Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
How good is a used 767-300ER?
Subscription required
By Bjorn Fehrm
Introduction
Dec. 16 2015, ©. Leeham Co: Fuel prices at a record low changes a lot of short- and mid-term planning scenarios for airlines. An introduction of a used aircraft with higher fuel burn for a typical lease period of five to six years is possible without endangering the airline’s economics.
The risk of oil prices going sky high in such a period is low, hence the attractiveness of complementing ones fleet with leased older aircraft like Canada’s WestJet has done. It will introduce ex. Qantas 767-300ERs on several traditional 757 destinations like Hawaii and presumably West Europe.
We therefore expand our in dept look of the deployment of used aircraft with a look at the WestJet choice; Boeing’s 767-300ER and compare it to a more contemporary twin, Airbus A330-200.
Summary:
⦁ The 767-300ER is around 25 seats smaller than our benchmark aircraft, the more modern A330-200.
⦁ The A330-200 previously put the 767 under pressure and Boeing responded with the 787-8. We will check if this is still the case when oil is below $40 a barrel and leasing cost for a used 767 is below $300,000.
⦁ We will also check what load-factors an airline like WestJet has to attain on the 767 to reach the same seat-mile costs as for the 757 that the route was up-gauged from.
⦁ We will follow the scheme of the 777-200ER vs. A340-300E comparison, Part 1 compares the aircraft, Part 2 the costs and Part 3 the revenue and margin performance of the aircraft.
Bjorn’s Corner: Twins or quads?
By Bjorn Fehrm
11 December 2015, ©. Leeham Co: The debate over two or four engines for long range aircraft is as old as the jet airliner. A number of myths have been pedaled over the years over the virtues of the one over the other. The myths have even been presented by airline CEOs as “facts that are known in the industry.”
Having done several in-depth comparisons of two-vs-four engined long range aircraft, we can’t find the patterns that these myths propel: that a quad is less efficient than a twin and should have higher maintenance costs. What we see is that it is all dependent on what one compares and to what technology generation the one or the other aircraft belong.
When we didn’t get the same results as the myths on a number of areas, we started to wonder what could have created the myths in the first place. Looking at what four engined airliners could have been the source of the rumours, we started to see a pattern. It was a pattern of apple-and-oranges being compared and wide ranging conclusions being drawn.
Here is what we found. Read more
Used B777-200ER or A340-300?
Subscription required
By Bjorn Fehrm
Introduction
Nov. 26 2015, ©. Leeham Co: In recent articles we have latched on to the debate around the prices for used Boeing 777-200 aircraft. Contrary to the market appraising companies’ ideas about second hand values, our surveys show that not only the Airbus A340-300 is cheap in the market but the Boeing 777-200ER is also available at interesting prices.
This, coupled with sustained low fuel prices, makes for interesting opportunities. Charter destinations can be reached which were not possible with less competent aircraft and it is possible to lease or purchase these long range aircraft to backfill an expanding route network while awaiting or even postponing delivery of the latest technology aircraft.
We decided it was time to take a look at which of the two would be the better choice as a long hauler of 300 passengers to destinations of up to 5,000nm. We use our proprietary model to find out which one is the most suitable given different conditions, such as cabin makeover or not. We will also introduce aircraft deterioration to the calculations to map the reality of an older aircraft.
In this first article, we will establish the base values for the aircraft and find their cash operating costs. In a subsequent article, we will add capital costs where we will look at different purchase scenarios and refurbishing options and how these affect the overall direct operating costs.
Summary
- The 777-200ER and A340-300 are very close in most dimensions.
- The 777-200ER is the slightly larger and heavier aircraft. Thanks to more effective engines, it can compete on fuel costs.
- When the other costs are added to make up cash operating costs, the higher weight and more expensive engines start to eat up any fuel cost advantages the 777-200ER has.
Evaluating airliner performance, Part 2
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
Sep. 24 2015, ©. Leeham Co: In the second part of our series about comparing and evaluating economic and operational performance of airliners, we look at the parts beyond fuel that make up the Cash Operating Costs (COC) for an airliner.
