CARDIFF - 2
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Siargao Island
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a trudge down the M5 / M4 or M5 / M50 / A40 / M4 then across country to Rhoose wouldn't figure in my plans,
That said give me an A330 medium/long-haul any day, not just the wide body but a maximum of one other person to climb over to reach an aisle.
But Qatar aren't cheap, I find myself regularly checking fares between UK/Europe and Asia, even when I was travelling the route myself Qatar never figured in my pricing, to get anything like a competitive fare I would have needed to layover in Doha incurring hotel and visa expenses, the one time I travelled the route from/to CWL I utilsed AF/KL so introducing Qatar in to the frame may represent a conflict of interest.
Just recently the likes of Emirates and Oman Air have had the best fares with Oman Air also having the best ME connection times, circa less than 2 hours in each direction.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: u.k.
Age: 56
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of the alliances one world do already have a presence at Cardiff and of course the BA maintenance base , these may also be contributing factors .
Out of interest, would this be the only European route that QR fly without a presence from EK/EY or TK?
Out of interest, would this be the only European route that QR fly without a presence from EK/EY or TK?
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Bristol
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intresting debate re QR, time will tell whether it can see the test of time. Personally from this side of the bridge in Somerset I would chose LHR to travel to mid east and beyond, I dont see any real benefits to fly from CWL,more choice of flights and routes to hub airports like DXB, DOH and others this generally means more competition which usually drives prices down, if it is to be operated on 320/737 then also that is a heck of a stint on a single aisle aircraft, BRS as CWL can ops 787 for up to 10.5 hrs direct (CUN) and that is with a larger seating capacity to QR and a belly full of cases so I dont see the BRS runway as a major issue, lots of people have said about cargo, however this will be a very limited amount in the belly if ops on 320/737, BRS is able to put in an airbridge with ease on the central walkway should the need arise with an airline like QR so I cant see that being a stumbling bkock, BRS has a larger and more affluent catchment than CWL so again that is a bit of a head scratcher. Its certainly a kick in the teeth for BRS but everything points to a ridiculous deal being supported by WAG and possibly that QR can boast of serving another capital city, if using 320/737 the only major reason for choosing CWL would surely be monetary for the airline. Having said all this I do hope it is a success for CWL as it has been down in the duldrums far too long and South Wales and South West has been screaming for a ME3 carrier. Who knows, EK might sit up and take notice and look at BRS in the near future especially as they have a plan to purchase more mid range a/c such as A320neo A350, stranger things have happened...such as QR at CWL. Good luck with it CWL and QR
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Siargao Island
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intresting debate re QR, time will tell whether it can see the test of time. Personally from this side of the bridge in Somerset I would chose LHR to travel to mid east and beyond
I dont see any real benefits to fly from CWL,more choice of flights and routes to hub airports like DXB, DOH and others this generally means more competition which usually drives prices down
When I emigrated from UK some 5.5 years ago, having just sold my house beside CWL, I checked fares from CWL and KLM were charging extortionate fares, as suggested little or no competition on the route(s) from CWL, I hate LHR with a vengeance but CWL simply couldn't compete on fares and I ultimately travelled with Cathay Pacific ex LHR.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This style of announcement is nothing new for Qatar, and the lack of detail fits the type.
They 'announced' they wanted to serve BHX and HEL for example, but then the elapsed time from that initial 'announcement' to then the formal announcement on both destinations separately was around 3-4 years IIRC.
So, I feel this forum shouldn't be getting into a frenzy just yet, as exciting as it may be, as I feel it may be a while to wait until the next set of details emerge.
They 'announced' they wanted to serve BHX and HEL for example, but then the elapsed time from that initial 'announcement' to then the formal announcement on both destinations separately was around 3-4 years IIRC.
So, I feel this forum shouldn't be getting into a frenzy just yet, as exciting as it may be, as I feel it may be a while to wait until the next set of details emerge.
This style of announcement is nothing new for Qatar, and the lack of detail fits the type.
They 'announced' they wanted to serve BHX and HEL for example, but then the elapsed time from that initial 'announcement' to then the formal announcement on both destinations separately was around 3-4 years IIRC.
So, I feel this forum shouldn't be getting into a frenzy just yet, as exciting as it may be, as I feel it may be a while to wait until the next set of details emerge.
They 'announced' they wanted to serve BHX and HEL for example, but then the elapsed time from that initial 'announcement' to then the formal announcement on both destinations separately was around 3-4 years IIRC.
So, I feel this forum shouldn't be getting into a frenzy just yet, as exciting as it may be, as I feel it may be a while to wait until the next set of details emerge.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: South Wales
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flights are to begin in 2018, so they should be on-sale in the coming weeks/months.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: -
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are no subsidies for this route.
