Nok Air Drops Bangkok-phuket Flights, Sacks Staff

[Sanddenmark]

For starters, jets use an awful lot of kero.

Even making leaner burning engines will not help very much more, because the maximum efficiency of a jet engine is VERY low.

Yes Jet engines do use a lot of kerosene. However we are ligthyears away from the fuelburn that older engines had. With the technology of today modern longhaul aircraft use as little as 4 litres/passenger/100 KM assuming the aircraft is full. this is way better than the average for cars. Modern short haul aircrafts use a bit more, around 5 litres/passenger/100KM. So actually it is NOT so bad

another observation, Air Asia & tiger Airways all fly brand new or relatively new planes, Airbus 319 and 320s. Fuel efficiency for these new engines are probably 10 times better than what Nok, 1-2 go and the rest of the failing US airlines, whose were flying 15-20 years old Boeing 737 or Airbus planes.

Well yes older aircrafts douse more fuel. But NOTHING in this range. There are many factors to be considered in calculating fuelburn. But using an MD80 will burn around twice as much as using an Airbus 320. Rougly, give or take.

What is killing airlines is AOG, when aircrafts don't fly they don't make money

[DrDave]

For starters, jets use an awful lot of kero.

Even making leaner burning engines will not help very much more, because the maximum efficiency of a jet engine is VERY low.

Yes Jet engines do use a lot of kerosene. However we are ligthyears away from the fuelburn that older engines had. With the technology of today modern longhaul aircraft use as little as 4 litres/passenger/100 KM assuming the aircraft is full. this is way better than the average for cars. Modern short haul aircrafts use a bit more, around 5 litres/passenger/100KM. So actually it is NOT so bad

another observation, Air Asia & tiger Airways all fly brand new or relatively new planes, Airbus 319 and 320s. Fuel efficiency for these new engines are probably 10 times better than what Nok, 1-2 go and the rest of the failing US airlines, whose were flying 15-20 years old Boeing 737 or Airbus planes.

Well yes older aircrafts douse more fuel. But NOTHING in this range. There are many factors to be considered in calculating fuelburn. But using an MD80 will burn around twice as much as using an Airbus 320. Rougly, give or take.

What is killing airlines is AOG, when aircrafts don't fly they don't make money

Correct. And I believe that the engines on an A319 are about 15-20% more fuel efficient than those on a 737, not 10 times as mentioned by the earlier poster. These days, a 15-20% variance in fuel cost can have a significant impact on the financial health of an airline.

[alanmorison]

Sorry, no apology for our 'new journalism.'

Your choice. I just find the sentence: "inevitably, the cutbacks will affect tourism on Phuket and before long, investment on the island in property and resort construction." directly after the first part of news information purely opinion, and it should IMO not be there. (I also don't agree with the statement, but that is a different matter).

In the rest of the article you missed Bangkok Air BTW as one of the carriers still flying to Phuket from Bangkok.

Happy to have anyone use the Comments facility to add to any article on phuketwan.com. No need to register first. We don't pretend to be perfect, the way some news organisations do. Please explain why you disagree so all phuketwan readers can share the benefit of your opinion. Yes, Bangkok Airways still flies to Phuket. It's interesting to note how wide the pickup rate was of our scoop on the Nok Air cancellation.

[Sanddenmark]

And I believe that the engines on an A319 are about 15-20% more fuel efficient than those on a 737, not 10 times as mentioned by the earlier poster. These days, a 15-20% variance in fuel cost can have a significant impact on the financial health of an airline.

The airbus A320-series are very capable aircrafts. tehy are fuelefficient and do have a less noisy cabin compared to the B737.

That being said both kind of aircrafts are generally very good. If we consider only the NG-series then we are not even close to a 15-20% higher fuelburn. Generally the 737 tends to be more efficient on shorter flights and the Airbus more efficient on longer shorthaul flights.