Air Serbia is planning to expand its fleet, maintain selected wet-lease agreements, and explore potential new aircraft orders. Speaking to EX-YU Aviation News at the recent IATA Annual General Meeting & World Air Transport Summit in New Delhi, CEO Jiri Marek and General Manager Commercial and Strategy, Boško Rupić, outlined the airline’s short- and long-term fleet development strategy.
Fleet expansion
Mr Marek noted, “We’ve already signed a Letter of Intent for two Embraer aircraft, which we expect to arrive sometime in November or December. Timeline is still subject to change. As you know, even with commitments from lessors, there are dependencies on MRO slots, and delays are quite common.
That said, we’ve structured our winter schedule so that we’re not reliant on those aircraft during that period. Whenever they do arrive, they’ll be more than welcome additions to the fleet. In addition, we’ve signed another Airbus A320 that’s scheduled to join us this winter as well. It’s relatively young, with a manufacturer serial number starting with a six.
We're also actively evaluating two more A320s. Over the past three weeks, we’ve noticed the market becoming more dynamic. Several aircraft are returning from Wizz Air - previously under extended leases - and it seems that the engine issues affecting NEOs may now be easing. A few units from Volaris are also coming onto the market. We haven’t seen this level of aircraft availability since the Covid period. At this stage, we’re definitely planning to add two more A320s for next summer”.
Wet-leases
![]() |
Air Serbia to extend wet-leases past October |
Commenting on the airline’s wet-lease strategy, which this summer includes four A320s from GetJet Airlines and four Embraer E190s from Bulgaria Air, Air Serbia’s CEO noted, “Our wet-lease strategy is helping us bridge the gap by avoiding long-term commitments when aircraft prices are high. Once we find the right opportunities, we can gradually phase out wet-leased capacity.
One issue that’s often overlooked is the impact of our aging fleet. While the V2500 engines are generally excellent, over the past two years they’ve been increasingly affected by what are known as AD notes. This creates periods where several engines have been in the shop at same time which requires backups with utilisation of spare engines to support operations.
Ideally, we aim to concentrate our heavy maintenance during the winter season. That way, we can avoid major disruptions during peak months. Interestingly, because wet leases are usually in demand during summer, we’ve been able to negotiate favourable deals by also offering winter operations as part of the arrangement. This strategy allows us to maintain continuity at lower cost”.
Mr Rupić added, "In June, we will launch a Request for Proposal (RFP) to extend our wet-lease agreements with GetJet Airlines and Bulgaria Air beyond October. Both partners are finalising the recruitment of locally based crew, meaning that Serbian-speaking staff are now present on nearly every flight.
With the wet lease market cooling down, this is the ideal time to renegotiate terms, especially as we’re discussing operations for the winter season. In this context, the negotiating advantage is on our side. We fully expect to retain some level of wet-lease capacity during the winter period".
New aircraft
Air Serbia currently operates a fleet of mid-aged aircraft, a strategy the carrier says has proven successful for its operations. Mr Marek said, "Taking into account our wet-leased capacity this summer, we are already operating 37 aircraft. On some days, particularly during the morning peak, all gates up to A9 [at Belgrade Airport] are occupied by our aircraft, with additional ATRs parked on remote stands. There’s very limited space left, and it’s clear that the airport is starting to face congestion.
If we consider the core fleet of 32 aircraft, plus the two additional units we’re evaluating, we’ll be operating around 34-35 aircraft next summer. On top of that, we expect to continue using some level of wet-leased capacity.
We’re also actively exploring long-term fleet development. However, this is a complex process, not only due to limited availability in current order books, but also because many of the aircraft types we would logically consider still face ongoing engine reliability issues. We’re determined not to repeat mistakes made elsewhere in the industry.
At the same time, the secondary market is becoming more active, which aligns with our current fleet strategy. While we’re certainly examining future fleet renewal, I wouldn’t expect any firm decisions before 2027. And even then, deliveries will depend on availability.
Probably additional 2nd hand aircraft? Like E-jet, A320ceo family, etc.
ReplyDeleteYou could read the article....
