5th A330 for Brussels Airlines

[cathay belgium]

Hi,

I travelled to JNB in an 747-400 (LH) and a 343 (IB).
I travelled from LXR via HRG in a A320 (Constellation).
A320 sucks at long/medium-haul, in any way!
Isn't it cargo,comfort is 0.
If you have comfort = ticket prices aren't competable !
Look at the A319 prices to JFK! (I can't afford it)

I read all about the A319 in this topic and pff... ,
okay maybe the idea isn't that bad BUT... SN is a little LH now..
LH gonna drop some 747-400,...
The market is difficult for A330/A340... but LH...
I think SN must evolve to AFI, off course..
But why such a discussion about a seperate plane/flight-system that I believe LH would never allows.
Or we gonna have A330 or maybe a little worse but nicer to see a B747-400 in the future.

THX for all the intresting info on both sides..
maybe start a new topic A319 and what to do with it ! because this is a lot of A319 and less 5th A330.

Okay?
Let the new A330 found quick somewhere on the market give it a *A colour livery and give it a
welcome flight day so we enthousiasts could fly it cheap rate !!!
Success Sn/Brussels Airlines !

Ciao,
CX-B

[ballisticz]

Hello,

whilst posting for the first time on the forum, I have been visiting luchtzak on regular basis for the last 5+ years. Tonight I decided to register thanks to NCB

NCB, I admire your dedication ref. to the feasibility of an A319 ops to Africa.
Don't misunderstand me, I don't mean to say you're wrong on figures but I also join some other members when they stated that it is way less easy than what you expose theoretically.
Refering to the cargo topic ... year in, year out cargo is roughly 10% of the total generated revenues.
So, yes, inbound and outbound cargo is pretty much needed, believe me it can make a crucial difference.

Whatever all your calculations, flying an A319 further South than Agadir has been done several times in the past by SN and always with payload issues, fuel stop in Casa or Agadir etc etc ... we do not even speak about a single kg of cargo. I can't recall all the operational max of the aircraft but again (sorry it is a bit late to do some researches) your theory will remain a theory ...

Next to this, a full c-class version has been evoked as well.
That works fine when you are AF or QR flying to markets where there is a demand for it and offering a good product from your hub to the final pax destination(s).
Way less when your name is SN especially within the currently operated network in Africa.
Not a single destination amongst the current AFI network would support it.
Even a mixed C/Y version, beside the ops constraints, would not work well vs a wide-body product offered by the competition. You mentioned Afriqyah, IMHO, correctly on some points but do not forget that they do not carry cargo and that they stop in Tripoli ... which is a different way of operating.
Last but not least you mention DL planning to fly Douala ... yes indeed, perhaps within 5 to 10 years when the airport would become FAA approved. Sorry for mixing a lot of things in my reply but again it is late and have no time anymore to a clean quote/unquote. Best regards. B.

[Stij]

Or we gonna have A330 or maybe a little worse but nicer to see a B747-400 in the future.

Given that:

- Cargo is pretty profitable
- A330 is hard to get
- B744 is easier to get, especially as LH has to much
- B744 Combi has about the same Number of Pax as a A330
- B744 should have enough range without payload restrictions
- B744 could be (initially) flown by LH pilots to avoid cockpit communality issues

Wouldn't it solve a few issues?

Or are there things I oversee? Fuelburn could be one... African runways another

Cheers mates,

Stij

[tolipanebas]

NCB,

you keep going around in circles my friend, stating it must be possible to operate to central Africa with standard A319s, despite being told numerous times it isn't, yet each time you state no arguments have been provided by us to proof our point.
If you go through this topic however, on several occasions, I've given you many arguments which you've failed to pick up.

