I've been bored today for once, and so spent a few minutes looking at the baby S07 CWL schedule. Well, first the good news, it definately needs three aircraft (eg, at 1115, one aircraft is en route BFS, one en route PRG, one returning from AGP) - I used a Monday for my thinkings...
BUT:
This is NOT a good low cost schedule. It has holes everywhere, which is precisely not what the low cost airline needs, and usually does all it can to avoid.
My guess is:
Aircraft 1 does AGP-ALC-BFS (out at 0600, home at 2145)
Aircraft 2 does EDI-PRG-EDI (home at a VERY early 1910!)
Aircraft 3 does BFS-GLA-AMS (out at 1020 - late - and back at 2205, with some looooong turns in there at CWL)
Either
1. baby have some planned maintenance - odd for the summer season; or
2. they have some ideas coming up to fill the gaps and make better use of the aircraft; or
3. they are going to be using an aircraft as a hot standby for, say, BHX; or
4. their scheduling team have had a brain fart; or
5. based on OltonPete's BHX study, they can't schedule anyway; or
5. they have lost the plot!
what routes could be supported here if airlines were to give our airport a chance
It doesn't really work that way. The airport is not a charity case, but a supplier to the airline industry, in the same way that a fuel company is. It is up to the airlines to find routes. Being honest, almost any route can be filled by any airline, if the fare is right - the trick is, can the revenue be lifted high enough to make it worthwhile. I call this the "Field of Dreams" school of airline management, Xtypeman will understand that!!
TA