BRISTOL - 3
Brunel to Concorde
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BRISTOL - 3
Continuation of: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...231023&page=14
crackling,
BE also operated to TLS but gave in when easyJet appeared alongside earlier this year.
To be honest, I was surprised that BE didn't look at CWL before. It seems an ideal place for their set-up, especially with baby at CWL a pale shadow of easy's BRS operation.
I agree with you about 'a Bristolian'. When he speaks, listen, because his gen is never duff. I too have a pretty shrewd idea of his real identity, and I would love to know his take on the discussions (or perhaps monologue) that must have occurred between BE and BRS over that airline's future, or lack of, at Lulsgate's Rear End.
Bristol_Trav,
I agree with your interpretation of the new Travel Rewards Scheme. It seems open to anyone to join and remain in, regardless of number of flights taken, and cannot be considered a loyalty programme because the rewards don't appear to be related in any way to airport usage.
Navigator did get into a terrible admin mess a year or two back and completely messed up the records of both my wife and me and, I believe, many other members. I was told at the time by someone fairly senior at the airport that they had seriously considered closing Navigator down then.
What they did was cull the numbers by insisting on a minimum five departures a year to stay in the programme.
Although their blurb suggests the change is in response to Navigator members' requests for a simpler system, I believe the real reason is that Travel Rewards will be a much easier and cost-effective system for the airport to operate, with no membership cards nor statements/vouchers to be sent out every six months. Everything will be done via email.
In truth, Navigator benefits were receding anyway. For instance, my wife and I, being regular leisure travellers, used to like to use the business lounge occasionally via our Navigator vouchers, but this facility was withdrawn earlier this year.
We shall just have to wait and see how it all pans out.
crackling,
BE also operated to TLS but gave in when easyJet appeared alongside earlier this year.
To be honest, I was surprised that BE didn't look at CWL before. It seems an ideal place for their set-up, especially with baby at CWL a pale shadow of easy's BRS operation.
I agree with you about 'a Bristolian'. When he speaks, listen, because his gen is never duff. I too have a pretty shrewd idea of his real identity, and I would love to know his take on the discussions (or perhaps monologue) that must have occurred between BE and BRS over that airline's future, or lack of, at Lulsgate's Rear End.
Bristol_Trav,
I agree with your interpretation of the new Travel Rewards Scheme. It seems open to anyone to join and remain in, regardless of number of flights taken, and cannot be considered a loyalty programme because the rewards don't appear to be related in any way to airport usage.
Navigator did get into a terrible admin mess a year or two back and completely messed up the records of both my wife and me and, I believe, many other members. I was told at the time by someone fairly senior at the airport that they had seriously considered closing Navigator down then.
What they did was cull the numbers by insisting on a minimum five departures a year to stay in the programme.
Although their blurb suggests the change is in response to Navigator members' requests for a simpler system, I believe the real reason is that Travel Rewards will be a much easier and cost-effective system for the airport to operate, with no membership cards nor statements/vouchers to be sent out every six months. Everything will be done via email.
In truth, Navigator benefits were receding anyway. For instance, my wife and I, being regular leisure travellers, used to like to use the business lounge occasionally via our Navigator vouchers, but this facility was withdrawn earlier this year.
We shall just have to wait and see how it all pans out.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WOWBOY
There are no routes to pick up as BA Connect hasn't dropped any routes. Neither have flyBE said they will drop routes.
Remember that the merger between flyBE and BA Connect is yet to happen
Not until the deal is signed, sealed and delivered is it likely that there will be any announcements about the future at BRS.
If I remember correctly, I asked previously, if the routes are profitable for BA Connect, why would flyBE want to drop them?
There are no routes to pick up as BA Connect hasn't dropped any routes. Neither have flyBE said they will drop routes.
Remember that the merger between flyBE and BA Connect is yet to happen
Not until the deal is signed, sealed and delivered is it likely that there will be any announcements about the future at BRS.
If I remember correctly, I asked previously, if the routes are profitable for BA Connect, why would flyBE want to drop them?
Brunel to Concorde
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the present time BACon operates twenty rotations out of BRS on most weekdays, involving five based ERJ 145s and also aircraft based in Scotland.
Given that the 145s are probably going sooner rather than later (assuming the purchase of BACon by Flybe does goes through) could Flybe logistically operate this pattern of scheduling, and would they want to?
For a start it would mean competing against easy on the high volume EDI and GLA routes where easy currently flies three rotations each weekday on both routes and BACon five on both.
easy have already seen off Flybe on the Belfast (admittedly a different airport), TLS and now BOD. easy also now flies to CDG (once a day) alongside BACon’s five rotations most weekdays.