1- Alternate fuel...
Have you managed to find you're nearby alternates acceptable to both the company (from a commercial view) as to the BCAA (from a safety view)? Just folding out a map of Africa and picking an airport nearest to your destination isn't going to work, my friend... especially NOT at night, I can assure you.
In short: realistically you're still stuck with alternates one (or even several) hours away from your destination, thus cutting your theoretical range seriously short. In stead of your theoretical 6 hours cruise + 30 min diversion like in the US, you're actually still down to 4.5 hours + 2 hours of diversion in AFI, fully in line with what I've told you and with what we've seen SN do whenever they have no choice but to send an A319 to Africa.

2- Catering problems....
On a long haul flight, you need to do at least 2 full meal services.
Is the A319 equiped to stow away that much catering in its galleys, you think?
Oh and don't forget that you have no opportunity to uplift catering in many African places, so you'll actually also have to take the catering for the way back with you too...
That's 4 full meal and beverage services you'll have to be stowing away in the galleys somehow!
GOOD LUCK

3- Take-off performance...
For the past 160 or so posts, you've been going on about how far the A319 should be able to fly, but have you ever considered that before it can even start its long haul flight, it actually needs to get airborne first? Have you ever considered that it may not be possible to get an A319 in the air with all the fuel needed for its non-stop flight back to BRU under the conditions present in many of our African destinations? We're not talking about a take-off from Ostend you know, nicely situated at sea level with a maximum temperature of just 20C... We're talking places at 1,500m (about the hight of the Mont Blanc) and a max temperature of 35C! Don't know if you realise, but that's ISA + 25 and beyond even!!!!

4- Cargo and luggage...
You prefer not to take into account the cargo aspect of our operations, because you know it to be the absolute weakest spot in your plan. Mind you however, SN is not just importing flowers or pineapples from Africa, we're importing loads of premium fish too and more importantly, we're also exporting over 30 tons of all sorts of premium goods A DAY (!) on our flights from BRU. How are you going to do that on your A319s? Cargo load factors are well over 90%, year round and this is reflected in prices. Your idea we simply fill up the plane with cheep cargo is simply wrong: on some occasions, cargo even has priority over some kind of pax!
Similar story with luggage really. You simply ignore reality. Our pax have on general more than 40kgs of luggage per person, often also very voluminous. Good luck trying to get all of that in the A319 cargo holds!
Not to mention that SN actually makes good money from the extra revenue it generates from making pax pay for the surplus in luggage they absolutely want to take with them. Do you happen to know how much SN charges extra per kilo? The idea of yours to create a mentality change with our pax is not only impossible to achieve in Africa, it is also a financially unsound idea!
Besides, even with a 'standard' luggage load, you'll be screwed, because half your underfloor holds will already be filled with catering ameneties for the return flight, as I've explained you above.

5- runway surface condition...
On several of our destinations, the state of the runways is so pisspoor, Airbus wants us to use a kind of 'short field take-off technique' to cut the take-off roll as sort as possible and thus avoid making too much damage to the gear assembly. Since our A330s are amongst the most heavily used out there and only fly to these kind of destinations (contrary to those of the other airlines serving Africa) they need to be carefully monitored for gear damage after each flight. Whereas this is no problem for the A330, the A319 isn't going to get away with it so easily and may see serious MTOW restrictions being imposed to keep the stresses at take-off within manufacturer's limits. Good luck making it back to BRU non-stop then, hey?

6- Year round reliability...
Don't forget that if you start offering something, you need to be pretty sure you can do it year round, without handicaps. There's no use in drawing up a business plan which might work only half the time, if conditions are favourable. Consider the worst case scenario, rather than the best case like you're constantly doing...

See how you're going around in circles?
You're constantly assuming things in Africa to be just like in Europe or the US, where everying is going smoothly and operating conditions are ideal. Under such circumstances, an airline can indeed go right up to the maximum possible performance envelope of a plane and squeeze out the last drop.
Take your case to an underdeveloped region, with scores of operational issues obviously totally unknown to you (see above, and that's just the tip of the iceberg really), and what seemed just about possible before, no longer is possible anylonger.

