PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Flybe-9
Thread: Flybe-9
View Single Post
Old 17th Jan 2018, 12:24
  #198 (permalink)  
A320.b744
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Flybe will NOT replace their Q400 fleet with jets for several reasons.
a) Flybe is primarily a regional airline flying short, high frequency, business routes. This requires the use of smaller aircraft, meaning the only viable options would by the CRJ700 and E170/175, both of which are much more expensive to operate than the Q400.
b) Flybe's average sector length is 311 miles (1hr25), and at this time jet models reduce flight time by just 0hr10. The extra fuel costs are not worth such a small reduction in flight times.
c) Flybe will not change their business plan. They have relatively little competition on their routes, and no other business model would allow the airline to operate as many domestic routes as it does.

What people seem to forget is that Flybe is not a leisure airline, it is primarily a business airline. In addition, Flybe's European leisure routes are one of the reasons why the airline is in financial difficulty. If Flybe could get rid of their entire E195 fleet immediately and axe their leisure network, they would do so in a heartbeat. Q400 operations can sustain the vast majority of their operations, including a number of European business destinations.

Just by comparing Flybe's Q400 operations with easyJet's A319 operations on key domestic routes shows why Flybe will not upgrade to larger aircraft.

Belfast-Manchester

Flybe: BHD-MAN x41 weekly (Q400) 1hr00
Weekly seats: 6,396
Annual seats: 332,592
Load factor: 80.1%

easyJet: BFS-MAN x18 weekly (A319) 0hr55/1hr00
Weekly seats: 5,616
Annual seats: 292,032
Load factor: 86.7%

If Flybe were to upgrade their Q400 fleet, they would have two options;
a) keep same number of weekly seats, and adjust frequency
b) keep frequency, and adjust number of weekly seats

Results;
a) 6,396 weekly seats would mean an A319 (156) would operate x21 weekly flights, and a CS100 (125) would operate x26 weekly flights. Both options see Flybe's convenient timetable almost cut in half, which would negatively affect the airline's (primarily business) passengers.
b) Flying the route x41 weekly would lead of 10,250 weekly seats if operated by a CS100 (125), and 12,792 weekly seats if operated by an A319 (156). Flybe currently have a load factor of 80.1% on the route - almost doubling capacity on the route without increasing the frequency would be crippling.
A320.b744 is offline