BERLIN BRANDT (BER) [Archive]

jabird

25th Aug 2011, 22:09

The new Berlin Brandurg 'Willy Brandt' Airport opens next June - probably making it the only major airport project which will be ready in time for the London Olympics!:ugh:

Why is this of potential interest to the UK airline industry? BER is billed as being sufficiently far east to operate flights to east Asia with a single crew. HEL or PRG may also offer this function, but Berlin is a much more significant destination in its own right, potentially bringing in operators who can tap the local market and offer through connections.

The obvious key player here will be Lufty, but they already have a double hub system at FRA and MUC, as well as a significant operation at DUS. AB currently serve BKK from TXL, but they will have much more expansion space at BBI. With their membership of oneworld, are there some further codeshare possibilities with BA? BA say they have given up on LHR R3, and that they might expand at MAD, but surely BER offers more opportunities to tap the emerging markets in Asia?

And will we finally get a 'sustainable' route from BHX to BER?

Phileas Fogg

25th Aug 2011, 22:59

But Schiphol is doing just fine for my trips to/from east/south Asia and I don't particularly care if there is an additional crew member, or two, on board, or not, whilst I'm sipping my Heineken etc. down the back!

How many passengers count, or have the opportunity to count, flight crew members as they board an aircraft?

And as for non augmented crewed flights ... yes, but only if the flights operate at the optimum time of day, circa 0900 to 1300 local time, crew duty limitations and all that, just try scheduling, circa 2 hours down times at the other end, flights operating between 0900 and 1300 from both Europe and Asia, it takes one hell of a lot of fine tuning to achieve it!

I'm sorry jabird but you're losing all credabilty with this one!

jabird

25th Aug 2011, 23:30

PF,

My interest is more in the airports than the airlines, so I am just reporting an argument I have read elsewhere on this one. Of course pax don't give a damn, but if it means reduced costs for the airline, it may be the difference between a route being viable or not.

I take your point about the fine tuning, but again this is surely an easier consideration at airports that have the spare capacity to let the airlines choose when they will operate, rather than dictate to the airlines which slots they can use?

Quoted capacity for BBI is 50m pax pa - more than twice the combined SXF (7) & TXL (15) - and two wide-spaced runways.

Phileas Fogg

26th Aug 2011, 06:00

jabird,

With local ltime differences it is possible to schedule both end's departures at optimum times of days, let's say between 0900 and 1300, but what happens when the outward flight suffers a delay and doesn't arrive in Asia until, let's say, 1300, if it was already a tight schedule on crew duty time then the aeroplane become grounded until 0900 the next morning due to there being insufficient crew members to operate it, try explaining this one to the passengers sitting in the terminal watching the flight's arrival!

I'm pretty sure that any reputable operator would 'heavy' crew such a schedule to err on the side of caution whilst doing away with fine tuning of flights scheduling.

If Berlin airport are advertising this as a 'carrot' to draw the airlines in then it's about as ridiculous advertising as Oxford/Kidlington's advertising of Christmas shopping charters to/from New York.

jabird

27th Aug 2011, 13:19

PF,

Finnair have put some ads out before about going via HEL being the 'direct route' to Asia. Direct to most people means go straight there, no need for a dunk in the sauna whilst changing planes! Clearly none of AY's Asia routes would survive without the feeder services.

I don't know the technicalities of airline crewing law, but surely if a flight is running late, the shift extends into over-time? I'm not aware of cases where a flight lands early because the crew are over limits? If it hasn't taken off, different story - as the infamous TFN disaster showed. If the crew are awaiting a late inbound, when does the shift start for safety and/or overtime purposes? I have seen airlines use cabin crew to do check-ins, but I think that is normally outsourced now.

Clearly, someone somewhere thought it was a point worth promoting, although I read it a while ago, so I can't give you a reference source.

There is also the question of optimum fuel burn - the longer the sector, the more fuel must be carried, just to transport the fuel that will be used later in the flight.

I've never seen a graph of this, but let's say the passenger starts at MAN and is going to BKK. MAN-LHR-BKK, being a very short and then a very long sector must surely burn more than MAN-BER-BKK, although the optimum may well be MAN-DXB-BKK?

