New Aircraft For Jet2?

[Harrier46]

There is a whisper going round that Jet2 (Channex) may be looking at purchasing 737-400s in the next few months. The rationale behind it is high load factors on their Jet2 Spanish flights and also on the flights they operate for Globespan, making a logical progression onto the -400.
Anybody else care to comment?

[bmibaby.com]

I might be wrong, but could anybody confirm to me that the Boeing 737-400, whilst being able to carry an additional 24 passengers over its smaller counterpart the -300, does have a more limited range?

Whilst greater capacity might be a huge benefit on some of Jet2 & Globespan's routes, I would be interested to know how capable the -400 is of Scotland-Spain/Portugal routes?

[682ft AMSL]

Channex have surplus -300s. 3 of the ex-Ansett machines have yet to be brought into service and G-LR operates for Globespan (along with 2 others which Channex lease from Islandflug).

With Globespan operating under their own (Cougar's) AOC then presumably G-LR will be eventually freed-up, giving Channex 4 to play with, so to speak. Would they really add to this by taking on -400s? Only if there are plans to expand Jet2 significantly, I would suggest.

I know that the Canaries and Cyprus are out of range for the current Jet2 fleet ex-Leeds due runway length. These are emerging seat only markets and might warant the investment in something that could do the job - probably only if there was crew / engineering compatability with the -300 though. Does the -400 fit the bill?

682

[MARKEYD]

LETS HOPE PALMAIR GET INVOLVED SOON WITH CHANNEL /JET2 AS THEY CANT KEEP THESE OLD 737 CLASSICS GOING MUCH LONGER PROBABLY ONE MORE WINTER SEASON AT THAT
ALSO PREHAPS JET 2 MIGHT SOON CONSIDER USING BOURNEMOUTH AS THERE NEXT BASE HAVING SEEN WHAT CAN HAPPEN AT SOUTHAMPTON AND NOW EVEN MORE SO AT EXETER , BOH IS REALLY LOSING OUT !

[FLYboh]

MarkeyD,

All Boeing 737-200's will be withdrawn from commercial use as of the end of March next year across Europe. So Palmair will have to source their fleet from somewhere else. Thats assuming that European can't replace their series 200's.

From next April onwards BOH should be a lot quieter place as this will mean no FR 200's either.

Might pop over to Dublin as a farewell to the 200.:ok:

[HOODED]

682 there are two options that are a possibility for Jet2 to do Teneriffe and Cyprus neither of which need -400s. Firstly a runway extension at LBA with I believe a 300m starter strip at the 32 approach end being mooted. Secondly I believe an engine mod on the CFM56s would allow the extra range due lower fuel burn. Both are expensive one to the airport the other to the airline. Given LBA never seems to do anything until there is no other choice I guess the runway extension option is out. Given Jet2 management are shrude dudes I suspect modification of one or two of their ac might be a possibility if they want to tap these routes.

[Tommyinyork]

Why not buy some 757s theres plent available and there cheap aircraft to run. Why does every low cost airline have 737s i have never seen a low cost airline using MD83s or A320s.

[MerchantVenturer]

i have never seen a low cost airline using MD83s or A320s

Those ubiquitous orange people are gradually re-equipping on A 319s.

We even get one here each day down in the west country. Indeed I saw it today just after lunch looking very smart and pleased with life waiting to go back to Berlin.

[jmc757]

And the other orange brigade have been using A320s on a "Lite" operation for 2 years now. Granted it is not a stand alone airline, but they still managed to do some tight turnarounds with those aircraft, mostly succesfully. Ok, not a Ryanair 20 minutes, but still tight!

[EGAC_Ramper]

The only thing about if it were true of getting 400's is then they would have a difference in pax numbers,say one a/c was to go tech then quite a bit of re-arranging has to be done to squeeze a 400's pax onto a 300,if you understand me.Much easier for a loco just to have total fleet commonality.
As for turnarounds if airlines like BMI for example at Belfast City were to close their check-inn like Easy's 30mins beforer departure they can be turn round in just as tight a time.We got a BMI A321 turned round back for Heathrow in 23 minutes as it was timed.:ok:


Regards

[HOODED]

Tommy, do not Snowflake operate MD80s? I believe they are the low cost arm of SAS.
As for the topic, a quick look at the Boeing website tonight if I read the graph right shows the 737-400 having a slightly better range than the -300.

Waits to be shot down by the 737 drivers!

[OLNEY 1 BRAVO]

Tommy - not to mention JetBlue (marvellous airline), Germanwings, Wizzair, Volareweb etc.

[Tarek Nor]

Hooded

"Tommy, do not Snowflake operate MD80s"

What's this then.....

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/586002/M/

One of the B737's is here....

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/516485/M/

[brabazon]

Tarek Nor - I think you missed the question mark. He wasn't saying Snowflake do not operate MD80s, but asking whether they do -which you have now confirmed.

