COVENTRY
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Finsbury Park
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would think CVT is an ideal Low Cost destination for the midlands, it certainly meets the no frills criteria.
I'm still not convinced about Tfly's shorthaul aspirations though, I may be wrong here but I think they've recently ordered some more 737s which would not distance them much from their Low Cost competitors.
It seems an odd purchase to be making if they are going to concentrate on longhaul in the future.
I'm still not convinced about Tfly's shorthaul aspirations though, I may be wrong here but I think they've recently ordered some more 737s which would not distance them much from their Low Cost competitors.
It seems an odd purchase to be making if they are going to concentrate on longhaul in the future.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TUI (Tfly's owner) has about 46 new 737-800s on order. I have already come. How long will they keep the older 737s?
The 100 day review is due to report in Jan08. I expect that is when bad news will come out for CVT.
I am sure the BHX would like to do a deal that would kill off CVT. It will all be a bit like poker.
The 100 day review is due to report in Jan08. I expect that is when bad news will come out for CVT.
I am sure the BHX would like to do a deal that would kill off CVT. It will all be a bit like poker.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Coventry
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone confirm that TUI have "About 46 737-800s on order"? I can find plenty of references to having that sort of number of 737NGs on order but can find no information that they are all -800s. This is potentially key to the future of the CVT operation (and that at other airports including some Greek Islands).
I suspect though that much bigger, broad brush policies of the new group will finally determine CVTs future with Thomsonfly. I doubt that offers from BHX or even achieving 100% load factors and fantastic yields at CVT would change that.
I suspect though that much bigger, broad brush policies of the new group will finally determine CVTs future with Thomsonfly. I doubt that offers from BHX or even achieving 100% load factors and fantastic yields at CVT would change that.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Warwick Uk
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The contract that Thomsonfly entered into when the current operators took over the airport just might have a part to play in determining the future presence of Thomsonfly at Coventry and how long that lasts.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So far, as far as I can tell, TUI have had 7 out of the order for 46 boeing 737s and all have been 737-800. CVT has dropped to 2-4 flights per day over the winter and is little better in the summer.
They are doing a "100 days" review that should end on the 29th Jan.
Then we should know.
They are doing a "100 days" review that should end on the 29th Jan.
Then we should know.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't see why 738 has to be restricted never mind a 752! BLK has a runway about 400ft shorter than CVT and can easily operate 752 to TFS and did so twice weekly last winter. TOM also used the 752 on their ALC rotation until LS arrived. Also, the FR 738s operated into BLK twice a day and used to four times per day each being able to carry 189 passengers.
Can anybody expain why the airport cannot hold these? Cheers.
Can anybody expain why the airport cannot hold these? Cheers.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Coventry
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 757-200 can operate with full capacity from Coventry, it has previously been used to fly double drops when the resident 737s have gone tech (CVT-BCN-AGP-CVT springs to mind). This is more to do with the excellent power to weight ratio of the aircraft, making the 5,987 ft runway at CVT less of an obstacle.
The 738 obviously does not have as good a power to weight ratio, and must therefore be payload restricted from CVT. Not sure if a full payload on a sector length equivalent to DUB would require a 738 payload restriction, however certainly flying to AGP, ALC, FAO etc would require a severe curtailing of number of seats on sale.
The 738 obviously does not have as good a power to weight ratio, and must therefore be payload restricted from CVT. Not sure if a full payload on a sector length equivalent to DUB would require a 738 payload restriction, however certainly flying to AGP, ALC, FAO etc would require a severe curtailing of number of seats on sale.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Coventry
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I know, there have not been any problems or restrictions with B752 operations from Coventry. I know TOM have landed them with 220 passengers plus when operating combined flights with Doncaster.
I believe the main issue with the B738 is the landing distance available -particularly when factored for a wet runway.
Although the tarmac might be about the same length as Blackpool the landing distance on Rw23 at Coventry is 1615 metres (Rw05 1795metres) compared with 1869 metres both ways at Blackpool. Unfortunately Coventry Rw 23 has 200 metres of tarmac at the end which they are not allowed to use because Warwick DC will not give planning permission. (It was laid done by a previous owner of the airport allegedly without proper permission).
I believe the main issue with the B738 is the landing distance available -particularly when factored for a wet runway.