I'm sorry for giving more questions than answers, but this is a rumours forum after all.

jabird

27th Aug 2011, 13:23

OXF - NYC, yes I agree - totally daft

London Oxford (Kidlington) Airport EGTK/OXF - Rail Service Enhancements Improve London Oxford Airport Accessibility (http://www.oxfordairport.co.uk/airport_news/news_2011/rail_enhancements.htm)

Even more daft - promoting OXF as a 'London' Airport - why the hell would anyone want to come out from London to catch a flight back down to the Channel Islands?

NYC seems to have gone from the website, didn't see how they were proposing to operate it.

Anyway, that's for the OXF thread, if there is one.

Phileas Fogg

27th Aug 2011, 15:23

jabird :)

Flights from Oxford to Palma | Oxford Airport Travel (http://www.oxfordairporttravel.co.uk/)

To complement the Jersey service, we are currently in discussions to add a number of new flights. These will include a range of scheduled services to a range of UK and European cities, along with some one-off charters, for example, Christmas Shopping in New York, as well as a renewed ski operation for next winter. We had hoped to be operating a flight to Mallorca this summer, but unfortunately, we have had to withdraw the service after further discussions with the airline that we had contracted to provide the aircraft.

Keep abreast of all these exciting developments by making this site one of your ‘favourites’ and looking out for ‘breaking news’ and our range of ‘offers of the week’. If you need more information or advice, then contact the Oxford Airport Travel team by phone or e-mail and we will be delighted to help you planning your holiday flying from London-Oxford Airport.

With regards to crew duty time limitations, and it's a long time since I worked with them, but, as for you and me, the optimum time of day to get the best out of us is to commence duty as a socialable time of the morning and the later in the day we start then the less one is going to get out of us before we become fatigued, the crew regulations work the same, i.e for one sector, in the morning, good for 14 hours duty which includes a 1hr or longer report time, perhaps only 13 hours during early afternoon, 12 hours late afternoon and early evening and may only 11 hours overnight ... but my memories have faded.

Basically, let's say an outward flight is delayed by a few hours, one knows this before it leaves Europe so the crew, at the other end, can be given 12 or more hours notice to adjust their period of required horizontal rest.

BUT, if they needed to report in the morning to get the flight back but this takes their report time in to the afternoon, well ..... and let it not be forgotten that many of the majors have crew unions that negotiate even more comfortable work practices in the favour of the crew members on top of legal crew duty regulations.

Mr Angry from Purley

27th Aug 2011, 19:38

Fogg
Long time since you worked with Crew Duty Limitations - well yes and even then you relied on your lowly Crewing Assistant to do all your chuffing work. The memory was perhaps faded during those times by the rum punch.....

Phileas Fogg

27th Aug 2011, 19:54

Mr A,

And how many times over the last 30 years, since those days of the rum punch, have the UK regulations been amended and/or changed, afterwards for a season I needed to learn and adhere to the Australian regulations, then back to UK regulations, then I had to write the FTL's for a JAA operator for approval by Bureau Veritas of France, then I needed to learn and adhere to the Dutch regulations for a season before reverting back to my written JAA regulations, then back to UK and so on.

So, some 9 years since I worked with any crew regulations I'm afraid to quote them because I'm somewhat confused between all the different regulations I've worked with.

jabird

27th Aug 2011, 23:34

Phileas,

So, some 9 years since I worked with any crew regulations I'm afraid to quote them because I'm somewhat confused between all the different regulations I've worked with.

In which case, I question your own challenge to my credibility:=

There are a number of constraints to the range of any one particular flight, anything relating to fuel burn seeing a streadily increasing cost per RPKM as the flight gets longer, until a point is reached where the maximum operating range of the aircraft is reached (without changing configuration, assuming the worst weather and load scenario).

The loco model is based on bringing the crew out and back in one rotation - and I presume that's still the case, even on longer sectors like EDI-TFS or EDI-ATH.

There is then a 'step' up in costs around a 4 hrs sector, even though the aircraft can technically fly further. IIRC, there are two rear-facing seats at the front of a 738 which are used by the crew during take-off and landing, and another two at the back in the galley? Crew who aren't working aren't just dead weight - they are taking up a seat which could be sold.

So there must still be a major advantage in operating long-haul sectors which are underneath a certain length, presumably around 8 hours - adding time for boarding at the start and a margin for delays at the end.

