Why do Low Cost carriers favour the Boeing 737
According to Boeing, its manufacturer, the make is the world's “most popular and reliable commercial jet transport” while the narrow body 737 is its best selling model. Boeing says that “cash operating costs” are nearly four per cent less than its closest competitor, the A320 series, in part due to its superior structural efficiency.
structural efficiency...hmmmm 79 Southwest 737s grounded whilst they look for fatigue cracks
18-foot chunk of fuselage ripped off an Aloha Airlines Boeing 737 in mid-flight
1999 (FAA) ordered operators of certain Boeing 737 aircraft to inspect for and correct possible fatigue cracks in the plane's aft pressure bulkhead, which is located near the aircraft's tail.
The answer to that is simple
It is the best aircraft for the job, and it is notable that the most profitable low cost carriers operate it, rather than the European equivalent.
Maybe so at this point, but with ageing 737s and the fatigue problems, I would bet on some of the carriers will start looking at the Embraers and Airbus to replace the 737s. With the A320neo selling well this could persuade a switch
Well EasyJet is pretty happy with the Airbus A320, aren't they?
Moreover in the Ryanair CEO last declarations good arguments for the A320 come out in respect of the 737.
The -800 is probably cheaper as initial investment than a A320, and the extra 9 passengers over the A320 180 limit is a good point for Ryanair.
Moreover Ryanair is coming from Ireland where, along with UK, transitated to the european narrowbody later that continental EU (Scandinavia didn't made it at all), and for a startup low cost carrier to find already in place qualifiesd pilots and technician is a good point.
This also mean that the new Boeing's narrowbody (797) will not automatically get its granfather legacy (and Boeing already argued that the -800/-900 will remain in production...)
Easyjet has A320 series it is true, but I think that Stelios Haji - Ioannou's comments and reported opinions on the adoption of Airbus aircraft are interesting , but I would not offer my own interpretation of them.
I guess customers won’t defect from buying the 737 they’re very happy with the dispatch reliability and cost performance of the 737NG; 737NG is slightly cheaper to operate than the A320 family, and the proposed A320 NEO only offers 2 percent to 4 percent unit cost advantage. But those customers will want a new toy very soon, and to re-engine the 737 will prove very difficult due to the wing being closer to the ground, this would need extensive work and rework to both wings, pylons and main gear.
I guess customers won’t defect from buying the 737 they’re very happy with the dispatch reliability and cost performance of the 737NG; 737NG is slightly cheaper to operate than the A320 family, and the proposed A320 NEO only offers 2 percent to 4 percent unit cost advantage.
But those customers will want a new toy very soon, and to re-engine the 737 will prove very difficult due to the wing being closer to the ground, this would need extensive work and rework to both wings, pylons and main gear.
The fact that the 737 sits closer to the ground is often overstated.
With every iteration of the CFM-56 it gets more efficient and while intuitively it would appear that a new engine, particularly a geared turbofan will deliver a substantial improvement in efficiency, it is the total life cycle costs that are usually the main determinant.
An example is Allegiant who operate the MD-80.
At first look this aircraft is a fuel burning dinosaur and on its variable cost's the numbers will confirm this, but its total life cycle costs are competitive.
Boeing in the meantime are eeking out efficiency improvements by cleaning up the airframe, and small incremental improvement's while not as sexy as a new engine do make a difference.
My hunch is that the 797 will be something looking the old ATMR and when the 787 has gone along the production learning curve, the resource will be available for its production and development , while Airbus will ensnared in the A350.
The A320neo is trying to buy some time for Airbus
Boeing are doing very little to improve the efficiency on the 737, they tried to smarten the cabin with the new Sky Interior this as not sold as expected
They claim to have a smarter engine in the CFM56-7B this will not compete the new CFM Leap-X or PW1100G.
Boeing claim to have 2000+ 737s on backlog, since Airbus announced the neo, what 6 months ago they have either orders or mou's for over 340 aircraft and aim to deliver in 2016. Bombardier has already said the neo launch slowed down orders for their CSeries.
