Its a shame that all Trans Atlantic Norwegian routes have been cancelled from Ireland, its an interesting model, but even with the MAX is challenged by poor utilisation. I think that just leaves the LGW operations? Ireland is a tough market with Aer Lingus (IAG) at one end with two-class A330/321/757s and the US3 at the other. EI and AA will likely have their JV in place from next summer. Wit the DL/VS/AF/KL and StarJV Point-to-Point service between secondary markets is a tough sell and fares are rock bottom this winter - I think the narrow-body operations might have a better chance flying into a US hub, or Dublin.

i think that BFS will be the surprise one to profit from all the eggs in one basket, all they need to do is market themselves correct and get the finger out to spend some money!, scotsman in charge always worrying lol

Same - more weight/payload (pax/cargo) loaded (ie wanting to take a full load of 189 pax non-stop) means less range available as more fuel is needed -- or you are TO weight restricted due any airport/runway limitations/WAT -

The 737 is not a Transatlantic load and long hauler LOL

You miss the point. TUI make money from the WHOLE package whereas Norwegian just have the flight i.e. TUI make money on resort spend, excursions, transfers etc etc

At the moment there is a recession happening, warning signs have been there for a while. Max issue allows a withdrawal from the market, maybe to return on another occasion or another operator to do so.

Indebtedness is worse than 2008, company debt is worse, national debt is worse and western world is slipping into a recession.

Max issue will help a lot of companies because it allows consolidation of routes and more importantly Boeing will be paying a lot of cash out.

what did that mean Brian_dromey, 'that just leaves the LGW opetations'?

Norwegian have a very extensive operation across the Atlantic from many cities like Paris, Amsterdam, Barcelona etc. Mostly centred on NYC and West Coast.
​​​​​​Maybe I'm misunderstanding.
​​

How do you figure that BFS will benefit from this?
It would be great if only it were true. Sadly, the long standing 757 run on UA didn't make a satisfactory return on investment and Norwegian were out like a shot. Norwegian have traditionally not been one to cut routes, but they didn't give BFS much time, that speaks volumes.

The bulk of NI passengers go to Dublin, enjoy US immigration preclearance and fly non-stop. Some go via LHR or AMS and some via MAN and LGW. I was on Aer Lingus BHD LHR and there were lots of passengers on the early flight going via LHR to the US...

EI-BUD

fair enough, but aer lingus managed a split run for years, i suppose in todays loco days 2 landing fees and 2 handling fees just won't work.

For how many years did Aer Lingus manage a Split Run​​​​ (by which I presume you mean flights originating in DUB and BFS meeting in SNN to swop onward pax to JFK and BOS)?
I only recall using it once.
For me, transatlantic from DUB is a no-brainer, although I did occasionally depart DUB and return to BFS (Continental/UA) to have local immigration/customs and short journey home on return
IMHO, there simply is no sustainable BFS transatlantic market other than a few summer holiday jaunts.
I think the carriers have established that as a fact

Airline Routes reporting this morning what could almost be described as a "cull" of their short-haul routes, some suspended and some cancelled. This suggests that they have far too many routes that are unsustainable from a financial point of view. Assuming that they will be either grounding or returning some of their aircraft to the leasing companies.

Many of the routes that are discontinued/not returning are the winter sun routes from Europe down to the Canary Islands, not ones you would expect to be cut.

Well it wasn't too long ago I was on a flight from Manchester to Tenerife with Norwegian in November and only 12 people onboard...

Heathrow Slots
 

I see that Norwegian have been awarded 3 slot pairs for Heathrow starting summer 2020.
I wonder what routes they will operate?
Summer season starts 29th March.

With 3 weekly return flights it is going to be one route if any.

Pointless eve trying at three weekly. If BA can match them on costs at Gatters with a 10 abreast B777, one wonders how higher cost LHR will work for Norwegian directly up against BA/AA, DL/VS and UA. Are they really going to chase bucket fares out of *Heathrow* on JFK? This is a pyramid scheme not an airline...

It's been suggested elsewhere that they would launch a 3 weekly Orlando.

I got excited when I read “three slots” as I stupidly assumed this was per day. Three a week is not quite as exciting. Can someone enlighten us as to what the timings granted are and what destination was used in the application?

It will most likely be a W pattern.