Deletethey don't mention it in the article. Only that they're looking at the secondhand market
DeleteWell they are not looking in the second hand market for 7378-8s or a350s now, do they?
Delete@9.17 yes they do mention it
Delete"We're also actively evaluating two more A320s. Over the past three weeks, we’ve noticed the market becoming more dynamic. Several aircraft are returning from Wizz Air - previously under extended leases - and it seems that the engine issues affecting NEOs may now be easing. A few units from Volaris are also coming onto the market. We haven’t seen this level of aircraft availability since the Covid period. At this stage, we’re definitely planning to add two more A320s for next summer”.
“We’ve already signed a Letter of Intent for two Embraer aircraft, which we expect to arrive sometime in November or December. Timeline is still subject to change. As you know, even with commitments from lessors, there are dependencies on MRO slots, and delays are quite common."
Reading past the headline is a good idea.
He said next summer 34-35 aircrafts. That means they will not retire 2 A319
Deleteby the end of the year
^ they will. Stop making things up.
DeleteBravo Air Serbia 🇷🇸🇷🇸🇷🇸
ReplyDeleteGlad to see Air Serbia growing strategically rather than rushing into expensive commitments.
ReplyDeleteThe dude knows what's going on. Kudos to him and his team
ReplyDeleteIf Belgrade Airport is already running out of space, where will they park the additional jets next summer?
ReplyDeleteThere are plans to expand aircraft parking positions. Plus another 4 gates are expected to begin construction later this year.
Delete^ they are so slow with ecerything... Let's hope it happens.
Delete@09:15
Delete+1
In the 8th year of the concession the airport will still be missing sufficient gate and parking space...
Concession has very bad terms, limiting aviation development in Serbia. They limit 15 million passangers until 2040, while Tirana already have over 10 million. Plus they limit other airports in Serbia. With those numbers, they limit AS growth, and profitability. Which can cause AS crash and aviation crash. Serbia should take back airport like in Hungary or change terms
DeleteVinci now manages BUD so BEG and its development is not their biggest concern.
DeleteWhat you wrote is complete nonsense. There is no limit to have 15 million passengers. These were estimates. And the airport has already revised it expectations. So no need to make things up and present them as matter of fact.
DeleteWell, Vinci just signed what the current government asked for. There is a state owned company (leadership appointed by the government) that is supposed to monitor the implementation of the concession agreement. Seems the government doesn't care and/or is incompetent.
Delete@9.07 Where are those positions meant to be? And isnt it 3 new C pier gates, up to C17?
DeleteIf they place an order in 2027 with Airbus, when it is realistic for aircraft to arrive?
ReplyDeleteGiven the existing backlog, first deliveries for A320neo could realistically arrive between 2030 and 2032. For long haul types, slots are generally further out. Deliveries would not begin before 2031–2033.
DeleteLeasing new or nearly new aircraft from lessors with secured Airbus slots could enable deliveries by 2028-2029. OU did that with A220.
DeleteThanks for the info
DeleteThe order could also go in favour of Embraer E2. JU could go for a larger order of the type to secure better pricing and earlier delivery slots compared to the A320neo.
DeleteE2 and NEOs have about a 50-60 seats difference.
DeleteThey are complimentary families, not competing so you can not just replace one with the other.
A320neos would be an order of a smaller size and a higher price compared to the Embraer E2. Nowhere is it suggested that the E2's replace the A320's, however for the E2 order to replace E195 fleet plus additional for growth.
Delete"it’s clear that the airport is starting to face congestion." .... Already? The building interior is not even finished, and the airport capacities are reaching limits? Could someone explain more, please?
ReplyDeleteIt has nothing to do with building interior but with parking spaces for aircraft. Read what he says
Delete"On some days, particularly during the morning peak, all gates up to A9 [at Belgrade Airport] are occupied by our aircraft, with additional ATRs parked on remote stands. "
So in the morning 25 jet bridge gates are occupied by JU. Wow
Delete^ yes
DeleteOh, yeah. And it could be well expected, given Air Serbia`s business model.
DeleteClearly, they should`ve built T3 and the second runway as envisiogned by the original plan - as they will now have to start that phase after unnecessarily investing money in turning T1+ T2 into a Frankenstein.