Hint that Welsh Government could gain power to cut Air Passenger Duty post-Brexit - Wales Online
I think APD is now around £73 for an economy passenger.
If they can sell the tickets at a similar price to LHR or BHX routes, that is an additional £73 in Qatar Airways pocket per passenger!
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: South Wales
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are a whole plethora of factors in this decision.
1) CWL is more operationally capable for this kind of route due to the Runway size, depending on A/C they intend to use of course.
2) APD may certainly be a factor for the future.
3) The Qatari's have long expressed an interest in investing in UK infrastructure so are keen to establish links with a growing Cardiff CBD which is gaining momentum rather quickly. The attraction of the Cardiff City Region, Metro and it's Universities is another city based factor.
There's many, and i'm sure you all know there's many more too. Great news for CWL, so can the usual mass complainants stop moaning, live with it and crawl back under your holes. Thank you. Some people just can't stand the thought that CWL has gained a great airline and a great route over BRS and many other UK airports.
1) CWL is more operationally capable for this kind of route due to the Runway size, depending on A/C they intend to use of course.
2) APD may certainly be a factor for the future.
3) The Qatari's have long expressed an interest in investing in UK infrastructure so are keen to establish links with a growing Cardiff CBD which is gaining momentum rather quickly. The attraction of the Cardiff City Region, Metro and it's Universities is another city based factor.
There's many, and i'm sure you all know there's many more too. Great news for CWL, so can the usual mass complainants stop moaning, live with it and crawl back under your holes. Thank you. Some people just can't stand the thought that CWL has gained a great airline and a great route over BRS and many other UK airports.
There's many, and i'm sure you all know there's many more too. Great news for CWL, so can the usual mass complainants stop moaning, live with it and crawl back under your holes. Thank you. Some people just can't stand the thought that CWL has gained a great airline and a great route over BRS and many other UK airports.
However as LAX_LHR pointed out, quite correctly, Qatar has "previous" here, announcing plans to serve BHX and then not coming through with them till some years later - same apparently with Helsinki. Fingers firmly crossed however for a 2018 start!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South West
Age: 35
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You state there are no subsidies for this route; are you able to tell us how you know this?
Can you provide us with the same information that makes you certain that is the case?
You have been very quick (and I suppose rightfully so) to defend why CWL was chosen as the next QR departure point over BRS (and other UK airports). However, you must understand that to those from outside CWL, some are questioning/moaning (and rightfully so) why an airport which in 2016 only handled 1,350,000 passengers (20th out of all UK airports) has now been chosen as the next QR destination?
Just looking purely at statistics, the airports in the UK currently served by QR are Heathrow (1st), Manchester (3rd), Edinburgh (6th) and Birmingham (7th), all of which handle over 11,000,000 passengers per year and have a strong freight market.... CWL just seems to stick out as not aligning with the current QR portfolio of destinations, not only in the UK but in Europe too.
Currently QR serves 34 destinations in Europe, 28 of which handle more than 10,000,000 passengers per year. The smallest destinations QR currently serve in Europe are Skopje (1.7M), Zagreb (2.7M) and Pisa, Belgrade & Sofia all of which handle around 5.0M. They are all capital cities/the main destination in their own countries except Pisa, which although not a capital is a large tourist destination as well as an important city. All of these destations are served by QR's A320s (Zagreb - A321s). My personal view is that CWL doesn't really seem to fit with what is already being served, unless there has been some sort of incentive?
Lastly, I just wanted to go through your list of three points which state the factors in QRs decision. Unfortunately, all three points are not much more than theory/speculation...
1) CWL is more operationally capable for this kind of route due to the runway size?
Here we go again..... Can you explain what you mean please? Have you seen the performance data for A320/A321NEOs or the B788s? You are aware that this year and next TOM will be operating 787-8s direct to Mexico, Florida and the Dominican Republic from Bristols "limited" runway. Sure, these flights are not full with freight but given that Doha is less than 7hrs away from the UK and and Cancun is around 11hrs, so I don't know how you get to this conclusion?
2) APD may be a certain factor
Based on speculation..... Would an airline start a route before something was set in stone, especially something as important as APD...?
3) Qatari's have long expressed an interest in investing in UK infrastructure
Still theory at this stage. I see no reason why an airline such as QR would set up a route because of this? Please enlighten me someone?
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: South Wales
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AirGuru,
You state there are no subsidies for this route; are you able to tell us how you know this?
Can you provide us with the same information that makes you certain that is the case?
