BIRMINGHAM - 3
Join Date: May 2003
Location: All over the place
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mark,
CO are going twice daily from next summer and actively trying to get a regular 762 in too. Highly unlikely they will get it, but it is a positive sign.
It is possible that AA will come back. It was quite lucrative cargo wise on the 767, if they think they can get a good passenger yield on it too, would be great.
I worked at BHX for nearly 6 years and as my home airport would dearly love it to expand and be great again.
CO are going twice daily from next summer and actively trying to get a regular 762 in too. Highly unlikely they will get it, but it is a positive sign.
It is possible that AA will come back. It was quite lucrative cargo wise on the 767, if they think they can get a good passenger yield on it too, would be great.
I worked at BHX for nearly 6 years and as my home airport would dearly love it to expand and be great again.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 60
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Baby
jimworcs
Might seem strange coming from me but good, although they are leaving
it a bit late unless it will be a 31/1/07 start.
There are no real gaps in with the current 5 based aircraft and I assume that this will one of the DTV aircraft. Hopefully at least one other route if not two could be announced at the same time, as they should be able to get 8 sectors in if Paris is twice daily.
Pete
Might seem strange coming from me but good, although they are leaving
it a bit late unless it will be a 31/1/07 start.
There are no real gaps in with the current 5 based aircraft and I assume that this will one of the DTV aircraft. Hopefully at least one other route if not two could be announced at the same time, as they should be able to get 8 sectors in if Paris is twice daily.
Pete
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North of CDG
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the Marketing department at BHX all try really hard to attract new airlines and routes, just look at the last few years: EK, AI, WW and ZB! And so passenger figures are going down at the moment, what can the Marketing team do if their hands are tied by the top brass and shareholders????
As for attracting "new" airlines over the past couple of years, let's see:
Emirates wanted to tap into the Midlands Asian community (as did Air India), so they were always going to open the route anyway.
Baby wanted to set up a major low-cost base at an airport where traditional LCCs (excluding FlyBe) were not represented (ignoring the thrice-daily Ryanair BHX-DUB)
ZB... a new carrier at BHX? Gimme a break! Once and for all, it's Monarch doing a scheduled service instead of an IT charter - using the same aircraft type. Yes, that means they will base more aircraft
, but bear in mind that Monarch Scheduled started at Luton (as the Crown Service) then expanded to Manchester. Monarch was always going to set up new ZB routes out of airports they already flew IT charters from. The fact that they use a different 2-letter code for the ZB routes does NOT mean it's a new operator at BHX.Cheers
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those landing fees are based on a 747-400, hardly a regular visitor now and unlikely to be so any time soon, so I'd be tempted to ignore those figures.
Well EK, AI, WW and ZB have all expanded since they started operations, something I doubt they'd do if they were being priced out??
Anyway, lets hope for some exciting developments from BE, WW and others over the winter, whilst everything sorts itself out!
Oh and any news on any runway extension?
Well EK, AI, WW and ZB have all expanded since they started operations, something I doubt they'd do if they were being priced out??
Anyway, lets hope for some exciting developments from BE, WW and others over the winter, whilst everything sorts itself out!
Oh and any news on any runway extension?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway extension? - DONT MAKE ME LAUGH
With the NEC, NIA, ICC in Birmingham, also being at the hub of the nations road AND rail networks and also with one of the best integrated "train to plane" facilities in the UK; why on earth would BHX need a runway extension (NOT!!!)
The reality of the situation is that the lack of a runway extension is the single most important factor holding back the economic regeneration of our region to take its place in the 21st century providing jobs and security as it did in the 19th and 20th centuries. The very nature of the Global Village insists on a fully functioning airport, imagine the seaports refusing to expand as needed, its unimaginable. The old industries may be gone or dying but there are new ones out there!
Apart from the fact that European and Wordwide air travel is an integral part of the lives of most people nowadays (yes BHX, management and owners, that includes the approx 5 million people who live in the Birmingham conurbation and its surrounds) and as everyone knows new airlines and routes bring jobs and prosperity.
The question should be: WHY hasn't it happened! Yet we are stuck with WHEN will it happen.
Still we are talking BHX management here, I doubt its on their agenda or that they even discuss it.