@09:23
DeleteThe new runaway should have been built in a sufficient distance from the old one so that both could be used at the same time.
What they did was very short sighted planning.
Just my2cents
Very short sighted and not smart at all.
DeleteInserted runway is not perfect but it's much cheaper as only small land purchase was needed; and inserted runway now avoids closing down operations like it happened at ZAG yesterday.
DeleteIt will turn much more expensive eventualy, as explained above.
DeleteWasn't there an issue the other day in Belgrade as well (though for a much shorter period of time), and the main runway was closed. They did not use the so called inserted runway instead.
Delete@10:48 it was under one hour and it happened before inserted runway and RETa opened. How long was yestreday's shutdown?
Delete@10.48 airport was closed for 46 minutes and no it was not possible because at the time the inserted runway was still closed as it was in the phase of transferring to taxiway And before you write how they could have just opened it, they couldn't because during transition phase it has to follow Eurocontrol guildelines.
Delete@09:42
DeleteNo, it was not much cheaper whichever way you look at it. This way we paid almost the same amount of money for something that can be used once and who knows if it will ever be used again. That is a waste, no matter how you look at it. And, no, the inserted runway cannot be used in case something blocks the main runway as it takes time to properly switch over, both technically and bureaucratically. We still haven't received any meaningful explanation for the government's decision so we are left to speculate (in which case, they did not want to tear down buildings of their party friends and open a can of worms that is ilegal legalisation of the objects in that area).
You didn't pay anything. The inserted runway and the reconstruction of the main runway was financed by Vinci, a private French company, which also paid almost 1 billion euros into the state budget.
Delete@13:59. No, it did not. It paid half of the amount you are saying - they paid 501 million euros upfront fee into the state budget.
DeleteBut you didn't pay for the runway as you said.
DeleteActually we did pay for the new runway.
DeleteThe cost of it was a big reason that the concession fee for 40 years was only half a billion Euros.
The concession is 25 years not 40. No, you didn't pay for it and stop making nonsense up.
Delete@13:56 full of incorrect statements. Inserted runway is there for a quick swap, doesn't take long time or bureaucracy as you said. It absolutely can be used if something blocks the main runway but also for debris removal, runway/equipment maintenance, snow cleanup if needed etc.
DeleteArea to the southwest needed for the second runway/taxiways would be significantly larger and therefore more expensive to purchase than the tiny portion needed for inserted one.
Decision for inserted runway was presented back in 2015. You just didn't pay attention.
Belgrade Airport needs an expansion soon. And they cannot just extend the C terminal. It will run out of space and is not ideal. It is time to start looking into the possibility of extending the airport in the open field near A terminal and expand there. Just my thoughts.
ReplyDelete+1
Delete+100
DeleteBEG could have gates on the other side of the C concourse (not in its entirety). There is plenty of space to do so for several additional gates.
DeleteExactly, four more jetties on the current side C15-C18 and probably 5-6 more on the other side of C concourse for a grand total of 34.
DeleteWill there be a commuter train then to provide for transfers or for arrivals, as walking distances are ridiculously big for an airport of that size even now?
DeleteNot ridiculous at all, look at many other mid/large airports.
DeleteIt is more then ridiculous, as it is not a large airport at all, and the walk from, say, gate A8 to pass control takes 15 minutes. They could`ve at least put travelators. But it`s cheaper without them.
DeleteWhy are people defending this s... of the expansion project, I wonder.
You can order a wheelchair from ground service if a 15 minute walk is too much.
DeleteAnd I don't think anyone is defending them. It is just that some complaints here by people about everything is so ridiculious.
It is easy to explain why and who is constantly attacking BEG and JU.
DeleteWho?
DeleteNot even tiger costume can hide it
DeleteI would love to see them order new wide bodies.
ReplyDeleteNice update, thank you ExYu. More remote stands and bus gates are needed but there is not a lot of space available for expansion until additional extension beyond C14 is built. In my opinion, gates should be also built on the other side of C pier, in the area where original plans showed vintage aircraft garden.
