5th A330 for Brussels Airlines

[tolipanebas]

this may sound like a stupid question but since cargo is so important on SN's africa network why don't they consider a narrow body (like the A319) full freigther plane? or a convertible a/c atleast

It's not a stupid question at all, but what do you think would costs less: sending 3 A319s and a 737Freighter, or the equivalent in the form of a single A333?

[cathay belgium]

Hi,

What about a jumbo 747-400, old SN had some (747-300) to Africa, LH's phases them out,
could be found cheap on the market ( I think ), and a lot of people on this forum likes the idea!

What's the thing that almost every company nowadays have A330's ???
( Ethihad-Hainan-... )

Is a A340 also out of the question?? ( more expensive,looks quite similar...).
I flown once A340 to JNB with IB,wasn't that bad !!

I know their aging..but
if you wanna fly a 747 you must look damn good for it... ( only some LH-BA routes ...on routes where
'normal' tourists will get to )

Cx-B

[NCB]

Tulip,I got your point of view.
Unfortunately Airbus numbers are for a 124 pax configuration with standard 20kg luggage, with nominal reserves (reserve + final reserve)

Basically that means 82kg x 124 + 20kg x 124 = 12648kg payload.
In a 108 pax configuration you get 82kg x 108 + 20kg x 108 = 11016kg payload
That frees up 1600kg of fuel, 40 minutes of additional reserve for an A319.
Then notice I have added additional redundancy margin of 500km to 6350km down from 6850km range.
Basically that brings us to a total redundancy of more than 5% of trip fuel.
Africa is Africa but there are enough alternates within one hour from anywhere for A319-sized aircraft, SN only needs to explore them. Until they do so, and put them on their paperwork to the CAA, they of course would only need be able to use the A333 alternates. Notice that firefighting facilities required for A319 are also less significant for A319 compared to A333.

Then why don't SN's A319 make it much further than DKR (4500km great circle range from BRU)?

Maybe the 132 pax configuration explains some stuff...
132 vs 108 means 2.5 tons less payload but 2.5 tons more fuel, which means 1 hour or 800km more range.
You know that 20% less pax also means less water, catering to carry on board, less equipment and resulting slightly lower operating empty weight due to less seats: 6 rows of 3-3 replaced by 3 rows of 2-2.

I think that for a healthy A319 in 108 pax config., FIH shouldn't be payload restricted but that there wouldn't be any room for cargo. For DKR up to 6 tons of cqrgo should be fine.

I think again that cargo is being overestimated.
Ok, granted, some fish can afford to be flown over at 5EUR the kg... but that's one leg of the flight, cargo only becomes a true moneymaker and self-sustaining when it can carry full loads both ways. That is also the answer to the question why SN doesn't have dedicated A320 freighters for Africa. Cargo is a lucrative by-product but pax remain main activity. To say that cargo is main activity is overstated...

[HighInTheSky]

NCB, did you take into consideration how much the weight is of those C class 'cocoonseats' ?
Also, the 20kgs luggage per pax is at least 40kgs with SN to AFI.

Anyway, we can discuss this as much as we want, but finally, SN is never going to order/deploy A319LR's to AFI.

[NCB]

46kg of luggage in economy for Africa is indeed a bit much, 64kg for business is crazy but SN have changed their luggage policies so often. I think that in the end the average weight should be around 35kg, but if SN make people realise that carrying food in the hold is not allowed, this should go down considerably. It's also very bad for the aircraft to get salt and salt water in the hold as many wrap their fish in salt water.

Just make it a standard 20kg and then charge alot for overweight... it will discourage people to take alot of unnecessary stuff.

[HighInTheSky]

Just make it a standard 20kg and then charge alot for overweight... it will discourage people to take alot of unnecessary stuff.

And then they will be happy to fly with AF to their destinations in AFI...

