What would the effect of transatlantic LCCs be on legacy carrier?
Aug 4, 2015, 9:55 am
#32
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,394
One 737 on a route targeting mostly price conscious leisure customers isn't going to make ST, *A, or OW carriers lay awake at night.
ME3 carriers adding a dozen or more A380 routes from Europe to NA has them all on notice.
Aug 4, 2015, 12:49 pm
#33
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Seatguru lists 'em at 31"-32". I'm not in position to actually fly them, so I'll just ask: what's so bad about their service?
The other thing no one has addressed is IROPS support. That's still a big advantage an alliance carrier has over anyone else. Over the years, I've had two TATL United and one American flight cancel, and all three times my total delay was in the 1-4 hour range because the airlines were able to reroute me fairly efficiently. (I had elite status in all cases - a critical factor, I'll admit.)
On an LCC, a cancel probably means a long delay...perhaps an entire day. How well would Norwegian react to a cancellation?
The other thing no one has addressed is IROPS support. That's still a big advantage an alliance carrier has over anyone else. Over the years, I've had two TATL United and one American flight cancel, and all three times my total delay was in the 1-4 hour range because the airlines were able to reroute me fairly efficiently. (I had elite status in all cases - a critical factor, I'll admit.)
On an LCC, a cancel probably means a long delay...perhaps an entire day. How well would Norwegian react to a cancellation?
DY has had a big impact on mainland-mainland TATL fares for Scandinavia-US-Scandinavia/US-Scandinavia-US travel offered by the U.S. and EU legacy majors.
Aug 4, 2015, 1:47 pm
#34
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Park, CO
Programs: Tegridy Elite
Posts: 5,678
Seatguru lists 'em at 31"-32". I'm not in position to actually fly them, so I'll just ask: what's so bad about their service?
The other thing no one has addressed is IROPS support. That's still a big advantage an alliance carrier has over anyone else. Over the years, I've had two TATL United and one American flight cancel, and all three times my total delay was in the 1-4 hour range because the airlines were able to reroute me fairly efficiently. (I had elite status in all cases - a critical factor, I'll admit.)
On an LCC, a cancel probably means a long delay...perhaps an entire day. How well would Norwegian react to a cancellation?
The other thing no one has addressed is IROPS support. That's still a big advantage an alliance carrier has over anyone else. Over the years, I've had two TATL United and one American flight cancel, and all three times my total delay was in the 1-4 hour range because the airlines were able to reroute me fairly efficiently. (I had elite status in all cases - a critical factor, I'll admit.)
On an LCC, a cancel probably means a long delay...perhaps an entire day. How well would Norwegian react to a cancellation?
I suppose one day when I'm retired and have time to spare, I might be willing to risk an extended delay if funds are tight.
Aug 4, 2015, 2:05 pm
#35
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Brexile in ADB
Programs: BA, TK, HHonours, Le Club, Best Western Rewards
Posts: 7,067
I believe a stop at KEF would not be necessary as BA fly a dinky A318 TATL LCY to JFK. Extended range versions are fine and a 150 seater 95% full is more cost effective than a 350 seater 80% full.
Aug 4, 2015, 2:10 pm
#36
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: jfk area
Programs: AA platinum; 2MM AA, Delta Diamond, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 10,291
Back in the 60's and 70's, when I flew charter carriers from JFK to PARIS (usually ORLY), for the return you could never be sure that you'd return on the scheduled day; but to their credit, they paid for overnight hotels and food. I was in NO special hurry to get back as scheduled. If you could live with this uncertainty, the charters were a super deal.
Would LCCs be so nice?
Would LCCs be so nice?
Aug 4, 2015, 2:54 pm
#37
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,587
Perhaps some bigger A320-321 variants that could do it too...
Not that I'd *want* to fly a narrowbody across the Atlantic...
Aug 4, 2015, 6:21 pm
#38
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: STL
Posts: 1,547
They were talking about 787s but I believe they have dropped the idea for the moment.
I believe a stop at KEF would not be necessary as BA fly a dinky A318 TATL LCY to JFK. Extended range versions are fine and a 150 seater 95% full is more cost effective than a 350 seater 80% full.
I believe a stop at KEF would not be necessary as BA fly a dinky A318 TATL LCY to JFK. Extended range versions are fine and a 150 seater 95% full is more cost effective than a 350 seater 80% full.
Aug 5, 2015, 3:17 am
#39
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2008
Location: CHA, MAN;
Programs: Delta DM 1 MM; Hz PC
Posts: 11,169
And part of Ryanair business model follows WN. All 737s mean 1 set of training, one set of spare parts etc, whcih keeps costs down. Start introducing other aircraft and it changes a whole lot of stuff.
Aug 5, 2015, 3:48 am
#40
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Aren't there a couple variants of the 737 that are ETOPS 180 certified? I know they are capable of flying to Hawaii, which I *think* entails a farther maximum possible diversion than TATL.
Perhaps some bigger A320-321 variants that could do it too...
Not that I'd *want* to fly a narrowbody across the Atlantic...
Perhaps some bigger A320-321 variants that could do it too...
Not that I'd *want* to fly a narrowbody across the Atlantic...
Aug 5, 2015, 4:22 am
#41
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: UK
Programs: BA Blue
Posts: 158
I listened to a panel discussion between O'Leary and Tim Clark at a travel agency industry conference.
O'Leary would consider transatlantic but he pointed to the main factor he wasn't was that to make it profitable you'd need volume and there weren't enough planes available (he joked Tim Clark had bought them all up!).
He also said you would be stupid to avoid the business market and so would have some kind of premium cabin available.
Take those comments for what you will.
O'Leary would consider transatlantic but he pointed to the main factor he wasn't was that to make it profitable you'd need volume and there weren't enough planes available (he joked Tim Clark had bought them all up!).
He also said you would be stupid to avoid the business market and so would have some kind of premium cabin available.
Take those comments for what you will.
Aug 5, 2015, 5:38 am
#42
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: STL
Posts: 1,547
They also follow the model of quick turn around times. A plane on the ground in KEF or YQX for a fuel stop is a plane that's not in the air making money.
Aug 5, 2015, 7:29 am
#43
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
The issue with the smaller planes is capacity and range. The A320 family doesn't have anything today which can go much beyond Eastern Canada to Ireland with a full load. Some 737s can go further but there are still limits. The proposed A320neoLR will, when they are produced, be akin to the 752s which are TATL-capable.
Last edited by sbm12; Aug 5, 2015 at 7:48 am