ReplyDeleteOk we finally have a year when new aircraft may be oredered
ReplyDeleteWaiting until 2027 for firm orders seems late. Others are securing slots now. Air Serbia might be too far behind when they finally decide.
DeleteAir Serbia doesn't have to order directly from the OEM, they can get faster deliveries from leasing companies.
DeleteFaster means more expensive. With the huge backlog Airbus has for the A320 family and the engine manufacturers seemingly unable to increase engine production ordering now will probably give us production slots in the 2030 period.
DeletePlease use some of those extra jets to add more frequencies to Western Europe. Some routes are still too limited.
ReplyDeleteFor example?
DeleteBRU, HAM, HAJ, AGP, MAD, GOT, STR, NCE. Going forward, JU is going to need more frequencies on routes such as DUS, BER, OSL, ARN, CPH, CDG, BCN, LCA, ATH, FCO, MXP.
DeleteMAD just went from 3 to 5 flights.
Delete@10:10
Delete+1
5 pw is not enough for a route such as MAD. Initial plan for this summer was for 7 pw.
DeleteActually, if you read the interview from the other day, he mentions Madrid in particular. You can find it and read it People here want everything immediietly. They want triple daily to Madrid. 20 new routes each summer. Long haul to mars, fleet of 100 new aircraft and in heir mind Serbia has a market size of 50 milliona affluent people and any destination can work. They just need to to throw a dart at the map.
Delete^And don't forget every commentator expects every new route to have 100% load factor and instant profit. Anything below 100% load factor is a failure and very bad.
DeleteThat is from ZamaAcademy.
DeleteMost of us don't expect massive increases with unrealistic expectations. Could more have been done, sure. SJJ is long overdue for a double daily rotation for example, which is easily achieved with existing capacity. Instead it's the same frequencies for the past 2 decades again this summer. DBV was initially planned at 10 pw for this summer. Instead it's still 7 pw and experiencing heavy bookings and aircraft upgauges just prior to peak season. CDG was 17 pw last summer, this summer it's back to 14 pw. Intial plan was 22 pw. As a minimum, they should of kept last summers frequencies. ORD could of had a 4th flight added for the peak summer period (mid June-late September). JU has the capacity for all of the above mentioned, as an example, without involving drastic increases and unrealistic expectations.
DeleteDo you consider market dynamics at any point? Or you think like the other person mentioned you just throw darts at the board.
Delete" ORD could of had a 4th flight added for the peak summer period (mid June-late September)."
Do you have any data to support that? I'm pretty sure they know better than you, based on the data and passenger flow what works and what not.
It isn't a secret that ORD performs very well in the summer, it's the winter months that is the issue. They've mentioned the seasonality of the route numerous times. It also isn't a secret that this is when the bulk demand for TATL is. It also isn't a secret that they have the extra A330 capacity this summer. 1 extra flight wont change the fact they will still have spare capacity for the event of AOG and the possibility to increase China frequencies once approved.
DeleteThrowing darts at the board would be to suggest something along the lines of Rio or Sydney and not a slight increase in frequencies on a route re-established 2 years ago during their peak season.
So you admit. You have absolutely no data on passenger numbers, loads, yields yet you are claiming without doubt that they should add more flights on this route. PS, all 4 A330s are in use.
Delete@ anon 12:09
DeleteThree of A330 are in use for couple of days now. ARD is in Naples and ARC was used for China flights.
Passenger numbers and loads we get both here and on the US DoT website. As for yields, we can do a guesstimate judging by the fares on the route. Another indication is that -ARC isn't scheduled at all for ORD indicating a higher need for J class seats (ie demand for business class).
DeleteYes, all 4 A330's are in use, however not fully utilised which was the intention of JU. 1 extra flight pw wont change much on their plans to have flexibility in the A330 fleet however would produce additional revenue in the peak season and have crew back in base quicker.
You are doing a whole lot of guestimates to suggest they need to fly more to Chicago. There is a reason they are not.
Delete@12:35
DeleteARD hasn't gone yet to NAP.
@12:47
You haven't provided an argument as to why they shouldn't.
