Read the forum code of contact
By: - 31st December 2004 at 20:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Arriving March I believe.
1L.
By: - 31st December 2004 at 21:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I assume the plane will be leased, not brought directly from Boeing.
By: - 31st December 2004 at 21:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I assume the plane will be leased, not brought directly from Boeing.
Well if they are to be 737-300s I'd say thats a valid assumption ;)
It was 300's last I heard of this
By: - 31st December 2004 at 21:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
way off topic here Sandy, but when did the '300 go out of production?
By: - 31st December 2004 at 21:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The current rumour is that the 737s are to be leased from Astraeus to begin with.
I believe the last 733 was D-ADIC to Deutsche BA 12/11/1999
By: - 31st December 2004 at 22:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
mark beat me to it..
By: - 31st December 2004 at 22:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Lomg term Flybe want B737-700 or A319
By: - 31st December 2004 at 22:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
For their ops I'd say the 73G would be best.. being the cheaper to run
In Termns of direct cost per hour:
B737-800 = $1665 p/h (varies very little for the 700)
A319 - $2254 p/h
Heck, the B737-300 is $1878 p/h! stick with them!
By: - 1st January 2005 at 11:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Wow!! I never knew the Airbus 319 cost that much more to run.
By: - 1st January 2005 at 12:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And the source for these figures, Sandy? :)
By: - 1st January 2005 at 12:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
probably his informant...."Bob"
By: - 1st January 2005 at 12:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't know about you, but I'd prefer to see figures from a verifiable and attributable source, and one that is not a Boeing or Airbus press release for a change.
Then I might take them seriously. :D
By: - 1st January 2005 at 14:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And the source for these figures, Sandy? :)
http://www.bh.com/companions/034074152X/appendices/data-a/default.htm
and
This
By: - 1st January 2005 at 15:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Hmmm...here's an interesting quote from the first of the sources you give: "The data in these table has been validated where possible but it still originates from manufacturers sources. The information requires careful interpretation since each manufacturer may define the data in a different way."
Lies, damned lies and statistics, eh? :D
Having carefully examined the data sets in the tables I still cannot seem to find the figures you quoted. How very odd!! :diablo:
We can't actually see the second of your sources, so it's difficult to make any comment at all.
By: - 1st January 2005 at 15:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well this is data analysts use.
Ignore it if you want, but it is correct.
My final comment is that flybe should stick with the 737-300's for the near to mid term future instead of going through the expense of new aircraft
By: - 1st January 2005 at 15:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"Ignore it if you want, but it is correct"
I'm sure the data in the tables in your first source are correct, bearing in mind as we must the health warning that I quoted from the same site.
However, since these data do NOT include the figures that you quoted I'm sure you will forgive me for looking somewhat askance at your figures.
"Because I say so" never has been a substitute for verifiable objective fact.
Unless, of course, you can show me some verifiable objective facts that bear your figures out?
By: - 1st January 2005 at 16:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"Ignore it if you want, but it is correct"I'm sure the data in the tables in your first source are correct, bearing in mind as we must the health warning that I quoted from the same site.
However, since these data do NOT include the figures that you quoted I'm sure you will forgive me for looking somewhat askance at your figures.
"Because I say so" never has been a substitute for verifiable objective fact.
Unless, of course, you can show me some verifiable objective facts that bear your figures out?
buy the report and you'll see.
But what I quoted here IS correct, regardless of what you may think of it.
the data is collated from operating experience... not just manufacturer specs, although I think they are used as a base line for calculations.
If you choose not to beleive because you can see it, then thats your problem. Not mine.
By: - 1st January 2005 at 16:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Whatever you say - it's not worth arguing over on New Years Day. ;)
(Edited to add:
My word, that last posting is a wee bit testy since your edit - and you did edit it this time, right?
There's neither law nor Forum rule that says that people have to agree with you, and must accept every statement you make without question.
A Happy New Year to you. :D )
By: - 1st January 2005 at 17:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Whatever you say - it's not worth arguing over on New Years Day. ;)(Edited to add:
My word, that last posting is a wee bit testy since your edit - and you did edit it this time, right?
There's neither law nor Forum rule that says that people have to agree with you, and must accept every statement you make without question.
A Happy New Year to you. :D )
yes I did edit this time.
And I'm not saying one has to agree with ME.
you asked for a source, I gave you an independant and official source. But you still don't accept it.
Maybe if the figures from the source were Pro airbus, would you be more willing to accept it then?
By: - 1st January 2005 at 17:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Not at all - if I may take the liberty of quoting from my own posting?
"I'd prefer to see figures from a verifiable and attributable source, and one that is not a Boeing or Airbus press release for a change."
I'd like to draw your particular attention to the phrase "not a Boeing or Airbus press release". This is called "e-ven hand-ed-ness". Maybe next time we can look at "ob-ject-iv-ity", too? ;)
Oh, and now that I've secured a copy of the ATA Report (free download in PDF format......."buy the report", indeed!) , could you direct me to the correct page please? I'm still having trouble finding the figures you quoted earlier.
Silly me! :diablo:
Posts: 530
By: cheesebag - 31st December 2004 at 19:41
Any idea when they are due to expand their fleet with the introduction of the 737? I have book the inlaws onto a BHX-FAO flight in August and would love to show them a photo ;)