Wazua
»
Investor
»
Stocks
»
Kenya Airways...why ignore..
Rank: Member Joined: 5/29/2016 Posts: 898 Location: Nairobi
|
maka wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:obiero wrote:tandich wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:maka wrote:On 17Nov, 29 bags to JFK were left behind because of payload. Flight had 196 passengers against a full capacity of 234. Too much cargo? It's good to see high load factors but pissing off pax isn't good! As I suspected, the chosen aeroplane can't carry full capacity for such a long flight. If break-even load factor is 90% and even 83% is technically unachievable, the only way to make money is to hike prices. Could this work in a competitive environment? It could work based on the fuel efficiency of the chosen aircraft.. Ethiopian flies the same type of plane on its long haul. Remember current pricing is still introductory. Meanwhile why would anyone care to count the number of bags left, if not to smear KQ. 29 bags are not many bags out of the number of passangers It's a painful experience for the pax whose bags were left behind. One might be getting married. One might be there for business and had samples. Poor planning. What if all 234 seats had been filled? Leave behind 70 bags? Yep extrapolate... Now add the cost of delivering the bag to wherever you are.... π I thought @maka you knew this. I am very surprised. This is a common phenomenon with a long haul flights. Payload restrictions must be applied at all times especially during bad weather/ any other conditions that lead to a higher fuel burn. The pilots need fuel to divert/ do a go around if required. Frequent flyers understand this and they just need to be paid a bagggage relief allowance and bags delivered to their address.This is not a huge cost to an Airline at all.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 4/22/2010 Posts: 11,522 Location: Nairobi
|
ArrestedDev wrote:maka wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:obiero wrote:tandich wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:maka wrote:On 17Nov, 29 bags to JFK were left behind because of payload. Flight had 196 passengers against a full capacity of 234. Too much cargo? It's good to see high load factors but pissing off pax isn't good! As I suspected, the chosen aeroplane can't carry full capacity for such a long flight. If break-even load factor is 90% and even 83% is technically unachievable, the only way to make money is to hike prices. Could this work in a competitive environment? It could work based on the fuel efficiency of the chosen aircraft.. Ethiopian flies the same type of plane on its long haul. Remember current pricing is still introductory. Meanwhile why would anyone care to count the number of bags left, if not to smear KQ. 29 bags are not many bags out of the number of passangers It's a painful experience for the pax whose bags were left behind. One might be getting married. One might be there for business and had samples. Poor planning. What if all 234 seats had been filled? Leave behind 70 bags? Yep extrapolate... Now add the cost of delivering the bag to wherever you are.... π I thought @maka you knew this. I am very surprised. This is a common phenomenon with a long haul flights. Payload restrictions must be applied at all times especially during bad weather/ any other conditions that lead to a higher fuel burn. The pilots need fuel to divert/ do a go around if required. Frequent flyers understand this and they just need to be paid a bagggage relief allowance and bags delivered to their address.This is not a huge cost to an Airline at all. What do you mean its not a huge cost... 1 sec let me get you a figure... possunt quia posse videntur
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/23/2009 Posts: 14,211 Location: nairobi
|
maka wrote:ArrestedDev wrote:maka wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:obiero wrote:tandich wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:maka wrote:On 17Nov, 29 bags to JFK were left behind because of payload. Flight had 196 passengers against a full capacity of 234. Too much cargo? It's good to see high load factors but pissing off pax isn't good! As I suspected, the chosen aeroplane can't carry full capacity for such a long flight. If break-even load factor is 90% and even 83% is technically unachievable, the only way to make money is to hike prices. Could this work in a competitive environment? It could work based on the fuel efficiency of the chosen aircraft.. Ethiopian flies the same type of plane on its long haul. Remember current pricing is still introductory. Meanwhile why would anyone care to count the number of bags left, if not to smear KQ. 29 bags are not many bags out of the number of passangers It's a painful experience for the pax whose bags were left behind. One might be getting married. One might be there for business and had samples. Poor planning. What if all 234 seats had