Okay, i’m getting a little fed up with my 737-700’s (i have 3) as being based in Casablanca on a Croydon server that has very low (but increasing) AGEX is not exactly rewarding. Simply put, the plane is too big for my needs. However, I do need its longer range as my routes to Cairo and Jeddah are too far to fly on a CRJ. I am thinking replacing it with the CS100. However two things are holding me back: the fact that the 737 family is huge and when I develop more, the 900ER can be used for long haul routes and secondly, with the AGEX having increased from 745 to 771 in the past week, I think that with time, my 737’s will start filling up more.
What do you guys think? Should I stick with the 737 and wait for AGEX to go up? Or should I just replace them with (in my opinion) the more economical at this time CS100?
While the CS family is not the largest, the CS300 has fantastic economics - almost on par with that of the A321neo, while not sacrificing any of range. I’d consider the profitability of all the C-Series types, especially the CS300, before making any moves.
The CS is a great plane and it was the first plane I helped get into Airlinesim. The economics are fantastic but I have two issues with it. I cant fit my desired amount of Lie Flat 140 seats in it (only 4 abreast instead of 5), and I just cant find a place for it to fit within my major airlines. I often have bigger planes as the bulk of the fleet and a couple of A319s or 73Gs to complement the bigger ones.
It would be uneconomical to add an extra category for a considerably small portion of my fleet. One example is IndoSky; Indo has it´s fleet based around three aircraft models where I operate around 210 A320NEOs, 250 A321s and 50 A380s, I also have 20 A319s to complement this fleet for smaller routes and short runways. Although it would be more economical per flight with 20 CS300s, it would make up a too small number of my fleet to compensate for the increased maintenance cost. The cap between smaller mainline machines such as A319s or A318s and feeder machines such as CRJ1000s is way too small in my opinion to have CSs.
Though I have found a more limited use for these machines in dedicated carriers which base their fleet around CS instead of using it as a tool to complement their existing fleet. Another use for them is if you deem this size category as ideal for your operation. For example one of my partners operates 310 of them as the centerpiece of his network. As well as my franchise partner who also operates a bigger number of them.
Morocco is not such a big market without competition so I think the CS will fit great for your needs as I don't see demand for hundreds of 739s.
Also which variation is more economical because if it is the CS300 then i don’t really see much point switching as it has the same capacity as the 737. I would mainly want to use the CS100’s on Medium and Skinny short haul routes
As someone who has actually operated in North Africa successfully, I will throw in my opinion. If I were building an airline in Morocco I would build a fleet of CR7s, C-Series (both types) and either 320/321 or 7M8/739. This will give you excellent profits while covering almost everything you need to cover. “Trunk” routes support the larger narrow bodies, the C-Series covers the bulk of your flying, and the CR7s are fantastic for smaller markets. This is as always, just my opinion, and YMMV.
Cheers, and good luck. Morocco may be a smaller market, but it can be very profitable.
I only would recconmend buying the Cseries when you don't plan to get widebodies in the future. If you do plan to get widebodies, I would just save the maintenancecategory. But also, I don't like to replace aircrafts to often because of the AGEX. Firing pilots and buying new seat adds up quite a lot when you replace entire fleets. Money I rather invest in expanding.
Me personally like the Ejets and 737's as the backbone of my fleet. It just gives me the most flexibility with the capicity and range for just two maintaiancecategories.
I use both the CS100 and the CS300. I mix and match them with A319/A320s on routes where there is little cargo, as the CSs don't carry cargo, so you can remove any cargo loss on a route by using them. :)
I use both the CS100 and the CS300. I mix and match them with A319/A320s on routes where there is little cargo, as the CSs don't carry cargo, so you can remove any cargo loss on a route by using them. :)
I wouldn’t bother about cargo if I where you, for a passenger carrier it is just an auxiliary revenue which is nice to have but not necessary. My mainline cargo operation accounts to just 2% of revenue and over half of that goes to handling and cargo staff. A passenger carrier should mainly focus on the passengers and if there is great cargo demand then it won’t hurt you to start a subsidiary with an ATR72f.
While the CS family is not the largest, the CS300 has fantastic economics - almost on par with that of the A321neo, while not sacrificing any of range. I'd consider the profitability of all the C-Series types, especially the CS300, before making any moves.
The CS100 also has one of the shortest runway requirements, even better than the CR700 NextGen.