Mind you I've just thought of something; maybe they think the runway extension HAS happened and they just can't understand why airlines are queueing up to come here.
The reality of the situation is that the lack of a runway extension is the single most important factor holding back the economic regeneration of our region to take its place in the 21st century providing jobs and security as it did in the 19th and 20th centuries. The very nature of the Global Village insists on a fully functioning airport, imagine the seaports refusing to expand as needed, its unimaginable. The old industries may be gone or dying but there are new ones out there!
Apart from the fact that European and Wordwide air travel is an integral part of the lives of most people nowadays (yes BHX, management and owners, that includes the approx 5 million people who live in the Birmingham conurbation and its surrounds) and as everyone knows new airlines and routes bring jobs and prosperity.
The question should be: WHY hasn't it happened! Yet we are stuck with WHEN will it happen.
Still we are talking BHX management here, I doubt its on their agenda or that they even discuss it.
Mind you I've just thought of something; maybe they think the runway extension HAS happened and they just can't understand why airlines are queueing up to come here.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does BHX need more business to be a financially viable airport, what if the management and shareholders took the view its making money as it is and we donīt need to attract a huge amount of business and we will carry on as we are keeping shareholders happy..... big is not always best or profitable.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call Established
Too true for comfort.
Your point however makes a perfect example as to why such important matters should be outside the control of purely private companies. It may have worked with BAA at LHR but then anything would have there. If your point is the reason for underdevoplemnt in all area's at BHX then government (local and national) should intervene.
Your point however makes a perfect example as to why such important matters should be outside the control of purely private companies. It may have worked with BAA at LHR but then anything would have there. If your point is the reason for underdevoplemnt in all area's at BHX then government (local and national) should intervene.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Coventry
Age: 63
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BHX - Aircraft handling ability
Sorry to ask a "newbie" question. But the talk of what can or cannot land at BHX is confusing me.
Could I please as the group what the limitations at BHX are - aircraft type wise ? Although I suppose the answer might be PAX and weight dependant.
Can 747-400ER land there (and take of with a normal PAX and fuel load) or a 777-200LR ?
I "think" the biggest aircraft I see there is the "Air India" 777 . .. . On a regular basis
Or do they choose not to operate them out of BHX due to commercial viability ?
Could I please as the group what the limitations at BHX are - aircraft type wise ? Although I suppose the answer might be PAX and weight dependant.
Can 747-400ER land there (and take of with a normal PAX and fuel load) or a 777-200LR ?
I "think" the biggest aircraft I see there is the "Air India" 777 . .. . On a regular basis
Or do they choose not to operate them out of BHX due to commercial viability ?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 1,061
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dismal
And so the latest passenger figures press excuse sheet has been revealed, passenger numbers down 7.7% in Oct due to the continuing effects of the latest security scare. Now would that be the situation back in August where other UK airports saw monthly pax growth dip to single or low double digit figures (for just a month or so, most are now back on track for a record 2006) or has there been another security alert affecting only the BHX catchment area that I am not aware of........
Truly this is BHXs annus horriblis and you know the worst thing about it - there seems to be no end to the misery. Babys much vaunted big expansion has so far amounted to well nothing but more route duplication (and can we expect CDG and PGF as the routes to complete their so called 'many new destinations' announcement back in Oct?). There aren't even any RUMOURS about new routes/operators, let alone hard evidence of route expansion (to NEW destinations). As for Flywho and Birmingham European, what a joke. All this while other most other UK airports, quite rightly, due to the foresight of their management, rack up new routes and offer the combination of airlines and destinations that passengers in their catchment area want - and USE. BHX's European network frankly is bland, boring and, give or take, little different to that of 10 years ago. Yes, size isn't everything and number of destinations served does not equate to a successful business operated in airport terms. However, failure to offer anything new and move forward to keep abreast of where passengers want to fly to does not bode well for the future. Why has BHX allowed airlines to totally saturate certain routes (GLA, EDI, ABZ etc) whilst not maintaining and developing links that befit the UKs second city eg to ARN, FCO, BUD, WAW??
Perhaps the BACON/Flybe deal may offer a way out of what seems to be terminal decline, there is mention on Flybes regional press release for BHX of new East European services. However, what airline Press say and airline Ops etc actually do are seemingly two very different things. Its a very long shot that BE (whether alone or combined with BACON) will offer the routes that BHX so desperately needs to stay competitive with other airports.