You have been very quick (and I suppose rightfully so) to defend why CWL was chosen as the next QR departure point over BRS (and other UK airports). However, you must understand that to those from outside CWL, some are questioning/moaning (and rightfully so) why an airport which in 2016 only handled 1,350,000 passengers (20th out of all UK airports) has now been chosen as the next QR destination?
Just looking purely at statistics, the airports in the UK currently served by QR are Heathrow (1st), Manchester (3rd), Edinburgh (6th) and Birmingham (7th), all of which handle over 11,000,000 passengers per year and have a strong freight market.... CWL just seems to stick out as not aligning with the current QR portfolio of destinations, not only in the UK but in Europe too.
Currently QR serves 34 destinations in Europe, 28 of which handle more than 10,000,000 passengers per year. The smallest destinations QR currently serve in Europe are Skopje (1.7M), Zagreb (2.7M) and Pisa, Belgrade & Sofia all of which handle around 5.0M. They are all capital cities/the main destination in their own countries except Pisa, which although not a capital is a large tourist destination as well as an important city. All of these destations are served by QR's A320s (Zagreb - A321s). My personal view is that CWL doesn't really seem to fit with what is already being served, unless there has been some sort of incentive?
Lastly, I just wanted to go through your list of three points which state the factors in QRs decision. Unfortunately, all three points are not much more than theory/speculation...
1) CWL is more operationally capable for this kind of route due to the runway size?
Here we go again..... Can you explain what you mean please? Have you seen the performance data for A320/A321NEOs or the B788s? You are aware that this year and next TOM will be operating 787-8s direct to Mexico, Florida and the Dominican Republic from Bristols "limited" runway. Sure, these flights are not full with freight but given that Doha is less than 7hrs away from the UK and and Cancun is around 11hrs, so I don't know how you get to this conclusion?
2) APD may be a certain factor
Based on speculation..... Would an airline start a route before something was set in stone, especially something as important as APD...?
3) Qatari's have long expressed an interest in investing in UK infrastructure
Still theory at this stage. I see no reason why an airline such as QR would set up a route because of this? Please enlighten me someone?
You state there are no subsidies for this route; are you able to tell us how you know this?
Can you provide us with the same information that makes you certain that is the case?
You have been very quick (and I suppose rightfully so) to defend why CWL was chosen as the next QR departure point over BRS (and other UK airports). However, you must understand that to those from outside CWL, some are questioning/moaning (and rightfully so) why an airport which in 2016 only handled 1,350,000 passengers (20th out of all UK airports) has now been chosen as the next QR destination?
Just looking purely at statistics, the airports in the UK currently served by QR are Heathrow (1st), Manchester (3rd), Edinburgh (6th) and Birmingham (7th), all of which handle over 11,000,000 passengers per year and have a strong freight market.... CWL just seems to stick out as not aligning with the current QR portfolio of destinations, not only in the UK but in Europe too.
Currently QR serves 34 destinations in Europe, 28 of which handle more than 10,000,000 passengers per year. The smallest destinations QR currently serve in Europe are Skopje (1.7M), Zagreb (2.7M) and Pisa, Belgrade & Sofia all of which handle around 5.0M. They are all capital cities/the main destination in their own countries except Pisa, which although not a capital is a large tourist destination as well as an important city. All of these destations are served by QR's A320s (Zagreb - A321s). My personal view is that CWL doesn't really seem to fit with what is already being served, unless there has been some sort of incentive?
Lastly, I just wanted to go through your list of three points which state the factors in QRs decision. Unfortunately, all three points are not much more than theory/speculation...
1) CWL is more operationally capable for this kind of route due to the runway size?
Here we go again..... Can you explain what you mean please? Have you seen the performance data for A320/A321NEOs or the B788s? You are aware that this year and next TOM will be operating 787-8s direct to Mexico, Florida and the Dominican Republic from Bristols "limited" runway. Sure, these flights are not full with freight but given that Doha is less than 7hrs away from the UK and and Cancun is around 11hrs, so I don't know how you get to this conclusion?
2) APD may be a certain factor
Based on speculation..... Would an airline start a route before something was set in stone, especially something as important as APD...?
3) Qatari's have long expressed an interest in investing in UK infrastructure
Still theory at this stage. I see no reason why an airline such as QR would set up a route because of this? Please enlighten me someone?
I know no more than what is in the public domain regarding this specific route at the moment, it's a piece of theory/speculation.
I also know a lot more about the Cardiff Airport core catchment and Long-Haul catchment area (Yes, they are different) than what i can openly write about on a public forum, so it's not in your interests to challenge me on that. Same goes for the entirety of the Cardiff City Region.
