Brussels Airlines' fleet renewal

[crew1990]

2 will leave the ITA fleet in December 2026 and 1 in March 2027. I believe around that time we can expect them in the fleet of SN.

Very glad to see that this airline is not shrinking.

perfect ...3 more 18years old aircraft...so much for sustainability

Just a ridiculous comment full of frustrations. If this 3 18y-old a320 replace 3 20y-old a319… The CO2 emission per PAX drastically decrease, but is it really what mater to you or you just want (need) to complain?

There is a lot to complain about, but let’s be right as well, the short haul fleet is seriously getting renew, again next year with 5 A320neo’s joining. There will be in total 13 factors new A320neo in total in the fleet in 2027, what we never could have dreamed of before.

[OO-ITR]

2 will leave the ITA fleet in December 2026 and 1 in March 2027. I believe around that time we can expect them in the fleet of SN.

Very glad to see that this airline is not shrinking.

perfect ...3 more 18years old aircraft...so much for sustainability

Just a ridiculous comment full of frustrations. If this 3 18y-old a320 replace 3 20y-old a319… The CO2 emission per PAX drastically decrease, but is it really what mater to you or you just want (need) to complain?

There is a lot to complain about, but let’s be right as well, the short haul fleet is seriously getting renew, again next year with 5 A320neo’s joining. There will be in total 13 factors new A320neo in total in the fleet in 2027, what we never could have dreamed of before.

BRAVO everything is going smoothly at SN...hence the two cancelled A330's "last minute"

[crew1990]

what didn't you get in my "there is a lot to complain about, but..."

I have no problem about your need to express your frustration, but please do so with some stuff to complain about like indeed the fact that the 2 a330 wich are not coming, but not on the fact that 3 a320 comes to replace 3 older a319...

[oldblueeyes]

You can't get meaningful judgments out of bias.

One old A319 has 141 seats vs an old A320CEO with 180 or, worst case 174. That's 20% more revenue seats vs around 10% additional marginal cost.

Is it ideal? No. Is it what Brussels can afford based on it's own performance. Sadly, yes.

Is there any better supply chain? Theoretically yes, eg ex Spirit aircraft, but these have the wrong engines for Brussels. Their ex CEO's would work only if sombeody elde in Lufthansa would take ex Spirit A321 (there the engines match LH's orders) and give some A320 away.

If the goal is to transition quicker towards an all 320 fleet, any short term replacement of the 319 is welcome.

[Flanker2]

A bigger A320 is only good if SN can fill the additional seats.

The greatest weakness of SN is and has always been a poorly run yield management division and route planning department.

They have to smell 2026, realize that we live in a world of Google flights, Skyscanner and Momondo where people compare in a matter of seconds and SN always works out as one of the most expensive options.
A hint for SN: hotels use yield management systems with dynamic pricing, where their rates are continuously compared on all the OTA's against their peers and prices adjusted hour by hour. (OTA Insight/Lighthouse)
Another lesson, you can adjust fares not only based on which flights people book but when they book it. Corporates, self-employed and institutions book through their secretaries between 10am and 4pm on weekdays, leisure book the rest of the time.

The next thing they need to understand is that they are selling perishables. Every empty seat has a freaking cost.

In the summer they need to reduce corporate destinations and be more aggressive on leisure Italy and Spain. Forget Portugal and Greece, they're too far.
An example: Sardinia.
They barely have flights to Sardinia when Olbia has both UA and DL flying B767's from 2027.
How can UA/DL have a daily B763 from NYC and SN can't even fly a daily A319 from BRU.
Lots of opportunities into Alghero and Cagliari as well as Ryanair doesnt offer a good schedule, too early or too late or wrong days. Not only that, there is also a lot of VFR for Sardinia. Don't they know that entire towns of Sardinian immigrants worked in the coal mines in Limburg and Hainaut, with hundreds of thousands of their descendants and friends living in these regions but there is only a 3 weekly poorly scheduled Ryanair flight in the winter. WTF is wrong with the route planning people.
Forget PMI or IBZ packed with students, VFR and retired babyboomers with a seaside villa in Sardinia is where the money is and you can go to the beach from April to November.
Go ahead, go look what FR are charging for CAG-CRL or Transavia on AHO-AMS in September. Why waste aircraft on multiple daily BRU-CPH or even BRU-MAD, there are no beaches in Madrid.