LGW > MCO > LHR > MCO > LGW

Given LHR is higher cost and MCO and high volume leisure destination with comparably limited business traffic, why add further costs by opening LHR. It's adding nothing but further costs to an existing LON-MCO rotation. Traditionally you move a long haul route to LHR to easier sell the front cabin, but I don't see much of a marginal difference on MCO vs LGW.

They are probably looking to attract passengers from North Greater London who prefer Heathrow. I know a relative who last year used Heathrow to go to Orlando via Charlotte with American rather than go to Gatwick. He and his family live in Watford. Also Heathrow is more convenient to get to from the South West and southern Wales and the Midlands.

And a long list of other places...

For the avoidance of doubt these are 3 slot pairs DAILY from next summer (from a well placed source inside DY), so a gamechanger for Norwegian and one which will have a bearing on the value of the company. They may well also be offered some 'slotsitting' opportunities as well so this could be a very smart timely move.

Not according to flightglobal.

"Heathrow's slot co-ordination organisation, ACL, has disclosed that Norwegian requested 14 weekly slots but has been given six, the equivalent of three weekly departures."

No this is false. And more so if you talk about the value of the company. Norwegian is most traded retail stock in Norway with wild swings of more that 10% per day on gossips or as they call them game changing news. The last fake news about SSJ order were shared as some secret inside info for weeks even after proven false.

Indeed. I spent a bit of time living in East Berkshire and from where I lived LHR was within 25 minutes driving time, compared to 1 hour for LGW if the M25 was clear. For most people living in North/North West/West London and for most living North/North West/West/South West of the M25, it is easier to get to LHR than it is to LGW. The market is there, but you wouldn't know it unless somebody tried it due to the well-documented slot constraints at LHR. There's also the fact that LHR is considered the primary London gateway.

Is this really the best use of slots.

Are we not veering away from a business market here ?

I thought LHR was supposed to be the prestige airport for London not the lo cost market ?

Actually I think LHR MCO will work for them. There are more than enough customers for a reasonably priced business class on that route and they will have no problem filling economy at a reasonable yield. After all, you don't really think that EK fills five A380s a day from LHR to DXB entirely with business passengers do you?

I see that they have off loaded the Argentinean operation.

No surprises there.

Norwegian's premium cabin is hardly "Business Class" though (admittedly its not Business class price either)

8 hours ago - Norwegian to wet-lease three A320s ch-aviation PRO exclusive. SmartLynx Airlines Airbus A320-200 © SmartLynx Airlines

Anybody know where these 3 A320's are to be based, what routes will they be on, and how long will Norwegian be leasing them for.

Thanks

Why do Norwegian need to wet lease aircraft ? I would venture that they need to be slimming their operation down and if necessary cutting routes, no matter what is happening to the 737 Max

Another question ... Why are so many 737s being SE- registered? The LN- and EI- fleets are both shrinking fast, yet the SE- fleet are operating the very same routes which would have been flown by EI- and LN- aircraft. What is the financial incentive?

Norwegian (DY) will base the leased A320s in OSL (2) and ARN (1).
Not sure for how long they will be leased for.
The routes served by the A320s from OSL will be AMS, BCN, BUD, CDG, GDN, KRK, MUC, NCE, PLQ, RIX, SXF, VIA, VNO, WAW
The routes served by the A320 from ARN will be ALC, AMS, CDG, FCO, KRK, PRG, RAK, RIX, SXF

Currently, the short-haul fleet for the group is as follows:
Norwegian (DY):
27x B738s and 3x grounded B38M

Norwegian Air International (D8):
53x B738 and 9x grounded B38M

Norwegian Air Sweden (LE):
18x B738 and 6x grounded B38M

A little out of date with the numbers Severn. The Norwegian Air Sweden B738 fleet is already at least 24!

Most came from the Norwegian Air Norway (NAN) fleet, which now seems to be down to just one aircraft (LN-NIB)

Heathrow Slots
 

I see we now have the answer to which destinations Norwegian are going to use the slots awarded to them at Heathrow, the answer is very straight forward and is no where.
They have returned the slots to ACL.

Share price of Norwegian is down 50% in the last 7 days. Easyjet by comparison is down just 20%

Yes, coronavirus is the root cause, but with a market cap of about £250m for the entire airline, this is really not healthy...