[Conti764]

Or we gonna have A330 or maybe a little worse but nicer to see a B747-400 in the future.

Given that:

- Cargo is pretty profitable
- A330 is hard to get
- B744 is easier to get, especially as LH has to much
- B744 Combi has about the same Number of Pax as a A330
- B744 should have enough range without payload restrictions
- B744 could be (initially) flown by LH pilots to avoid cockpit communality issues

Wouldn't it solve a few issues?

Or are there things I oversee? Fuelburn could be one... African runways another

Cheers mates,

Stij

I guess LH would only want to invest such way in SN when they fully own the company. With the 748i and A380 coming in by then, SN getting some 744's (Combi) could be possible of course, although I doubt if it is wise to have such a small subfleet...

[134flyer]

What arguments?
Cargo is so important that the only possible option is to operate with A330's or not at all?
Hardly arguments, I call them unthought thoughts. The sense of logic is absent.

And your Grandiose Ideas are logic?

Put this in your mind once and for all: Virgin America's A319's are not A319ER nor A319LR.
STANDARD A319!

Put this in your mind once and for all: IT ISN'T ABOUT THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS OF A SPECIFIC AIRCRAFT TYPE, BEING IT AN A319ER, A319LR OR A STANDARD A319 (in whatever seat configuration)!! THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER FACTORS INVOLVED!!!

Tolipanebas' post above summarises pretty much all factors which DO matter when operating to Africa, but you will probably ignore most of them anyway! Maybe it's time to ignore your posts about this subject NCB, as I'm afraid you will never get it regarding this subject...

[tolipanebas]

Tolipanebas' post above summarises pretty much all factors which DO matter when operating to Africa, but you will probably ignore most of them anyway! Maybe it's time to ignore your posts about this subject NCB, as I'm afraid you will never get it regarding this subject...

Mind you,the above isn't even a summary really, it is merely an list of things which popped to my mind when reading the proposals of NCB and which I have posted here before, albeit never in one reply.

Another interesting aspect to consider NCB, and which you likely haven't considered, is that on some of the Central-African destinations, we are actually flying under ETOPS rules. Now, whereas it is perfectly possible to certify an A319 to ETOPS too, this should be well considered before doing so.

Allow me to tell you ETOPS certification will hugely increase the maintenance costs of your 'standard A319s' and one of the backbones of your business plan is that you'd want to use these 'standard A319s' (which aren't as standard any more, given they are actually going to have to be ETOPS certified) both on long haul flights to Africa, as well as to compete with LCC in Europe.

Apart from the fact your cabin and galley interior is never going to be up to the task of doing both these jobs successfully as I and others have been trying to explain to you, you should understand that it will be costing you a fortune in legally required yet unneeded maintenance to fly an ETOPS certified A319 on short haul sectors. ETOPS maintenance rules don't care whether you've actually been flying over the desert, the ocean or Europe: every hour counts and will cost you a lot of money! Good luck trying to compete with those 'standard A319s in Europe'...

[kiwiandrew]

Apologies for going back on topic ( which , in case anyone had forgotten , is "5th A330 for Brussels Airlines" )


I just noticed this article

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/fin ... 79348.html

EI is looking at disposing of some aircraft

The airline is considering offers on four A330s, three A321s and four A320s in its 44-strong fleet. They are all believed to be at least eight years old.

...

Aer Lingus negotiated the termination of an existing lease of an A330 aircraft in October and has agreed to end early an additional lease of an A330 in March 2010.

As has been previously mentioned a couple of EI aircraft were built to Air Inters specification , as were 3 out of 4 SN aircraft - this suggests the possibility of some degree of compatibility with SN fleet , the downside being that the aircraft are of course , like the SN ones , getting on a bit in years . Nevertheless could this be a source for an additional frame for SN ?

[NCB]

Could be good news for SN.
Who wants 15 years old A333's for 5 year lease contracts?