Would I pay a little more to be on SN vs Ryanair or AZ?
Ryanair yes if the fare difference is less than 20%, AZ only if the schedule is better, otherwise AZ offers better service than SN these days.

Fuel cost is high so NEO's save money but at the same time PW engines are a liability so CEO's are just fine.
Just need to stop focussing on intercity routes, rediscover all the opportunities they are not taking in the European market and wonder why Ryanair is making loads of cash while SN are flying half empty planes.

For flights scheduled around times that the lounge is not busy, randomly offer lounge access promo's for 12 euro's so guests can try their lounge and at the same time bring in revenue. A frozen croissant and a coffee has a food cost of less than a Euro, the rest is profit.
Sell 300 of these per day spread out over the day, 1 million € of easy profits per year.

I could go on like this all day.

[crew1990]

I would suggest you to have a look at the data on the load factor because obviously you are totally way off base with your statement about « SN flying half empty plane »

[TimTam]

Without knowing the numbers and the figures, I tend to say that you are right in your latest post, crew1990.

Regarding the three 18-year-old A320's, I would say that I, myself, am disappointed to see that the latest member in the Group in getting newer planes (correct me if I am wrong) and again SN is treated as an "unwanted child".

My main work destinations are Athens and Lisbon which I sometimes combine with a leisure. I always try to fly A3 and TP because their service and crew are definitely better (personal opinion which you do not have to share). From the few flights I still sometimes take I can only conclude that SN has gone down in quality compared to the improvements announced some time ago by management.

This is slightly off topic, but I can understand that cabin crew are tired of doing their utmost when one sees what they receive in return and the aircraft the airline is getting compared to the other members of the Group.

[koninckske]

We all need to realise that Brussels Airlines doesn't exist anymore . It is just part of the Lufthansa Group. They will move aircraft as they like and when/where needed. Internationally BRU is also just a regional airport, nothing more, not a big hub.

And don't start saying they should have been part of IAG. Just have look at Aer Lingus: forced to downsize since they need to make more money.

[Flanker2]

I would suggest you to have a look at the data on the load factor because obviously you are totally way off base with your statement about « SN flying half empty plane »

SN's 82% load factors is low compared to any of their peers.
Ryanair averages 96% on larger 189~ seat aircraft.
Even Air France does much better.

Also, SN's load factors is likely boosted by longhaul which has high load factors and large traffic numbers, bumping up the average. Hence, their short haul network is flying "half empty".

[lumumba]

I would suggest you to have a look at the data on the load factor because obviously you are totally way off base with your statement about « SN flying half empty plane »

SN's 82% load factors is low compared to any of their peers.
Ryanair averages 96% on larger 189~ seat aircraft.
Even Air France does much better.

Also, SN's load factors is likely boosted by longhaul which has high load factors and large traffic numbers, bumping up the average. Hence, their short haul network is flying "half empty".

How is the yield?
Also important is the yield .

[oldblueeyes]

Without knowing the numbers and the figures, I tend to say that you are right in your latest post, crew1990.

Regarding the three 18-year-old A320's, I would say that I, myself, am disappointed to see that the latest member in the Group in getting newer planes (correct me if I am wrong) and again SN is treated as an "unwanted child".

My main work destinations are Athens and Lisbon which I sometimes combine with a leisure. I always try to fly A3 and TP because their service and crew are definitely better (personal opinion which you do not have to share). From the few flights I still sometimes take I can only conclude that SN has gone down in quality compared to the improvements announced some time ago by management.

This is slightly off topic, but I can understand that cabin crew are tired of doing their utmost when one sees what they receive in return and the aircraft the airline is getting compared to the other members of the Group.

