kick the tires - the operating costs of an easyJet A319 are substantially lower, but of course they take less punters. Without wishing to ignite the Airbus v Boeing debate, both companies would claim their operating costs are less when comparing a 320 to a 738. Even more difficult to know the truth over are the costs of operating a 737 Max v the A320NEO. Norwegian have taken the decision to hedge their bets and do both - not sure that has efficiency written on it, but that is the game plan. I accept the production slot argument (the same one that made easyJet by A319s instead of A320s). Nonetheless, it is simply not low cost 'best practice' to run two fleets with all the duplication of effort that entails, not to mention the reduction of flexibility in terms of cross utilisation of crews. Anyway, that is their decision, and we will see who is right.
LNIDA
Thanks for that info. The 738 figures I quoted I think are actually correct as the rest are 300s or similar. I am not aware of any Airbus recruitment being started by them yet, but however they do it they will have to attract TREs and the like - my view is that without a substantial inducement that will not happen. I am not planning to go there, but any upwards pressure on salaries is good news for us all. The big 'boom or bust' decision by Norwegian is to reach 220+ aircraft in 6 years. That will prove to be either amazingly insightful or a complete disaster - I am not at all sure it will be a smart move but we shall see. Low cost airlines run on amazingly tight margins and even the decision to de-ice can destroy the profit for a flight. Therefore 1% fuel burns, wi-fi, video on demand etc is all added cost that is again totally opposed to the low cost traditional model. Have Norwegian got it right? I personally do not think so, but I may yet be proven wrong. There is no doubt they are making a big splash but, being a cautious individual, I would not be betting my house on their ultimate success.