Row 12 & 14 on the 737-300 are good seats, they both have 33" of legroom and at no extra cost, apart from the two window seats on 14 which are chargeable. Obviously these seats do get a bit more noise/engine vibration. As far as I'm concerned, can't beat the front row of any aircraft. The further away from the rudder the better! Obviously it's personal preference, no doubt one of the reasons advanced seat selection is so popular!

The "ageing" fleet comments barrage this thread constantly! At the end of the day Jet2.com regardless of fleet age makes profit every year and in general passengers seem happy with the service and often make nice comments on disembarkation. Yes the aircraft are getting on a bit but as most of the people who make the comments about getting new aircraft know, brand new aircraft cost hundreds of millions just for one! so there would be no jet2 left if they just said oh lets buy 25 new aircraft! They are gradually aquiring more 737-800 aircraft every year which are highly efficient. At the end of the day delays happen to every airline no matter what age their aircraft are and personally knowing the jet2 engineers they do a fantastic job of maintaining the aircraft and never compromise safety in any way!!

The interiors of all our aircraft are newly fitted with slim seats that dont recline and have more legroom than thomson and thomas cook (shorthaul). In general passengers love this as one of the gripes of anyone is having someone recline in their face and cut off their legroom! Yes going abit off topic here but just trying to reiterate that Jet2 aircraft are old but they are well maintained and generally have little problems!! having flown for 6 years with them trust me i wouldnt fly on them if they werent safe!

Lsflyer
 

Totally agree except for one point.

Yes they do, but you can lease them.


The biggest danger to Jet2 as I see it, is that if they suffer a hull loss with an ageing aircraft, it could wipe them out completely ala Valujet.

Cant believe no one has not picked up the fact that it was 10 years today that Channel Express owners Dart Group PLC announced that it was setting up a low cost airline call jet2 with flights operating from Leeds-Bradford using A fleet of Boeing 737-300C aircraft.

That only makes them more expensive. Jet2 owns the aircraft and they are cheap airframes so that makes it possible to park them in the winter. Leases will kill you because you will have more expensive airframes plus a bank that wants to make a healthy margin on it too!

That is total non sense. Valuejet had a string of problems BEFORE the crash and was under FAA scrutiny BEFORE the crash. The crash had nothing to do with an ageing airframe but with a MX contractor sending oxygen generators in an unsafe condition

In short total [email protected]! :rolleyes:

Does BA not have some 30 year old aircraft?

Would love to think so. They do already have cargo flights to Stansted ocassionally so would be great to get passenger flights. They'd be a good competitor to Ryanair on the Spanish (mainland, Balearic's and Canaries)Greek and Cypriot routes and EasyJet on the Turkish and Croatian routes and would also fill in the gap left by easyJet who have cut back quite drastically recently (but never announced it, unlike Ryanair!).

I'd always say when asked that question in the past, that I can't see it happening however it does seem more likely than a Monarch move to Stansted (since they already have Gatwick and Luton) and Stansted would probably be the best London airport for Jet2, since Gatwick is already over-crowded with leisure flights to the typical Alicante, Palma, Tenerife, Heraklion, Dalaman, Paphos etc. Stansted could actaully benefit with more capacity and more competition on these type of services!

The oldest aircraft in BAs fleet are around the 22 year mark, with the oldest of the 747-400s, although some of the first of these have now been scrapped. The 737-400 are around the 18 year mark and are due to be replaced by winter 2014.

Longest serving current 737-400 with BA is G-DOCB, delivered on 16th Oct 1991, so 21 years old last week. 747-400 G-BNLE wins though, delivered on 15th Nov 1989, so almost 23 years old. The 767s aren't far behind, with G-BNWB being delivered on 8th Feb 1990.

Jet2's 733s made their first flights between Aug 86 (G-CELP) and May 98 (G-GDFK - started out with BA strangely enough), while the 757s first took to the skies between Sep 87 (G-LSAG) aand Nov 96 (G-LSAK).

For what it's worth I wouldn't hesitate to get on any of them!

Yes, and on the Nice Airport Arrivals and Departures part of their Website - ten years on - it's still listed as Channel Express -very confusing for anyone meeting arriving passengers.
I thought companies were always very proud of their 'Brand' -surely somebody could be tasked to get this changed ?