I am very sad to see the way BHX has ended up (don't get me started on the state of T1 or the farcical runway never will happen extension). It really could be so good - but I'm afraid I saw the fall coming a long time ago. I worked for BIA plc in Diamond House for a number of years, until 2004. LCCs were regarded by many as a passing fad and EMA, LPL and LTN as mere outsiders in the Airports League. Indeed, at the time of the FR 'landing fees situation' (when FR chose to relocate to NEMA), I clearly remember senior managers saying words to the effect of that'll never last, it won't work, even they'll be back................what a pity that those heads are still stuck in the sand, if only they got themselves out they would see perhaps that the ascendency of NEMA (and others) has only just begun....by the way anyone want to take bets on next months pax figures decline excuse - 8.5% down due to unseasonal heatwave in the West Mids area????
Truly this is BHXs annus horriblis and you know the worst thing about it - there seems to be no end to the misery. Babys much vaunted big expansion has so far amounted to well nothing but more route duplication (and can we expect CDG and PGF as the routes to complete their so called 'many new destinations' announcement back in Oct?). There aren't even any RUMOURS about new routes/operators, let alone hard evidence of route expansion (to NEW destinations). As for Flywho and Birmingham European, what a joke. All this while other most other UK airports, quite rightly, due to the foresight of their management, rack up new routes and offer the combination of airlines and destinations that passengers in their catchment area want - and USE. BHX's European network frankly is bland, boring and, give or take, little different to that of 10 years ago. Yes, size isn't everything and number of destinations served does not equate to a successful business operated in airport terms. However, failure to offer anything new and move forward to keep abreast of where passengers want to fly to does not bode well for the future. Why has BHX allowed airlines to totally saturate certain routes (GLA, EDI, ABZ etc) whilst not maintaining and developing links that befit the UKs second city eg to ARN, FCO, BUD, WAW??
Perhaps the BACON/Flybe deal may offer a way out of what seems to be terminal decline, there is mention on Flybes regional press release for BHX of new East European services. However, what airline Press say and airline Ops etc actually do are seemingly two very different things. Its a very long shot that BE (whether alone or combined with BACON) will offer the routes that BHX so desperately needs to stay competitive with other airports.
I am very sad to see the way BHX has ended up (don't get me started on the state of T1 or the farcical runway never will happen extension). It really could be so good - but I'm afraid I saw the fall coming a long time ago. I worked for BIA plc in Diamond House for a number of years, until 2004. LCCs were regarded by many as a passing fad and EMA, LPL and LTN as mere outsiders in the Airports League. Indeed, at the time of the FR 'landing fees situation' (when FR chose to relocate to NEMA), I clearly remember senior managers saying words to the effect of that'll never last, it won't work, even they'll be back................what a pity that those heads are still stuck in the sand, if only they got themselves out they would see perhaps that the ascendency of NEMA (and others) has only just begun....by the way anyone want to take bets on next months pax figures decline excuse - 8.5% down due to unseasonal heatwave in the West Mids area????
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 1,061
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dismal
And so the latest passenger figures press excuse sheet has been revealed, passenger numbers down 7.7% in Oct due to the continuing effects of the latest security scare. Now would that be the situation back in August where other UK airports saw monthly pax growth dip to single or low double digit figures (for just a month or so, most are now back on track for a record 2006) or has there been another security alert affecting only the BHX catchment area that I am not aware of........
Truly this is BHXs annus horriblis and you know the worst thing about it - there seems to be no end to the misery. Babys much vaunted big expansion has so far amounted to well nothing but more route duplication (and can we expect CDG and PGF as the routes to complete their so called 'many new destinations' announcement back in Oct?). There aren't even any RUMOURS about new routes/operators, let alone hard evidence of route expansion (to NEW destinations). As for Flywho and Birmingham European, what a joke. All this while other most other UK airports, quite rightly, due to the foresight of their management, rack up new routes and offer the combination of airlines and destinations that passengers in their catchment area want - and USE. BHX's European network frankly is bland, boring and, give or take, little different to that of 10 years ago. Yes, size isn't everything and number of destinations served does not equate to a successful business operated in airport terms. However, failure to offer anything new and move forward to keep abreast of where passengers want to fly to does not bode well for the future. Why has BHX allowed airlines to totally saturate certain routes (GLA, EDI, ABZ etc) whilst not maintaining and developing links that befit the UKs second city eg to ARN, FCO, BUD, WAW??