For Flybe to take on the Orange machine on these routes would mean a reversal of its recent behaviour at BRS.
I suppose it's conceivable that Flybe might still fly all or some of MUC, FRA, DUS, ZRH and MXP.
A couple of other items in the news:
BRS is now wholly owned by the Australian Macquarie Group following the exercise of its option to purchase Ferrovial’s half share recently.
The Stop Bristol Airport Expansion consortium is now flexing its apparently not inconsiderable muscles.
They are in the process of delivering 10,000 leaflets to households in areas they believe might contain a lot of NIMBYs and have also taken out a full two-page advertisement in today’s Bristol Evening Post – not cheap even on a Saturday.
I received one of their leaflets. It is very professionally produced on four thin card pages and additionally contains a perforated business reply card to be sent to North Somerset Council to object to the expansion.
I took advantage of this free postal offer and edited the card to explain why the expansion SHOULD go ahead. Thanks SBAE for the chance to save a few pence.
Clearly this group is highly organised and seemingly well funded. I foresee legal obstacles being put in place every step of BRS’s way through the planning jungle as it attempts to expand its infrastructure.
Given that the 145s are probably going sooner rather than later (assuming the purchase of BACon by Flybe does goes through) could Flybe logistically operate this pattern of scheduling, and would they want to?
For a start it would mean competing against easy on the high volume EDI and GLA routes where easy currently flies three rotations each weekday on both routes and BACon five on both.
easy have already seen off Flybe on the Belfast (admittedly a different airport), TLS and now BOD. easy also now flies to CDG (once a day) alongside BACon’s five rotations most weekdays.
For Flybe to take on the Orange machine on these routes would mean a reversal of its recent behaviour at BRS.
I suppose it's conceivable that Flybe might still fly all or some of MUC, FRA, DUS, ZRH and MXP.
A couple of other items in the news:
BRS is now wholly owned by the Australian Macquarie Group following the exercise of its option to purchase Ferrovial’s half share recently.
The Stop Bristol Airport Expansion consortium is now flexing its apparently not inconsiderable muscles.
They are in the process of delivering 10,000 leaflets to households in areas they believe might contain a lot of NIMBYs and have also taken out a full two-page advertisement in today’s Bristol Evening Post – not cheap even on a Saturday.
I received one of their leaflets. It is very professionally produced on four thin card pages and additionally contains a perforated business reply card to be sent to North Somerset Council to object to the expansion.
I took advantage of this free postal offer and edited the card to explain why the expansion SHOULD go ahead. Thanks SBAE for the chance to save a few pence.
Clearly this group is highly organised and seemingly well funded. I foresee legal obstacles being put in place every step of BRS’s way through the planning jungle as it attempts to expand its infrastructure.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BRISTOL
Posts: 763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice one MV, thats brilliant, I remember an old Billy Connelly show where he's on about junk mail, he says "reply to it with a dog poo and a note saying, you send me your s**t, so heres some of mine" absolutely brilliant ha ha 
As there words of Micheal Caine (kind of) "NIMBY'S THOUSANDS OF EM" Wonder where they all fly from when they go their hols hmmmm my guess is that they dont wish to add polution by driving to LGW!
As there words of Micheal Caine (kind of) "NIMBY'S THOUSANDS OF EM" Wonder where they all fly from when they go their hols hmmmm my guess is that they dont wish to add polution by driving to LGW!
Brunel to Concorde
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi W,
I wouldn’t like anyone to think I am someone who believes airports should be allowed to expand any way they wish.
It’s just that I believe Bristol’s proposals are entirely reasonable and, if anything, a touch modest.
In any negotiations you usually ask for more than you expect to get and the ‘other side’ then feels it has justified itself if it knocks you back a bit. In this case BRS has already pared what it might have reasonably sought but will still face huge challenges from objectors.
Why not ask for more and finish with about what they are actually asking for now? The danger is that this will still be reduced in some way or ways to satisfy the bargaining by compromise principle.
The hypocrisy of some people also infuriates me. Apart from the objectors’ case being full of selective ‘facts’ and at times downright inaccuracies, at least one of the people associated prominently with the group is a regular leisure user of the airport, and outbound tourism is one of the planks of the antis’ argument.
I remember this man campaigning in 1993 in dear old Les Wilson’s days - I know Les wasn’t everyone’s cup of tea but what an enthusiast and publicist for the airport he was and, apart from the obvious grief to his family and friends when he was killed in a motor accident, the local aviation scene also lost something good.
At that time the airport first put forward plans for a new terminal (they had to wait until the airport was partially privatised four years later before it got under way) that was going to public enquiry.