While fuel consumption, crew costs and aircraft maintenance costs can be evaluated in a way which closely resembles reality, other costs in the COC are too complex to model in their true form.
This is the case for underway or airway fees, landing fees and station fees. Here, just about every country/airport in the world has taken the liberty to invent its own charging principles and formulas. With several hundred different formulae for these charges, the way out is to use industry-accepted approximation for these costs.
Summary:
- We establish how crew cost are modeled for our evaluation missions, taking into account the complex world of work time regulations for pilots and cabin crew.
- We also describe how we handle airframe and engine maintenance costs and how these get allocated to our missions.
- Finally, we describe how the complex underway and landing/station costs are modeled with the accepted approximations these require.
Bjorn’s Corner: Engine efficiency
18 September 2015, ©. Leeham Co: The debate around the market’s two single aisle combatants is quite heated, with fans of the one side saying “the limited space for a high bypass engine on the 737 MAX will cripple it forever” and the other side saying “the tighter design of the 737 will make it highly competitive against the A320neo, it is the A320 which has a weight and size problem”.
One of the arguments is that each inch of engine fan diameter brings 0.5% in increased propulsive efficiency. Therefore the A320 with up to 81 inches fans will win against the 737 MAX, which has a 69 inch fan. Having all the tools to check out if this is really the truth, I fed our airplane model with all the facts and looked at the result. It’s not so easy, guys…
Boeing’s 767 revitalized as a MOM stop gap, Part 3
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
Aug. 31 2015, ©. Leeham Co: After examining the characteristics of the Boeing 767 to serve the market segment that Boeing is studying for its Middle of the Market (MOM) requirement, the 225 passenger/5000nm sector, we will now finish the series by looking at how the 767 can be made economically more competitive.
We will study the influence of improved aerodynamics like Aviation Partners Boeing’s Split Scimitar Winglet for the 767. We will also look at what engine PIPs can provide and also look at what a re-engine could bring.
Finally we examine at what happens when we add crew costs, underway/landing fees and maintenance costs to form Cash Operating Costs (COC) followed by capital costs to form Direct Operating Costs (DOC).
Summary:
- Boeing’s 767 has the right cross section for passenger transportation in the 225 passenger/5000nm segment.
- Its wings and empennage are too large, however. We make them work harder by transporting the 767-300ER fuselage and passengers.
- We also introduce aerodynamic and engine improvements. Still, the fuel consumption per seat mile is considerably higher than modern alternatives.
- At a Cash Operating Cost and Direct Operating Cost level, the higher fuel consumption has less influence in today’s fuel prices. The result is that the 767-300ER becomes an interesting alternative as long as the fuel price stays low.
Boeing’s 767 revitalized as a MOM stop gap, Part 2
By Bjorn Fehrm
Subscription required.
Introduction
Aug. 31 2015, ©. Leeham Co: Last week we started to look at Boeing’s 767 to see if it can serve the passenger and range space which is not well covered by modern aircraft: the 225 passenger/5,000nm sector. Boeing calls this the Middle of the Market or MOM. Boeing recently said that there is some increased interest for the 767. We analyze why and what can be done to increase any chances of it having a new life as a passenger aircraft.
We started with comparing the 767’s different variants to the most likely MOM aircraft from our series “Redefining the 757 replacement requirement for the 225/5000-sector”. We will now continue and look at the 767 in detail, its strong suits and its less efficient areas. We will also discuss what can be made to address the less efficient areas.
Summary:
- Boeing’s 767 has the right cross section for passenger transportation in the 225 passenger/5,000nm segment.
- It also carries cargo containers, not as efficiently this time. We show what the consequences are.
- Finally the wing is not the slender wing of the modern aircraft. We show what impact it will have on overall efficiency.
- Combined with engines from the 1990s, this gives less than stellar fuel economics. We investigate what can be done about this and how much of an impact it will have in today’s low fuel prices.