Although the tarmac might be about the same length as Blackpool the landing distance on Rw23 at Coventry is 1615 metres (Rw05 1795metres) compared with 1869 metres both ways at Blackpool. Unfortunately Coventry Rw 23 has 200 metres of tarmac at the end which they are not allowed to use because Warwick DC will not give planning permission. (It was laid done by a previous owner of the airport allegedly without proper permission).
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
100 day review
TOM have cut the flying programme at Coventry to just a few per day. They will be doing only about 34 takeoffs per week in the summer. It is clear that they have a big duplication with BHX. One flight is even co-timed with the same destination as BHX.
Looking at the TOM website it is clear that the shortest routes operate from Coventry and longer - short hauls go from BHX. This is unlikely to last. TUI are doing a big review of what they do. It is due to report on the 29th Jan 2008. The Coventry op is clearly not viable at its current pax level. Instead of going to 2 million per year it is dropping.
I am sure that BHX would love to take the extra TOM plane. The question is will it happen in the spring or after 2nd November when current booking period is over.
Looking at the TOM website it is clear that the shortest routes operate from Coventry and longer - short hauls go from BHX. This is unlikely to last. TUI are doing a big review of what they do. It is due to report on the 29th Jan 2008. The Coventry op is clearly not viable at its current pax level. Instead of going to 2 million per year it is dropping.
I am sure that BHX would love to take the extra TOM plane. The question is will it happen in the spring or after 2nd November when current booking period is over.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Coventry
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right, firstly, current booking period for flights/holidays from Coventry Airport goes until 30 April 2009, check thomson.co.uk and see for yourself.
If the Coventry operation is "clearly not viable at its current pax level", then firstly you must obviously have all the stats in front of you, and secondly, that same rule of thumb should also be attributed to BOH (only one based aircraft next Summer)?
The only reason Coventry would not be viable, is due to the fast backtracking of the FCA/TOM "merger" to concentrate on charter ops: make a quick buck for the shareholders.
I have no doubt that TUITravel want to pull out of Coventry, interesting time for TOM/FCA will be when the short-haul charter/package market is finally consigned to the history books, which should not be in the too distant future given the rapid growth of EZY and FR over the last 5 years.
If the Coventry operation is "clearly not viable at its current pax level", then firstly you must obviously have all the stats in front of you, and secondly, that same rule of thumb should also be attributed to BOH (only one based aircraft next Summer)?
The only reason Coventry would not be viable, is due to the fast backtracking of the FCA/TOM "merger" to concentrate on charter ops: make a quick buck for the shareholders.
I have no doubt that TUITravel want to pull out of Coventry, interesting time for TOM/FCA will be when the short-haul charter/package market is finally consigned to the history books, which should not be in the too distant future given the rapid growth of EZY and FR over the last 5 years.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The last flight you can book from Coventry is to Pisa on 01/11/2008 by doing a search. If you put a date after this in the booking form then Covetry is not a option in the from box. You can cheat the system by selecting the 1/11/08 and then changing the date forward. That does not mean it is closing on 2/11/08 but does mean they will have very few bookings past that date.
The "100 day" review will report on the 29th Jan. That should make the future clear.
TOM were working 3 planes from Coventry but it looks like its down to 1, sometimes 2 in 2008.
There is little point having staff at Coventry for just a few flights a day when they could go from BHX.
The "100 day" review will report on the 29th Jan. That should make the future clear.
TOM were working 3 planes from Coventry but it looks like its down to 1, sometimes 2 in 2008.
There is little point having staff at Coventry for just a few flights a day when they could go from BHX.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Coventry
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You might want to visit the Thomson holidays website, then to see operations from Coventry into April 2009, could the reason for no flights after 02 November possibly be that the scheduled season Winter 2008/09 has not been released for sale yet, as going by your presumption, there will be no DSA-AGP, ALC, FAO (scheduled flights), or any BOH scheduled flights...only two flights from DSA in Winter 2008/09, and 3 from BOH for the same period. Suppose that these operations should therefore be moved to LBA and to SOU/LGW respectively then, as of course there would be little point in having staff for so few flights.
If the CVT operation ends, then it would be far more likely that TOM/FCA or whatever the hell they think they are now called will send the 733s back to the lessors to save money, or send them up to MAN as it is there that the company at the moment has a strong position, rather than have a 150 seater plane try and make profit flying to/from the 4th most expensive airport to operate from in the world.
Of course though, befree, the insecurity surrounding 500 jobs, and the impact on 500 families if TOM leave is completely irrelevant, just as long as BHX is rid of some competition and gets one extra plane.