Perhaps the BACON/Flybe deal may offer a way out of what seems to be terminal decline, there is mention on Flybes regional press release for BHX of new East European services. However, what airline Press say and airline Ops etc actually do are seemingly two very different things. Its a very long shot that BE (whether alone or combined with BACON) will offer the routes that BHX so desperately needs to stay competitive with other airports.
I am very sad to see the way BHX has ended up (don't get me started on the state of T1 or the farcical runway never will happen extension). It really could be so good - but I'm afraid I saw the fall coming a long time ago. I worked for BIA plc in Diamond House for a number of years, until 2004. LCCs were regarded by many as a passing fad and EMA, LPL and LTN as mere outsiders in the Airports League. Indeed, at the time of the FR 'landing fees situation' (when FR chose to relocate to NEMA), I clearly remember senior managers saying words to the effect of that'll never last, it won't work, even they'll be back................what a pity that those heads are still stuck in the sand, if only they got themselves out they would see perhaps that the ascendency of NEMA (and others) has only just begun....by the way anyone want to take bets on next months pax figures decline excuse - 8.5% down due to unseasonal heatwave in the West Mids area????
Truly this is BHXs annus horriblis and you know the worst thing about it - there seems to be no end to the misery. Babys much vaunted big expansion has so far amounted to well nothing but more route duplication (and can we expect CDG and PGF as the routes to complete their so called 'many new destinations' announcement back in Oct?). There aren't even any RUMOURS about new routes/operators, let alone hard evidence of route expansion (to NEW destinations). As for Flywho and Birmingham European, what a joke. All this while other most other UK airports, quite rightly, due to the foresight of their management, rack up new routes and offer the combination of airlines and destinations that passengers in their catchment area want - and USE. BHX's European network frankly is bland, boring and, give or take, little different to that of 10 years ago. Yes, size isn't everything and number of destinations served does not equate to a successful business operated in airport terms. However, failure to offer anything new and move forward to keep abreast of where passengers want to fly to does not bode well for the future. Why has BHX allowed airlines to totally saturate certain routes (GLA, EDI, ABZ etc) whilst not maintaining and developing links that befit the UKs second city eg to ARN, FCO, BUD, WAW??
Perhaps the BACON/Flybe deal may offer a way out of what seems to be terminal decline, there is mention on Flybes regional press release for BHX of new East European services. However, what airline Press say and airline Ops etc actually do are seemingly two very different things. Its a very long shot that BE (whether alone or combined with BACON) will offer the routes that BHX so desperately needs to stay competitive with other airports.
I am very sad to see the way BHX has ended up (don't get me started on the state of T1 or the farcical runway never will happen extension). It really could be so good - but I'm afraid I saw the fall coming a long time ago. I worked for BIA plc in Diamond House for a number of years, until 2004. LCCs were regarded by many as a passing fad and EMA, LPL and LTN as mere outsiders in the Airports League. Indeed, at the time of the FR 'landing fees situation' (when FR chose to relocate to NEMA), I clearly remember senior managers saying words to the effect of that'll never last, it won't work, even they'll be back................what a pity that those heads are still stuck in the sand, if only they got themselves out they would see perhaps that the ascendency of NEMA (and others) has only just begun....by the way anyone want to take bets on next months pax figures decline excuse - 8.5% down due to unseasonal heatwave in the West Mids area????
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 60
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BHX
GayFriendly
ARN, BUDA, WAW, FCO - agreed all should be operating now
FR - Can see both sides of the argument in terms of charges but yes
"heads in the sand" did sum up the general attitude to LCC's but
boy have they had a big wake-up call
November Pax - Shock horror, should actually be up between 3-7%
depending on weather (notams show runway closures)
Baby - Like you I now fear the worse unless they send the 9th aircraft
here. With BACON gone I can see at least 2 CDG's
possibly 4 EDI's and 3 GlA's. This will not leave many new routes
BA/BE - The worrying aspect is that last summer the combined based
units were 13 with another 8 early morning arrivals. If BE
do as they claim and dump the BA aircraft quickly, how many
based units will there be? I can also see the 5 early BA morning
inbounds just going (route duplication and lack of craft).
