Which rates first
p. 53 · Read in the full issue
Comment
Which rates first - tourism or communications?
It has taken time but the low air fare revolution is about to encompass the South Pacific.
Already planeloads of Australians are flying north to Honolulu and the US West Coast at fares that rate among the lowest in the world, and back down the reverse track growing numbers of planeloads of Americans are enjoying a similar low fare boom.
Beneath the wings of the 747 s and DClOs lie the Pacific Islands, where tourist interests would like to see the great travel boom in the sky come down to earth. Standing alongside the tourist interests are the small regional airlines which don’t see the low-fare explosion in the same rosy light as their col
leagues.
The division faces many governments with the dilemma should they try to tap this new boom in tourism, or should they work to maintain the identity of their own national airlines?
The airlines are characterised by being small, flying between sparsely populated centres, and operating equipment that is not only small in modern terms but one or two jumps behind in the technology that made the low fares possible.
Aircraft like the 747 can be operated profitably at ridiculously low fares - down to about 1.8 cents a seat/kilometre, or about a fifth the cost of a bus ride in Sydney because of their size, their 400-plus passenger capacity, and their highly efficient engines. There is no way that the BACII Is or Boeing 737 s opera-
ted in the Pacific can achieve anything like the economies of the big jets. So if tourism is to be enticed to or diverted through the Pacific Islands, the local carriers will have to see some of their rights to have access to an equal share of traffic into their home territory eroded. They will also have to be prepared to carry tourists from one airport to another at fares much lower
than at present, which, even with full aeroplanes, means they will be making book losses.
Airlines like Air Pacific, facing the dilemma of whether they will preserve their identity or act as ‘insurance’ for the tourism industry (as one opinion in the present debate in Suva defines the airline’s role), are talking about following Air Niugini’s example and buying used Boeing 707 s to participate in inter national routes.
But while this is a step up, it is by no means the answer. The older jets are less attractive to passengers and still have much higher operating costs than the newer airliners (which is why
airlines like Qantas and Air New Zealand are disposing of the
older jets).
Another solution is to charter capacity on somebody else’s aeroplane. Hypothetically, one cabin on a Qantas 747 operating to Sydney or Melbourne could be sold and staffed as Air Pacific.
But this does not go down well with the airlines and their staff.
They feel, at best, second rate.
Fortunately, a newer generation of aircraft is now taking shape on the drawing boards that may offer the ultimate solution to the Air Pacifies of this world. From Europe, the A3OO and A3lO offer passenger capacities of between 200 and 300, plus lots of freight space, and from the US the Boeing 767 is pitching for the same market. All these will offer competitive seat/km costs but will demand cripplingly high investments for small countries.
Beneath these is another categoy of 130-180 sealers, the first of which is the Boeing 757. These will also be expensive aero planes but may provide sizes more balanced to the requirements of the Pacific. At the bottom end of the size range, Fokker is briefing airlines on a 115-130 sealer development of its F2B that would be very attractive - but won’t be ready much before 1986.
There is no easy solution to the dilemma - which rates first, tourism or communications? There must be compromises. More importantly, there must be extremely skilled planning at a high level of technological understanding so that national priorities are met in the most efficient way in the difficult years to come.