Cardiff has a growing prestige, and is a Capital city. The fastest growing city in the whole of the UK you know. Look at what South Wales has hosted in recent years, NATO Conference, Ryder Cup, Champions League Final this Summer ? Is it not right for QR wanting a piece of the fastest growing city in the UK ? I think not ... Who would have thought Iberia Express would have launched MAD this year ? It's the city of the unexpected as Roald Dahl once put it.
Take it for what it is, it's happening. Live with it, move on. Cheers !
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 798
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are no subsidies for this route.
I know no more than what is in the public domain regarding this specific route at the moment, it's a piece of theory/speculation.
I also know a lot more about the Cardiff Airport core catchment and Long-Haul catchment area (Yes, they are different) than what i can openly write about on a public forum, so it's not in your interests to challenge me on that. Same goes for the entirety of the Cardiff City Region.
I also know a lot more about the Cardiff Airport core catchment and Long-Haul catchment area (Yes, they are different) than what i can openly write about on a public forum, so it's not in your interests to challenge me on that. Same goes for the entirety of the Cardiff City Region.
I think the point that is trying to be made is that if you're going to say things like this on an open forum, follow it up with facts and sources or don't say it at all.
787 shouldn't be a problem from BRS given the TOM routes. The A321neo from what i'm reading elsewhere needs over 7000ft of runway at MTOW. BRS is just under 6600ft so would potentially have weight restrictions. I know for a fact (from speaking to Pilots) that the standard A321's can have issues on departing from BRS in certain conditions and operational scenarios
so can the usual mass complainants stop moaning, live with it and crawl back under your holes. Thank you.
Take it for what it is, it's happening. Live with it, move on. Cheers !
There will be some disappointed and annoyed people questioning why not BRS, but so far there's no solid answers to those questions as details are still quite sketchy.
IF, and it's a big IF, it's supported by the WG, then I would look at it as a wise investment, not just for CWL but for the Welsh economy as a whole.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: South Wales
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the fence here. It's great for CWL and questionable for BRS.
I think the point that is trying to be made is that if you're going to say things like this on an open forum, follow it up with facts and sources or don't say it at all.
787 shouldn't be a problem from BRS given the TOM routes. The A321neo from what i'm reading elsewhere needs over 7000ft of runway at MTOW. BRS is just under 6600ft so would potentially have weight restrictions. I know for a fact (from speaking to Pilots) that the standard A321's can have issues on departing from BRS in certain conditions and operational scenarios
Comments like that are really not needed, bordering childish. Given all the route announcements BRS has gained over the years, I rarely, if ever, have seen similar comments made towards CWL. This isn't a playground.
There will be some disappointed and annoyed people questioning why not BRS, but so far there's no solid answers to those questions as details are still quite sketchy.
IF, and it's a big IF, it's supported by the WG, then I would look at it as a wise investment, not just for CWL but for the Welsh economy as a whole.
I think the point that is trying to be made is that if you're going to say things like this on an open forum, follow it up with facts and sources or don't say it at all.
787 shouldn't be a problem from BRS given the TOM routes. The A321neo from what i'm reading elsewhere needs over 7000ft of runway at MTOW. BRS is just under 6600ft so would potentially have weight restrictions. I know for a fact (from speaking to Pilots) that the standard A321's can have issues on departing from BRS in certain conditions and operational scenarios
Comments like that are really not needed, bordering childish. Given all the route announcements BRS has gained over the years, I rarely, if ever, have seen similar comments made towards CWL. This isn't a playground.
There will be some disappointed and annoyed people questioning why not BRS, but so far there's no solid answers to those questions as details are still quite sketchy.
IF, and it's a big IF, it's supported by the WG, then I would look at it as a wise investment, not just for CWL but for the Welsh economy as a whole.
The A321NEO cannot operate from BRS's runway. MTOW requires 7500ft. as a worst case, 7000ft. at a minimum. Could be a fairly valid reason for choosing CWL over BRS if they don't have confidence of efficiently operating B787's into either of the Severnside airports.
The A321NEO is a game-changing aircraft, and whilst having a range in excess of the B757, it is more than 30-35% more efficient. The A321NEO even has a greater range than that of the B737-MAX's i'm led to believe.
I personally wouldn't mind the trek to DOH on the A321, the QR cabins have a great seat pitch and i believe they're to be configured 165Y and 12C so far from the maximum dense capacity they can offer.
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Siargao Island
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally wouldn't mind the trek to DOH on the A321, the QR cabins have a great seat pitch and i believe they're to be configured 165Y and 12C so far from the maximum dense capacity they can offer.
After all the B777 was designed and planned for 9 across seating in economy, only the penny pinching airlines are squeezing in 10 across seating making it damn uncomfortable for the people that pay their salaries.
So go guess who one of the latest penny pinching airlines are to squeeze 10 across economy seating in to the B777's?