The one that went out is for Vladivostok.
The one set for March 2010 is EI-DUB and would be the 3rd for Vladivostok.

SN could bid for EI-ORD as said 8 pages earlier, but EI's A333's are not cheap since they are early-terminations.

Actually this topic has everything to do with the 5th A330 all along.
It is about SN's Africa expansion, possibly by an A330, or discussing alternatives to a more drastic plan.

Your MTOW, range and other arguments are nice to read, but not supported by facts.

Let's assume BRU-DLA, pax are 80kg combined average and luggage 40kg combined luggage.
Total mass 120kg per pax.

108 Pax (96 pax Y, 12 pax J) = total payload of 12 960kg at 100% load factor.
Operating empty weight including return catering and redundancy: 41 000kg.
Trip fuel for BRU-DLA, 7 hours + 5% contingency + reserves = 8 hours.
Average fuel burn on sectors above 4000km for A319: 2500kg/hour.
Total fuel: 20 000kg.

12960 + 41000+ 20000 = 73 960kg < MTOW 75 500kg in normal conditions

BRU-DLA can be done with little margin, fuel stop or maybe some luggage may need to be sent with the next flight when it's very hot or there's strong headwinds, if the flight is fully booked. Most international airports in Africa have 3000 meter runways, a true advantage for narrowbody ops with shorter take-off run even if the "extremities of the runway are unusable". Actually this last faacotr is more of aan issue for A330 than the A319 which has significantly shorter take-off and landing distance.

Anything North of DLA will only add more margin, which means the West-coast north of Cameroon is no problem and there's room for cargo.

So please stop saying that it can't be done, because simply it can!

SN's actual A319's may be lower gross weight but nothing prevents them from taking newer ones, even brand new ones. They are cheap now, lessors are very happy if they can sign a long-term contract in this climate.

Tulip, the increase of MX costs depends on the portion of the flight that is operated under ETOPS.
If you are operating under 5% of your flight portion under ETOPS, you can just motivate and ask for a waiver to the CAA. Most aircraft in European fleets are already operating under reliability programs similar to ETOPS. Alot more than that, the fact that SN is outsourcing all A330 maintenance including line to Sabena Technics is very costly. SN does alot of the A319 MX in-house and can do even more...
Anyway I find that there are sufficient routes SN can serve without doing Cental Africa, notably West coast.

[cathay belgium]

A319 again

NCB,

Maybe better discuss B747-400 as you're the only one who see a A319 operating to AFI or west-coast .
The thing is that if you read toliplanebas and others they have better arguments!
So instead discussing A319 come up with better options.
The A319 isn't the only plane that exist you see.
A300, MD11,B767,B747 or whatever a TRISTAR could do the job,they're old (our AVRO's are still
flying (yet) and they'll do their job.),
they (not the avro off course,all the other types) fly/flown to Africa ( Martinair ex. ) and if it's just for a tempory solution they are all
realistic solutions or even as good as an A319! (ex. the Tristar but I would like to see one again once )

So instead of still talking about A319 that you're the only one who want to sell it to SN better be realistic!
)

CX-B
( altough I admire your 'koppigheid' of defending your ideas ( and calculations) to people like toliplanebas and all others, please read also the other reasons why it's not the prefered option to do!,..
but I think you lost the war )

[NCB]

CX, thank you for your reaction.
If you had read the thread carefully, you would notice that I have answered all arguments politely and with alot of details. I like to take my time for this kind of stuff because I learn from it as well.

LH phased out A300's without even considering sending them to SN. They were closing on to their D-checks and they have alot of issues seen their intense use on shorthaul. They could have operated the Western Africa destinations but a big handicap is range. It has less range than A319 and starting new routes with A300 capacity is alot of seats to fill from day 1.

