Can someone who has access to real figures provide some insight into the reality of the loads on our route?

Don't like the ones you're being provided I assume Owen?

I know the loads are poor but there are several factors for that. Hopefully things will pick up once it gets established and people realise that Stewart isn't that far out of NYC. Perhaps as options grow onwards from SWF or when the big new Legoland opens next door and families start to make trips there etc... I just can't see why using the plane to near Europe on either a new location or an established one would be that much more of a risk than just leaving it sitting for 6 hours in BFS. I feel it will take a bit of speculation to come up with an answer

2nd based A320 for EZY
 

Looks like the 2nd A320 will be based a little earlier than i thought... seems to be based from around the 7th February 2018 instead of the end of March.

3x A319 & 2x A320 based :ok:

Looks like Geneva flights on Saturdays from 10th February will be using the 2nd A320! Plenty of seats available to Geneva now with the 3rd daily flight added the other week on Saturdays!

Even cdg is 5 hrs round trip, Scandinavia would be even further away, cant see it happening folks unless they arrive in earlier eg 05 06

A nice short domestic would do - say NCL! :ok:

Or Stansted.

The only official stats we have are CAA for July.

SWF had an average load of 138 pax (74%)
PVD had an average load of 110 pax (59%)

The load factor would of course be higher if some of those flights had a max load limit of less than 186 seats, as happened with some B737-800 flights.

To compare, EDI-SWF had an average load of 143 pax (77%) and EDI-PVD had an average load of 129 pax (69%).

PVD was 738 and SWF 738 MAX.

It's a new business model that may or may not work, Dublin is doing really ditto EDI, not every route will work, some may grow frequency others may fail.

I don't think the aircraft type is to blame, the lack of an up front product will put some off when their employer is footing the bill, some of the flight time are point to point quicker than other options

employers and buisness travel are not really the target market here.
If the capacity is not 100 % load factor, im not sure why its being limited by seat cap?

Because of range issues.

The 737-800 has the capacity restrictions, however the 737 MAX does not.

So, PVD is near 70 %!

No because the operation switches between MAX and NG

MAX only started flying on the PVD service this month and was only on a couple of flights.

Who is the idiot in charge of marketing at Belfast international airport! On twitter there is an advert advertising a beach break with easy jet with the slogan "Orlando is overrated anyway"! Does this person not realise that Virgin have a 6 month program to Orlando from bfs next year! They are basically saying Orlando is crap! Also if you look st the amount posts to travel with Norwegian it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that the two routes are clearly struggling. And iv been to Stewart and it's not that easy getting to New York.

The MAX & NG have the same lift & fuel capacity, both are now ETOPS, the max is of course heavier and it's a Cat 'D' aircraft for minima.

The only real benefit of the max is lower fuel burns saving at best 250kg per hour so even on a 6 hour flight it's only 1500kg

On OTS routes you'll normally be capped at 340 going west and then climb to 380 after the exit point so around 165 -170 is the practical pax limit, east bound isn't an issue, but either way I suspect that the A321NeoLR will be more suited

Taken across all routes ( PVD BDL SWF) to/from (BFS DUB SNN ORK EDI BGO) it's doing ok, there is bound to be some tweaking, I think DUB will work year round, I'm less certain of the BFS point to point market and onward connections inbound to BFS are far less than DUB

Fuel saving is around 2.5 tonnes per flight, so 5 tonnes per return trip, give or take for weather etc

Its like hitting your head against the wall at times, one step foward two back😲