I don't have their internal data in front of me to argue that they shouldn't. What I can say is that they have the data and if they saw an opportunity to make money they would have added another flight, just like they have added flights to New York in the past. You claiming that they must do it with the only thing supporting your argument being guesses is not serious.
Delete:) :) :)
Delete@14:31
DeleteThere was an info on FR24 about ARD BEG-NAP flight 2 days ago, idk.
Anyways, at the end of the day having a spare A330 is not such a bad idea. If it is power by hour I mean. Having their present long haul operations consistent should be primary goal before any new expansion.
they're paying attention to cost cycles which is good.
ReplyDeleteConsidering these wet leases are here for long term and that now crew is Serbia, is it possible to paint them in JU livery?
ReplyDeleteWouldn't risk it after Marathon incident.
DeleteExpanding without overcommitting.
ReplyDeleteI really hope that they go for a simplified fleet that incluses A220-100/300, A350-900 and ATR72-600.
ReplyDeleteIncludes***
DeleteA220 doesn't fit their needs, A359 is too large.
DeleteNo cockpit commonality with those 3. Current fleet also has 3 with Atr, Embraer and Airbus
DeleteOnly if A220-500 becomes reality.
DeleteA220 is a trash. It’s not Airbus at all
DeleteA220-300 is the ideal A319 replacement with 25% less fuel consumption!
DeleteIt just doesn't fit management need for the absolutely cheapest lease rate available.
JU isn't looking to replace the A319 with an aircraft of the same/similar capacity. It doesn't fit their needs going forward hence the ERJ introduction.
Delete11:36 And insecure and unreliable engines. Read the article again, Marek stated clearly that for few more years, next generation engines are not coming. BTW, oil and fuel prices were not cheaper last decade
DeleteQuote regarding wet lease: "Once we find the right opportunities, we can gradually phase out wet-leased capacity"
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly does this mean? Unless you can attract local Serbian pilots, and retain your current ones, this wet leasing will not end. Once you staff enough pilots to cover at least the winter season without wetleases, we can then call it a progress in the right direction.
Air Serbia operates more dryleased/owned aircraft than ever, all with own pilots and crew. Why don't you learn at least a fact or two before posting such comments.
DeleteYes, I know that. But it still operates wetlease in the winter, which is not something you do unless you have to. Which means it does not have its own flight crews to carry the full winter network in the winter. It needs to retain and attract more pilots in oreder to eliminate winter wet lease and reduce its reliance during summer season.
Delete^ do you think before writing your comment? They have the same number of wet leases in winter as they have in summer, yet they have less flights in winter and you think they don't have enough crew.
DeleteIt has wetleases in the winter so crews can have their vacation time and a/c can undergo maintenace scheduled work. I still don't think wet leases in witner time are ok.
Delete@13:05
DeleteThis isn't true. Winter wet leases is 2 x A320 and 2 x E190 ie half capacity compared to the summer months.
@13:34
Wet leases have nothing to do with crew vacation.
@13:34 You don't think wet leases in the winter time are ok? Did you read the explanation in the text above:
DeleteInterestingly, because wet leases are usually in demand during summer, we’ve been able to negotiate favourable deals by also offering winter operations as part of the arrangement. This strategy allows us to maintain continuity at lower cost
If that works for JU the great. All I know that wet leasing in winter time is not something legacy carriers do. But times are changing...so go for it!
DeleteIn my opinion, BEG airport can grow rapidly but they have to do the job properly. They should build a very new T3 just like ATL has. They dont have to buy land and they can grow. Also, as the state owned airline, the government shoud pay (all of us tac payers) for buying new airplanes and making two main hubs in Serbia (BEG and INI) and to open more smaller airports in Serbia to feed the two hubs, and they should massively grow in the region with boosting current network and expanding to the new destinations.
ReplyDeleteI feel they are stucked in bad deal with Vinci.
How could INI possibly be another main hub?
DeleteAirlines in Europe don't have two hubs, they only have one. Exception is only Lufthansa with hubs in FRA and MUC. Even Turkish doesn't have a single route from Ankara except to Istanbul.
DeleteIdemo dalje...
ReplyDelete