BER is approx. one hour flying time east of FRA, which itself is the easternmost of the major ('big 4') European hubs. I count 11 destinations in East Asia (SIN & East) served by Finnair from HEL, and one in N.America (JFK) +YYZ seasonal. That is disproportianate to what would be expected, considering the population & incomes in HEL. It can't just be because being in that location makes HEL a natural hub - there must be something to do with the differences in sector length.

TXL has always previously been constrained by Berlin's unique history & geography - so it was never a logical place for transfer traffic. SXF used an outdated cold-war terminal.

So, could there be an opportunity for growth in the new BER beyond the o&d market? I still think there could.

Phileas Fogg

28th Aug 2011, 11:14

jabird,

The airline of 30 (ish) years ago at which Mr Angry & myself worked together, that airline's originally wide body long-haulers were DC10-10's thus on the UK/LAX/UK routes a fuel & US immigaration clearance stop would take place in BGR.

Later on the airline acquired some DC10-30's, in addition to the -10's, and these could operate the UK/LAX/UK routes direct, which they did because that is what the passengers wanted, direct services, but with all the additional fuel that needed to be tankered for the first half (ish) of each journey to be used in the second half of each journey, it would have been cheaper to continue operations via BGR despite all the extra sector costs and additional flying involved.

You say BER is one hour east of FRA, well a quick Google search suggests the distance is around 234NM which would be a jet flying time of around 30 minutes however don't be mistaken that aircraft fly east/west between Europe and Asia and the best places (western) European airports for the shortest hops to/from Asia might be the Scandinavian airports, as you mention Helsinki, flights between Europe/Asia/Europe route (approximately) up over Siberia and if you want to demonstrate the shortest track between two points then go buy yourself a good quality/sized globe and a piece of string, place one end of the string over one point and pull it as tight as you can to the other point and that will be the shortest track.

But, a circa 30 minutes difference between FRA and BER .... I can't see it happening, can you?

Cyrano

28th Aug 2011, 20:58

I count 11 destinations in East Asia (SIN & East) served by Finnair from HEL, and one in N.America (JFK) +YYZ seasonal. That is disproportianate to what would be expected, considering the population & incomes in HEL. It can't just be because being in that location makes HEL a natural hub - there must be something to do with the differences in sector length.

Why can't it be? Add the fact that the home carrier in Helsinki is motivated to build a transfer business, specifically focused on Europe to East/NE Asia, around its advantageous location and I don't think you have to bring crew-saving arguments into the equation to explain the network density there. (AMS is another example. The number of direct flights which KL operates from AMS is considerably more than the local population would justify - it's the connecting traffic which they have built up over the years which enables this level of service.)

And following on from Phileas's point about saving costs by having a fuel stop in UK-BGR-LAX, I recall seeing a reference a few months back to a paper (by someone in Rolls-Royce? or am I imagining that?) about how a major saving in overall long-haul airline fuel consumption could be achieved by simply stopping for fuel en route rather than flying very long non-stop sectors. Does anyone have the reference to this? (Yes, I know that passengers want to go non-stop. But sooner or later, if fuel prices continue to climb and one-stop flights are appreciably cheaper, they'll be priced accordingly and passengers will make their own choices.)

Phileas Fogg

28th Aug 2011, 21:15

The classic hub operation is Icelandair's KEF hub in mid North Atlantic, twice each day the fleet arrives from one direction, all the passengers play musical chairs/aeroplanes, and the fleet heads off in t'other direction, just look at the size of Icelandair's fleet ... It's just not possible that anywhere near that number of people want to travel to/from Iceland.

jabird

28th Aug 2011, 23:05

PF,

Yes, I know aircraft don't fly 'straight', and even your globe idea is limited - there are numerous waypoints / airspace restrictions etc.

The hub / size argument could be applied to numerous airports - FRA itself serves a relatively small metro population, but it does obviously have a large business market. In the US, ATL is quite a way down the list of largest cities by population or business, but the airport has created a transfer market, which in turn has attracted some corporates to relocate. Ditto for DEN.

However, LHR and CDG are both 'natural' hubs in that they serve large populations with substantial business markets and tourism, together with the transfer market.