been filled? Leave behind 70 bags? Yep extrapolate... Now add the cost of delivering the bag to wherever you are.... π I thought @maka you knew this. I am very surprised. This is a common phenomenon with a long haul flights. Payload restrictions must be applied at all times especially during bad weather/ any other conditions that lead to a higher fuel burn. The pilots need fuel to divert/ do a go around if required. Frequent flyers understand this and they just need to be paid a bagggage relief allowance and bags delivered to their address.This is not a huge cost to an Airline at all. What do you mean its not a huge cost... 1 sec let me get you a figure... Whatever figure you are getting, compare it with the inherent risk of a plane crash leading to deaths, in the event of overcapacity on payload; coupled with default of insurance cover
KQ ABP 4.26
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 4/22/2010 Posts: 11,522 Location: Nairobi
|
obiero wrote:maka wrote:ArrestedDev wrote:maka wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:obiero wrote:tandich wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:maka wrote:On 17Nov, 29 bags to JFK were left behind because of payload. Flight had 196 passengers against a full capacity of 234. Too much cargo? It's good to see high load factors but pissing off pax isn't good! As I suspected, the chosen aeroplane can't carry full capacity for such a long flight. If break-even load factor is 90% and even 83% is technically unachievable, the only way to make money is to hike prices. Could this work in a competitive environment? It could work based on the fuel efficiency of the chosen aircraft.. Ethiopian flies the same type of plane on its long haul. Remember current pricing is still introductory. Meanwhile why would anyone care to count the number of bags left, if not to smear KQ. 29 bags are not many bags out of the number of passangers It's a painful experience for the pax whose bags were left behind. One might be getting married. One might be there for business and had samples. Poor planning. What if all 234 seats had been filled? Leave behind 70 bags? Yep extrapolate... Now add the cost of delivering the bag to wherever you are.... π I thought @maka you knew this. I am very surprised. This is a common phenomenon with a long haul flights. Payload restrictions must be applied at all times especially during bad weather/ any other conditions that lead to a higher fuel burn. The pilots need fuel to divert/ do a go around if required. Frequent flyers understand this and they just need to be paid a bagggage relief allowance and bags delivered to their address.This is not a huge cost to an Airline at all. What do you mean its not a huge cost... 1 sec let me get you a figure... Whatever figure you are getting, compare it with the inherent risk of a plane crash leading to deaths, in the event of overcapacity on payload; coupled with default of insurance cover We are now losing the plot... Without a doubt safety comes first actually KQ is well respected when it comes to this area... The issue are the figures and the overall picture rem what @Tandich posted... Lets just agree Mikosi and co goofed we should have just done a flight through one of the West African countries... possunt quia posse videntur
|
|
|
Rank: Chief Joined: 1/3/2007 Posts: 18,342 Location: Nairobi
|
NBO-West Africa-NYC could have captured a lot of traffic to/from USA-West Africa. The 787 could have replaced some of the 737 seats on NBO-West Africa routes. The disadvantage would have been the 787 can't do the matatu hops like the 737. Greedy when others are fearful. Very fearful when others are greedy - to paraphrase Warren Buffett
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/23/2009 Posts: 14,211 Location: nairobi
|
VituVingiSana wrote:NBO-West Africa-NYC could have captured a lot of traffic to/from USA-West Africa.
The 787 could have replaced some of the 737 seats on NBO-West Africa routes.
The disadvantage would have been the 787 can't do the matatu hops like the 737. The two most crucial components of a flight remain take off and landing.. I would rather reduce the odds than increase them on route serviced by Delta. Which American would rather fly KQ out of Accra than their very own Delta!
KQ ABP 4.26
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/28/2015 Posts: 9,562 Location: Rodi Kopany, Homa Bay
|
VituVingiSana wrote:NBO-West Africa-NYC could have captured a lot of traffic to/from USA-West Africa.
The 787 could have replaced some of the 737 seats on NBO-West Africa routes.
The disadvantage would have been the 787 can't do the matatu hops like the 737. This would mean even more bags left behind and "pissing off pax isn't good".
|
|
|
Rank: Chief Joined: 1/3/2007 Posts: 18,342 Location: Nairobi
|
hardwood wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:NBO-West Africa-NYC could have captured a lot of traffic to/from USA-West Africa.