If the CVT operation ends, then it would be far more likely that TOM/FCA or whatever the hell they think they are now called will send the 733s back to the lessors to save money, or send them up to MAN as it is there that the company at the moment has a strong position, rather than have a 150 seater plane try and make profit flying to/from the 4th most expensive airport to operate from in the world.
Of course though, befree, the insecurity surrounding 500 jobs, and the impact on 500 families if TOM leave is completely irrelevant, just as long as BHX is rid of some competition and gets one extra plane.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Warwick
Age: 42
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SeamusCVT,
I can feel the anger in your posts, and if TFly do pull out of CVT (and sadly IMHO I think that will happen at some point in 2008), although the stated reasons will probably largely be about consolidation, concentration on charter, ?problems with 738's I think the real villain of the piece is WDC and their incompetent planning dept (I can substantiate this statement people so please don't flame me, PM for details).
As has been extensively discussed before they have done nothing to help CVT and it seems at times have gone out of their way to scupper it based on the very vocal minority. A crying crying shame; and a shocking waste of council tax payers money.....
Lets hope that TFlys 100 day review doesn't turn out as predicted; or that CVT get some good new business in - I would hate to see its demise! Chin up all.
HC.
I can feel the anger in your posts, and if TFly do pull out of CVT (and sadly IMHO I think that will happen at some point in 2008), although the stated reasons will probably largely be about consolidation, concentration on charter, ?problems with 738's I think the real villain of the piece is WDC and their incompetent planning dept (I can substantiate this statement people so please don't flame me, PM for details).
As has been extensively discussed before they have done nothing to help CVT and it seems at times have gone out of their way to scupper it based on the very vocal minority. A crying crying shame; and a shocking waste of council tax payers money.....
Lets hope that TFlys 100 day review doesn't turn out as predicted; or that CVT get some good new business in - I would hate to see its demise! Chin up all.
HC.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: sunshine coast
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello, just a little input from BOH. The TOM schedule for winter 08/09 currently only consists of purely charter flights. The loco flights will not be added till early in the new year. It will be interesting to see what happens after the 'Big Meeting' as to whether the loco flights will cease completely at the end of next summers schedule. Hopefully not, although U2 or FR will more than likely take over the routes from BOH. Lets hope 2008 starts with some good news for both CVT and BOH
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Convergence International Aviation Limited
It seems the airport is owned by CAFCO Coventry and CONVERGENCE INTERNATIONAL AVIATION LIMITED (They have a website www.ciao.aero).
They seem to have grand plans but are overdue at filling accounts at compaies house. CONVERGENCE INTERNATIONAL AVIATION LIMITED should have filled the 2006 accounts 2 months ago. CAFCO Coventry have never filled accounts.
Which of the many firms is the real owner of the airport and are they broke?
They seem to have grand plans but are overdue at filling accounts at compaies house. CONVERGENCE INTERNATIONAL AVIATION LIMITED should have filled the 2006 accounts 2 months ago. CAFCO Coventry have never filled accounts.
Which of the many firms is the real owner of the airport and are they broke?