[NCB]

It all depends on the rest of the convenience, the final fare and marketing abilities.
Actually if you use some marketing tricks, you would just lower the fares by small margins just to remain cheaper than your competition even with 20kg overweight luggage and charge for the overweight luggage.
Just the mere thought of paying money for the overweight luggage would discourage people from going overweight.
Alot of the luggage is illegal food import for the shops in Matonge, and gives the border control only more work. If people have to pay more to carry other people's food, they will think twice...

Also, not everyone needs to carry 46kg, so why should they all pay the same?
In the end luggage is weight, weight is fuel, fuel is money.

SN's norms is a copy-paste of AF norms...

[tolipanebas]

Africa is Africa but there are enough alternates within one hour from anywhere for A319-sized aircraft, SN only needs to explore them. Until they do so, and put them on their paperwork to the CAA, they of course would only need be able to use the A333 alternates. Notice that firefighting facilities required for A319 are also less significant for A319 compared to A333.

If SN picks an alternate at 2 hours flying (and beyond) for their A330s, they don't do this for fun you know, it's because they basically have no other option, you know?

There may be airports nearer by indeed in theory, but good luck getting approval from the Belgian CAA to actually make use of those airports, especially as we're talking night landings overthere. Or are you thinking of serving them during daytime in your plan? Note this means you'd basically have to redo the entire SN network and that of their partners (bye bye connectivity to the US and most of the STAR partners) then....

Also, think about the commercial aspect: do you really think it's a great idea to dump 100+ pax at some remote and almost unserved airport in AFI when your plane diverts (and your crew subsequently goes out of duty), knowing there are no hotel facilities for instance? And how are you going to get your plane fixed there, knowing you're going to have to rely on the help of other airlines (in AFI, everybody helps eachother, but for that, you need to be at one of their stations)?

I think that for a healthy A319 in 108 pax config., FIH shouldn't be payload restricted but that there wouldn't be any room for cargo. For DKR up to 6 tons of cqrgo should be fine.

There's a lot more to look at than just payload-range under ideal conditions...How about take-off perfo?
There won't be a problem in BRU, but how about getting out of FIH or NBO with your fully loaded A319, at 30°C on a RWY of which just over half is usable due to the poor surface condition for a non-stop flight back to BRU? Still sure you can make it?

Let me tell you what the result of an in-depth analysis of A319 operations to/from AFI is going to be:
the plane is going to be seriously payload/range limited on its flight TO AFI due to some huge alternate fuel requirements to reach far away alternates and the plane is going to be even more penalized on its flight BACK to BRU do to take-off performance limitations, despite the obvious presence of more suitable nearby alternates in Belgium....

There's a long list of reasons why nobody in Europe is using medium haul planes to Central AFI destinations, despite the theoretic possibility to do so, you know? An A319 might in theory be suitable for such sectors, but in practice, it isn't, given the huge revenue potential from cargo, the challenging environmental conditions and the underdeveloped status of the continent.

Allow me to say all of you're reasoning is based on a theoretic assumtions which assume AFI to be just like EU or North America. I can assure you the operational conditions are quite a bit different overthere, so you really don't want to use a plane which is used already at its utmost limits when things go exactly as planned, because there are so many things overthere which are not as they should be on an almost daily basis, you're going to have massive problems with it!

I think again that cargo is being overestimated.
Ok, granted, some fish can afford to be flown over at 5EUR the kg... but that's one leg of the flight, cargo only becomes a true moneymaker and self-sustaining when it can carry full loads both ways. That is also the answer to the question why SN doesn't have dedicated A320 freighters for Africa. Cargo is a lucrative by-product but pax remain main activity. To say that cargo is main activity is overstated...

If you really believe this, then any fleet suggestion you are going to come up with, is going to be faulted.
The only realistic alternative to the A330 is an A340; forget about an A319 or similar for anything sub-sahara, as you have come to learn here, it's not really a viable alternative...

