More than likely, they haven’t reduced at all – conditions will have developed that allows them to have enough aircraft time. A continual dilemma for airlines and constant juggle is aircraft utilisation. Obviously, with utilisation very high, there are minimal “spare” hours and so any interruption can have significant domino effects to the entire system (as happens so often North America). Too low, at the CEO won’t keep his job.
Factors determining route expansion include:
- The timing of the various levels of maintenance (aircraft can be out for weeks)
Overnight usage possibilities (vs parking them at airports)
Landing slot availability
The existence of traffic rights (aero-political issues)
Reliability of the fleet
Fleet configuration (2 class & 3 class aircraft are not interchangable)
General market conditions (in origin as well as destination)
4/5th vs 5/6th freedom traffic possibilities
Yield Opportunities (as well as premium cabin mix)
Level of hubing & location of hubs
Viability of new routes, versus;
Adding capacity to existing routes
Code-share possibilities to share risk as well and disbursement/feeder traffic
Rotational capabilities
Age of fleet
Exchange rates
Associated costs (landing fees and charges, fuel at destination, handling etc)
So, when there are enough factors right in the “cycle”, an airline doesn’t necessarily have to acquire additional aircraft to add capacity. QF were probably waiting for the A330s to settle into their operation as well as more “Approved Destination Status” travel agents to be accredited by DIMIA and Tourism Australia...hense increasing demand.