L-1011 have been subject to explosive maintenance costs, same for MD-11.
B767 could be good but then again MX costs could hike drastically and SN doesn't have the financial capabilities to add these one after the other. They would be better off leasing an A330 at a high rate.
B744 would be great to FIH... but rather high risk and not adequate for the actual situation at cash-strapped SN.

It's been written 3 times but the cost of adding A319 would be close to zero if they just replace the B737's. The parked RJ's can cover for the small loss of capacity intra-European and that would come in handy with the low load factors. 24 hours operation would make them big moneymakers.

I'm not playing a war with you guys but SN is losing opportunities and lost opportunity has a cost.
Apparently I care about SN alot? I want to see it grow into something good and believe that there will be big changes in the next few years, with or without LH.

[cathay belgium]

NCB,

If you had read the thread carefully, you would notice that I have answered all arguments politely and with alot of details. I like to take my time for this kind of stuff because I learn from it as well.

as always you do ! and believe me I find it also interesting !!!
I see your point of view, and maybe your findings are true BUT as already said by other I also
believe that besides calculations and technical know- how some things don't get match with the formulars
on papers because your talking about ... AFI .
Maybe it's better for SN and other forum members to replace the A319 discussion to
for ex. BOS-JFK as BA but I don't think that this way SN should deal because the A330 was for AFI!

A300 already sold,gone okay but the graveyard is full of it !

L-1011 was a joke offcourse , I'm sorry for bringing this into your true-lly serious anwers!!

MD11, expensive maintenance ( good for SN technics) but the thing is, if the total cost is even 0,
it's good for SN,keeping jobs,planes into the air , spreading their wings and name out of AFI and wait for a
decent solution!!
A330 on a higher rate ?
( offcourse this is the same for your A319!! )

B767 same idea, but maybe ( out of LH) in codeshare with JAF (NAI) or technical agreements.
I know it not very likely but who knows..,JAF can use a spare one and SN could use it.
( like SLR/SN/Citybird but offcourse we know how that all finished )
( okay Cargo is bad and because LH hasn't 1 767 forget this idea)

B744, maybe risky but with support of LH (if they ever will before total take-over) I could see it happen.


Lasts A319.. I see your point but think also on above ...

I'm not playing a war with you guys but SN is losing opportunities and lost opportunity has a cost.
Apparently I care about SN alot? I want to see it grow into something good and believe that there will be big changes in the next few years, with or without LH.

Hey, off course there's no war on this forum just in speaking terms..
Your right, every missed penny for waiting on a new money-making or zero-operation expansion is lost money!
We have to wait on a new plane but which...
We all care about SN on this forum ( especially all Belgians I hope) but to be realistic,

I think we're pretty tied to LH now and we may not expect risky-special solutions that could be hard to swallow for LH now, the only option is wait so many months for real changes... .
With LH ? Probably, but as an adopted AFI (LH) -child. ( nice if we still may mention SN instead LH Belgium -keeping our red dots instead an blue tail/yellow bird )
Without ? I'm afraid we're the next BD ( or old SN for SWISS )
Maybe I'm to pessimistic...

But so far..let's discuss

Cx-B

[ballisticz]

NCB,

am not looking to countersay all your writtings but again ... please understand there is a difference between figures as such and their application in real life. Don't misunderstand me, the aim is not to show you that you're wrong and that the 'others' are right since we're all here because we are aviation fans (freaks).

As such, let me quickly come back on your Brussels - Douala ops by a (current) SN A 319.
First of all the current MTOW for the SN A319's is set at 70.000 kg (vs 75.500 mentioned).
Max fuel tank capacity on these birds is set at +/- 20.000 kg.
The dry operating weight for such trip would be at +/- 42.815 kg.
I will not reproduce a full loadsheet here but your limit with the fuel taken for such trip will be at MTOW.
Pax weights used by SN is 84kg.
Average bag weight on this route is roughly +/- 35kg
Without even calculating the traffic load etc ... I am already not convinced that the fuel tank capacity will be large enough to ops that flight ... The trip solely would be in the vicinity of 17.000 at least ... add the alternate, holding, etc, ... and you're above the max. tank capacity.
But ok let's even say that does not play a role here, only your traffic load will put you in overweight by 5.000 kg ...