[tolipanebas]

46kg of luggage in economy for Africa is indeed a bit much, 64kg for business is crazy but SN have changed their luggage policies so often. I think that in the end the average weight should be around 35kg, but if SN make people realise that carrying food in the hold is not allowed, this should go down considerably. It's also very bad for the aircraft to get salt and salt water in the hold as many wrap their fish in salt water.

Just make it a standard 20kg and then charge alot for overweight... it will discourage people to take alot of unnecessary stuff.

Yeah, let's just convince our pax to travel without luggage, maybe then we can even use the RJs to FIH...

If SN cuts the luggage allowance to the levels you suggest, they can close their shop!
We're talking a long haul airline for business travelers and expatriates here, not some kind of Ryanair short haul operations for tourists.

Rather than change the situation to fit your idea, why don't you just admit the idea doesn't fit the situation nearly as good as it may have looked for a second?

What do you think is the best idea, with the lowest risk and the highest degree of success involved?
Add another A330 which has been proven to be perfectly suitable for the kind of operations we conduct lucratively now, or start using an A319, reconfigure the plane, void cargo contracts, convince our pax to travel lightly, reshuffle our timetable and reorganise the entire EU network and aks our STAR alliance partner airlines to do the same?

[NCB]

Let's get a bit technical as this is interesting.

The main reasons of hot & high limitations are, if I'm not mistaken, engine performance and take-off run affected by weight.
Flat-rating of the engine is going to reduce your available thrust setting, granted.
But take-off run is only a factor when runway length is a problem. Most runways at international airports in Africa have around 3000m, so not a problem at all for A319, even less so as indeed I am simulating a night operation when temperatures are cooler.

It is true that it wouldn't be easy to set-up night alternates for all airports.
But if we draw 500km circles around most airports served by widebodies of SN, AF or other European airlines we get this:



Plenty of choice within less than 45 minutes of range...

Of course, it is best if SN can add A333 capacity.
But as shown previously there are zero available on the market... adding one every 3 years will take us to 6 A333's by 2014 if we're lucky... I think that finding an A333 at decent rates now is more unrealistic than expanding with A319's.
It's also the way to go for shareholders who want to raise profitability and increase chances that LH buy them over 2 years at a decent price. If SN doesn't do well in the next years, I'm not sure that LH will buy it. It will depend on LH's capital position, but LH may not be in as strong a position as it is today with all the loss-making luggage they are starting to carry now (OS, BD, SN), upcoming fleet renewals and if SN doesn't perform well, I think that LH will defer the option to buy until SN becomes interesting again...

In the aviation business, innovation is not well seen.
In reality, it's the conservative idea's that bring you down.
If you draw a map of aviation, every 15 years it will be a different world.

Don't forget one thing, SN may not have the luxury of choice.
Before you know it, airlines like Afriqiyah and Egyptair are positioning themselves very well to compete a hard battle against the likes of SN. Especially Afriqiyah is very dangerous... government owned, low fares and oh... A319/A320's.

[AirDupont]

NCB:

where is the EI 330 going to?
Afriqiyah is receiving 330's as well, so not just 319/320...

[NCB]

Afriqiyah's A330's are meant for Asian and N.America, I believe. The long turn-around times are not so interesting for Africa.
Afriqiyah's strategy is to maximise A320 utilisation within range, Africa and Europe, and they are expanding very smoothly thanks to that operation. Out of Libya, A320's can work 4-6 sectors per day to Europe and most of Sub-Saharian Africa. They benefit of a better position to operate as a hub between Europe and Africa, and are going to use the same benefit for connections to Asia and N/S America.
Within 6 or 7 years, Afriqiyah could grow to become the SIA of Africa...

About the 2 EI A333's, and 1 A332, I know that they have been returned to lessor (ILFC?) and that they have been placed with Vladivostok Air and an Indonesian airline Batavia, if I'm not mistaken.
There will be new deliveries but I believe that Vladivostok Air has 1 more A333 on order with a lessor, which could be another Aer Lingus bird ( MSN 055 EI-DUB?).
Aer Lingus would then still have an older A333, MSN059 EI-ORD, but whether it will leave the fleet, I don't know. Even if it does, ILFC probably isn't going to give it away cheap...
It seems that one of 3 Air Comet A332's stored will go to Batavia as well, which only leaves one older Air Comet A332 available.
Vladivostok is a partially government-owned airline, so they can afford these more expensive A333's...

