Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Easyjet to buy 120 A319s, with options for another 120 a/c

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Easyjet to buy 120 A319s, with options for another 120 a/c

Old 14th Oct 2002, 17:16
  #41 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Copenhagen
Age: 46
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good News for Airbus!

Easyjet refer to Jetblue in a statement regarding Low Cost. I flew with Jetblue from FLL and turnaround times varied from 30min to 1hr in some cases, didn't notice Jetblue making 20m turns. Most JB flights last for over 2-3 hours.

The question is from a ground handling point of view "Is it possible to turn a A319 in 20min"

Simple things like

Baggage: Loading? EZY 737's didn't get belt loaders at my last station, the 733 was low to the ground and only the 73G required extra effort. How higher is the A319 of the ground? Would this slow the turn down?

Which is quicker to fuel? A319 or Boeing 733/73G these minutes and seconds count on a 20min turn.

I'm sure there are lots of other things but in the longrun i think they will make it work and good luck to them and all you guys who will fly it.
cabbott1 is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2002, 17:22
  #42 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London,England
Posts: 1,391
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
There will definitely be a disadvantage to having no airstairs, but if easy keep on top of their handling agents it shouldn't prove to be too much of a problem.
Who says they won't have airstairs. It is an option if they want it, the first BA (ex BCAL) 320's have airstairs, costs a few quid (minus easyjet discount of course) and weighs about 300kg. Worth it if you use them a lot, if you mainly park on jet ways then it's not worth hauling the extra weight around for 25 years.
Max Angle is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2002, 17:26
  #43 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BAs A319 reliability is excellent. There are a few repetitive teething problems as its a relatively new aircraft with the V2500 engines, but most either sort themselves out in time (eg packs slow to come on line) or just require a quick reset of a circuit breaker. Technical delays on despatch are few and far between and when things go wrong its usually just a computer that needs swapping. As for the quick turnarounds its exactly as 52049er states. We regularly do 25 minute turnarounds or less, with the critical path (so to speak) getting the cleaners & caterers off so the pax can board, or loading the holds. Belt loaders are nice but not necessary as I've seen a couple of stations just back a flatbed truck up to the hold and lob the bags in. Airstairs were fitted to our original 320s so perhaps they could be ordered as an extra for the 319? The flight deck itself can be fully prepped and programmed by one person in under ten minutes with ease. Squeezing 156 pax on shouldn't even be difficult. The BA aircraft are certified up to about 147 pax. If you put charter seats in and deleted the forward wardrobe and galley 156 should be easy, plus you'd have 3 lavs to boot! On top of all that its a comfortable aircraft to fly with a spacious, well thought out, quiet flight deck, two proper jump seats that you don't have to build yourself.
Hand Solo is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2002, 17:48
  #44 (permalink)  
Plumbum Pendular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Avionics Bay
Age: 55
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Max Angle,

Very true, I hadn't considered that they might, I have heard that the airbus airstairs are sh*t, but have no reliable information on that!!!
fmgc is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2002, 18:38
  #45 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2002
Location: preston
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ezy at blk

found out today that easy looked at using blackpool instead of liverpool when the airline first started. the management at blk werent interested! and how many airlines use blackpool?
canberra is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2002, 18:45
  #46 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: the dark side
Posts: 1,122
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
easyjet have indeed used Blackpool a couple of times in the past!, not many people have mentioned the other big issue, the amount of jobs and job stability throughout europe this will create, big credit points for easy to get access to new routes!.

As a slight diversion I see simba101 aka the guv is back, interesting to see that his earlier prediction about GO outlasting easyJet was 100% wrong!

Last edited by jumpseater; 14th Oct 2002 at 19:10.
jumpseater is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2002, 19:40
  #47 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: London Whipsnade Wildlife Park
Posts: 5,041
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
156 easySeats on an easyBus!

Delete First Office add passenger (Premium priced seat with good views). Delete 3 cabin crew add 3 passengers who get their seats cheaper by selling from the easyKiosk. 2 nearly free seats on the loos.

