SOUTHEND 5
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't the ATR42 pretty much the same cost-wise as the ATR72 except for the second flight attendant ? (hence why the ATR42 is only selling small number for niche applications these days). Of course capital costs are another issue if the choice is between a knackered- written-down 1990 vintage ATR42-300 and a factory-fresh ATR72-600, but generally speaking the operating costs should not be that different - with the ATR72 giving the airline additional flexibility to cover peak-time demand.
The initial route negotiations were based upon the ATR42 both because its capacity seemed appropriate and also the ownership costs of new ATR72s were considered too great to be viable on such routes as CFR, GRQ and RNS.
I would agree that if ownership costs were similar the additional cost of using the 72 would probably not be too much above that of the 42.
I would agree that if ownership costs were similar the additional cost of using the 72 would probably not be too much above that of the 42.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Outer London
Age: 43
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All things being equal a switch to a ATR42 would see passenger numbers drop. The 42ish per flight is an average of course so some flights will be much busier, some much emptier. If you cap seats at 48, that is your new maximum. You would lose X pax. Also in theory you would be losing revenue from pax that would have bought the more expensive seats on the full flights.
AirportPlanner
I agree with you that the 72 gives you more potential in terms of gross revenue. However if it enables you to enjoy, say, 15% more revenue and yet your costs are 20% greater than on the 42 that hasn't helped your profitability. There are obviously some routes where the smaller aircraft is better suited and I think CFR and GRQ are among those. The smaller aircraft also enables you to offer greater flight frequency which can be a major contributor to a route's success.
I agree with you that the 72 gives you more potential in terms of gross revenue. However if it enables you to enjoy, say, 15% more revenue and yet your costs are 20% greater than on the 42 that hasn't helped your profitability. There are obviously some routes where the smaller aircraft is better suited and I think CFR and GRQ are among those. The smaller aircraft also enables you to offer greater flight frequency which can be a major contributor to a route's success.
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Expressflight
15% increase in revenue could be a greater sum than the 20% increase in cost.
However, there have been many posts on this thread about having the right aircraft for the job, so, given your knowledge, I think you definitely have a point.
I think there's a 'new broom' element at work here. 'Out with the old' etc. Seems to me the baby could be being thrown out with the bathwater.
15% increase in revenue could be a greater sum than the 20% increase in cost.
However, there have been many posts on this thread about having the right aircraft for the job, so, given your knowledge, I think you definitely have a point.
I think there's a 'new broom' element at work here. 'Out with the old' etc. Seems to me the baby could be being thrown out with the bathwater.
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Groningen, NL
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to regional news channel RTV Drenthe in the Netherlands, Flybe/Stobart will keep flying between Groningen and Southend in the winter. According to this article, the weekly frequency will go from 8x/week to 6x/week: the six evening flights (daily except Saturday) will continue, only the Tuesday and Thursday morning flights would be cancelled.
The flights will be added to the booking system this week, according to a Groningen Airport spokesperson.
Ochtendvluchten lijndienst tussen Londen en Eelde verdwijnen - RTV Drenthe
The flights will be added to the booking system this week, according to a Groningen Airport spokesperson.
Ochtendvluchten lijndienst tussen Londen en Eelde verdwijnen - RTV Drenthe
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The article also mentions that the route funding has expired and that now the airport will provide "marketing support". So probably some sort of power game involving a threat to axe the flights.
Which all highlights the risk of jumping to premature conclusions...
If the GRQ route continues they will need an extra ATR at SEN because there is no space for an extra rotation by the aircraft planned for MAN and RNS.
Just a thought (maybe irrelevant )when is the expiry of the lease of those two -500s to Flybe for IoM services?
If the GRQ route continues they will need an extra ATR at SEN because there is no space for an extra rotation by the aircraft planned for MAN and RNS.
Just a thought (maybe irrelevant )when is the expiry of the lease of those two -500s to Flybe for IoM services?
If true I think this represents a change of mind on the part of Stobart. Everything I had heard up to now indicated that CFR and GRQ would definitely be dropped for the winter.
It will certainly be interesting to see where the capacity to operate the flights comes from.
It will certainly be interesting to see where the capacity to operate the flights comes from.