Brussels Airlines in 2024

[lumumba]

Also the next 2 transfer A330 from LH to SN are known: D-AIKR and D-AIKS and those are much younger ones, 12 and 10 years old. Will be transferred in 2026 and 2027

D-AIKS is even the youngest A330-300 of the group

I discovered that United for example is flying with 33 years old plane's....is this not too much?!

[longwings]

I discovered that United for example is flying with 33 years old plane's....is this not too much?!

Time alone is not much of a stressor for modern aircraft. Lifetime is measured in ground-air-ground cycles (take-offs and landings) and flight hours. Each aircraft series has a baseline number based on typical mission (example 50,000 cycles for a 767) but the limits evolve based on actual use. A long-haul aircraft used mainly on short sectors will have a higher cycle limit than the same aircraft doing mainly long-haul flights. Often, the cycle/hours lifetime can be extended with additional maintenance too (none of United's aircraft have reached that point).

[lumumba]

I discovered that United for example is flying with 33 years old plane's....is this not too much?!

Time alone is not much of a stressor for modern aircraft. Lifetime is measured in ground-air-ground cycles (take-offs and landings) and flight hours. Each aircraft series has a baseline number based on typical mission (example 50,000 cycles for a 767) but the limits evolve based on actual use. A long-haul aircraft used mainly on short sectors will have a higher cycle limit than the same aircraft doing mainly long-haul flights. Often, the cycle/hours lifetime can be extended with additional maintenance too (none of United's aircraft have reached that point).

Ok thx

[oldblueeyes]

In 2026 and 2027 ? We are in 2024 ! I assume the information is correct, but it sounds like a bad joke (sorry) in comparaison with, for instance, Discovery.

Again,
Compearing apples with pears makes no sense.

SN has an approved strategy to grow by 1 long haul aircraft per year and 1-2 A320fam per year for the coming years.
This is not a fetish for the sake of growth, it has to come along with profitability as well - any ramp up is associated with costs.

Discovery is a different story - one part of the transfers are replacements to the remaining 332 that would go out in 2026 and a partial transfer of less business intensive routes to a cost competitive operator.

[Stij]

I prefer them to grow sustainably with 1 long hul aircraft a year than unsustainably with more.
Each time we had agressive growth in the past in Belgium it collapsed.

[nathan_06]

When will we know how many a320 neo's Brussels Airlines will get in 2025? Or are they getting some a320's from the group?

[oldblueeyes]

Likely no new 320 allocated yet.

LH City would get 9 straight from the factory. Swiss has 2x321 scheduled. That's roughly the delivery volume for the group.

And there was never said that growth would happen over NEOs.

Could also be that the management would like to consider 321.

Let's see first when all PW Neos would be back into service. And with the Austrian Neos returning to LH let's see who would get their younger A320, as likely they would switch to 737 Max

[TimTam]

I know that the management theory is one long haul aircraft for SN per year.
In the meantime LH bosses would like us to fly east (FRA/MUC/ZRH) to fly west (for instance, North America). Imho, when additional flighs (especially to increase frequencies) are added, geographical location should be seriously taken into account.

As to the likely allocation of Boeing 737 MAX ordered by the LH Group (let us have the guts to call a spade a spade, ordered by LH bosses) to OS given the recurrent serious technical problems of this aircraft, LH bosses should have had the ethical courage to allocate these new aircraft to German airlines in the Group.

OS and SN are no longer second class but third class members of the Group.

[sn26567]

Meanwhile, Discover Airlines will get 6 A330-300s by 2027.

https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/luft ... w-product/

Where do they come from? And how is this going to influence the "one A330-300 per year" deliveries to Brussels Airlines?

[SN501]

Meanwhile, Discover Airlines will get 6 A330-300s by 2027.

https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/luft ... w-product/

Where do they come from? And how is this going to influence the "one A330-300 per year" deliveries to Brussels Airlines?

Everything has been already explained by several members here.

Your own article mentions the phase out of three older A332. The growth of Discover is the same as SN: +3 as of 2027.

All data are available on https://sites.google.com/view/europeana ... leets/home

[longwings]

In the meantime LH bosses would like us to fly east (FRA/MUC/ZRH) to fly west (for instance, North America). Imho, when additional flighs (especially to increase frequencies) are added, geographical location should be seriously taken into account.

Thanks to the A++ TATL alliance, Lufty doesn't care much whether you connect in IAD, ORD, EWR, YYZ, or YUL over FRA or ZRH, on the way to North America... South America is admittedly different.