Name & Registered Office:
CAFCO (COVENTRY) LIMITED
32-34 HIGH STREET
CROYDON
SURREY CR0 1YB
Company No. 05506849
Status: Active
Date of Incorporation: 13/07/2005
Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Company Type: Private Limited Company
Nature of Business (SIC(03)):
6323 - Other supporting air transport
7415 - Holding companies including head offices
Accounting Reference Date: 31/12
Last Accounts Made Up To: (NO ACCOUNTS FILED)
Next Accounts Due: 13/05/2007 OVERDUE
Last Return Made Up To: 13/07/2007
Next Return Due: 10/08/2008
Last Members List: 13/07/2006
Previous Names:
Date of change Previous Name
10/08/2005 CHARCO 1126 LIMITED
CAFCO (COVENTRY) LIMITED
32-34 HIGH STREET
CROYDON
SURREY CR0 1YB
Company No. 05506849
Status: Active
Date of Incorporation: 13/07/2005
Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Company Type: Private Limited Company
Nature of Business (SIC(03)):
6323 - Other supporting air transport
7415 - Holding companies including head offices
Accounting Reference Date: 31/12
Last Accounts Made Up To: (NO ACCOUNTS FILED)
Next Accounts Due: 13/05/2007 OVERDUE
Last Return Made Up To: 13/07/2007
Next Return Due: 10/08/2008
Last Members List: 13/07/2006
Previous Names:
Date of change Previous Name
10/08/2005 CHARCO 1126 LIMITED
Name & Registered Office:
CONVERGENCE INTERNATIONAL AVIATION LIMITED
CASTLE COURT
41 LONDON ROAD
REIGATE
SURREY RH2 9RJ
Company No. 03069030
Status: Active
Date of Incorporation: 16/06/1995
Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Company Type: Private Limited Company
Nature of Business (SIC(03)):
6420 - Telecommunications
6323 - Other supporting air transport
Accounting Reference Date: 31/12
Last Accounts Made Up To: 31/12/2005 (FULL)
Next Accounts Due: 31/10/2007 OVERDUE
Last Return Made Up To: 16/06/2007
Next Return Due: 14/07/2008
Last Members List: 16/06/2007
Previous Names:
Date of change Previous Name
26/06/1996 THE CONVERGENCE GROUP LIMITED
30/06/1995 APPEAREQUAL LIMITED
22/12/2005 CONVERGENCE VENTURES LIMITED
CONVERGENCE INTERNATIONAL AVIATION LIMITED
CASTLE COURT
41 LONDON ROAD
REIGATE
SURREY RH2 9RJ
Company No. 03069030
Status: Active
Date of Incorporation: 16/06/1995
Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Company Type: Private Limited Company
Nature of Business (SIC(03)):
6420 - Telecommunications
6323 - Other supporting air transport
Accounting Reference Date: 31/12
Last Accounts Made Up To: 31/12/2005 (FULL)
Next Accounts Due: 31/10/2007 OVERDUE
Last Return Made Up To: 16/06/2007
Next Return Due: 14/07/2008
Last Members List: 16/06/2007
Previous Names:
Date of change Previous Name
26/06/1996 THE CONVERGENCE GROUP LIMITED
30/06/1995 APPEAREQUAL LIMITED
22/12/2005 CONVERGENCE VENTURES LIMITED
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Coventry
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The owner of the Airport is Coventry City Council.
Cafco/Convergence Holdings bought the lease to the Airport from TUI on January 6th 2006.
If they are broke then the appeal to the rejection of the terminal won't take long, as there won't be any money available. The Airport MD Chris Orphanou is also an Executive Officer of CIAO
Cafco/Convergence Holdings bought the lease to the Airport from TUI on January 6th 2006.
If they are broke then the appeal to the rejection of the terminal won't take long, as there won't be any money available. The Airport MD Chris Orphanou is also an Executive Officer of CIAO
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No matter how far the bookings from Coventry go ahead, it would not be any real hardship for those who booked to go a few miles up the road to fly should the CVT flights be cancelled.
SeamusCVT. I know how passionate you are about Cov but I would forget about Thomson and maybe play to CVT's strengths. I think freight could be a big money spinner for Cov and make it a major competitor of East Mids. BHX has no plans anywhere to increase freight ops. It's sole freight will be belly freight.
Something is wrong with Cov, none of the LOCO big boys want it apparently the lures of the worlds 4th most expensive airport are greater. (You don't really believe that myth do you???)
I would hate to see it close, but I think it must get a bit more realistic and maybe change lessors .....They have been very, very quiet lately....I don't think it helps that the Owners are also major shareholders in BHX.
SeamusCVT. I know how passionate you are about Cov but I would forget about Thomson and maybe play to CVT's strengths. I think freight could be a big money spinner for Cov and make it a major competitor of East Mids. BHX has no plans anywhere to increase freight ops. It's sole freight will be belly freight.
Something is wrong with Cov, none of the LOCO big boys want it apparently the lures of the worlds 4th most expensive airport are greater. (You don't really believe that myth do you???)
I would hate to see it close, but I think it must get a bit more realistic and maybe change lessors .....They have been very, very quiet lately....I don't think it helps that the Owners are also major shareholders in BHX.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wherever Carmen says...
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the 4th most expensive claim, if you read the original article(forgive me it has been a while) but if memory serves it was based on a 747 with full pax figures, their operational charges for a 737 or A321 are going to be on a different scale.
BHX is a very crowded airport and probably uses high charges to keep 747's away for noise polution problems amongst other reasons.
just my opinion.
BHX is a very crowded airport and probably uses high charges to keep 747's away for noise polution problems amongst other reasons.
just my opinion.