I think there is an unintuitive scaling factor at play that makes a 150 passenger jump in capacity much harder to justify than it seems on the surface.
Planes are optimal when they are full. So 550 people need to want to go specifically between two cities and at generally the same time. A similar number need to want to immediately then the other direction or onto another city.
With the aforementioned move away from huge hubs, it’s hard to find that kind of consistent demand.
Stated slightly differently, the planes on a route have to make sense for the off-peak demand. It’s better to constantly run a 777 at 90% capacity and then leave potential rev on the table a few days a year rather than an a380 at 60% to absorb those really busy times.
A larger fleet of smaller planes also gives you much more flexibility as a carrier to shift capacity around to reach regional demand shifts. The only downside is increased crew costs.
Planes are optimal when they are full. So 550 people need to want to go specifically between two cities and at generally the same time. A similar number need to want to immediately then the other direction or onto another city.
With the aforementioned move away from huge hubs, it’s hard to find that kind of consistent demand.
Stated slightly differently, the planes on a route have to make sense for the off-peak demand. It’s better to constantly run a 777 at 90% capacity and then leave potential rev on the table a few days a year rather than an a380 at 60% to absorb those really busy times.
A larger fleet of smaller planes also gives you much more flexibility as a carrier to shift capacity around to reach regional demand shifts. The only downside is increased crew costs.