[NCB]

DATE:26/10/09
SOURCE:Air Transport Intelligence news
Royal Jordanian to decide on possible 777 or A330 lease
By David Kaminski-Morrow
Royal Jordanian Airlines is intending to decide within a couple of months whether to lease Boeing 777-200 or Airbus A330-200 aircraft as a replacement for its Airbus A310s.

It is considering acquiring three aircraft, on three- or four-year leases, to carry out a one-for-one replacement.

Royal Jordanian's new chief executive, Hussein Dabbas, detailed the plan to Air Transport Intelligence during the Arab Air Carriers Organization conference in Jeddah.

He says the airline has had to rethink its interim fleet strategy after the delays to the Boeing 787 programme, which have pushed back Royal Jordanian's deliveries to 2013.

Dabbas says the airline is "in discussions with Boeing and Airbus, and lessors" over a possible 777 or A330 lease, adding that the alternative is to retain the three passenger A310s for a longer period.

The carrier is already planning to refurbish the interiors on its A340 long-haul fleet from September-October 2010, having signed an agreement with Sicma.

Royal Jordanian is planning a route to Mosul next year, expanding further its services to Iraq, as well as the holy city of Medina in Saudi Arabia. Dabbas also identifies Johannesburg as a candidate destination for the airline.

Source: Flightglobal

It's tough times to find A330's with this kind of demand...

[tolipanebas]

Let's get a bit technical as this is interesting.

Actually, it isn't that interesting at all, since you're trying to proof the eath is flat, IMHO.

The idea to start non-stop central African operations with narrow bodies has actually been looked at by SN in the past and it has been dismissed for basically the same reasons I've stated above in a very brief way:
-) loss of cargo revenue
-) insufficient range in several operational scenarios
-) performance limitations on the return flights leading to unavoidable fuel stops in MRS or NCE
-) catering problems for return flights
-) etc...

Take-off run is only a factor when runway length is a problem. Most runways at international airports in Africa have around 3000m, so not a problem at all for A319.

You are aware the actual runway state at some airports SN serves is so pisspoor, it is company policy not to use full rwy length for take-off to avoid the risk to damage the gear, but rather take off from a seriously shortened runway?

Allow me to say you're constantly assuming things to be 'as in Europe' but in Africa, things are quite different.

Did you know for instance SN discovered a few years ago their contracted handler at some station in AFI was scewing them for many tons of cargo per flight, thanks to some close fuel burn monitoring over a longer period of time which reveiled their planes had to be heavier than thought? They started weighing the cargo upon arrival in BRU and compared it to the cargo documents they got at the start of the flight and found systematic deliberate discripancies!
Mind you, these are things which happen in AFI on an almost regular basis, so you really do not want to 'plan' on dispatching a plane to the last meter of the RWY, the last kg of the MTOW or the last drop of fuel overthere on a regular basis... Rather build in a small 'comfort margin' and do your best not to eat too much into it. I can tell you stories about AFI operations, you probably woudn't believe me....

[NCB]

The idea to start non-stop central African operations with narrow bodies has actually been looked at by SN in the past and it has been dismissed for basically the same reasons I've stated above in a very brief way:
-) loss of cargo revenue
-) insufficient range in several operational scenarios
-) performance limitations on the return flights leading to unavoidable fuel stops in MRS or NCE
-) catering problems for return flights
-) etc...

In the situation I mention, there would be no loss of anything, only growth, as the A319's would come to complement the A330's.
I guess that FIH would be a little bit tough to operate daily on A319, but I guess that anything at latitude of Cameroon and North shouldn't be a problem operationally... there's enough to explore there already, as proven by the map above. Probably enough destinations for a daily A319 ride times 20 aircraft.
Catering will be a challenge, of course. But we're not talking 300 people here, only around 100 pax, and max. 7 hours between sectors, not mission impossible at all.