As far as the bags are concerned ... the hold volume will be a huge issue on itself (taking into account the volume of such bags to AFI). You will leave bags behind for sure whilst taking 0kg of freight. I explained already yesterday the importance of the freight when it comes to revenues.
Weather conditions over and around the equator might lead you to take some more fuel at times too ...
SN flight dispatchers tried this in the past several times as I told you, and SN never managed because it is not manageable to ops even DKR or BJL with these birds without technical stops for fueling whilst leaving bags and cargo behind so what are your trying to demonstrate here ?

Again, I do not mean to edit a thesis over the feasibility of such an ops. Of course you will tell me 'yes but new A319 (ER, LR etc ...) could do it ...' blabla ... BUT what I can tell you for sure is that, even the REAL operational constraints, such an ops would never be profitable for SN seen the direct operating costs on that route and the limited amount of pax, excess bags revenues and nihil cargo on board ... I could go further into details but I really believe the conclusions are now clear enough to all of us ... don't you think ?

Good nite to all !

[NCB]

You got a point and I agree with your figures, they are coherent and make sense.
I do not know MTOW's for SN A319's and am sure there are differences within the fleet. I'll have to work with the 70 tons you mention.

I quote myself:

SN's actual A319's may be lower gross weight but nothing prevents them from taking newer ones, even brand new ones. They are cheap now, lessors are very happy if they can sign a long-term contract in this climate.

So basically, the 5.5 tons MTOW problem and fuel tank capacity problems would be solved if SN would lease newer A319's with the 75.5 tons MTOW. Even with 70 tons MTOW, SN can fly Mauritania, Senegal.
Lease rates on new A319's are very good now, especially with the low demand. Some desperate lessors may be tempted to reach deals at around 250 000$/month for multiple airframes. Comparatively the old B73G's lease for around 100 000$ and older A333's at 600 000$/month. Newer A333's go for 850 000$/month.

[LX-LGX]

I like to take my time for this kind of stuff because I learn from it as well.

Long way to go. On a scale from 0 to 10, you are now at level -2.

LH phased out A300's without even considering sending them to SN.

Says who? Says NCB. What are your sources to say that LH and SN haven't considered this? You don't have to give a name, as you probably have to protect this high ranked source. Just mention the department: Board, OPS, Management, Sales, Resa, Development, AFI-desk, ...?

L-1011 have been subject to explosive maintenance costs.

- Apart from the maintenance costs, which vintage did you have in mind?
- Ever heard about the new noise restrictions at BRU and the weekend curfew?
- Who will fly the Tri-Star? NCB ?

... but rather high risk and not adequate for the actual situation at cash-strapped SN.

Deloitte says that on 31/12/2008, there was exactly 234.138.702 euro booked as financial investment, with another 18,6 mio available on the current account. And that is just for Brussels Airlines nv. What is your source to say SN is cash-strapped? Have you checked the annual account? Yes or no?

It's been written 3 times but the cost of adding A319 would be close to zero if they just replace the B737's.

Correction: you've said it three times. Three times without mentionning both amounts. So please tell us: how much is the exact lease SN is paying for it's 737's? Do you know it, yes or know?

By the way, any solution yet for the storage problems for meals and drinks on your 319's?

[NCB]

Deloitte says that on 31/12/2008, there was exactly 234.138.702 euro booked as financial investment, with another 18,6 mio available on the current account. And that is just for Brussels Airlines nv. What is your source to say SN is cash-strapped? Have you checked the annual account? Yes or no?

