Just curious if anyone has any info on the difference in operating cost of current 737NG to current A320 aircraft, and current 737NG compared to the new A320 NEO. Thanks

The graph above may or may not be impartial, I don't know. Seems legit enough for me as long as you take Bombardier and Airbus at their word for their new products. The CASM though seems to point towards the A320 as being the winner because it is a known quantity that will have some staggering 90 or 95% commonality with the current A320 and it's just being improved in the engines and drag. I think AW&ST said the A320 family would go from 4,000 or so to over 10,000 aircraft with the NEO. Whereas the C Series is still in the computer until it flies.

This is summer 2000 numbers: http://www.icao.int/icao/en/ro/allpi...g4/wp28app.pdf
If you do the math and multiply fuel by 2 to 3 times you'll get closer to todays numbers.

2007 CASM numbers, as reported by Delta:

DC9-30: 11.1
DC9-40: 9.5
DC9-50: 8.8
A319/320: 6.1
MD88: 7.5
737-800: 5.6
MD90: 6.9
757-NWA: 6.0
757-DAL: 5.4
757-300 (NWA): 4.2 (most efficient airplane on the planet, BTW)
767-300: 5.6
767-400: 4.5
A330: 4.3
B777: 5.9
B747-200: 8.9

Crj-200-CA: 13.4
Crj-200-SW: 10.0
Crj-700-CA: 9.6
Crj-700-SW: 7.9
CRJ-900-SW: 7.3

Don't know why the MD-90 is so high. Figure it must be a result of having such a small fleet. Just a couple of expense items could throw the numbers. Also, since the next question everyone asks is about cap ex, these numbers do not include acquisition costs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Available_seat_miles

My forecast was the high cost outliers would get parked. So far, that's been correct, even to the order which the cuts have been made. I'll do updated numbers sometime in January when I get bored and the weather stinks.

Any 744 numbers?

Notice in FTB's most excellent chart, the 320 needs the new engines to be roughly equal with the 737-NG on a cost per seat mile basis. If equal, Boeing's insistence on making a profit will cede sales to the French (and French Canadians) who's government recognizes what EADS is ... a jobs program.

The 737's got a great wing and they'll eek out a percent here and a percent there to remain slightly ahead of the 320's numbers.

Of course, if buying a new platform ... might as well go for the C Series. The C Series probably screwed up by already committing to too small a wing. ... and they don't know their numbers for real yet. The engine's still getting tweaked, the wing is only "01001000010011100011100111 ..... (going on for 500 pages)

What about the 737-700?

Do I really have to? I'm waiting another 3 years to release those ...

just kidding

747-400 (premium wide body, parks in front of the fountain for the advertisements jet) ....... wait for it ...... 5.0

2007 numbers ... DAL did not report 737-700. Again, I'll crunch the new numbers some time in January when I'm bored.

Thanks, too lazy and uneducated to figure it out for myself. Of course that number will go up when they do the lie-flat mod and reduce the number of seats.

True, but hopefully the lie-flat seats and IFE will allow for an increase in RASM.

I'm guessing since they first started that mod on the 767-400, and are continuing it on the rest of the long haul fleet, is that the RASM does go up.