I'll keep it here, no one's paying me for publishing idea's and to defend them so I don't really care.

I only hope that they can find another A333 in these times, and if they do I will applaud them.
But if you open your eyes, it's nothing but an attempt to defer the attention from the real subject which says:
"Temporary lay-offs, SN is going to book a loss in FY 2009, and it's not going to be pretty".

[Kabila]

NCB's idea of SN starting a narrow body operation into Africa, is probably one of the brightest ideas and suggestions I have read in many years on this forum.

Innovation is the key word to success. A radical change in operating to Africa is the only chance of survival for SN. A conservative approach will only lead into status quo or to another bankruptcy.

Hello ! Wake up world ! To all those would-be managers on this forum, stop daydreaming. Adding 1 A330 to SN's long haul operation is not going to save SN in the long run. It's time to stop acting like the 'big' guys - aka AF, LH, KL, ET, ... into Africa. The gap between SN and the 'big' guys in Africa can't be closed anymore. They have such a lead, that 1 A330 is not going to make the difference in closing the gap. It's to late already.

Only an innovative project, radically against any exisiting African operation model from AF/KL/..., like NCB is discribing, can save SN.

The main idea for SN should be: small country, small airline. Start from an underdog position and launch a product + route network which is completely different than anyone who is flying into Africa nowadays. Instead of flying big planes, fly small (economical planes), with an outstanding product and service. Fly to cities in Western and Central Africa at a high frequency (at least daily). The 'big' guys will have a good laugh and predict a failure to the project, but in reality, SN will severly bite into their market share. Many Africans are tired of AF's monopoly in many African countries and will galdly shift to SN, not caring wether they are on an A319 or A330. And with an A319, you can fly to cities which will never be profitable with an A330.

SN management should look at 1 specfic airline from the US, who has deployed this strategy many, many years ago into Europe and has now become an important player on the trans atlantic market. I am talking CO. Mid 1990's, CO came with an innovative plan to to start B757 flights from the US to Europe... the whole world laughed at them, their competitors in the first place. Who would fly a narrow body planes between the US and Europe? Ha ha ha... many predicted a total failure an CO's collapse of the project. Thousands of posts have been opened on-line about how bad it is to fly on a 757...

Yet, CO persisted and went on with the plan. And look where they stand now. CO flies and has flown many trans atlantic routes sucessfully on a B757 now and all those flights are profitable. Many of the competitors have tried the same routes with wide bodies, yet they have all failed and stopped the routes again. Some examples? EWR-BRS, EWR-HAM, EWR-OSL, EWR-EDI, EWR-BHX, EWR-BFS,... and many, many more. And thye are even going head on with the competion on main European routes, using their B757. EWR-CDG, EWR-AMS, EWR-LHR,... many 757 are used on these routes. Who do you think is making money on those routes? CO with a 757 or DL witha 767? Trust me, the answer is the 757, while the 767 is bleeding into the red...

And look what happened in the last 2-3 years? All of CO's American competitors have followed suit. DL, AA, US, NW,... they all have launched 757 services to Europe, with a 10-15 year delay after CO started it, because of the conservative idea that CO would fail anyway... yet, CO has in many of those cities such a strong position now, that the competitors can't even make money on their own 757's...

So, NCB, your idea is brilliant. Don't be put down by those people saying that your idea is worthless. It's because they can't think further than their nose. It's because of this mentality, that SN is where it is now.