There you go 156 on a 150 seater!

Hope they order Cat 3b equipment.
Buster the Bear is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2002, 20:07
  #48 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dallas, TX USA
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Boeing press release...

Boeing Statement in Response to the Loss of the easyJet Campaign

SEATTLE, Oct. 14, 2002 - easyJet, the United Kingdom-based low-fare carrier, today announced it had ordered 120 Airbus A319s. Boeing had offered them 120 Next-Generation 737s.

"Boeing took this campaign very seriously and fought it aggressively." said Toby Bright, vice president of Sales, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "Any sale loss is painful, of course, but win or lose, we value our customer relationships. EasyJet is an important customer. We are proud to be a part of their success thus far and will continue to work with them in the future.

"Given the success of the 737 among low-cost carriers, we believe that Airbus offered easyJet a price lower than Boeing was willing to go. When you add the apparent guarantees on maintenance and transition costs, it seems that the competition was a "must-win" at any cost for them."

Even without this order, the numbers show that worldwide, the 737 is the preferred airplane of low-cost carriers. The low-fares model of Southwest Airlines and Ryanair that is copied around the world is based on operating an all Boeing 737 fleet. There are some 900 737s either in service or on order for the low-fare market compared to just around 100 of the competitor's aircraft. The Next-Generation 737s have the lowest operating costs in their class - almost 4 percent lower on a typical route than the closest competitor. The maintenance costs of the 737 are up to 35 percent cheaper. The 737 is the industry leader in reliability. The 737 is also quicker to load and unload, which allow carriers to make maximum use of their aircraft.
Flight Safety is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2002, 20:43
  #49 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: A very long runway
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't know the bare facts but i can't see why the 73 should be cheaper to operate. It certainly isn't my airlines experience. During the 70's and 80's the Ford Cortina was the preferred fleet car for most businesses, it was cheaper to run because of the stranglehold it had established in the market which in turn forced parts manufacturers to produce a lot of bits at cheaper cost. Ford could make loads and guarantee sales, make more at a cheaper unit cost. Volume generally = cheaper costs. Ford then binned the cortina and introduced a new model the sierra and presto overnight lost their domination and rivals gained more of a foothold.
Overall i think that this reliability issue is a misnoma, the 'in general' recent introduction of the bus to engineers with years of experience on 73's etc has meant that they were learning on the job. My airline had the same issues, a few years on with more experience we now know about the packs and the odd cb reset which no longer delays departures. I remember waiting over an hour in the early days to try and fix a 'faulty pack' but these days we just leave it alone and it comes on line.
73 quicker to unload, ,load and turn round - not in my experience! Quicker than a 320 and 21 perhaps because they carry more punters! Own stairs can be specified as an option and we operate some with, some without. Those with are a real bonus at busy places in the height of summer, especially FAO where they charge a fortune for the airbridges.
The deal is probably a had to win price, but so what? More aircraft about = cheaper in the long run and a sustainable long term - the bus will do exceptionally well. Having spent years in 737's all of our pilots prefer the working environment of the bus, initially some old captains are sceptical because they knew the 73 inside out and were suddenly launched into the computer age. Now they love it and that table is a godsend. For easy i reiterate that with the same type rating for their pilots it has enabled them to start laying plans for the future to up their capacity and target other routes for the low cost treatmentt hat would make a 737 uneconomic by virtue of enabling the same yield. The costs of a 321 against a 319 are not dissimilar and these aircraft operated in the low cost style will make them even more competitive down to the big paying routes such as AGP, FAO and ALC.
What i wonder about is as the low cost operations grow in size is how they will prevent the spiralling costs that may be associated with that same growth.
Still although Ryan is irish it has relied on the UK market to grow and demonstrates to europe that we are leading the way. Shame our primary airports are shambolic and handicapped by public inquiries etc. Hopefully though this will keep the regional bases growing so we can all live in the regions and still fly a decent jet.
Let's all get behind easy as they prosper and offer pilots with significant outstanding debts from financing their training the opportunity to achieve their goal. The face of aviation has changed for good, the glory days of BA have gone. No final salary and all pilots on similar T's and C's rather than a few very senior 744 captains whose seniority allows them to draw 6 figure salaries and only work a few days a month - then saddle the business with an astronomical pension requirement. Met a 56 year old ex hamble cadet the other day said his pension was 74k and was considering an offer to become a TRE with Easy on a similar salary!!
Please don't accuse me of being bitter, good luck to them but that is no longer sustainable. The market is more orange to joe punter than a favorite airline market.