By financial investment, do you mean that total assets or net worth?
Either way, even with a net-worth of 234 millions, that's 25% of the yearly revenue.
In one word, if revenues decrease by 25% and cost remain at same level, for instance by losing Africa passengers to other airlines, the airline would be insolvent in a year's time... that's what I call cash-strapped.

One wrong move or being too passive and...

Worst even, if something happens that is out of SN's control which I pray would not, it could join the failed-because-was-unlucky list.

[C-46commando]

By financial investment, do you mean that total assets or net worth?

FYI, Financial investment represents neither. Financial investments (FI) (Placements de trésorerie, Geldbeleggingen) comprise two sub sections in the Annual report (Bilan, Balans na winstverdeling).

The first is "Other investments" (Autres placements, Overige beleggingen) which is the sum of all the different ways a company has invested part of its money. However FI refers to pretty liquid assets, meaning they can be sold easily and fast. For example : SICAV, time deposit accounts, obligations, etc.

The second represents the company shares owned by the company itself (Actions propres, Eigen aandelen). Since SN is not listed on the stock market, this is equal to zero.

The 234.138.702 € represent SN’s Financial investment.

It also had 18.661.865 € in its current account (Valeurs disponibless, Liquide middelen).

As for total assets (Total de l’actif, Totaal der activa) this is the sum of all the assets, meaning FI, current account, terrains and buildings, office furniture, equipment and cars, planes (owned by SN), long term financial investments, etc. For SN, the total assets were worth 419.488.737 €.

As for the Net worth, this is simply the difference between the assets and the liabilities (Passif, Passiva) of the company.

What has to be remembered is that all this data is valid only for the 31st of December 2008. We are nearly at the end of 2009 and we will have to wait until mid 2010 for SN to post its annual accounts for the Fiscal Year 2009.

As for calling SN cash strapped, I think this is jumping to conclusions a bit too fast. Its not just a question of looking at how much it has in the bank. You have to look at how they made their revenue and what were the loads. Did they have exceptional revenues (revenue made from an activity that is not the company’s main business activity. This can be for example selling a building, selling a plane in the case of SN). Did they have exceptional loads?

[NCB]

Aer Lingus is an example of a cash-strapped airline, it is about the size of SN and has a similar yearly revenue. It is forced to remove aircraft from leases though it has a good net worth and assets worth over 2 billions and an equity totalling more than SN's assets. This is due to their falling revenues in 2009.

It would be interesting to know how much SN has in liabilities and net worth.

Below is Aer Lingus 2008 assets/liabilities position.

2008 Full Year | Balance Sheet Strength -- Aer Lingus
€m 2008
Aircraft 686.2
Cash1, 206.81
Other assets 191.5
Total assets 2,084.51

Debt 552.9
Other liabilities 758.95
Equity 915.6
Total equity and liabilities 2,084.51

In a healthy balance sheet of a stable airline, the equity should at least equal yearly expenses, in SN's case Revenue~expenses. Aren't they tying to sell their owned airplanes?
For SQ for instance, the equity is 4 times the yearly revenue...

[LX-LGX]

Aer Lingus is an example of a cash-strapped airline, it is about the size of SN and has a similar yearly revenue. It is forced to remove aircraft from leases though it has a good net worth and assets worth over 2 billions and an equity totalling more than SN's assets. This is due to their falling revenues in 2009.

I rest my case : you are not only an aviation expert, but also a financial genius and probably a Bachelor (if not Master) in Commerce. I'm not.

It would be interesting to know how much SN has in liabilities and net worth. In a healthy balance sheet of a stable airline, the equity should at least equal yearly revenue.

Totally agree. But then, wouldn't it be normal, justified, logic and honnest to wait with conclusions like "SN is a cash-stripped airline" and remarks like "they cannot afford to pay new planes" (or similar) till you actually have seen these figures? (That is, if you also understand them, because you already fail to understand that theoretical flight calculations, based upon the manufacturer's technical data, are only applicable to the best case scenario which can almost never be met).