The 787 could have replaced some of the 737 seats on NBO-West Africa routes.
The disadvantage would have been the 787 can't do the matatu hops like the 737. This would mean even more bags left behind and "pissing off pax isn't good". How so? If I understand what @maka said earlier, 80 tonnes [please correct me if I am wrong] of fuel is loaded for a 15 hour flight. From NBO-ACC (as an example), it is just 5 hours so less fuel (30 tons) needs to be loaded thus more luggage/cargo (50 tons) can be loaded from NBO. Luggage will also be offloaded in ACC for NBO-ACC pax. That can be replaced with ACC-NYC luggage. The remainder (10 hrs?) flight requires less than 80 tons [50 tons?] which means 30 additional tons of luggage can be loaded. Of course, adjustments will be made depending on what is dropped off or picked up in ACC. One doesn't want pissed off pax! Greedy when others are fearful. Very fearful when others are greedy - to paraphrase Warren Buffett
|
|
|
Rank: Chief Joined: 1/3/2007 Posts: 18,342 Location: Nairobi
|
obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:NBO-West Africa-NYC could have captured a lot of traffic to/from USA-West Africa.
The 787 could have replaced some of the 737 seats on NBO-West Africa routes.
The disadvantage would have been the 787 can't do the matatu hops like the 737. The two most crucial components of a flight remain take off and landing.. I would rather reduce the odds than increase them on route serviced by Delta. Which American would rather fly KQ out of Accra than their very own Delta! The same Americans who fly KLM to AMS? Or AF to CDG? Or BA to LHR? Greedy when others are fearful. Very fearful when others are greedy - to paraphrase Warren Buffett
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 6/23/2009 Posts: 14,211 Location: nairobi
|
VituVingiSana wrote:obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:NBO-West Africa-NYC could have captured a lot of traffic to/from USA-West Africa.
The 787 could have replaced some of the 737 seats on NBO-West Africa routes.
The disadvantage would have been the 787 can't do the matatu hops like the 737. The two most crucial components of a flight remain take off and landing.. I would rather reduce the odds than increase them on route serviced by Delta. Which American would rather fly KQ out of Accra than their very own Delta! The same Americans who fly KLM to AMS? Or AF to CDG? Or BA to LHR? Check the NTSB stats and the Fly American state policy of the USA
KQ ABP 4.26
|
|
|
Rank: User Joined: 8/15/2013 Posts: 13,237 Location: Vacuum
|
obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:NBO-West Africa-NYC could have captured a lot of traffic to/from USA-West Africa.
The 787 could have replaced some of the 737 seats on NBO-West Africa routes.
The disadvantage would have been the 787 can't do the matatu hops like the 737. The two most crucial components of a flight remain take off and landing.. I would rather reduce the odds than increase them on route serviced by Delta. Which American would rather fly KQ out of Accra than their very own Delta! The same Americans who fly KLM to AMS? Or AF to CDG? Or BA to LHR? Check the NTSB stats and the Fly American state policy of the USA The fly american policy only applies to US federal and state employees or private sector employees contracted by the federal or state(s) government of USA If Obiero did it, Who Am I?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 12/7/2012 Posts: 11,935
|
Swenani wrote:obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:NBO-West Africa-NYC could have captured a lot of traffic to/from USA-West Africa.
The 787 could have replaced some of the 737 seats on NBO-West Africa routes.
The disadvantage would have been the 787 can't do the matatu hops like the 737. The two most crucial components of a flight remain take off and landing.. I would rather reduce the odds than increase them on route serviced by Delta. Which American would rather fly KQ out of Accra than their very own Delta! The same Americans who fly KLM to AMS? Or AF to CDG? Or BA to LHR? Check the NTSB stats and the Fly American state policy of the USA The fly american policy only applies to US federal and state employees or private sector employees contracted by the federal or state(s) government of USA Fly America will also not apply for passngers going beyond the destinataion of the American Ailrlines .... therefore anybody going beyond Accra can board KQ officially bila wasiwasi. In the business world, everyone is paid in two coins - cash and experience. Take the experience first; the cash will come later - H Geneen
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 8/29/2008 Posts: 573
|
Angelica _ann wrote:Swenani wrote:obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:NBO-West Africa-NYC could have captured a lot of traffic to/from USA-West Africa.