Snowflake have to be one of the oddest LCAs in terms of types of routes operated and aircraft types used. Anyone know if their Inverness service will continue?

[nef]

The ARN-INV service is apprently to be discontinued from 23 July due to poor pax numbers:(

There was mention of reserecting it with a smaller aircraft next year - I guess it'd have to be an SAS mainline Dash-8? Can't see it myself, but you never know!

[Harrier46]

Dart Group (parent company of Jet 2 and Channel Express) have announced today purchase of two more 737s from Credit Lyonnais in Singapore. Are these more -300s or the expected -400s?

[hotline]

I'll have to ask one of my contacts in Jet2 Engineering next time I see him. He's mentioned -400s before but not for a few months so things may have changed in this fickle business.

I s'pose it would make sense to go for the -400. I expect there's a reasonable number available and if they've got a bit more range than the existing fleet they'd be okay for the likes of Larnaca, Paphos and the Canaries whilst hopefully carrying more punters.

The -700 and -800 would probably stretch the purse strings of Dart Group a little too far at the moment. Still, whatever they get, the more the merrier.:ok:

[Harrier46]

Recent talk at BOH is of three -400s, time will tell!

[682ft AMSL]

This latest pair that have been picked up are -300's. No decision (at least publically) on whether Channex will use them for Jet2 or the charter / freight business.

This brings to 5 the number of -300s that are not yet in service.

If they also want 3 x -400's then what are they all going to do?

682

[LBAir]

I understand Jet2 are seriously looking at flights to Tenerife. If this is the case, they must have something up their sleve with this equiptment issue.

[bacardi walla]

If JET2 are looking for more -300's, they should take a look at the back pages on this weeks FLIGHT mag :oh: 6 will be available soon :uhoh:

[Going loco]

Anyone know why the current Jet2 fleet can't reach TFS without a tech-stop.

loco

[LBA]

Certianly do hope Jet2 start flights to TFS! Would be a very good idea.

I would also like to know why the -300s cant do TFS without a tech stop?

[opsgeezer]

Difficult to explain quickly & I am no expert and I am sure there are plenty better qualified who will correct me where / if I'm wrong.

Runway length & obstacle clearance are limiting factors at LBA.
The further you go, the more fuel you need.
More fuel means more weight & that restricts payload.

It is only a problem off one end of the runway but there is little point planning for anything other than a realistic worse case scenario. Eg You may get a full flight off runway 14 but thats not much use if you can only get airborne with 130 from runway 32!

So you could only do the canaries by restricting payload (i.e. the number of passengers) That means the cost per passenger goes up and that makes the whole thing less attractive.

There is also the issue of time. An aircraft doing short hops within the UK or to closer mainland Europe destiantions will fly more sectors and probably make more money than a plane going to say TFS.

Thats why you don't see the area so well covered by the lo-cos.
I'm not at the number crunching end of the business (my title probably indicates where my knowledge lies!) but this is my (limited) understanding of the situation.

Never say never tho!

Hope that helps!

[14 loop]

Although what opsgeezer has said is undoubtedly true - I've been told that there is something specific to the type of CFM56 fitted to the batch of 300s operated by Jet2 (former Ansett machines) that preclude flights (with LBA's runway length) to the Canaries.

Note that 737-300s have previously operated direct to TFS & ACE from LBA (Air Europa being an example), however in such cases these have the more capable version of the '56 fitted. I've been told that the Jet2 aircraft can be made 'Canaries capable' but at a price!

Of course the 2 recent additions to the Channex inventory of 737-300s (to which 682ft AMSL refers) may already have this engine and might hint at their raison d'etre! However I now understand there are 2 former Ansett 737-300s stored in Singapore which might be our mystery machines (serial numbers 24302 & 24303) and one suspects they are of a similar ilk to their sisterships!

One wonders whether the addition of blended winglets might give the 300 enough legs to reach the Canaries? Remember that Air Plus Comet have such a machine.

Although TFS isn't a traditional LOCO destination, as opsgeezer states particularly in terms of sector length, that's not a big concern for Jet2. The announced winter programme still has loads of downtime for the fleet and there is ample capacity for a couple of weekly sorties to TFS & ACE based on 7 LBA units. When you consider that TFS seat only capacity will be lower this winter because of MYT reductions and the Planetair demise then there ought to be some punters out there.

Time will tell!

[opsgeezer]

The aircraft at LBA are all B2 powered. I believe that this is the tweak of which you speak!! If there is a further tweak I don't know. Perhaps the aircraft you spoke of had less seats?? - that would make a difference. "Untweaked" is even worse. The next aircraft to arrive, LE is rumoured to be B1 powered. If this aircraft were to be LBA based it would be limited to the shorter runs (BFS/AMS/CDG/maybe PRG at a stretch!)
It would be able to get back from some of the further away places with a full load but thats not an awful lot of help!!