As to the likely allocation of Boeing 737 MAX ordered by the LH Group (let us have the guts to call a spade a spade, ordered by LH bosses) to OS given the recurrent serious technical problems of this aircraft, LH bosses should have had the ethical courage to allocate these new aircraft to German airlines in the Group.

What an odd statement... The "ethical courage!" Besides 40 firm 737 orders, Lufty signed up for 100 options. Where do you think these aircraft will go? Hint, that is far more than what is needed to replace every A320 of every group airline that is not based in Germany.

[oldblueeyes]

Meanwhile, Discover Airlines will get 6 A330-300s by 2027.

https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/luft ... w-product/

Where do they come from? And how is this going to influence the "one A330-300 per year" deliveries to Brussels Airlines?

It is just the fleet harmonisation puzzle in the Group.

B789 are replacing in FRA the 343 and 333 of LH.
The 333 are going to SN and Discover.
Discover is ending the 332 leases and harmonize the fleet towards 333.

[oldblueeyes]

I know that the management theory is one long haul aircraft for SN per year.
In the meantime LH bosses would like us to fly east (FRA/MUC/ZRH) to fly west (for instance, North America). Imho, when additional flighs (especially to increase frequencies) are added, geographical location should be seriously taken into account.

As to the likely allocation of Boeing 737 MAX ordered by the LH Group (let us have the guts to call a spade a spade, ordered by LH bosses) to OS given the recurrent serious technical problems of this aircraft, LH bosses should have had the ethical courage to allocate these new aircraft to German airlines in the Group.

OS and SN are no longer second class but third class members of the Group.

You were given several times in the past months honest advise to build up some basic sector knowledge.

Unless you have a personal frustation vs LH for any reason eg being laid off etc and you are continuosly building up bashing "arguments", your statements are at the intelectual level of "milk is coming from the bottle".

If your posts are emotional, than be honest and we all would understand your position.

If not, please don't behave like an idiot.

Ask what you don't know and you'll get answers, before posting such stupid statements.

[DannyVDB]

Hi all,

I have another question related to the expansion of SN (from 9, now 10 and then eventually 13 long haul A333), which I think will take place as described by others here on the forum.

Assuming the two US destinations remain (JFK, IAD), and one plane is kept aside (reserve, in case ...), so there would be 10 daily flights to Africa.

I think in Pier A, there are now 6 or 7 gates in part T (?). This would be not enough for the ten flights of course. I see two alternatives:

1) Shift the current border control in pier A to the West, but that would mean less capacity for the Schengen flights; also not sure those gates can handle the A333.

2) Rearrange flights to Africa, now they are 'spread' between 10:20AM and 12:15PM. In case they split triangle flights, they are quicker back in BRU, no? So they could start leaving earlier in the morning and/or leave later until e.g. 2PM (not sure this is an option though).

Even in case BRU would decide to expand Pier A westward this would not be ready by 2027 ...

Also, the renewed lounge would become a bit crowdy ...

Any thoughts on this?

Cheers,
Danny

[Atlantis]

Hi all,

I have another question related to the expansion of SN (from 9, now 10 and then eventually 13 long haul A333), which I think will take place as described by others here on the forum.

Assuming the two US destinations remain (JFK, IAD), and one plane is kept aside (reserve, in case ...), so there would be 10 daily flights to Africa.

I think in Pier A, there are now 6 or 7 gates in part T (?). This would be not enough for the ten flights of course. I see two alternatives:

1) Shift the current border control in pier A to the West, but that would mean less capacity for the Schengen flights; also not sure those gates can handle the A333.

2) Rearrange flights to Africa, now they are 'spread' between 10:20AM and 12:15PM. In case they split triangle flights, they are quicker back in BRU, no? So they could start leaving earlier in the morning and/or leave later until e.g. 2PM (not sure this is an option though).

Even in case BRU would decide to expand Pier A westward this would not be ready by 2027 ...

Also, the renewed lounge would become a bit crowdy ...

Any thoughts on this?

Cheers,
Danny

Hi,

Like you have said, one aircraft will be used as back up. Not for the moment bcs all 10 are flying but as from nr 11 yes. The next is to fly more direct. For the moment there is no capacity issue at the T gates. But in future more aircrafts can be prepared for the flight on a remote stand. Only for pax it will be at the gate.

[convair]

Hi,
Like you have said, one aircraft will be used as back up. Not for the moment bcs all 10 are flying but as from nr 11 yes. The next is to fly more direct. For the moment there is no capacity issue at the T gates. But in future more aircrafts can be prepared for the flight on a remote stand. Only for pax it will be at the gate.

It was stated here a few weeks ago that SN is keeping a spare aircraft every day; and that seems to be the case, as only 9 lh flights are operated every day.
But that doesn't fundamentally change the problem mentioned above by DannyVDB.

