Tokyo Haneda slot - how will Virgin Operate it?

[justinbrett]

A330-200,will do just fine - I can see a number of late models on some websites.
Overall cost depends on various factors

define "just fine"?

Cost per seat is a lot higher, and it can only barely do BNE-LAX. QF is only using it because they don't have enough 787s.

Terrible way to relaunch your long haul services. May as well just get some DC10s.

 

[Quickstatus]

You can't seriously be considered an international airline

Yes VA2 would do well to reflect on the failures of the Borghetti method. Concentrate on what makes money rather than some grand idea to be everything to everyone.

Cost per seat is a lot higher

Depends on what they can buy/lease it for. Who knows, it could be competitive.

 

[justinbrett]

Depends on what they can buy/lease it for. Who knows, it could be competitive.

I think that was the late OzJet's model.

I can't think of a single airline that's been successful in the last decade that doesn't operate near-new aircraft, or at least isn't madly scrambling to replace their fleets.

 

[Quickstatus]

single airline

Several airlines
Example : WestJet - bought QF767-300 then sold it to Amazon
Delta airline just bought/leased a fleet of used 737-900
Allegiant always uses 2nd hand aircraft
Don't forget Rex - it's fleet of used Saab340 and used VA1.0 737.

Against that, United for many years relied on sweating their fleet for as long as possible until they realised that people do prefer newer aircraft.

 

[justinbrett]

Several airlines
Example : WestJet - bought QF767-300 then sold it to Amazon
Delta airline just bought/leased a fleet of used 737-900
Allegiant always uses 2nd hand aircraft
Don't forget Rex - it's fleet of used Saab340 and used VA1.0 737.

Against that, United for many years relied on sweating their fleet for as long as possible until they realised that people do prefer newer aircraft.

long haul

It's all about fuel burn

This is a good video:

 

[Quickstatus]

It's all about fuel burn

Not all... fuel burn, bums on seats, capital costs, maintenance costs. I don't pretend to full understand but nothing is only ever about one factor.

 

[justinbrett]

Not all... fuel burn, bums on seats, capital costs, maintenance costs. I don't pretend to full understand but nothing is only ever about one factor.

I guess you didn't watch the video.

With long haul, fuel costs become the main cost because those other costs are static, and fuel makes up the majority expense of the flight.

No, it's not impossible to make money with an old fleet (in fact this video says you can - but it has to be offset with other factors). But it's a disadvantage. There's a reason QF gives JQ its youngest aircraft. AA doesn't want to fly it's 777s to Australia now because the 787s are more economical for the route.

It was easier when fuel prices were low.

 

[Quickstatus]

I did
Again it all depends. So many factors. Fuel is one. The other one is frequency of operation.

 

[justinbrett]

I did
Again it all depends. So many factors. Fuel is one. The other one is frequency of operation.

It depends much less the longer the route. Sure the A330s would suit Asian destinations, but when you say long haul to people looking for an Australian international airline, they're looking at UK and USA.

 

[Quickstatus]

fuel costs

Are you saying the fuel burn of the 787-9 is significantly better than an A330-200?

 

[justinbrett]

Are you saying the fuel burn of the 787-9 is significantly better than an A330-200?

Yes, per Kg of payload.

 

[SCM]

Why buy when there is a glut of widebodies and leasing should be relatively cheap?

Glut? It's basically impossible to buy one right now (very long lead times) - airlines are absolutely scrambling to get aircraft back in the air, any kind of aircraft at all, which means I highly doubt you could even lease one. Maybe an old 340 or something, but that's not really going to do anything for VA's costbase.

A330-200,will do just fine - I can see a number of late models on some websites.
Overall cost depends on various factors

Why waste money on an obsolete platform when everyone else is flying more efficient aircraft? How are they supposed to compete?

Even if they lease an A330, they still need to do painting and fitout, they need to probably train some crews for them as well. A lot of effort for an aircraft which should be in the retirement phase. Then you have fuel costs, which are going to make it impossible for VA to price tickets in mid-market and profit. Current absurd prices aside, they need to think longer term.

 

[Quickstatus]

Then you have fuel costs

Again, are we saying the fuel burn in a A330-200 is worse than a 787

It's not that different:

 

[Quickstatus]

obsolete platform

Lots of A330 remain in service. It's not exactly obsolete. There are airframes that are less than 10years old for sake/lease.

Very hard to get a 787/350. But A330 not as much so if they are keen to operate HND, there are options.

More fuel efficient per kg payload?. It's actually not about per kg. Each aircraft has its own unique payload, max takeoff weight, passenger carrying capacity. How it comes together for a particular route is the important consideration. The 787-9/A350 are built for long range operations, and for the ULR often with passengers and a lot less cargo. The A330 is perfect for the AU to Asia config and Also carry cargo.

I'm not convinced that per kg or per seat Mike or whatever that an A330 is all that different to A350-900 or B 787-9.
Fuel burn per hour appears to be very similar. I wonder how they arrived at those figures though...

As to crew training?. An 737 pilot trainining to go to a330 will be similar to go to A350. So I don't see a benefit necessarily to go to A350.

Overall operating HND is not a good idea IMO for VA2. It seems like Borghetti's ghost still lives...

Overall

 

[justinbrett]

Again, are we saying the fuel burn in a A330-200 is worse than a 787

It's not that different:

View attachment 313684

This is meaningless. What payload can they carry? You missed the caveat at the top of that table.

Rough figures for max payload BNE-LAX, 789 is 2T fuel per 1T of payload, A332 is 3.2T of fuel, or around 40% less payload for the same fuel.

There’s a reason why the 787 is the fastest selling widebdy in history.

 

[justinbrett]

More fuel efficient per kg payload?. It's actually not about per kg. Each aircraft has its own unique payload, max takeoff weight, passenger carrying capacity. How it comes together for a particular route is the important consideration.

Well it is all about Kg of payload, as payload pays the bills.

The difference is bigger on the US routes as shown above, but even on SYD-HND, 787 will use 10T less fuel and carry 10T more payload.

 

[jakeseven7]

I feel like the real question moving forward is, what is going to be Virgin's strategy for widebodies?

Ask our resident AFF consultant, they worked on it

 

[jakeseven7]

This is meaningless. What payload can they carry? You missed the caveat at the top of that table.

Rough figures for max payload BNE-LAX, 789 is 2T fuel per 1T of payload, A332 is 3.2T of fuel, or around 40% less payload for the same fuel.

There’s a reason why the 787 is the fastest selling widebdy in history.

On the other side of the equation is also what VA2 will be able to charge for their tickets which will be significantly below JAL, QF etc being a hybrid LCC now after they moved down market post the collapse.

So unless VA2 intends to make their hypothetical international wide body airline a different name / brand positioning (I believe V Australia might be free ) I think you are right @justinbrett - they will need the absolutely most efficient aircraft possible as they won’t command any premium.

QF (and other carriers) can run A330’s and other older aircraft profitably because they have built a premium brand positioning that can extract a higher yield.

Again it would be interesting to hear if @pauly7 is able to share anything

 

[jase05]

QF (and other carriers) can run A330’s and other older aircraft profitably because they have built a premium brand positioning that can extract a higher yield.

QF have the best marketing team in the world.
They have the ability to fleece their customers premium price for what essentially is a LCC offering.

 

[Quickstatus]

A332 is 3.2T of fuel, or around 40% less payload for the same fuel.

40% comparing a twin with a twin?. Even AJoyce never went as far as that. For him it was 20% comparing a twin with a quad