No RYR For Me
 

With respect, you have totally misunderstood the points in my post.

First, the point about aircraft leasing. My point (in response to a previous post highlighting the high cost of purchasing new aircraft), was nothing more than leasing being an alternative to outright purchase. I made absolutely no comment as to whether leasing is a suitable way of fleet replacement for any airline.

In repect of Valujet. Again I made no comment whatsoever connecting the CAUSE of the Valujet accident with the age of the aircraft. The cause is well documented and, as you say, had sod-all to do with the aircraft's age.
My point related to the EFFECT of the accident in that when any airline who in the mind of the travelling public is associated with ageing aircraft, and actually suffers a major hull loss (and loss of life as in the case of Valujet) irrespective of cause, the EFFECT is catostophic on the airline in terms of passenger loss of confidence.

Under these circumstances I find your harsh comments unwarranted.

I agree TSR2...If Jet2 had a B737 or 757 down..Fingers would be pointed at the age of the aircraft.

In fact with without an a/c down, the fleets age is a popular topic for some on this forum.

It's not the age of the a/c that counts, it's the quality of the maintenance engineers.

My point: Leasing a new airplane is as expensive if not more expensive than buying and financing a new airplane. Why take on expensive assets that you don't use in the winter....

No, that is only put in the mind of the travelling public by people scaremongering on "professional" pilot forums. At the same time curious pax is spot on that a lot of airlines fly older airplanes. It is all down to economics and maintenance. Airlines don't buy new fleets based on the planespotter comments as mentioned in this thread.

Rant over :rolleyes:

I disagree. If an airline suffers a major loss, the media will make sure that all the world knows the history of that airline.

Venice usually shows as "Channel Express" too.

Look at airlines around the world like air france and BA they have had some very high profile accidents with very new planes. It doesnt matter about the age it matters about the people who fly and maintain them, in which case Jet2's engineers and pilots are some the most professional and friendly in the business! i would have no problem going to them to alert them to a problem whereas some airlines they would be scared to ring the flight deck!

For widebodies perhaps, current delivered prices for A320/737-800 around $45m and for A319/737-700 around $38m.

Rental factors for new aircraft are around 0.82%/month giving a rental for a new A320/737-800 of approximately $370,000 per month and, for the A319/737-700, approximately $312,000 per month. So, very much more expensive than used 737-300s and, unless you can maintain very high year-round utilisation, difficult to justify a switch into new equipment. Hence, I guess, why used 737-800s being added to the fleet. However, the "bargain of the month" must be used A319s which are available at very low lease rates - even for relatively young aircraft - and I would have thought would make the perfect 737-300 replacement in due course even allowing for type difference).

What's the problem with some of the posters on this thread? You see them posting regularly denigrating Jet2.Just scroll through the posts, same names over and over again.It's like a big willy waving contest.Our engineering base,our engineers are better than yours.Our aircraft are newer .cleaner and smell better than yours.Same crap repeated as though if you say it often enough it must be true.Jet2 may fly with older aircraft but they are well maintained.The new refurbished cabins are comfortable and look nice.If problems do occur and they will and don't forget similar problems occur with airlines who have newer fleets. Jet2 resolve the problem while looking after the passengers.That cannot be said for some airlines.Ten years since they started with 1 aircraft and now have over 40.Last year flew over 4 million passengers from 8 bases flying 145 routes which must tell you something which is passengers like to fly with Jets2 and their older aircraft.So if the success of Jet2 and they do make a profit as well is too much for you to accept live with it.

Impressive news on JET2's summer bookings, as reported in the Financial Times on Saturday last:

Shares in Dart Group, which runs the Jet2 budget airline and package holiday group, rose after miserable weather and tightened family finances resulted in a surprisingly strong summer holiday season. Passenger numbers at its Jet2holidays package division almost doubled year-on-year to 312,000 as families opted for all-inclusive deals when trying to escape the wet summer (FT).

I wonder if Jet2 would be interested in re-starting the MAN-LGW route now that BA have pulled out, or is it a route more suited to easyjet.