[longwings]

But in future more aircrafts can be prepared for the flight on a remote stand. Only for pax it will be at the gate.

Is that an actual plan or a suggestion?
If a plan/project, that'd be impressive. It would take a lot of coordination to start prepping an aircraft in one location and finish in another. It also increases the risks of operational delays.

An alternative is to push the early morning arrivals not leaving again until noon to a remote stand, and bring them back to a gate for prep and boarding, far more common.

It was stated here a few weeks ago that SN is keeping a spare aircraft every day; and that seems to be the case, as only 9 lh flights are operated every day.

As in an aircraft is intentionally idled to serve as a hot spare? Or they plan maintenance so that most days an aircraft is at base?
The latter speaks of more maintenance than usual, but the former should be absolutely unnecessary for such a small fleet.

[Conti764]

Hi all,

I have another question related to the expansion of SN (from 9, now 10 and then eventually 13 long haul A333), which I think will take place as described by others here on the forum.

Assuming the two US destinations remain (JFK, IAD), and one plane is kept aside (reserve, in case ...), so there would be 10 daily flights to Africa.

I think in Pier A, there are now 6 or 7 gates in part T (?). This would be not enough for the ten flights of course. I see two alternatives:

1) Shift the current border control in pier A to the West, but that would mean less capacity for the Schengen flights; also not sure those gates can handle the A333.

2) Rearrange flights to Africa, now they are 'spread' between 10:20AM and 12:15PM. In case they split triangle flights, they are quicker back in BRU, no? So they could start leaving earlier in the morning and/or leave later until e.g. 2PM (not sure this is an option though).

Even in case BRU would decide to expand Pier A westward this would not be ready by 2027 ...

Also, the renewed lounge would become a bit crowdy ...

Any thoughts on this?

Cheers,
Danny

Hi,

Like you have said, one aircraft will be used as back up. Not for the moment bcs all 10 are flying but as from nr 11 yes. The next is to fly more direct. For the moment there is no capacity issue at the T gates. But in future more aircrafts can be prepared for the flight on a remote stand. Only for pax it will be at the gate.

I know it's not in the plans, but BRU should realy move forward with A-pier West. It wil be '28 or '29 before it would open and it's about the only infrastructural growth possible.

[lumumba]

Hi all,

I have another question related to the expansion of SN (from 9, now 10 and then eventually 13 long haul A333), which I think will take place as described by others here on the forum.

Assuming the two US destinations remain (JFK, IAD), and one plane is kept aside (reserve, in case ...), so there would be 10 daily flights to Africa.

I think in Pier A, there are now 6 or 7 gates in part T (?). This would be not enough for the ten flights of course. I see two alternatives:

1) Shift the current border control in pier A to the West, but that would mean less capacity for the Schengen flights; also not sure those gates can handle the A333.

2) Rearrange flights to Africa, now they are 'spread' between 10:20AM and 12:15PM. In case they split triangle flights, they are quicker back in BRU, no? So they could start leaving earlier in the morning and/or leave later until e.g. 2PM (not sure this is an option though).

Even in case BRU would decide to expand Pier A westward this would not be ready by 2027 ...

Also, the renewed lounge would become a bit crowdy ...

Any thoughts on this?

Cheers,
Danny

Hi,

Like you have said, one aircraft will be used as back up. Not for the moment bcs all 10 are flying but as from nr 11 yes. The next is to fly more direct. For the moment there is no capacity issue at the T gates. But in future more aircrafts can be prepared for the flight on a remote stand. Only for pax it will be at the gate.

I know it's not in the plans, but BRU should realy move forward with A-pier West. It wil be '28 or '29 before it would open and it's about the only infrastructural growth possible.

There is space enough in my opinion off shore which is still very little exploited in Brussels with a little investment you could create a lot if space.

[crew1990]

Hi,
Like you have said, one aircraft will be used as back up. Not for the moment bcs all 10 are flying but as from nr 11 yes. The next is to fly more direct. For the moment there is no capacity issue at the T gates. But in future more aircrafts can be prepared for the flight on a remote stand. Only for pax it will be at the gate.

It was stated here a few weeks ago that SN is keeping a spare aircraft every day; and that seems to be the case, as only 9 lh flights are operated every day.
But that doesn't fundamentally change the problem mentioned above by DannyVDB.

When the A330s fleet will be bigger (around 13) there will be most probably an evening departure wave as well so the flight will be spread even more through the day. Some recent improvement on the T-terminal has been recently set by the way, like the new e-gate at the custom allowing the EU-pax to go faster at the custom freeing up the way for non eu passport holder