BBI / BER is a new opportunity offering twice the capacity the other two terminals offered. The new rail hub under the terminal will also improve connections to other nearby cities. I know there was a lot of wrangling locally before this facility got built, and there is a €4bn investment to recoup, but there is no NRN or HHN alternative. Will this make BER an expensive white elephant, or will they be adaptable to all types of airline? Either way, there is surely more room to play with than at DUS or FRA.

Phileas Fogg

29th Aug 2011, 07:20

jabird,

You make me smile when you suggest HHN as an alternative to FRA yet you make no mention of the other airports nearer to FRA, including CGN, than HHN is, have you taken MOL's marketing too seriously? :)

Lufthansa already has 3 hubs ... FRA, MUC and DUS allbeit DUS being much more the regional aircraft with some larger B737 or similar.

A hub isn't just for flights to/from Asia, that it might be 30 minutes nearer etc. What about the flights to/from The Americas, Africa etc.

As for connections to/from Asia the middle east airlines, Emirates, Etihad, Qatar, Gulf Air etc. have got this pretty well tied up, they're approximately mid point to/from and they operate to multiple destinations at both ends.

jabird

29th Aug 2011, 23:07

You make me smile when you suggest HHN as an alternative to FRA yet you make no mention of the other airports nearer to FRA, including CGN, than HHN is, have you taken MOL's marketing too seriously?

Frankfurt (City centre) - CGN 179k; - HHN 125k

Hmm, I think we are now both equally guilty of making geographical assumptions before we check them:ugh:

I agree, CGN is much quicker by train, but I did once actually take the 'scenic route' out to HHN via Koblenz. MOL's marketing had nothing to do with it - I had been in AMS for a stag do, wanted to visit DUS, CGN, STR and FRA (as it happens, the airports and the cities they served). This was c. 2003, long before LH offered one-way fares. So even though FRA-BHX was a much more direct route, I wasn't shelling out £300+ for the privilege.

Now back to BER......

I've already said I didn't expect LH to set up another hub there, and that AB would be more likely to expand. They already serve JFK and KEF westbound, and BKK (+HKT seasonal) and DXB eastbound.

My initial post was about the opportunities for UK travellers - so flying to BER to fly back to JFK or KEF doesn't really make much sense. My concern would be that AB don't currently serve the UK from BER, but that could change with the new airport. Germanwings also offer through connections, which might be of interest eg to Moscow, but again they don't serve the UK from SXF either.

U2 & FR both have several UK and/or IE routes into SXF, but neither offers through connection, nor do either have any plans to expand to Russia. However, U2 are starting MAN-SXF in October, and BER is one of the most frequently discussed 'missing' destinations on the BHX thread.

So we can stay in the 'argument clinic' if you like, but I still think what has to be one of the most significant European airport developments in recent years (perhaps since ATH) is going to create some opportunities for UK travellers. I also think it sets a precedent - most new airport developments involve a new site being found, with the intention of closing down the old site. History shows us that old airports die hard - but I don't think there has been a case where 3 airports have been amalgamated on the one site - even if BBI uses much of the land already taken by SXF.

So I'll leave you with a question - what will FR do with the new airport? Will there be a hike in charges for them to complain about? Again, I can't quote the source, but I heard something about costs being kept at the same rate - but this would surely result in an uneven playing field between former users of SXF and TXL? Will MOL try and storm off back to the terminal at SXF, before the bulldozers wreck it?

virginblue

30th Aug 2011, 07:29

As far as I remember, MOL has repeatedly announced that FR will leave BER once it replaces SXF. The fees at BER will increase dramatically, not only compared to cheapish SXF, but also to rather pricey TXL. When the fees were published a while ago, there was almost some sort of mutiny among German airlines.

AB currently serve BKK from TXL, but they will have much more expansion space at BBI.

AB are almost bancrupt. They will be happy if they survive next winter with almost all their capital burned (as you will have noticed, their CEO stepped down the other week thanks to the disastrous performance of the airline he sort of founded). Even if they do survive, they do not have the fleet to set up a proper longhaul hub. Besides that, if BER is the only place other than HEL and PRG to offer these advantages, oneworld already has Finnair and HEL - do you expect BA/IB to dump them like a hot potato?