Apart from Brussels Airlines nv, there are other companies involved. So I was just referring to this one company, because it proofs that Brussels Airlines is not in financial danger, as you constantly post. The operational loss is covered up by far by the financial results/benefits. But there is an operational loss. So for the shareholders, every investment is risky - hence their conservative investment policy in expanding the fleet. Hence their conservative approach "we are starting to look for a 5th A330".

But then, let's remember 2002, when Brussels Airlines was established. As a private company, not as a public company playing with taxpayer's money. Aim was not to conquer Africa or the world but to have a 100-plus fleet. Aim was double: to limit unemployment after the Sabena bankruptcy and to keep Belgium and Brussels online. Which, so far, they've realized quite well. Through own flights, through codesharings or through connecting flights to hubs.

In a healthy balance sheet of a stable airline, the equity should at least equal yearly revenue.

This is another proof that you really are totally unaware of what's happening in aviation. Read IATA's press releases about aviation 2008, 2009, 2010 (I post them regularly in the "official news" here). Aviation is in deep s..t and your list of "stable airlines" is a very short list, compared to the total number of airlines. Even established airlines like BA are already happy they can survive and stay out of JP's list of Defunct Airlines.
( http://www.justplanes.com/AirlineHist.html )

[134flyer]

If you had read the thread carefully, you would notice that I have answered all arguments politely and with alot of details. I like to take my time for this kind of stuff because I learn from it as well.

No you don’t! You only ‘cherry-pick’ the arguments which you want to reply to and ignore all the other arguments, especially if they are valid arguments which prove you wrong. E.g., you totally ignored one of tolipanebas’ last replies, in which he stated you were going in circles and gave you a number of very good arguments. Instead of replying, you continue to go in circles and start yapping again over your A319 plan…

What arguments?
Cargo is so important that the only possible option is to operate with A330's or not at all?
Hardly arguments, I call them unthought thoughts. The sense of logic is absent.

I quoted this one before, but if your statement wasn’t so funny (look who’s talking about unthought thoughts and absence of logic NCB?), it would almost be insulting for the other posters here…

In one word, if revenues decrease by 25% and cost remain at same level, for instance by losing Africa passengers to other airlines, the airline would be insolvent in a year's time... that's what I call cash-strapped. .

You are talking about loosing Africa passengers to competitors? Let’s suppose SN will fly A319’s to AFI and let’s not look at the other arguments why it wouldn’t be feasible: You need at least the same kind of Business Class seats as on the A330, not the kind of seats as you will find e.g. in First Class on Virgin America, otherwise you will LOOSE CUSTOMERS as you are offering an inferior product compared to the competition! (Virgin America has a superior product than their competitors, and like said before, you can’t compare AFI to the US domestic market). But anyway, those seats are quite heavy.

Also, by operating A319’s, there will be cases of overbooking, left behind luggage (it’s not only about weight, but also about VOLUME; an anecdote about overweight luggage to AFI: a woman was flying to LOS with here 4 kids and she checked in 19 bags. She laughed very hard when told she had to pay hundreds of dollars for extra luggage fees. She just waived over her son who paid the fees on the spot by counting several $100 dollar bills. And you want to chase away those kind of customers NCB?), not being able to transport a lot of cargo etc. All reasons for customers to go directly to the competition, where they will be welcomed with open arms!

There is a nice article about SN in the latest issue of the German magazine Aero International. A lot is the same as said here by others, but maybe you will now get it.

Some snippets:

-‘Cargo to AFI is very important for us’. AFI Cargo 2008: 20000 ton, which if I calculate very roughly is about 7-8 ton on each and every flight to and from Africa!
-Cargo is the ‘icing on the cake, and the icing is getting bigger and bigger’, ‘the A330 gives us a lot of potential cargo wise’
-'We fly to AFI in trianguals as e.g. at one airport there is no catering, at another there is no high quality kerosene etc.'