ITA designed their fleet once the company was created. Thus they have secured deliveries of new aircraft and should replace their A319 with A223 and renew the A320 fleet.
The downside of this model is that the fleet is totally leased and running at maximum cost, the chance is to adjust in time, as most lease contracts go for good financial reasons for the lessor until mid life.
And you can already see that ITA is preparing to normalize the fleet - the expansion towards more A359 shall happen via midlife aircraft and for the rollover 339->359 in the early 2030's, there is no clear decision taken yet.

With respect to service, let's see that Belgium has one of the highest LCC shares in Europe on short haul. Service may follow the mainstream market trend - if this is the right or wrong decision, that's another discussion.

The major problem Brussels Airlines has is for sure it's positioning:
- it's creation is a result of a regional airline and a low cost airline - SN +Virgin Express
- until 2020 the declared operating model was of a hybrid airline - LCC on short haul, full flag on long haul ; as a benchmakr, the most prominent company trying to do everything of all, Air Berlin, collapsed
- needless to say that the geographical position in the middle of 4 large hubs is difficult
- agreements during the pandemic to position the company as a network airline do not ease the situation - for a ntworker the size is to small to match the economics, a realistic repositioning as a strong short haul airline is currently not possible by agreements and likely by local emotions

Just a food of thought : Norwegian is doing very well since they abandoned the long haul operations and the follow up player of that division , Norse, is not doing well. Also within Lufthansa Eurowings is doing well once they were allowed not to follow the low cost long haul model. And Discover is doing also well by filling their planes based on the strong feeders of the hubs.

[lumumba]

Without knowing the numbers and the figures, I tend to say that you are right in your latest post, crew1990.

Regarding the three 18-year-old A320's, I would say that I, myself, am disappointed to see that the latest member in the Group in getting newer planes (correct me if I am wrong) and again SN is treated as an "unwanted child".

My main work destinations are Athens and Lisbon which I sometimes combine with a leisure. I always try to fly A3 and TP because their service and crew are definitely better (personal opinion which you do not have to share). From the few flights I still sometimes take I can only conclude that SN has gone down in quality compared to the improvements announced some time ago by management.

This is slightly off topic, but I can understand that cabin crew are tired of doing their utmost when one sees what they receive in return and the aircraft the airline is getting compared to the other members of the Group.

ITA designed their fleet once the company was created. Thus they have secured deliveries of new aircraft and should replace their A319 with A223 and renew the A320 fleet.
The downside of this model is that the fleet is totally leased and running at maximum cost, the chance is to adjust in time, as most lease contracts go for good financial reasons for the lessor until mid life.
And you can already see that ITA is preparing to normalize the fleet - the expansion towards more A359 shall happen via midlife aircraft and for the rollover 339->359 in the early 2030's, there is no clear decision taken yet.

With respect to service, let's see that Belgium has one of the highest LCC shares in Europe on short haul. Service may follow the mainstream market trend - if this is the right or wrong decision, that's another discussion.

The major problem Brussels Airlines has is for sure it's positioning:
- it's creation is a result of a regional airline and a low cost airline - SN +Virgin Express
- until 2020 the declared operating model was of a hybrid airline - LCC on short haul, full flag on long haul ; as a benchmakr, the most prominent company trying to do everything of all, Air Berlin, collapsed
- needless to say that the geographical position in the middle of 4 large hubs is difficult
- agreements during the pandemic to position the company as a network airline do not ease the situation - for a ntworker the size is to small to match the economics, a realistic repositioning as a strong short haul airline is currently not possible by agreements and likely by local emotions

Just a food of thought : Norwegian is doing very well since they abandoned the long haul operations and the follow up player of that division , Norse, is not doing well. Also within Lufthansa Eurowings is doing well once they were allowed not to follow the low cost long haul model. And Discover is doing also well by filling their planes based on the strong feeders of the hubs.