Ranted on for long enough! Last time i wrote this many words was my english o level! With 6000 hrs and over 2000 in the bus but still at least 4 years to command the future is looking more and more orange!!

Best wishes to everyone - Long time dead so enjoy it while you can!

Last edited by MaxAOB; 14th Oct 2002 at 20:58.
MaxAOB is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2002, 22:01
  #50 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Every member of the A320 Family comes with Cat IIIB as standard and always has. No need for a HUD unless your going into non-equiped airfields.
By-the-by, 150 seats in the A319 comes at 30" pitch, 156 squeezes it up a bit but 150 is more comfortable than anything else in the LCC market today.
saman is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2002, 22:12
  #51 (permalink)  
I had an arsehole transplant but the arsehole rejected me, which is why I write such rubbish
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In reply to Cabbot, most JB flights are not between 2-3 hours. They have 3 primary markets: NY- Florida, NY- West Coast and intrastate NY. These fights within NY might take 30 mins. MAX.

Getting back to the discussion, did Boeing ever stand a chance? With Airbus having the support of the EU governments, they should have offered a lower price and did. Boeing is a large company, but no company can compete against a multi-national coalition. Those are the facts.

BTW, I'm not a Boeing supporter, I prefer the Airbus too. Gives an illusion of more space. Having said that, I'm just calling it the way I see it.

whatshouldiuse is offline  
Old 14th Oct 2002, 23:10
  #52 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: EGKK
Age: 43
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Your home state is bigger than you think, jetBlue's shortest run (JFK, NY to Syracuse, NY) is 01:05 in duration. Longest runs out to Oakland at 06:15 duration.

The Florida flights are roughly 02:30 each way, with San Juan routes touching 04:00 per sector and the rest of the west coast routes 5:00 to 6:00.

Pretty versatile aircraft the 320 huh?

Average sector length of 2-3 hours sounds about right to me anyway.
Localiser Green is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2002, 01:20
  #53 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Unusual to hear so many "pilots" say they prefer Airbus?
Airbus' philosophy is radical and deeply flawed in its man-machine interface which primarily engages the weakest sensory channel of the poor pilot/system operator,namely the optical channel.Maximum power is not available in the event of an emergency.The autothrust system is nuts.Endless protection features lead to over-confidence in the system(always a bad thing in aviation) and over-reliance on automation.Airmanship and manual flying skills are eroded if the pilot has flown a conventional a/c beforehand;and if he hasnt,then he wont need them anyway.The whole design centers around the desire to reduce the pilot to a system monitor.But they forgot that humans dont excel in this role at all. What makes you so happy?

Boeing's design is simplicity itself;man-machine interface is uncluttered.No second-guessing.Its all about "what does the pilot want".
The sad thing is that a lot of pilots today dont mind NOT being pilots.
Did easyjet consider the pilot's opinions before making their decision or was it strictly based on economics?
Rananim is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2002, 01:50
  #54 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have to say upfront that I am a big Boeing fan for a lot of reasons but that does not mean that Airbus cannot compete with the Boeings for LLC's. I do have to point out that the comments in the various postings referring to the Bus wider aisles and more spacious cabins are a bit misleading especially when you pack 156 pax into the 319. Sure they are a little bigger but with that pax density it won't mean a thing.

