Aer Lingus - 6

[ayroplain]

Here we are 22 years later and EI now have a whole seven long haul aircraft and still only five (vs BA at 18 LHR + 3 LGW to the US) destinations, one of which is literally Mickey Mouse.

This is true but, in making your point, I think you have to remember that EI was not a proper airline. It existed solely for the convenience of the Government, the rich, its unions and staff so there was no incentive (or even reason) to expand it. The cosy arrangement with BA was an extension of that. It is equally important to remember that the Management and Board were people who knew little or, in most cases, nothing about aviation. Then a real airline, FR, came along, burst that bubble and bypassed all that nonsense. EI simply couldn't cope. It is extraordinary that EI had almost a half-century start on FR and yet they were spectacularly passed out.

Unfortunately, due to the intransigent unions and staff who were entrenched in cushy circumstances, trying to change proved a near impossibility not helped by more utterly inept management.

Nevertheless, and regardless of whether or not you fly with them, you have to agree that the current CEO is doing quite a good job given what he came into and the obstacles he has subsequently had to face. It must be soul-destroying for him having to get union agreement for even scratching his ass and, inevitably, progress has been very slow. But, there HAS been progress and I wish him well.

[akerosid]

Quoting ayroplain:

"This is true but, in making your point, I think you have to remember that EI was not a proper airline. It existed solely for the convenience of the Government, the rich, its unions and staff so there was no incentive (or even reason) to expand it. The cosy arrangement with BA was an extension of that. It is equally important to remember that the Management and Board were people who knew little or, in most cases, nothing about aviation"

With all due respect, I don't think that's entirely fair. It's certainly true to say that EI was largely controlled by the govt and it was kept under a firm thumb. I remember that time too and was active in the Shannon stopover issue at the time; I can tell you that there were a lot of EI people who knew very well the damage this was doing and how urgent it was to get rid of it; it was Maire Geoghegan Quinn who tried to silence EI employees from commenting on this (and ordered the then CEO, Cathal Mullen, to take disciplinary action against them - which thankfully never happened).

It is true to say that, had the stopover not been there, EI could certainly have expanded; at that time, ALC had a pretty large network in the UK, and it was ultimately its own shareholder which prevented this from happening; Aer Rianta, as you'll recall, was dead set against any change, largely because US bound pax could use its duty free shops twice, once at DUB, then at SNN. It would have been comical, were it not so serious.

It wasn't until Brian Cowen introduced the 50/50 split between DUB and SNN, in 1993, that the first crack in the wall of the SNN stopover appeared - and did the Shannon crowd bleat! (In fact, the 20th anniversary of the first nonstop is around now.)

Sure, there were things EI didn't do so well, but I think that credit should be given where due. I would certainly agree that EI is a better airline now than it has ever been and CM deserves praise for this, particularly given that EI is competing against Europe's most ruthless competitor.

[Omnipresent]

It's a niche and good on EI but a 757 reported to have 12 business class seats isn't going to cause many headaches at BA which sends 747s with 14 First Class, 70/52 business class and 30/36 premium economy seats.

[Paul_from_Dublin]

Quoting Akerosid

"I remember that time too and was active in the Shannon stopover issue"

Akerosid, I remember well reading many of your patient, persistant and reasoned posts on different forums about this. I'm pretty sure you played a significant role in getting that self-defeating stopover removed. Can't believe that was 20 years ago.

The subsequent growth in transatlantic services from Dublin has been modest and steady and continues to head in the right direction. Shannon successfully retained transatlantic ops on a more realistic basis and looks to have a sound future. BA, according some, don't miss the traffic that is now traveling via Dublin instead of Heathrow so all we need is for Cork to secure a direct US flight and everyone's a winner here.

[ryan2000]

It'd be interesting to know how many people travel to the U.S. from Cork on EI's code share with KLM via Schiphol and with BA via LHR. It would give some idea of the potential traffic on a direct route.

Also with the smaller aircraft on JFK EI mightn't be as dependent on the Cork's catchment to support the Shannon flight as was the case with the 747's and A330's

[EISNN]

Any truth to the rumour that EI might operate one of the 757's to AGP/FAO ex DUB following their arrival in from YYZ in the morning and will be back in time to go back over to YYZ in the afternoon? Neither make sense if you ask me as larger seat capacity A330 and A321 are operated on both routes in the morning already. Will they use the 757's in SNN to operate anywhere? Don't think there's enough time to operate either of them to any southern Iberian destination. Near European destination would be best option considering the arrival and departure times of the aircraft to and from BOS and JFK. Question is though, "where?" if at all?

[Aerlingus231]

Not exactly sure what benefit it would be to them, the 757s only have 177 seats in comparison to the A320's 174, and they'd burn a considerable bit more fuel. Perhaps if an A320 went tech they could slide in and do a rotation if there was the time remaining, but with such a low density layout, I can't see them using them in inter-European routes when they have the A320 and A321.

I'd understand if the 757s were high density with maybe 200-210 pax, but not 177.

[dublinaviator]

The seat capacity on the 757s will be about the same as Aer Lingus' A320s, so I can't see them downgrading from an A330 to a 757 on such a profitable route as AGP or even FAO. If there is a gap in the schedule I'm sure they'll find a use for it, but it definitely won't be AGP.