It is also clear that if we followed the Dutch tax policy, it would be a definite advantage for Brussels Airlines

[longwings]

An example: Sardinia.
They barely have flights to Sardinia when Olbia has both UA and DL flying B767's from 2027.
How can UA/DL have a daily B763 from NYC and SN can't even fly a daily A319 from BRU.
Lots of opportunities into Alghero and Cagliari as well as Ryanair doesnt offer a good schedule, too early or too late or wrong days. Not only that, there is also a lot of VFR for Sardinia. Don't they know that entire towns of Sardinian immigrants worked in the coal mines in Limburg and Hainaut, with hundreds of thousands of their descendants and friends living in these regions but there is only a 3 weekly poorly scheduled Ryanair flight in the winter. WTF is wrong with the route planning people.

Route planning is part art, part science, but comparing short-haul to long-haul is apples to oranges, they serve different markets and different needs. For the past two seasons, American travelers want new destinations no one else is going to, that means less flights to Paris and London in the summer, and more to new destinations. Belgians still prefer Spain and Turkey. Generally American passengers are willing to pay more for a better travel experience in greater number than Europeans are, and that only increases with the distance flown. That means there may be a very limited segment of passengers willing to pay a premium for Brussels over Ryanair. I don't know any of Brussels' "route planning people" but how do you know they have not looked at the market and concluded there aren't enough passengers willing to pay a premium to turn in a profit?

For flights scheduled around times that the lounge is not busy, randomly offer lounge access promo's for 12 euro's so guests can try their lounge and at the same time bring in revenue.

€49 will get you in.

SN's 82% load factors is low compared to any of their peers.

It's a low load factor in the era of yield management (which Brussels may not be very good at yet according to another post), but load factor is not a key metric either. Revenue per available seat km (RASK), and related cost factor (CASK) are the more important measures.
It's not that hard to find airlines with a similar load factor to Brussels, but higher profitability - they sell more high-priced tickets.

[convair]

Generally American passengers are willing to pay more for a better travel experience in greater number than Europeans are, and that only increases with the distance flown. That means there may be a very limited segment of passengers willing to pay a premium for Brussels over Ryanair.

I agree for the Ryanair flights to/from BRU, but I can't see American passengers willing to switch airports for a Charleroi flight, though.

[oldblueeyes]

Let's all face reality.

Base fare at Southwest Airline starts from 79 USD upwards, base fare starts at Ryanair at 14,99 EUR. Whilst average sector length at Southwest is 20% longer at Southwest, the base fare is 4 times higher and average total revenue double ... we speak here about 160 USD vs 70 EUR.

American are willing to pay sounds nicer, when the company operates in a different environment.

And the bad news for all patriots is that Luftahnsa Group started to optimize finally all their hubs one year ago, with a clear objective - reducing feeder flights cost and optimising capacity.

So whatever leisure destination is not in the scope of route planning of a network brand - feeder jobs come first.

[Flanker2]

I would suggest you to have a look at the data on the load factor because obviously you are totally way off base with your statement about « SN flying half empty plane »

SN's 82% load factors is low compared to any of their peers.
Ryanair averages 96% on larger 189~ seat aircraft.
Even Air France does much better.

Also, SN's load factors is likely boosted by longhaul which has high load factors and large traffic numbers, bumping up the average. Hence, their short haul network is flying "half empty".

How is the yield?
Also important is the yield .

Well the profits or lack thereof, tell us clearly that yields are not where they should be.
There are hotels in Belgium that make more profit than SN.

An example: Sardinia.
They barely have flights to Sardinia when Olbia has both UA and DL flying B767's from 2027.
How can UA/DL have a daily B763 from NYC and SN can't even fly a daily A319 from BRU.
Lots of opportunities into Alghero and Cagliari as well as Ryanair doesnt offer a good schedule, too early or too late or wrong days. Not only that, there is also a lot of VFR for Sardinia. Don't they know that entire towns of Sardinian immigrants worked in the coal mines in Limburg and Hainaut, with hundreds of thousands of their descendants and friends living in these regions but there is only a 3 weekly poorly scheduled Ryanair flight in the winter. WTF is wrong with the route planning people.