Airbus may have well bought the order and may have needed to do that to crack the LCC market - time will tell. Boeing has taken a few big blows over the last year both in the commercial and military aircraft sectors, hopefully next year will be kinder.
GeofJ is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2002, 03:16
  #55 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Asia
Age: 74
Posts: 2,284
Received 37 Likes on 13 Posts
<By-the-by, 150 seats in the A319 comes at 30" pitch, 156 squeezes it up a bit but 150 is more comfortable than anything else in the LCC market today>

Isn't 30'' pitch the BA 744 economy pitch? If so, seems more than adaquate for short haul.
ZFT is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2002, 07:15
  #56 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: EGKK
Age: 43
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

If I remember rightly 32" is the typical BA 747 economy seat pitch. 30" isn't bad for shorthaul thought IMO.

Remember MyTravelLite still squeeze 180 into the A320-200, at 28" pitch throughout. And they are a "low-cost airline"... right?
Localiser Green is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2002, 08:34
  #57 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: North of London
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs down

Rananim, very intersting post on the nature of Airbus design philosophy. But, I have been at easyJet for 5 years, and I can tell you without doubt, they don't consult their pilots on anything!!!!!
Colonel Klink is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2002, 08:39
  #58 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: london
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looks like it all came down to simple economics.
mjenkinsblackdog is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2002, 09:04
  #59 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: @ a loss
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Ah Rananim,

It must be at least a couple of years since we last sparred in a Boeing/Airbus debate. I had assumed that you had grown up, joined the rest of us in the 21st century, and moved on from your unfortunate and wholly misinformed attitude to Airbus products. It appears though that you have not. To you, therefore, I have nothing further to say.

To those who have the ability and willingness to embrace newer ideas I offer the following.

I have not flown the B737. I have, however, flown the MD83, the B757, and the A320/321. I have been flying the A320/321 for ten years and have almost 7000 hours on type. I fly from both seats.

It is a delight to fly. It has Cat 3B as standard (subject to operator approval from the regulator). It has excellent field performance from shortish runways (Blackpool to TFS, no problem), and the A319 ought to be even better. It is reliable. We operate in the UK charter market, and my base is the busiest in the company, getting world beating utilisation year round. On the A320 we have achieved a 25 min turnround with full change of 180 Pax, bags, catering, and crew plus fuel uplift. our normal turnround is longer, but short turnrounds are entirely feasable if you put your mind to it. All our fleet is fitted with brake fans, so brake cooling time is not an issue.

I still miss the airstairs from the MD83, but these are an option on the Bus, I hope Easy have taken them.

Rananim is not the only person who likes to bad mouth the Bus, of course, but when we converted a heap of B757 chaps and chappeses to to it this year, most were enthusiastic about their new steed. Some are going back to the Boeing, but primarily for lifestyle/basing reasons.

At the end of the day, the beancounters have made this decision, but I commend the current generation of airbus products to any pilot worthy of the title 'Professional'. Bigoted luddites, however, need not apply!
Bus14 is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2002, 10:28
  #60 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,201
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A couple of issues that come into my mind regarding the purchase.

1. Do the airports where ej operates have high loaders. If they do then I would think that fast turnarounds should not be a problem since LD3-46 should be really fast to handle in comparaison with a buch of luggage.

2. My feeling - I guess unfounded is that A319 can not take the same beating a B737 can take. Maybe because it is lighter maybe because it is more sofisitcated... I don't know but I would welcome any commnets.

3. It seems AI would fincance the additional cost of operating an additional type.

4. Finally under the current climate it is more difficult to get an order rather than to fullfill it. Airbus get an order to keep its production line up and running while Boeing should hunt for orders to do the same.

A big cheer for ej that buys aircraft in the middle of a recession in order to have them available for the next boom in travel.

I agree that 150 seats are tight in A319 let alone 156. How about the need for a new certification due to larger number of pax.

Oops I overdid it

Rwy in Sight
Rwy in Sight is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.