Ryanair and Southwest are already looking at the neo, so my hunch is, if Boeing doesn't get their finger out soon and stop prating about with the 787, they could face major losses in their 737 market.
Oh and dont forget the A320 technology, not biased in any way
Lets not forget that Easyjet went for the 737 and then switched to the A319 when they realised the error of their ways!
Ryanair didnt get Airbus aircraft as EADS told them to bugger off with their demands for getting the aircraft at a very very cheap price. Something Boeing were willing do to!
Also look at BA (i know not a low cost carrier yet!) they have always been big Boeing fans but even they were impressed with the A320s that they inherited from Caledonian. So much so that in the end they ordered A320 series aircraft themselves.
As a passenger i prefer to fly on an A320 series rather than a 737! Although just to prove i am not anti Boeing my favourite aircraft to fly on are the 757 and 747!
Victor
Easyjet got involved with the A320 series largely because of Andy Harrison
see the below from the Telegraph
"Stelios thinks Andy Harrison's performance is overrated," a source close to the tycoon said. "Over the last five years, Andy Harrison has developed a love affair with Airbus, spent $4bn (£2.68bn) doubling the size of the fleet, while he paid no dividend and the share price has gone sideways. The only thing that went up was the size of his bonus
One can only speculate as to what this "love affair" entailed and what the financial details were, but running two different types of aircraft and the transition costs are clearly not low cost and the shareholders will not get that money back.
It would appear (according to Stelios) that Harrison put his own financial interests before that of the shareholders so one could argue that Easyjet operates the A320 because of that.
BA are not low cost so that part of your argument is irrelevant.
Mike O'Leary like any rational businessman will look for the best deal, and he knows that most A320's are given away anyway courtesy of European taxpayers, but he really just wants the 737.
He is ,as I say rational.
I can also add to that, Easyjet took A320s due to the competition from Wizz it was not just the Harrison love affair with Airbus. Wizz have competed heavily with easyjet out of Luton, and have made a success with a now large fleet of A320s in the low cost carrier market.
I hear that you pal O'Leary is thinking about charging passengers for using airstairs! Apparently he is looking at charging £1 for each step you take! If you take them two at a time then you will be able to get a 50% discount on the charge!
Boeing Will Do 737NEO And Not 797
Boeing is evaluating whether to go with an all-new 737 replacement for introduction around a decade from now - five years after the A320neo is due to arrive - or follow Airbus's lead and re-engine its existing models with advanced turbofans like the Pratt & Whitney geared turbofan and/or CFM Leap-X.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2011/04/06/355274/video-no-viable-all-new-single-aisle-before-2030-leahy.html
Wizz
2003 :Wizz was formed in Poland ,and purchases/leases a European aircraft
2004 Poland joined the EU
To buy/or lease an American aircraft while trying to join the EU may have appeared un European
Coincidence?
As for making a success of it, no one really knows (apart from its investors) if Wizz is making any money.
Ebeneezer.....If I may interject, regarding your comment "Easyjet got involved with the A320 series largely because of Andy Harrison"
The Orange love affair with Airbus originated from an order of 120 x A319 at the end of 2002 under the direction of Ray Webster (Chief Executive) and Stelios (Chairman). Harrison (formerly of the RAC) was appointed in 2005.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2002/11/01/156729/easyjet-goes-for-airbus.html
Global Ranger
It may be the perception of a reasonable person that my choice of words in my argument was innapropriate , but clearly this is a question of semantics, and misses the main point of my argument, which is further evidenced by the following excerpt from the article you refer to
"Ray Webster, easyJet chief executive, says that speculation about a 60%discount from list price is "a bit ambitious, but not far off". He adds: "I've been buying aircraft for 20 years and I've never seen a deal like this." Boeing has already hinted that the price went too low for it to stay in the running.
Therefore it, is resaonable to suggest that the purchase of the aircraft was decided on the calculated total life cycle cost of which the purchase price is a component.
In other word's it was the total package not the technical attributes of the aircraft, which returns us to my original argument.