU 06:00
Daily inspection / operational margin
BRU 07:00 - GVA 08:00
GVA 08:30 - BRU 09:30
BRU 10:00 - FCO 12:00
FCO 12:30 - BRU 14:30
Check / light defects / operational margin
BRU 16:00 - to Africa

e.g. a turnaround of 30 min. on European sectors… Good feed from NA, so somebody who arrives at around 0700 has to wait until his connecting flight to Africa at 1600…
And this is coming from somebody who is:

but I am actually involved in several activities in different sectors from training to operations and maintenance.

ROTFL

Once again, you are ignoring all the arguments of others and are going “back to topic”, which is your A319 plan. Are you perhaps one of these consultants who sell their crappy plans to airlines, making them loose millions of Euro’s. But never mind, they just sell the same plan to another airline, as the only problem is that the customers and market are not correctly responding to their plan, as there is nothing wrong with their plan/theory…

How many times have people said here that your plan doesn’t make sense, but you just can’t give up and have little respect for others while excpecting respect in return Basically you are saying scr#w the experts here, scr#w the aviation management universities, scr#w SN management, as they don’t know what they are doing, scr#w LH management, as they haven’t got a clue; afterall, they haven’t come up with your Grandiose Plan themselves. Strange, as the LH management team is normally considered to be quite smart...

Hell, scr#w the pax as well, they can fly in an uncomfortable narrowbody (remember that some pax prefer to take the AF widebody out of Brazaville, even if they have to get there on a small prop-plane, instead of taking the AF A319 directly out of Point Noir?), they can do with one full meal & a snack, they have to leave behind luggage/refuse excess baggage (to AFI, which is suicidal ) as it WON'T FIT in an A319 etc.
You said that SN ‘only’ copies AF, why do you think they do this? Because you have to look at what your peers are doing and react to that! The pax will flee in droves to e.g. AF if your A319 plan will ever materialize…

Cargo potential? Hell, we can do without it! Market analysis? Why do we need that for? The only thing that matters is that I have a specific aircraft type that can theoretically fly from A to B over a certain distance, never mind the operational constraints…

[NCB]

Well thank you Vinnie, that is worth responding to.

When starting up an A333 operation there are several problems that take alot of time to solve.
1st, you have to find an aircraft. That's going to be very hard now, but for the right money, it's possible.
Several considerations are necessary including configuration, MX condition and records, etc...
2nd, you accept the aircraft then send it to Sabena Technics who give the aircraft a check and modify the aircraft to SN specs... 2 months.
2nd bis, you have to do quite some operational planning.
3rd you have to make alot of marketing to fill 400 new seats daily at 2 or 4 destinations depending on the fact that it's a capacity increase on existing routes or new routes. It's more than 400 seats actually but a healthy revenue management asks for pricing to fill 80% of available capacity.

The A319 isn't much harder to operate to Africa than A333.
Actually, for the Africa-specific aspects, the A319 is alot easier to operate.

A333 has alot less viable alternates, requires more facilities at destination airports and alternates (hotels, handling equipment, runway surface strength, landing run restrictions/take-off run restrictions, etc...).
Firefighting facilties for A333 are significantly more important. There must be hospitals in the vicinity of the airport to accommodate at least as many passengers as the aircraft can carry on top of their average capacity.
Catering for 550 pax requires maybe 700 meals to be carried to allow for meal choice. This has to be carried from BRU, and dirty trays must be carried back to BRU.
Long turn-around times, time waisted on the ground at BRU.
Further, the A333 is built to fly a long time in cruise, not shorter sectors. You use up cycles in a triangle, and the take-off/climb ask for alot of fuel. You fly between 2 African cities, a trip that generates ZERO revenue but has a high cost.
If an A333 goes tech or something worse happens which makes the aircraft U/S for a long period or permanently, good luck finding a replacement. Good luck finding local facilities able to carry-out or assist with repairs even at the bigger airports.

You make it sound like A333 ops to Africa is a piece of cake compared to A319 but it's not that simple.

I don't blame you but next time take a more objective view.
I really shouldn't be around here defending such a position, but I think that it's a good thing to do.
My colleagues would definitely laugh about me posting on an internet forum, but they would definitely open their ears about my A319 concept, as we usually do mutually.
One of the reasons I can not lay down my credentials is that I don't want my employer to know that I am posting some information on an internet forum, including sometimes some sensitive stuff like estimated figures. That's why you won't see me quote exact numbers or concepts, but approximations.
I don't work for SN, so rest assured.