The 787 could have replaced some of the 737 seats on NBO-West Africa routes.
The disadvantage would have been the 787 can't do the matatu hops like the 737. The two most crucial components of a flight remain take off and landing.. I would rather reduce the odds than increase them on route serviced by Delta. Which American would rather fly KQ out of Accra than their very own Delta! The same Americans who fly KLM to AMS? Or AF to CDG? Or BA to LHR? Check the NTSB stats and the Fly American state policy of the USA The fly american policy only applies to US federal and state employees or private sector employees contracted by the federal or state(s) government of USA Fly America will also not apply for passngers going beyond the destinataion of the American Ailrlines .... therefore anybody going beyond Accra can board KQ officially bila wasiwasi. Personally,I wouldn't fly the NBO-JFK non stop KQ route.I like to stretch my legs after about 8hours.And reduce the risk of thrombosis.
|
|
|
Rank: Chief Joined: 1/3/2007 Posts: 18,342 Location: Nairobi
|
Angelica _ann wrote:Swenani wrote:obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:NBO-West Africa-NYC could have captured a lot of traffic to/from USA-West Africa.
The 787 could have replaced some of the 737 seats on NBO-West Africa routes.
The disadvantage would have been the 787 can't do the matatu hops like the 737. The two most crucial components of a flight remain take off and landing.. I would rather reduce the odds than increase them on route serviced by Delta. Which American would rather fly KQ out of Accra than their very own Delta! The same Americans who fly KLM to AMS? Or AF to CDG? Or BA to LHR? Check the NTSB stats and the Fly American state policy of the USA The fly american policy only applies to US federal and state employees or private sector employees contracted by the federal or state(s) government of USA Fly America will also not apply for passngers going beyond the destinataion of the American Ailrlines .... therefore anybody going beyond Accra can board KQ officially bila wasiwasi. "Check the NTSB stats and the Fly American state policy of the USA" I checked and like what the others have said... it does NOT apply to Americans flying on non-gov't business. USG employees can fly any airline for personal travel. Furthermore, non-US airlines can be taken if the logistics call for it. USA-NBO pax also includes Kenyans, diasporans, other Africans (EAC, Somalia, southern Africa), Canadians, World Bank & IMF employees, UN personnel and Americans on personal travel. Greedy when others are fearful. Very fearful when others are greedy - to paraphrase Warren Buffett
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 8/30/2007 Posts: 1,558 Location: Nairobi
|
Ali Baba wrote:Angelica _ann wrote:Swenani wrote:obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:obiero wrote:VituVingiSana wrote:NBO-West Africa-NYC could have captured a lot of traffic to/from USA-West Africa.
The 787 could have replaced some of the 737 seats on NBO-West Africa routes.
The disadvantage would have been the 787 can't do the matatu hops like the 737. The two most crucial components of a flight remain take off and landing.. I would rather reduce the odds than increase them on route serviced by Delta. Which American would rather fly KQ out of Accra than their very own Delta! The same Americans who fly KLM to AMS? Or AF to CDG? Or BA to LHR? Check the NTSB stats and the Fly American state policy of the USA The fly american policy only applies to US federal and state employees or private sector employees contracted by the federal or state(s) government of USA Fly America will also not apply for passngers going beyond the destinataion of the American Ailrlines .... therefore anybody going beyond Accra can board KQ officially bila wasiwasi. Personally,I wouldn't fly the NBO-JFK non stop KQ route.I like to stretch my legs after about 8hours.And reduce the risk of thrombosis. I did the flight and itβs very comfortable. DVT requires you to stretch not do a 100m sprint. Itβs made flying to the US very easy and convenient. Going to the US I went via Europe and that was a headache π€¦π½ββοΈπ€¦π½ββοΈ
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Investor
»
Stocks
»
Kenya Airways...why ignore..
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|