As you spotted the aircraft in SIN are the new machines. As to what power rating they will have I don't know.

As for spare time on the fleet this winter, there's a fair bit of heavy maintenence coming up so don't be so sure that theres as much free time as you'd expect!

[14 loop]

Thanks opsgeezer for that detailed info.

I flew on a full Air Europa 737-300 Y148 many years ago LBA-ACE (on a flight that should have operated ex MAN but the fire staff strike caused it to divert to LBA along with an ELAL 707!!) and it operated direct. It was a cold winter's evening however and a mid summer day might have been a different proposition!

I've been doing a bit of homework and have found that there are 3 variants of the CFM56-3 , the B1 and B2 which you mention and also the C1. Respective max thrusts are 20,000lb, 22,000lb and 23,500lb. The B1 is fitted to just 300s & 500s, the B2 to either 300s & 400s and the C1 is available to all three variants. I imagine that a C1 engined 500 would be a bit of a hotrod!

Production has now ceased on the CFM56-3, however the information that I have read doesn't make it clear whether the different variants are achieved by a mod or whether it requires an engine change (if feasible). However there are probably enough C1s in storage in the US that could be donors.

Interesting info about this winter's heavy maint requirements. I still hope they are able to look at a few other destinations nevertheless!

[galley-wench22]

As I have been told by a couple of guys up the front... winglets reduce the cross wind landing limit, which would probably not be a good thing to have at LBA.

Also, LE is confirmed to have B1 powered engines. This a/c will be used on shorter runs, AMS/BFS and CDG, and also used as a standby a/c for other routes... loads permitting. I believe it is planned for LE to be a standby a/c for other channex bases too... not just for ex LBA ops.

[In trim]

Another factor which restricts many carriers is an artificially restricted MTOW to reduce on-route and landing charges. This means many carriers operate aircraft at a more restricted figure than is necessary.

This is easily rectified as it is effectively only a paperwork exercise. However, the route network needs to make it viable. If you only need the higher weights for 1 long sortie a week (I'm not suggest this is the case here, just an example), then you end up paying all the higher ATC and landing charges for all the other short sectors where it is not required.

Some operators have a range of 'heavyweight' and 'lightweight' aircraft to allow for this, rather than having all aircraft capable of the longer sectors which puts up the cost considerably.

[alterego]

Not totally sure about the economics of -400s, but aren't they expensive as you need 4 Cabin Crew for 168 Pax?

Average of @42/cc, whereas -300s are averaging @49/cc.

(-800s seat 189pax average @47/cc)

[BEST L/CONTROLLER]

That's right about the airlines reducing MTOW for landing charges etc!! the runway length at LBA is not a problem it's proved that in the past the problem is the MTOW JET2 B737-300 ave a MTOW of 59999KGS when I know other operaters using the same a/c at figures way over that, JET2 AGP flts a very restricted from LBA not coz of RWY length but because of MTOW they very rarley restrict the TOW for their departures however weather permitting it has been known I've had it, Typical take off fuel for JET2 737 to AGP is approx 10500 - 11000kgs and he will burn in between 7000 - 8000kgs and then he is very close to the boarder line with no restriction so there is know way a TFS will be done on a full flt unless they change the MTOW TFS flts usually burn 10000 - 12000kgs of fuel leaving them with a Take off fuel of 14000-16000kgs which my freinds they will be so over weight!!

CHEERS!!!!!!!!!!:ok:

[colegate]

There is a very simple solution to the range payload problem for the 737 out of restricted runways. Air Europe fitted its 733's with identically rated engines to those it used on the 734. This enabled non-stop operations from Skiathos to London. If Channex were to study this they would find that non-stop operations from LBA to Larnaca and the Canaries would be easy.

[Frankfurt_Cowboy]

Now I'm no engineer but is changing engines on all your aircraft "very simple"?

[BEST L/CONTROLLER]

Yes I agree but still they are using restricted take off weights for cheaper landing fees, now they could have the most powerfull engines in the world but untill they they lift the MTOW they're not going any further than AGP.

It's fact,

CHEERS!!!!!!:ok:

[BEST L/CONTROLLER]

Well I assure you that JET2 B737-300 lift more that 58000kgs from 32 it's happened quite a few times as a matter of fact.

CHEERS!!!!!!!:ok:

P.s Air Europa used to do it, but mind you we shouldn't use that shower of ****e as an example, they always used to give me incorrect fuel figures to show them under weight!!:ok:

[Tommyinyork]

Ok try and name any low cost airlines with a 757, thats not to easy is it, however the list for low cost airlines with 737s is endless. Why are 737s so popular i mean i have to say A230s are better planes.

[aeulad]

'low cost' (some low cost ish) airlines with 757s are/were/will be Greece Airways/Air Scotland, Song, Thaijet, Orient Thai, Smartjet and Flyjetgreen.

Regards

Mike