In a world where you have enough O/D passengers ex-BRU, you would be right. IBut you mentioned connecting flight and my guess is there lies your answer.crew1990 wrote: ↑22 Nov 2020, 14:28 My point was that, you have days with 6 long haul flights a day (saturday's) and plenty of connecting flight, and day with one single flight. There is just a problem with the use of the fleet. The demand is low (thank you sn26567 I didn't know ) but it doesn't mean that you can't split the production more equally during the week. In therm of long haul aircraft, as there is only 22 long haul flight per week, it could be 3 flight per day with one day of the week 4 long haul flight. 4 A330 active would be sufficient to reduce the cost instead of activation 6 aircraft.
If long haul to Africa needs connecting traffic from Canada/US, it makes sense to concentrate as many flights as possible to depart on days Air Canada and United land.
If they need the European feed but there isn't enough demand to run a full bank 7 days a week (see the single flight to LHR), consolidating onto fewer days is again a better option than daily flights.
Also to consider what to do with the "extra" aircraft if they operate daily? Not like the lessor wants them back, so flying them may be a better option than parking them. For the A330s doing a RON at destination, having the same crew operate both inbound and outbound legs is cheaper than having enough crew for daily ops.
Other costs (fuel, overflight, landing & handling fees, etc.) don't vary much whether an airline operates a daily flights, or seven flights once a week...