[ryan2000]

They might use one on SNN-FAO instead of doing a rather awkward W with a Cork based 320. As far as I know the cabin crew have to be transported back and forward by road.

[EISNN]

Thanks for that everyone. That's all what I was thinking myself. It was only a rumour I'd heard and it really didn't seem to make any sense to me either. It was just on an off chance but there might be some truth to a near european destination such as CDG, AMS or (wonders would never cease) BRU to SNN and onwards? I feel that those routes would not generate enough traffic and from a business man's point of view it mightn't be enough if it was meant to be a day trip. Not to mention that it would possibly take from DUB operations. Maybe even the old BFS-SNN-JFK route that was there before? Or maybe BHD? Can BHD take a 757?

[MCDU2]

There were rumours that a 75 could do ACE as it won't be runway limited. Full loads off the northerly runway with the wrong winds often result in a tech stop getting back to Dublin for the 320/1. Will have to wait and see what pans out.

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote: "This is true but, in making your point, I think you have to remember that EI was not a proper airline. It existed solely for the convenience of the Government, the rich, its unions and staff so there was no incentive (or even reason) to expand it. The cosy arrangement with BA was an extension of that. It is equally important to remember that the Management and Board were people who knew little or, in most cases, nothing about aviation."

You make it sound like AI! AI really has been screwed.

Quote: "It'd be interesting to know how many people travel to the U.S. from Cork on EI's code share with KLM via Schiphol and with BA via LHR. It would give some idea of the potential traffic on a direct route."

Any pax wanting to go the US from ORK on EI via DUB can no longer do so. IF these pax are connecting through LHR and/or AMS in droves then maybe it's a bit of an "own-goal" on EI's part?

[EI-BUD]

Not exactly sure what benefit it would be to them, the 757s only have 177 seats in comparison to the A320's 174, and they'd burn a considerable bit more fuel. Perhaps if an A320 went tech they could slide in and do a rotation if there was the time remaining, but with such a low density layout, I can't see them using them in inter-European routes when they have the A320 and A321.

The benefit might be that despite the extra fuel burn they will be able to add frequency where airbus aircraft are not available or deployed on another route.

"Can BHD take a 757"

There is a really interesting idea, BHD management would give their eye teeth to get a transatlantic flight in. This would need to be like LCY SNN JFK LCY operation, doing pre clearance at SNN. Given low punt of fuel on arrival and departure I think it might work, but I'm nog sure the economics would stack up .

[Michael Scott]

757 performance out of BHD would depend on the weather conditions and specifics of the route and ETOPs etc. but it's not as marginal as you would think with a full load. SNN pre clearence stop could be an option but it would need aggressive marketing. Getting 190 odd pax to leave their stuff to go out to pre clear and get them on again is something that could be a turn off for those that haven't endured a 2 hour wait in immigration before!

Another thing to bear in mind is the apron capacity at City - a 757 takes up two stands and with the apron running at over 100% at the moment it would take Aer Lingus or Flybe to reduce their base allocation to make it work. TCX have had 757 ops within the past few years though.

[flying officer kite]

They had a 757 in last month, and one in the 90s.

Its a really interesting suggestion for BHD. One of the biggest problems is that they dont have anywhere big enough at the terminal to feasibly park a 757.

I suspect that even the mighty 757 wouldnt have the oomph to get off the ground fully loaded for a transatlantic voyage, but i could be wrong. They have had fully laden 220 seater A321s fly out to Spain, and full Ryanairs to mainland UK.

Looking at other airports with similar runway lengths, like Bristol- they operated 757 services to Newark and even 767s to the Caribbean (even if one had a crumpled landing), but i presume being on a hill with no obstructions (not to mention yakking airport watch types) gives them better performance capabilities..?

[flying officer kite]

Hmm the TCX flights in Belfast City have always been 320s and 321s. Some of them Belgian registered

[CCR]

Think a far more practical option would be for Aer Lingus Regional to provide ATR services from BHD to Shannon to connect with flights to New York JFK, Newark, Boston, Chicago and Philadelphia.

Though with Aer Lingus`s negative attitude to reinstating Cork-Dublin flights which numbered up to 11 a day during the Celtic Tiger days, think we`ll be a long time waiting for either route

[El Bunto]

There were rumours that a 75 could do ACE as it won't be runway limited. Full loads off the northerly runway with the wrong winds often result in a tech stop getting back to Dublin for the 320/1. Will have to wait and see what pans out.

Even a tech stop can work out cheaper than running a 757 on a route; the Renton Rocket burns a good 1.5 tonnes more per hour than an A320 in cruise.

It can haul an extra 50 pax in high-density config but that can't outweigh 50% more fuel ( and that's a conservative figure ).

Overpowered == inefficient, sadly.

[VanBosh]

Accepted its very rare but next Sunday both flights to Boston are sold out in economy. Should EI not offer a connection via UA or Jet Blue?

[Aerlingus231]

Not all that rare, Flights last month across the Atlantic operated at a 96% load factor on average so there'd have been a few full flights going across. But indeed, probably better for them to offer a connection in JFK or ORD back to BOS, unless they're full too...