In the end, BER is just another new airport in an already crowded European market that lacks a strong home carrier that could turn it into something bigger.

jabird

31st Aug 2011, 21:54

VB,

There are no official statements on Ryanair's website, although MOL obviously comments on all kinds of issues every time he faces the press.

With their recent moves towards more 'main' airports, I think they will be more likely to stay. There are at least separate low cost and airbridge enabled gates.

FR have previously pulled routes due to the German APD equivalent, currently €8. Faced with a large new airport on their doorstep, German politicians might would want to see this revised down, rather than up, but they will also have to placate the powerful green lobby - but they didn't stop FRA adding a new runway.

I think the demise of AB has been predicted quite a few times in recent years - surely any airline needs to be of a certain financial standing in order to be accepted into one of the alliance groups?

AB have 15 A330's in the fleet, and 15 787s due from 2014. I think that should be sufficient to launch new long haul routes, if they see profit potential? Obviously, long haul is higher risk, but AB are already in this arena, and they won't face competition from other European loco's.

I never said BER was the only place to offer an 'eastern' advantage - unlike the US E or W coasts which have strict cut-off points, BER will compete with various airports N,S,E and W. However, the population of BER, at 4.4m (metro) is notably larger than most other comparable airports, and disposable incomes are also higher than they are to the east. Therefore, there is a huge, wealthy market for o&d, which can then be supplemented by offering transfers.

Of course BA won't drop oneworld connections via HEL - my suggestion was simply that AB might offer some extra destinations to the east, and these could be offered as through connections with BA from LHR, and perhaps with additional ex-UK routes such as BHX.

It is quite common to be routed outbound LHR-ORD-SLC and then return SLC-DFW-LHR, so why not via BER when AB have full OW membership next year, assuming they are still with us:)

virginblue

31st Aug 2011, 22:48

The 787s are replacements for the Airbus A330 (part of which are purely mid-haul charter aircraft with Y387). As a result of the problems, AB is, by th way, shrinking its fleet.

I think the demise of AB has been predicted quite a few times in recent years

Yes, but never did the CEO of 20 years (and part-owner) resign.

There are no official statements on Ryanair's website, although MOL obviously comments on all kinds of issues every time he faces the press. With their recent moves towards more 'main' airports, I think they will be more likely to stay. There are at least separate low cost and airbridge enabled gates.

Wel, this is from a press release by the airport - it does not sound as if they are pulling all strings to keep Ryanair:

On the subject of Ryanair, and boss Michael O’Leary, who has threatened to leave Berlin on numerous occasions, Airport CEO Schwarz said: “BBI’s success does not depend on Ryanair’s presence. Ryanair’s business model is mainly based on flying to small, remote airports that offer subsidies – once these stop, it leaves again.”

Phileas Fogg

31st Aug 2011, 22:49

jabird,

After I posted it I realised, the joke was that HHN was nearer to CGN than it was to FRA rather than FRA being nearer to CGN than HHN.

But when I lived/worked in LUX it was a great joke, particularly amongst the Irish, that a Frankfurt airport has just opened around the corner and 'we' can get to/from home on the cheap and without bothering Charleroi.

HHN ain't nowhere near to FRA and never shall it be.

jabird

31st Aug 2011, 23:45

HHN ain't nowhere near to FRA and never shall it be.

But it is closer to FRA than it is to STN:D

My brother tried to have a go at his (considerably better paid) flatmate for using HHN, instead of FRA. His response was simple - FR were considerably cheaper than the alternatives, even after the cost / hassle of using Luxembourg East was accounted for. I think he was just going for the w/e, so he avoided MOL's most fanciful charges. when I used HHN in 2003, there wasn't a BHX or EMA route from CGN, and the ICE station hadn't been opened - but even if it was, that has to be added on to the cost, much more than a bus fare.

So the bottom line is - it doesn't matter how far these Ryanairports are from the cities they serve. As long as they are marketed as an alternative, and as long as IATA deems them part of the same city group, they can and will leak passengers from the main terminal.

BBI is unique in that it is replacing 3 airports (or 2 1/2 anyway) - and although I'm sure there are other military fields within a 100km radius of Berlin, I haven't seen any suggestion of MOL using them, nor do I think he'd have a hope in hell of getting approval to convert one.

