Changing out a fleet type

[Chaxterium]

Hello,

Another question for you guys. I'm currently operating two types, F100s and ATR72s. I'm thinking about swapping out my ATRs for F50s. My question is that as I'm changing the fleet out one by one, I'm going to be taking a hit on my commonality costs while the new aircraft arrive right? But once all the new F50s are delivered and I no longer have any ATRs in my fleet, the commonality costs should go back down to normal levels right?

Cheers,
Chax

[Curse]

Correct. As long as a fleetgroup has routes on it, it will create commonality costs.


If you have a fleetgroup in your airline but without routes - maybe because you wait till you have a bunch of them or because you want to lease them out - those fleetgroup doesn't increase commonality costs.


That's why it could be useful to delete all routes if you have 2-3 aircraft left even without cancelling the lease. The profit of 2-3 aircraft rarely covers the higher commonality costs.

[lilius]

Hello,

Another question for you guys. I'm currently operating two types, F100s and ATR72s. I'm thinking about swapping out my ATRs for F50s. My question is that as I'm changing the fleet out one by one, I'm going to be taking a hit on my commonality costs while the new aircraft arrive right? But once all the new F50s are delivered and I no longer have any ATRs in my fleet, the commonality costs should go back down to normal levels right?

Cheers,
Chax

Im sure you know this but also notice that there is no real advantage to switch from ATR to F50. Commonality cost of F100 + F50 = F100 + ATR. So I figure it is a question of eyecandy or dutch nationalism having an all Fokker fleet. 

[Chaxterium]

Im sure you know this but also notice that there is no real advantage to switch from ATR to F50. Commonality cost of F100 + F50 = F100 + ATR. So I figure it is a question of eyecandy or dutch nationalism having an all Fokker fleet. 

Haha, well I do like the idea of having an all Fokker fleet but you're right; after some research there's not much benefit to swapping my ATRs for F50s. Not worth the cost at all. By the way, my F100s are starting to get old so I was looking at swapping them out for a new fleet but there is nothing that touches the F100 as far as speed vs fuel burn. It's impressive! I guess I'll be buying new ones as soon as I can!

Correct. As long as a fleetgroup has routes on it, it will create commonality costs.


If you have a fleetgroup in your airline but without routes - maybe because you wait till you have a bunch of them or because you want to lease them out - those fleetgroup doesn't increase commonality costs.


That's why it could be useful to delete all routes if you have 2-3 aircraft left even without cancelling the lease. The profit of 2-3 aircraft rarely covers the higher commonality costs.

Thanks for that! I was curious how that worked. I was giving some thought at some point to buying some airframes for the purpose of leasing but I wasn't sure about commonality costs.

That reminds me of another question then. If you own an aircraft but it has no routes on it what does it cost you to sit parked on the ramp? I know maintenance still has to be completed but other than that does it cost anything to sit?

Cheers,
Chax

[brique]

Parked aircraft, without any schedule, are only charged for insurance, on owned aircraft, that's pretty minimal.

BUT : the staff associated with the aircraft ( pilots, FA's and back-office) stay on the payroll : best policy is to 'retire' the aircraft before scheduling a new delivery, then the staff get 're-cycled', otherwise, you end up with extra staff. Not good.

[Chaxterium]

BUT : the staff associated with the aircraft ( pilots, FA's and back-office) stay on the payroll : best policy is to 'retire' the aircraft before scheduling a new delivery, then the staff get 're-cycled', otherwise, you end up with extra staff. Not good.

Ok, good advice. So if I bought 10 airframes for the sole purpose of leasing them out, I'd still end up having to pay for 10 crews for those aircraft? Even though I wouldn't be operating them?

Cheers,
Chax

[brique]

getting confused here as to what you intend to do :

If are you replacing existing aircraft with a new delivery : you can carry those staff over by moving the schedule wholesale to the new aircraft : the old aircraft is now schedule-free and so attracts no new staff costs, only its insurance cost,  when you park it up.

If you just retire and park-up existing aircraft : even though it is now un-scheduled and so has no cost apart from insurance, the staff previously employed for it stay on the books: you'll see them as excess on the personnel page.

If you are buying aircraft just to be leased out : as long as you do not schedule them after arrival, they will not have staff allocated so only cost will be insurance.

Its the act of scheduling an aircraft that causes a staff requirement : if auto-hire is on, they get employed from that point : if on manual hire, then a 'staff shortage' is caused until you do hire the staff.

[Chaxterium]

Thanks for your help and I apologize for the confusion. I guess I was asking about two different situations. My first question was about replacing my entire ATR fleet with Fokker 50s. In the end though I'm not sure it would be worth it. My second question was just regarding acquiring aircraft for the sole purpose of leasing them out. Fortunately you've cleared up both of my questions so thanks.

Cheers,
Chax