How flybe are going to shuffle the back and speed up deliveries
is going to interesting to watch.
NEMA - Not totally brilliant at the moment, I could have bought ten
tickets for week next for £166 for virtually any European route and some of tomorrows flights are £40 return. Even with FR's low cost
base, these surely are mega empty. I know people travelling
soon (tomorrow and next week ready with their reports)
Pete
ARN, BUDA, WAW, FCO - agreed all should be operating now
FR - Can see both sides of the argument in terms of charges but yes
"heads in the sand" did sum up the general attitude to LCC's but
boy have they had a big wake-up call
November Pax - Shock horror, should actually be up between 3-7%
depending on weather (notams show runway closures)
Baby - Like you I now fear the worse unless they send the 9th aircraft
here. With BACON gone I can see at least 2 CDG's
possibly 4 EDI's and 3 GlA's. This will not leave many new routes
BA/BE - The worrying aspect is that last summer the combined based
units were 13 with another 8 early morning arrivals. If BE
do as they claim and dump the BA aircraft quickly, how many
based units will there be? I can also see the 5 early BA morning
inbounds just going (route duplication and lack of craft).
How flybe are going to shuffle the back and speed up deliveries
is going to interesting to watch.
NEMA - Not totally brilliant at the moment, I could have bought ten
tickets for week next for £166 for virtually any European route and some of tomorrows flights are £40 return. Even with FR's low cost
base, these surely are mega empty. I know people travelling
soon (tomorrow and next week ready with their reports)
Pete
Last edited by OltonPete; 11th Nov 2006 at 10:11.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Banotok,
I personally feel the airport may of taken the view that they are happy with the results from operating as an airport. Afterall it is a business they are running. Whilst I accept the lack of destinations and carriers offered at present and I am not airport management, but if it was losing money and really really needed carriers then I am sure they would invest in giving away free fees to a Ryanair or Easy in return for a few hundred thousand pax a year that the low cost carriers can give. These pax spend money in the terminal shops - parking etc.... and its these shops that pay the famous high rent and 6% of its turnover licence fee to the airport! It is a known fact BHX probably like many airports make more in "other" charges than in landing feeīs.
Regds...........
I personally feel the airport may of taken the view that they are happy with the results from operating as an airport. Afterall it is a business they are running. Whilst I accept the lack of destinations and carriers offered at present and I am not airport management, but if it was losing money and really really needed carriers then I am sure they would invest in giving away free fees to a Ryanair or Easy in return for a few hundred thousand pax a year that the low cost carriers can give. These pax spend money in the terminal shops - parking etc.... and its these shops that pay the famous high rent and 6% of its turnover licence fee to the airport! It is a known fact BHX probably like many airports make more in "other" charges than in landing feeīs.
Regds...........
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Middle england
Posts: 539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Banotok,
These pax spend money in the terminal shops - parking etc.... and its these shops that pay the famous high rent and 6% of its turnover licence fee to the airport! It is a known fact BHX probably like many airports make more in "other" charges than in landing feeīs.
Regds...........
These pax spend money in the terminal shops - parking etc.... and its these shops that pay the famous high rent and 6% of its turnover licence fee to the airport! It is a known fact BHX probably like many airports make more in "other" charges than in landing feeīs.
Regds...........
If the above is the case then havn't the airport got in wrong. More pax equals more revenue and the landing charges hinder this.
I am not convinced myself. I would like to see the accounts of some of the locost base airports and their results.
Centre cities.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BHX needs to get a grip.
EVERY UK major conurbation has a native low cost airline, often two. BHX has an anaemic BMIBaby offering and a handful of Ryanair W patterns. Come on the second city(!), get a grip. Lower your ridiculous charges. You CANNOT charge more than LONDON Stansted without looking like complete pillocks. BHX management are damaging the Midlands economy because:
a) They have no serious rival airport (don't say Coventry as its rubbish).
b) They charge so much that only middle east and barely profitable airlines can operare and in the first case there is no European routing and in the last no non-regional.