Therefore, BER is different from DUS and FRA in that it does not have an immediate low cost alternative on its doorstep. The closest major cities are Magdeburg and Szczecin - both of which have their airports some considerable distance from the city, and both further away from Berlin.

The airport with the shortest drive from BER would be LEJ, at a whopping 176k - now I think MOL stretches to about 125k in his wildest fantasies - eg NYO & VST + TRF.

However, if BER can keep all the routes from SXF and TXL, then it will be able to suck passengers from all of these cities, as it offers a direct connection to the ICE network. This is a notable improvement from SXF, which mainly offers S-Bahn, and a limited range of regional services, and it does so through a station which is not directly connected to the terminal. Any city not directly connected to the new airport will be a simple change at Berlin HBF - a delight to use, compared to lugging bags across London. Can't see your connection? Just pop downstairs!

Anyway, that stuff is all good for the Germans! I think a new BHX route would be most welcome round here, that would do!

virginblue

1st Sep 2011, 08:57

However, if BER can keep all the routes from SXF and TXL, then it will be able to suck passengers from all of these cities, as it offers a direct connection to the ICE network. This is a notable improvement from SXF, which mainly offers S-Bahn, and a limited range of regional services, and it does so through a station which is not directly connected to the terminal.

We are talking about 8 or 9 ICE trains each day tat will be dead-ending at the airport instead of the central station, IIRC. More or less to keep the local politicians happy.

Any city not directly connected to the new airport will be a simple change at Berlin HBF - a delight to use, compared to lugging bags across London. Can't see your connection? Just pop downstairs!

It will be 30minutes before you get to the city from the airport. Realistically, I do not see who would be willing to make a train connection through BER other than the locals from the sparsely populated areas around Berlin. Any larger cities in the region have their own airports which are served at least by Star Alliance, if not also by Skyteam and/or oneworld (LEJ, DRS, HAJ, HAM).

Phileas Fogg

1st Sep 2011, 09:03

Cottbus-Drewitz Airport

jabird

5th Sep 2011, 19:30

PF - Berlin to CBU is 161k, really don't see it happening.

VB - the ICE is the flagship, or flagtrain at least. I'm sure I've seen 15-17 mins somewhere, but Wiki says 30. It also says 10% of pax will come from Poland - POZ, SZZ etc have pretty limited networks, as do LEJ and DRS.

For home users, the rail connection is very efficient - not just via the Hbf, but also via the ring. That has to make it easier to access than the current TXL or SXF.

Apparently the fed govt is using the SXF terminal until they get their own swanky VIP shed - so MOL might have to wait until 2014 before he gets his hands back on it. I suspect he'll storm out initially, make a big fuss about using SXF, and then eventually base ac in the new BER.

Phileas Fogg

5th Sep 2011, 20:13

jabird,

More like 100kms/65miles, check it out:

Germany Distance Calculator, Driving Directions, Distance Between Cities, Distance Chart (http://distancecalculator.globefeed.com/Germany_Distance_Calculator.asp)

jpthomas72

6th Sep 2011, 14:07

For home users, the rail connection is very efficient - not just via the Hbf, but also via the ring. That has to make it easier to access than the current TXL or SXF.You're aware that people are very unhappy with BER's public transport connection ? I mean the 'Dresdner Bahn' in Berlin hasn't been finished in time, currently planned for 2014, so the trains have to go via various loops, and will also only be every 30min and take 30min or more. Say what you want against Paddington and LHR, but that's not what the Heathrow Express is offering. Road access is even poorer, from wealthy Charlottenburg all traffic will go on the already overcrowded city motorway. BER initially has 25m capacity, so it's immediately full with current TXL+SXF users. The 50m quoted here are the expansion stage (satellites), which is only about to be built, not even sure they've started.
While it's surely a step forward for SXF users, many TXL users aren't happy about this massive change. Oh, surely Berlin HBf is a great building, but have you ever tried to change trains between the underground and overground plattforms ? The elevators are very slow, and the layout is confusing. I like to use Ostbahnhof and Suedkreuz (now that's a great station !) for that reason. At least Berlin HBf now has one hotel nearby (until recently, only a hostel). Willy Brandt wasn't actually that popular with all Germans, so if the airport turns out to be not such a great thing after all, insulting his name isn't such a big deal. I doubt the airport will be commonly known as 'Berlin Brandt'. Will still be Schoenefeld or BBI. For the airport buffs amongst you, some aspects of BER remind me of YMX. We just don't need another hub in Europe. If so, why not WAW, no German air-tax, and no protests about the aircraft noise (now that's a whole new can of worms for any BER discussion). NB Am very amused about the mention of our modest little airfield HHN in this thread ;-)

jabird

26th Sep 2011, 01:33

Phileas, are you talking about Cottbus Airbase or CBU Cottbus Airport? Your planner gives me 103k to Drewitz, it doesn't acknowledge the airport.