I have some glossy brochures of that period outlining the future plans – indeed the airport’s target in 1993 when it carried one million pax in a year for the first time was two million in 2003. The actual total became 3.8 million in 2003 but few could have predicted the rise of low cost airlines then.
Anyway, all this led to certain groups predicting the end of life as we know it for the residents in the surrounding villages and even further afield.
They were saying that two million passengers a year would mean jumbo jets circling over south Bristol, huge traffic jams and unacceptable noise and air quality levels for local people.
I remember having a heated argument with a group of protestors in a south Bristol shopping precinct at that time.
The current anti-expansionists are using exactly the same tactics: distorted truth, lies and a wish to scare-monger.
I wouldn’t like anyone to think I am someone who believes airports should be allowed to expand any way they wish.
It’s just that I believe Bristol’s proposals are entirely reasonable and, if anything, a touch modest.
In any negotiations you usually ask for more than you expect to get and the ‘other side’ then feels it has justified itself if it knocks you back a bit. In this case BRS has already pared what it might have reasonably sought but will still face huge challenges from objectors.
Why not ask for more and finish with about what they are actually asking for now? The danger is that this will still be reduced in some way or ways to satisfy the bargaining by compromise principle.
The hypocrisy of some people also infuriates me. Apart from the objectors’ case being full of selective ‘facts’ and at times downright inaccuracies, at least one of the people associated prominently with the group is a regular leisure user of the airport, and outbound tourism is one of the planks of the antis’ argument.
I remember this man campaigning in 1993 in dear old Les Wilson’s days - I know Les wasn’t everyone’s cup of tea but what an enthusiast and publicist for the airport he was and, apart from the obvious grief to his family and friends when he was killed in a motor accident, the local aviation scene also lost something good.
At that time the airport first put forward plans for a new terminal (they had to wait until the airport was partially privatised four years later before it got under way) that was going to public enquiry.
I have some glossy brochures of that period outlining the future plans – indeed the airport’s target in 1993 when it carried one million pax in a year for the first time was two million in 2003. The actual total became 3.8 million in 2003 but few could have predicted the rise of low cost airlines then.
Anyway, all this led to certain groups predicting the end of life as we know it for the residents in the surrounding villages and even further afield.
They were saying that two million passengers a year would mean jumbo jets circling over south Bristol, huge traffic jams and unacceptable noise and air quality levels for local people.
I remember having a heated argument with a group of protestors in a south Bristol shopping precinct at that time.
The current anti-expansionists are using exactly the same tactics: distorted truth, lies and a wish to scare-monger.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bristol
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can see that Bristol faces opposition from a group of people who (as individuals) have an unusually potent mix of being relatively affulent, environmentally aware and organised. That probably reflects the socio-demographic make up of the Greater Bristol area and the area directly around the airport. We're certainly the most eco-aware part of the UK - for both good and bad.
There's an unjustified level of stridency and emotion in their campaigning; maybe there aren't enough environmental risks in the West to put the airport's proposals in proportion? (I would have thought much of the chemical business down at Avonmouth was a far greater *risk*, but less visible).
I don't have much experience of dealing with North Somerset council; if it was Bristol City Council, I'd be groaning. BCC is a council that rarely shows leadership or organised thinking. I suspect they must have tired legs from all the knee-jerk reactions.
On a divergence; Bristol - Stockholm has turned up on SAS website, at about £104 return (mid July dates). But it hasn't permeated Star Alliance's website, who claim that the only Bristol in the world is in Virginia, and LH (my *A home airline) can't look at award booking avails yet for the same reason.
There's an unjustified level of stridency and emotion in their campaigning; maybe there aren't enough environmental risks in the West to put the airport's proposals in proportion? (I would have thought much of the chemical business down at Avonmouth was a far greater *risk*, but less visible).
I don't have much experience of dealing with North Somerset council; if it was Bristol City Council, I'd be groaning. BCC is a council that rarely shows leadership or organised thinking. I suspect they must have tired legs from all the knee-jerk reactions.
On a divergence; Bristol - Stockholm has turned up on SAS website, at about £104 return (mid July dates). But it hasn't permeated Star Alliance's website, who claim that the only Bristol in the world is in Virginia, and LH (my *A home airline) can't look at award booking avails yet for the same reason.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: bristol
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ba Connect Advertising
Don't know if any one else in Bristol has noticed that virtually every major Bill Hoarding site in the city has a poster for BA connect flying from Bristol.I know these thing are organised some time in advance,but considering the uncertain times facing Ba's operations it would seem at the same time the Flybe deal was being discussed,the marketing department was budgeting quite a considerable sum on advertising.If the Flybe takeover of Ba connect is completed it would be ironic if the routes disappeared and later CAA data showed a gain in passenger numbers.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 44
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
virtually every major Bill Hoarding site in the city has a poster for BA connect flying from Bristol.
