4 ms·
This is an interesting perspective, thank you. IMO it still doesn't explain the exact threshold though: why 400-seat planes make sense and 550-seat planes someh
by alexey-salmin 2y ago
This is an interesting perspective, thank you. IMO it still doesn't explain the exact threshold though: why 400-seat planes make sense and 550-seat planes somehow don't. One of the options would be to draw the line at "2 vs 4 engines". If that's the case, then I hope to live long enough to see 2-engine behemoths.
- kortilla 2y agoI think there is an unintuitive scaling factor at play that makes a 150 passenger jump in capacity much harder to justify than it seems on the surface. Planes are optimal when they are full. So 550 people need to want to go specifically between two cities and at generally the same time. A similar number need to want to immediately then the other direction or onto another city. With the aforementioned move away from huge hubs, it’s hard to find that kind of consistent demand. Stated slightly differently, the planes on a route have to make sense for the off-peak demand. It’s better to constantly run a 777 at 90% capacity and then leave potential rev on the table a few days a year rather than an a380 at 60% to absorb those really busy times. A larger fleet of smaller planes also gives you much more flexibility as a carrier to shift capacity around to reach regional demand shifts. The only downside is increased crew costs.