Either way - we're talking 100k+, this doesn't compare with nearby cities which have established airports, where pax might make a decision between a less frequent local service and a better offering at BER.

Now what were you telling me about HHN and NRN being nowhere near FRA / DUS respectively?

jabird

26th Sep 2011, 01:40

JP,

You're aware that people are very unhappy with BER's public transport connection. Oh, surely Berlin HBf is a great building, but have you ever tried to change trains between the underground and overground plattforms ? For the airport buffs amongst you, some aspects of BER remind me of YMX.

I hve followed some of the local politics, but I've tried to stick to stuff that's relevant to BER as an airport. Architecture and public transport is a long debate - I happen to be a huge fan of the Hbf, but this is often a question of taste aswell as practicality. Yes, I have transferred there, and I think the views from the elevated tracks are stunning - not that this matters if you are a commuter stuck on a delayed train (yes, some of us Brits know that the trains get delayed in Germany too!).

Any big airport project is always going to get compared to YMX sooner or later, but BER is not the same. Sure, the costs are high, but when you roll 3 airport sites into one, you aren't going to find a new out-of-the-way facility losing out to an easier-to-use facility closer to town, because there is no YUL. Competition obliterated!

Seljuk22

9th Nov 2011, 11:16

Today LH announce to base 15 A319/A320/A321 at BER. In total there will be 23 A319/A320/A321 based at BER by the LH Group.

30 new routes: Barcelona, Bastia, Beirut, Bergen, Birmingham, Bologna, Bucharest, Catania, Dubrovnik, Geneva, Helsinki, Istanbul, Izmir, Lyon, Malaga, Manchester, Milan-Linate, Moscow-Vnukovo, Nice, Palma, Reykjavik, Rome, Split, Stockholm, Sylt, Tel Aviv, Valencia, Vienna, Zadar, Zagreb
http://infolounge.partnerplusbenefit.de/pdf/Lufthansa_Flugplan_Berlin-neue_Verbindungen.pdf

http://presse.lufthansa.com/fileadmin/downloads/de/news/LH-Streckennetz-2012-BER.pdf

pee

9th Nov 2011, 12:33

It's a very logical decision of LH. But are they really creating a proper hub, or just increasing the number of planes stationed in Berlin?

Anyway, tnx for the HEL route :ok:- also a good choice.

Seljuk22

9th Nov 2011, 12:56

LH said it's point-to-point but expecting 10% up to 15% transit passengers. One-way flights start with 49€ to compete with AB and EZY.
Wages for the crew will be 20% lower compared to FRA or MUC. New Airbus will be used to reduce costs (no maintenance, fuel efficiency etc).

Maybe in the future there will be a hub with long-haul flights.

jabird

9th Nov 2011, 14:48

This is still good news for Berlin, and at long last for Birmingham :D:D:D

I can see some connection opportunities, especially to MOW, but this is mainly a vote of confidence that they can expand in the new airport, when TXL was always tight.

davidjohnson6

9th Nov 2011, 19:23

Does this mean Air Berlin becomes more like the German equivalent of bmi, slowly being squeezed from both the high and low end carriers into a loss of its customer base ?

jabird

20th Nov 2011, 04:20

DJ, the difference is that LHR had three home-grown carriers all competing for the same slots, so bmi could never make any money, and I don't think VS are doing that well either - but they are atleast an airline some people 'want' to fly with.

BER is the opposite of LHR - a new airport with plenty of room to grow. AB perhaps were different from the other low cost airlines by using TXL - now everyone is at BER. Whatever changes happen, I think the problems of AB pre-date this new airport.

Jet2 now launching LBA-BER. They are presumably happy with the airport fees regime.