Route planning is part art, part science, but comparing short-haul to long-haul is apples to oranges, they serve different markets and different needs. For the past two seasons, American travelers want new destinations no one else is going to, that means less flights to Paris and London in the summer, and more to new destinations. Belgians still prefer Spain and Turkey. Generally American passengers are willing to pay more for a better travel experience in greater number than Europeans are, and that only increases with the distance flown. That means there may be a very limited segment of passengers willing to pay a premium for Brussels over Ryanair. I don't know any of Brussels' "route planning people" but how do you know they have not looked at the market and concluded there aren't enough passengers willing to pay a premium to turn in a profit?

For flights scheduled around times that the lounge is not busy, randomly offer lounge access promo's for 12 euro's so guests can try their lounge and at the same time bring in revenue.

€49 will get you in.

SN's 82% load factors is low compared to any of their peers.

It's a low load factor in the era of yield management (which Brussels may not be very good at yet according to another post), but load factor is not a key metric either. Revenue per available seat km (RASK), and related cost factor (CASK) are the more important measures.
It's not that hard to find airlines with a similar load factor to Brussels, but higher profitability - they sell more high-priced tickets.

Yeah well the part-artists at SN are not very good at their job are they? You've got good artists and bad artists and guess which category they belong to.
SN has the most boring European network. Most of their routes are to major European cities.
Focus on feeding? What are they supposed to be feeding exactly? Only a handful of routes feed their African network, people aren't exactly flying from FCO to DKR. Even SN don't know what they are feeding, they end up flying multiple daily intercity routes against VY, FR, U2 and each country's major airline.
People from all over Flanders and even Netherlands are stepping over BRU to catch a flight in CRL which has a much more diversified and interesting network.

SN just has to diversify their route network and stop doing things that don't bring in the Euro's.

Revenues matter as much as load factors yadayadayada. If yields and revenues are so good, where are the earnings?
Why is SN always on the brink?

49€ for what?
I've been in their lounge plenty, the buffet is about what you get in a 4-star hotel s breakfast and they charge about 30€ for it.
49 is too expensive, they should sell this at 25-30, they need to focus more on volume than margin.
Whenever it's too empty, 12 is good as a promo.

With Jet Fuel cost where it is, oil reserves drying up and fiat currency debasement on the deck, SN is ripe for another round of begging for a government bail out.
Maybe this time we should let it fail and start over fresh like ITA Airways did.
When they close Suez and the last bit of oil stops flowing out of the Gulf, airlines are going to fight each other over who shuts down first and many will fail. Airlines with reserves will get to play another round after the crisis, the rest will eat dust.

[OO-ITR]

what didn't you get in my "there is a lot to complain about, but..."

I have no problem about your need to express your frustration, but please do so with some stuff to complain about like indeed the fact that the 2 a330 wich are not coming, but not on the fact that 3 a320 comes to replace 3 older a319...

How disrespectful that I would allow myself having not read one of your (many) messages!

[fcw]

It is also clear that if we followed the Dutch tax policy, it would be a definite advantage for Brussels Airlines

Would you mind to clarify?

[lumumba]

It is also clear that if we followed the Dutch tax policy, it would be a definite advantage for Brussels Airlines

Would you mind to clarify?

For Ryanair, the price difference is already much greater as a percentage, but more importantly, the public is much more price-sensitive than the Brussels Airlines public.

[fcw]

It is also clear that if we followed the Dutch tax policy, it would be a definite advantage for Brussels Airlines

Would you mind to clarify?

For Ryanair, the price difference is already much greater as a percentage, but more importantly, the public is much more price-sensitive than the Brussels Airlines public.

With all due respect, Patrice, what you wrote is completely incomprehensible.
What on earth does Ryanair have to do with the difference in taxes between AMS and BRU and the fleet renewal of BruAir?