A large number of new ad's have been erected up here in Edinburgh advertising BRS, MAD & HAM - would appear to be nationwide
A large number of new ad's have been erected up here in Edinburgh advertising BRS, MAD & HAM - would appear to be nationwide
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: weston
Age: 40
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder how many trees were cut down in the making of 10,000 ,at least, leaflets regarding stop bristol expansion.
Not to mention how many poor squids were squeezed for the ink 
If the Nimby's have this much time on their hands why don't they plant some trees not waste paper and card that, I would say, at least 98% of is going to be thrown, more than likely, in the black sack rather than being recycled!!! Which in turn is going to fill up more land fill sights so more trees will have to be cut down to make room for our waste. Which in turn will over run the country with rats and more bl**dy nimbys meaning us people with a bl**dy life will have to fly more to get away from the insanity which we live in. Or something like that!
t23
Not to mention how many poor squids were squeezed for the ink
If the Nimby's have this much time on their hands why don't they plant some trees not waste paper and card that, I would say, at least 98% of is going to be thrown, more than likely, in the black sack rather than being recycled!!! Which in turn is going to fill up more land fill sights so more trees will have to be cut down to make room for our waste. Which in turn will over run the country with rats and more bl**dy nimbys meaning us people with a bl**dy life will have to fly more to get away from the insanity which we live in. Or something like that!
t23
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the present time BACon operates twenty rotations out of BRS on most weekdays, involving five based ERJ 145s and also aircraft based in Scotland.
Given that the 145s are probably going sooner rather than later (assuming the purchase of BACon by Flybe does goes through) could Flybe logistically operate this pattern of scheduling, and would they want to?
For a start it would mean competing against easy on the high volume EDI and GLA routes where easy currently flies three rotations each weekday on both routes and BACon five on both.
Given that the 145s are probably going sooner rather than later (assuming the purchase of BACon by Flybe does goes through) could Flybe logistically operate this pattern of scheduling, and would they want to?
For a start it would mean competing against easy on the high volume EDI and GLA routes where easy currently flies three rotations each weekday on both routes and BACon five on both.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: bristol
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA hanger coming down?
I was at the back of the airport today and saw what seemed to be the start of the dismantling of the BA hangar.If this is the case then this would seem to indicate that the next phase of apron extension continues apace.Nice to see that despite the reduction of BA/FLYBE ERJs based next year and SBAE sabre rattling, Bristol airport management remain focused on their expansion plans.
Brunel to Concorde
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there terrier.
The accolade was apparently awarded by a panel of judges on behalf of Passenger Terminal World, a publication I must confess to never having heard of although I am sure many aviation professionals have.
Amongst the range of critera to be considered were the food and retailing. Hmm! Not sure about these, especially the food outlets.
The next few weeks could be crucial to the airport’s future expansion. The North Somerset Council is currently supervising the public consultation period for the master plan and on 18 January its relevant committee will decide whether the plan can be used as a guide for subsequent planning applications.
Already one local MP is demanding that the council adopt a noise quota system for day flights as part of any acceptance of the plan.
I remember a decade or more ago the then local authority originally insisted there be no night flights at all as part of the price to be paid for their passing the plans for the new terminal. Common sense eventually prevailed.
Even if the council does accept the master plan (and it would be a surprise to me if they did not try to tinker with some of it), each planning application for the likes of the terminal extension, on-site hotel and multi-storey car parks will still need a lot of pushing through.
18 January will certainly give a clue as to how much pushing will be needed over the next few years.
The accolade was apparently awarded by a panel of judges on behalf of Passenger Terminal World, a publication I must confess to never having heard of although I am sure many aviation professionals have.
Amongst the range of critera to be considered were the food and retailing. Hmm! Not sure about these, especially the food outlets.
The next few weeks could be crucial to the airport’s future expansion. The North Somerset Council is currently supervising the public consultation period for the master plan and on 18 January its relevant committee will decide whether the plan can be used as a guide for subsequent planning applications.
Already one local MP is demanding that the council adopt a noise quota system for day flights as part of any acceptance of the plan.
I remember a decade or more ago the then local authority originally insisted there be no night flights at all as part of the price to be paid for their passing the plans for the new terminal. Common sense eventually prevailed.
Even if the council does accept the master plan (and it would be a surprise to me if they did not try to tinker with some of it), each planning application for the likes of the terminal extension, on-site hotel and multi-storey car parks will still need a lot of pushing through.
18 January will certainly give a clue as to how much pushing will be needed over the next few years.