And last but not least, I'd like to give my idea of an A319 route network SN should think of (with the idea of having 15 A319's dedicated to AFI):
* Brussels - N'djamena - Bangui - N'djamena - Brussels
* Brussels - Nouakchott - Sal - Brussels
* Brussels - Dakar - Banjul - Brussels
* Brussels - Bamako - Ouagadougou - Brussels
* Brussels - Timbouctou - Niamey - Brussels
* Brussels - Conakry - Freetown - Brussels
* Brussels - Monrovia - Abidjan - Brussels
* Brussels - Lagos - Lome - Brussels
* Brussels - Accra - Cotonou - Brussels
* Brussels - Kano - Port Harcourt - Kano - Brussels
* Brussels - Abuja - Malabo - Abuja - Brussels
* Brussels - Douala - Pointe Noire or Brazzaville - Douala - Brussels
* Brussels - Yaounde - Librville - Yaounde - Brussels
* Brussels - Cairo - Brussels
* 1 spare A319 on stand-by for irregular operations

If it was me, I would let these flights run southbound during the night from Brussels and have a daytime northbound flight back to Brussels. I'd let my A319's originate every day from some mayor European airports with some decent connecting traffic (mainly from France and the UK, due to the historical ties of those African countries with the old motherland; example LGW, CDG, FRA, MRS, LYS, NCE, BHX, GVA, MAN, ...) leaving Europe between 7-9 pm, arrive 9pm-10.pm in BRU, and leave again 11.00pm to 11.59pm from BRU soutound to Africa. Arrive early morning in Africa, fly second leg within Africa and start early morning return (7-9am) back to Brussels (after a very short turnaround time in Africa), with arrivals back in Brussels around 3-5pm. And then a new departing bank within Europe (Europe back to LGW, CDG,... for connecting purposes) between (6 and 8pm).

This would give an incredible utulisation rate of the A319. Ok, you would miss out any connecting pax to the USA, but you can't have it all.

The 5 A330 could then be deployed on routes to Central, Eastern and Southern Africa and increase frequency on existing routes or open new cities. Daily non-stop to FIH (rather then today with 1 stop). Increase KGL and BJM as well as EBB and NBO (for cargo reasons). Consider new routes like FBM (Lubumbashi - if the bilateral will ever be expanded, god knows when...), BZV (Brazzaville), LUN (Lusaka - only served non stop to Europe by BA), LLW (Lilongwe, no flights to Europe), DAR (Dar Es Salaam) or JRO (Kilimanjaro), in combination with KGL or BJM. Introduce flights to JNB (Johannesburg, 4 weekly) & CPT/WDH combination (Cape Town / Windhoek - 2 weekly).

[cnc]

even if SN could manage to get 15 A319's i doubt they would have the money to start all those operations.
related to my previous post i had the idea to expand the AFI network with some cargo only routes that could get upgraded in the future to both cargo and pax with a big a/c like the A330

[sn26567]

Didn't one of the two SN CEOs say recently that starting a new destination in Africa would cost 20 million EUR? Where on earth is SN going to find that money? It is not enough to buy one or more A330s or a series of A319s, you must alos provide staff, both on board and at destination.

[Vinnie-Winnie]

Kabila,

I really like your idea but it sounds rather inefficient as short haul planes have horrible CASM & RASM on long distance flights! U really need to have mega yields to make a venture such as this profitable which by making one stop flights is not gonna happen!

I've got a better idea which SN pursued before but which could be located somewhere else: Why not create a very central african hub

Say Ndjamena in Tchad. Fly 3 to 4 A330's a day there from Brussels and locate 6-7 733's there to fly to

Bangui
Nouakchott
Sal
Timbouctou
Lome
Kano
Port Harcourt
Abuja -
Malabo
Pointe Noire
Brazzaville

All other destinations could be served directly a few days a week, and indirectly through Ndjamena some other days

You'd get a system where all cities are connected daily to Brussels, but with little loss efficiency! If only SN could find a safe & modern city-airport-country somewhere in the middle of africa!

[HighInTheSky]

Vinnie-Winnie:

SN is currently looking at Brazzaville to establish such a 'hub' and to locate Air DC there in stead of Kinshasa.

If this will go ahead or not I don't know for sure, but they are looking into it. Maybe someone else has more info?