AirwaySim
Online Airline Management Simulation
Login
Username
Password
 
or login using:
 
My Account
Username:
E-mail:
Edit account
» Achievements
» Logout
Game Credits
Credit balance: 0 Cr
Buy credits
» Credit history
» Credits FAQ

Author Topic: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question  (Read 1413 times)

tm07x

  • Former member
PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« on: August 16, 2010, 01:58:06 AM »
Can anyone tell me if there is any point in flying 736 over 739/738?
Or flying the 319 over the 321s?

You pretty much get more seats for a little more money. The ops costs of the AC are the same. Lease or purchase prices fairly close.
But you get more seats...?

Say there is a a 300 pax demand on a route. You could easily cover that demand in two flights with a 321, or you could fly it three times with a 319. But why not fly it 3 times with a 321? If you sell any extra seats that's a bonus right?
And although the L/F might be higher operating the 319 over the 321, you wouldn't be making more money would you?

can anyone educate me?

Offline schro

  • Members
  • Posts: 3065
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #1 on: August 16, 2010, 02:46:51 AM »
You've pretty much got it nailed. Not many people actually figure it out.

There are a few considerations, some of which are modeled in AWS and others that are observed moreso in real life:

1. Runway length - in general, the shorter variants use less runway, so this is helpful for hot and high operations as well as well, short runways.

2. Shorter variants have lower crew requirements

3. Shorter variants tend to have lower landing costs (as landing fees in real life are a function of either MLW or MTOW).  I'm not sure how they're computed in AWS, so it may or may not have an impact.

4. The 736 is a turkey of a performer compared to the rest of the family and even the plane it succeeded, the 735, as the NG frame is significantly heavier than the classics.

5. There have been baby busses (A318s, the 736 equivilant) being scrapped in the real world that are just a few years old because the sum of the parts was worth more than the plane whole.

6. Usually the shorter variants have longer range.  In the real world, the A320 and A321 will struggle to make a US transcon flight westbound during the winter without a fuelstop. The 319 can do it without issue, as can the 737NGs.

Now, with regards to your question about running 3x A321's on a 300 pax route: thats just stupid when you could be flying 2x on that route and 1x on another that has unmet demand :-).


tm07x

  • Former member
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #2 on: August 16, 2010, 03:13:01 AM »
Glad to hear I haven't been overthinking this...

hehe, yeah you could fly it twice. and the third somewhere else ;P

Now I just need to figure out if a 321 would be profitable on a 200-400 pax route over 2000nm

Offline schro

  • Members
  • Posts: 3065
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #3 on: August 16, 2010, 03:44:09 AM »
Glad to hear I haven't been overthinking this...

hehe, yeah you could fly it twice. and the third somewhere else ;P

Now I just need to figure out if a 321 would be profitable on a 200-400 pax route over 2000nm

I don't see why it wouldn't be. Depends on fuel prices, of course.  Keep in mind that your ticket price isn't tied 1:1 to miles flown - if anything, its a decreasing trend...

In the prior Modern Times, I flew 757's to Hawaii and Europe (from KMSP) and printed money from it, even when fuel was around 1400....

tm07x

  • Former member
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #4 on: August 16, 2010, 04:04:44 AM »
decreasing in what way? that you make less money pr seat on longer flights?


Offline schro

  • Members
  • Posts: 3065
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #5 on: August 16, 2010, 04:41:46 AM »
decreasing in what way? that you make less money pr seat on longer flights?



Suppose you can charge the following as standard fares:

100nm: $150
500nm: $200
1000nm: $250
2000nm: $300

See how the RASM (revenue per available seat mile) declines when stage length increases?  Try it out by psuedo opening routes at different distances from your home base, and you'll see the standard price to flight miles isn't linear...

Offline Sami

  • Administrator
  • Members
  • Posts: 14535
    • AirwaySim - Are you the next Richard Branson?
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #6 on: August 16, 2010, 07:04:35 AM »
Larger plane = higher MTOW = higher enroute/landing fees. And also higher fuel burn. And in some cases extra cabin crew.

That's about it.

Offline Marksw76

  • Members
  • Posts: 116
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #7 on: August 18, 2010, 06:07:34 PM »
Its very same to reality, the 737 600 was never that popular with airlines who much prefered the '800

Give me a '300 series anyday

tm07x

  • Former member
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #8 on: August 20, 2010, 07:51:20 PM »
Its very same to reality, the 737 600 was never that popular with airlines who much prefered the '800

Give me a '300 series anyday

Captain obvious to the rescue!
sorry, I couldn't resist! :-)

but frankly, I was wondering about the effects in the game, not IRL.

The 600 was almost made solely to get SAS as a Boeing customer. SAS favored MDs and McDonnald Douglas actually decided to build the MD-95 (B717) based on orders from SAS and AirTrain (I think, correct me if I'm wrong), but Boeing hi-jacked the deal by offering an insane deal to SAS so the MD-95 would never go into production, and thus Boeing could take over MDD. :)

So the 600 was made to take over the 100 seater MDs, many of em had routes to airports with shorter runways bla bla...

Anyways, I'd like to know how profitable the 600 is in SAS' service.

Pavlov

  • Former member
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #9 on: August 22, 2010, 09:11:48 PM »
Anyways, I'd like to know how profitable the 600 is in SAS' service.

Well, in a bigger perspective; the their midrange fleet strategy is beyond me.
4    A319-100
8    A321-200
4    B737-400
8    B737-500
28    B737-600
19    B737-700
20    B737-800
23    DC-9-82
7    DC-9-87

The result? They weren't very profitable last year. And now their CEO resigned as well.

Offline jimsom

  • Members
  • Posts: 146
    • jimmyringsell.se
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #10 on: August 23, 2010, 09:57:38 AM »
The result? They weren't very profitable last year. And now their CEO resigned as well.

Haha! :laugh: The whole airline industry is suffering, SAS' poor results the last years isn't due to the usage of 736's.
/ jimsom

Offline TFC1

  • Members
  • Posts: 662
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #11 on: August 23, 2010, 05:51:35 PM »
SAS happens to be a rather poorly run airline with a management stripped of balls and courage. And absolutely no fleet plan at all. Wrong model of the A330, the -300, should have bought the -200, throwing out LH aircraft, too many fleet types as pointed out in the medium range fleet, and of course the Q400 debacle.

In addition, they announce new LH routes from Oslo every time someone else starts planning, but nothing ever materializes. Continental is making a fortune on the OSL-EWR route, and Thai are doing well on the OSL-BKK route. And in case you're interested, KLM is the largest LH airline out of Norway, through AMS of course... :-\

SAS will be gone within the next 2-3 years if nothing earth shattering happens.....

Pavlov

  • Former member
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #12 on: August 24, 2010, 09:58:49 PM »
I really feel pity for them, because I love them for their multi-hub network. Which -to their credit- can't be compared to European carriers (except LH maybe). I have often used their quick (<1,5 hour transit) connections AMS via CPH to Finland and Poland.

But connectivity isn't the whole story; they're expensive, onboard food and drinks is for sale and out of AMS always those old MD-80s... Are they the last 'big name' carrier in Europe to still fly MD-80s??

Anybody got any experience on the new Norwegian LCC?!

Offline Marksw76

  • Members
  • Posts: 116
Re: PAX L/F on 737 and 320 family question
« Reply #13 on: August 24, 2010, 10:02:30 PM »
Did SAS ever manage to flog Spanair in the end? I know that was a thorn in their side for quite a while....

 

WARNING! This website is not compatible with the old version of Internet Explorer you are using.

If you are using the latest version please turn OFF the compatibility mode.