5 ms·
AFAIK Delhi-Mumbai is served almost completely by A320s and 737s. I doubt most people traveling on that route could afford a 787 or A380 flight.
by dingo_bat 9y ago
AFAIK Delhi-Mumbai is served almost completely by A320s and 737s. I doubt most people traveling on that route could afford a 787 or A380 flight.
- kalleboo 9y agoIsn't the whole point of the A380 that it's cheaper per passenger-mile when fully loaded up? Why would an A320 ticket be cheaper? Is it the cost of the airframe? Could better leasing options (as other airlines leases run out) solve that?
- dingo_bat 9y agoI just assumed that buying a new jumbo jet would need costlier tickets, the initial cost more than offsetting the cheaper operating costs. Otherwise why are they not operating yet?
- kalleboo 9y agoIt's a complex equation. An old enough plane will have higher maintenance costs. And many planes are leased instead of bought outright and those lease prices already price in depreciation and expected lifetime.
- bluGill 9y agoCost isn't the only issue, the A380 is probably slightly cheaper overall (a few dollars/ticket - assuming you fly the and maintain the airplane on the most economical replacement schedules), but it flies each leg half as often to reach that (presumably you have either half as many large planes, or the large plane covers two routes instead of one) which means customers don't have as much convenience in choose when they want to fly. If you have 400 people every 15 minutes wanting to make a flight, then a lot of A380s makes sense. However if it is 400 people per day you can make them happier by running 2 200 passenger airplanes one for those who want to leave in the morning, one for those who want to leave in the afternoon. (and 100 passenger planes might make even more sense running 4 times a day, down to 25 passenger planes running hourly) More smaller planes also allows more routing flexibility. These are very complex decisions that each airline has too make.