Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
FlyRow wrote:No (some people try) stupid questions.
What I guess.. The a320 serie is kind-off newer in the US, charter airlines usually/often use older or second hand planes. When they started the A320 was to expensive to buy, while the 737-300-400 was readilly available. When you start with 737 and you want to keep cost down as a charter, it's easier to switch to a 737NG from a classic then to switch to a airbus.
That's just what I think, not fact based, but I could see this as a logical explenation.
SierraPacific wrote:FlyRow wrote:No (some people try) stupid questions.
What I guess.. The a320 serie is kind-off newer in the US, charter airlines usually/often use older or second hand planes. When they started the A320 was to expensive to buy, while the 737-300-400 was readilly available. When you start with 737 and you want to keep cost down as a charter, it's easier to switch to a 737NG from a classic then to switch to a airbus.
That's just what I think, not fact based, but I could see this as a logical explenation.
That is what I was thinking, It is super interesting how Airbus has such a huge chunk of the market when it comes to scheduled ops but then looking at the non sked market there is absolutely none.
JayinKitsap wrote:Looking at lease rates the 737 holds its value with age compared to the 320. That points to higher maintenance cost to keep a high cycle 320 going compared to the 737. Also, B had a larger market share in the US 20+ years ago, worldwide it was more balanced. So it is likely more available 727's in the US, and a balanced availability elsewhere.
This compares metal 20+ years ago, the market will be clearly different when today's planes are 20+ years old.
aemoreira1981 wrote:SierraPacific wrote:FlyRow wrote:No (some people try) stupid questions.
What I guess.. The a320 serie is kind-off newer in the US, charter airlines usually/often use older or second hand planes. When they started the A320 was to expensive to buy, while the 737-300-400 was readilly available. When you start with 737 and you want to keep cost down as a charter, it's easier to switch to a 737NG from a classic then to switch to a airbus.
That's just what I think, not fact based, but I could see this as a logical explenation.
That is what I was thinking, It is super interesting how Airbus has such a huge chunk of the market when it comes to scheduled ops but then looking at the non sked market there is absolutely none.
Which is interesting because in Europe, the charter market for narrow body mainline planes is about split...Travel Service uses the 737 NG and soon MAX, while Small Planet and SmartLynx use the A320 series. That said, the need for more A320 lift for the Lufthansa Group has likely raised prices on those frames as some remain in service that are almost 30 years old.
dcajet wrote:Cheaper cost of acquisition, most likely, as well as availability both of frames and qualified pilots and mechanics.
FlyRow wrote:No (some people try) stupid questions.
What I guess.. The a320 serie is kind-off newer in the US, charter airlines usually/often use older or second hand planes. When they started the A320 was to expensive to buy, while the 737-300-400 was readilly available. When you start with 737 and you want to keep cost down as a charter, it's easier to switch to a 737NG from a classic then to switch to a airbus.
That's just what I think, not fact based, but I could see this as a logical explenation.
wrongwayup wrote:dcajet wrote:Cheaper cost of acquisition, most likely, as well as availability both of frames and qualified pilots and mechanics.
A 737-800 will be more costly to acquire (lease or buy) than a comparatively aged and spec'd A320, and tend to move faster on the used market.
EvanWSFO wrote:USA 3000 operated 320's. Aside from them I can't think of any US charter carrier that did.
metroline2006 wrote:Is it because 737 have built in stairs which help at out stations
Mnich wrote:6. Longevity (there are hundreds 30+years old and still reliable 737s in active service, while old A320 is a nightmare)
metroline2006 wrote:Is it because 737 have built in stairs which help at out stations
fjhc wrote:Didn't Air Berlin fly 737NGs until the end?
metroline2006 wrote:Is it because 737 have built in stairs which help at out stations
GianiDC wrote:fjhc wrote:Didn't Air Berlin fly 737NGs until the end?
Kind of. They were operated by TUI and leased out to AB. Many people suggests that this deal was one of the nails in the coffin for AB as the rates were very high.
EvanWSFO wrote:USA 3000 operated 320's. Aside from them I can't think of any US charter carrier that did.
910A wrote:Xtra (then Casino) and Sierra Pacific both started out with 732 and they are still flying one ex-Air Florida bird that is 37.5 years old. At stated before both of these airlines started with 732 before Airbus was established in the US.
fjhc wrote:GianiDC wrote:fjhc wrote:Didn't Air Berlin fly 737NGs until the end?
Kind of. They were operated by TUI and leased out to AB. Many people suggests that this deal was one of the nails in the coffin for AB as the rates were very high.
Thanks! I knew they had some flown by TUI, but I didn't know about the high rates. Seems odd for a company who was flying a lot for other airlines to then also be contracting some of their own flying out to 3rd parties! But then again... there's a reason why they aren't around any more.
SierraPacific wrote:(.......Swift Air......)