This should not be allowed to stand. BHX is a valuable resource which is being mismanaged. People are starting to notice. The likes of Bristol and Liverpool were Minnows compared to Birminghams Pike only 6 years ago. How times change. Perhaps BHX's management should be changed to reflect this?
AP
EVERY UK major conurbation has a native low cost airline, often two. BHX has an anaemic BMIBaby offering and a handful of Ryanair W patterns. Come on the second city(!), get a grip. Lower your ridiculous charges. You CANNOT charge more than LONDON Stansted without looking like complete pillocks. BHX management are damaging the Midlands economy because:
a) They have no serious rival airport (don't say Coventry as its rubbish).
b) They charge so much that only middle east and barely profitable airlines can operare and in the first case there is no European routing and in the last no non-regional.
This should not be allowed to stand. BHX is a valuable resource which is being mismanaged. People are starting to notice. The likes of Bristol and Liverpool were Minnows compared to Birminghams Pike only 6 years ago. How times change. Perhaps BHX's management should be changed to reflect this?
AP
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centre Cities
It is again a known fact that Ryanair will approach an airport and open a new route for which if I recall they can guarantee 115,000 pax per route per annum. In return for this they will say to the airport how much are you going to pay us per passenger for giving you 115,000 pax per annum per route extra through your terminals. Some airports pass and others are prepared to pay. In which case if you pay its normally a per head fee back to Ryanair, hence FRīs success in secondary located airfields. Now the airport have to look to the extra pax for income in terms of spend and parking etc...
I guess and only guess that BHX are not open to this deal hence no FR, but this case would say to me that more pax does not mean more landing fees or more taxes as in this case the airport have to pay FR and not receive enough taxes / landing fees from them to make it viable to have the carrier. In BHX case they will hold out for other carriers to serve routes through natural growth if they are happy with the airports current performance.
Only my humble opionion and may be wrong!!!!!
It is again a known fact that Ryanair will approach an airport and open a new route for which if I recall they can guarantee 115,000 pax per route per annum. In return for this they will say to the airport how much are you going to pay us per passenger for giving you 115,000 pax per annum per route extra through your terminals. Some airports pass and others are prepared to pay. In which case if you pay its normally a per head fee back to Ryanair, hence FRīs success in secondary located airfields. Now the airport have to look to the extra pax for income in terms of spend and parking etc...
I guess and only guess that BHX are not open to this deal hence no FR, but this case would say to me that more pax does not mean more landing fees or more taxes as in this case the airport have to pay FR and not receive enough taxes / landing fees from them to make it viable to have the carrier. In BHX case they will hold out for other carriers to serve routes through natural growth if they are happy with the airports current performance.
Only my humble opionion and may be wrong!!!!!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Coventry
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coventry is so rubbish that it has kept hold of the third largest UK airline, and has attracted the second largest Central and Eastern European Airline to both operate from a glorified Portakabin? Yes, Coventry Airport and Management must be appaling...
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Coventry
Age: 63
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lesson here
Mr Abeampoints - You sir are talking b
ks.
Please compare the growth at CVT against the shrinkage at BHX.
I use both and they are vastly different
CVT is a drag if there is a delay outbound (due to the size of the famed portacabins) - but on return, its soooo nice to be met by your bags going around on the conveyor (as opposed to the famed BHX 30 - 50 minute wait)
Is it better than BHX ? - obviously not.
But the management team are really having a go at bringing in work instead of actively trying to loose it
ks.Please compare the growth at CVT against the shrinkage at BHX.
I use both and they are vastly different
CVT is a drag if there is a delay outbound (due to the size of the famed portacabins) - but on return, its soooo nice to be met by your bags going around on the conveyor (as opposed to the famed BHX 30 - 50 minute wait)
Is it better than BHX ? - obviously not.
But the management team are really having a go at bringing in work instead of actively trying to loose it
Last edited by CVTDog; 11th Nov 2006 at 16:41. Reason: Spelling error
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Coventry, UK
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coventry
Originally Posted by AbeamPoints
a) They have no serious rival airport (don't say Coventry as its rubbish).
In the new year the chances are they'll get permission for the long awaited terminal, a terminal that is being designed for locos. Things may then change. With concrete (pardon the pun) facilities and infrastructure, far lower costs and generally being geared towards the lo-cost short haul market Coventry may well give BHX a run for their money on short haul.