BIRMINGHAM - 4

[wingeel]

Whats the money on HSR not being built ? I wouldnt be surprised if the government reneged on their promise. There's plenty of time for them to go back on it. The route is questionable, too. London to Leeds via the West Midlands ? As far R3 at LHR goes, it wouldnt surprise me if there was a reversal in the current governments decision not to build.

[grundyhead]

Market Development

Rumour has it that BIA's Route Development Manager has resigned and taken up a post at CVT

Work that one out???

[call100]

It's not a rumour, it's fact!!
Birmingham airports answer to the Mawhinney report on HSR...Mawhinney Report Misses the Point - Birmingham Airport

[getonittt]

''Rumour has it that BIA's Route Development Manager has resigned and taken up a post at CVT ''

Car park attendant ? Fuel bowser driver ? scarecrow? or if it's up a post maybe chief lookout.

[Skipness One Echo]

Quoting the Mawhinney article

Other forward-looking Countries (for example, Germany) have chosen to spread aviation demand across a number of major airports,

Reflecting the spread of economic activity, the numerous attempts to spread the wealth of the South East outwith the home counties fails as the London centric market is a magnet. Politicians have been trying to do this for years but the truth is that it won't happen. They have to be seen to be trying to go for the votes in the regional constituencies.

[wanna_be_there]

Ive said right from the start that many people were looking at the HSR with rose tinted spectacles.
Yes, it would be easy to assume many from the south east will now use BHX, but if the large majority of the flights people from the midlands need are already at LHR, now its much easier for them to get there!

Also, I kind of applaud BHX for putting itself out there in terms of publicity, but its been harping on about being 'LHR's third runway' for a long time now. Its starting to look like the kid in class putting its hand up every time a question is asked, but never gets picked. 'sir, im here, sir, ask me, sir, I can do this, SIR, SIR, ask me, SIRRR!!!'

Maybe they need to concentrate on getting services in their own right and focus on keeping the services they already have. Then, Get the bloomin extension of the runway sorted, integrate the terminal and show airlines what your capable of!

[Skipness One Echo]

What's the point of the runway extension?

Realistically how many flights per day would use it versus the expense and hassle to build it?

[GayFriendly]

Yes, it would be easy to assume many from the south east will now use BHX, but if the large majority of the flights people from the midlands need are already at LHR, now its much easier for them to get there!

Sorry I beg to differ. By car maybe but by public transport? Have you tried it? Its either a 2 and a half hour coach (from central Brum, add on another 45 mins to an hour if you live in the suburbs to get to Digbeth coach station) or a complicated rail journey dragging bags on the underground or waiting the (IMO) unreliable coach link at Watford Junction. Its a nightmare. As for LHR itself the less said the better (except T5). The spectacular success of the double daily EK operation at BHX speaks volumes - the majority of sane folk in the Midlands, given the choice, do not want the hassle of flying from LHR to make journeys to India, Asia and Australasia.

Maybe they need to concentrate on getting services in their own right

We all know that, shame the Route Development department didn't seem to share the same opinion

Rumour has it that BIA's Route Development Manager has resigned and taken up a post at CVT

Maybe BHX might actually get some new routes now. I pity CVT though.......

[wanna_be_there]

What's the point of the runway extension?

Realistically how many flights per day would use it versus the expense and hassle to build it?

Rrealistically, none in my opinion.
BHX already handles the B773, and has handled the A388. The longest flights are to Pakistan/dubai, and frankly, thats as far as the majority of BHX flights will go.
EK is successfully covering the middle east/far east and Australasia, Mahan is covering the middle east and going west, CO covers the USA segments.

With this in mind, few carriers beyond Dubai will look at BHX and BHX seems to have a strange problem of not being able to support 2 daily flights to the USA (CO tried double daily, US/CO tried 2 destinations, CO/AA tried 2 destinations, and all have always whittled down to 1 daily again)

Maybe better to concentrate on terminal upgrades and more parking stands? but Like I say, this is just my opinion.

I know some will say 'well, its ok for MAN with its 2 runways', but this is a problem in itself, its a financial burden that cant pay its way as its closed most of the day thanks to noise/traffic quotas, BHX should learn from this and think again.

[call100]

Originally Posted by wanna_be_there

Maybe better to concentrate on terminal upgrades and more parking stands? but Like I say, this is just my opinion.

Not been there in a while then?

[wanna_be_there]

Not been there in a while then?

If your referring to the new Pier they have built, im fully aware of that, I mean their 'integrated terminal' plan and an upgrade of the other areas of the terminal.

Also more parking as I notice on days of many diverts, they park aircraft on the old cross runway. Last time I checked they were not official stands, so no need for the sarcasm. Im not putting the place down, as I think BHX has masses of potential, Im mearly musing over ideas to make BHX better, thinking outside of the box, instead of investing in things that it doesnt really need.

[Daza]

BHX

Re Runway extension and Terminal planning and design

It would appear that some contributers on this forum (mainly from London and Manchester) seem to feel that BHX doesn't need to expand and evolve its services. Frankly, we have just as much right to secure infrastructure development and investment for the future of the West Midlands economy and its people as any other part of the UK. It would appear that big business is convinced and Birmingham Airport has secured investment for runway expansion. It is their opinions that count.

We don't need to explain why we need these developments to contributers who appear to have jaded, stereotypical, outdated and ignorant views of Birmingham airport, The city of Birmingham and the wider Midlands Region.

Daza

[wanna_be_there]

Daza, you miss my point completly.

1) It will be hard to make a runway extention pay due to the fact BHX already handles the largest aircraft it would realistically get in the future, and has handled the A388. Longer routes will be hemorraged not because of BHX's runway issue, but because of the carriers already in place (as mentioned in a previous post by me). What chance will BHX have of attracting the likes of LAX/SFO/LAS etc when it cant even support 2 daily B757's to the US as it is (again mentioned in another of my posts)

2) you will see that I have said BHX has lots of potential, which I do think it has for the likes of Middle east (Qatar etc) and India (Air India) and Euro cities (MAD, VIE, WAW, BUD etc)

3) I have said MAN's second runway is more of a problem than a help, as its not paying its way compared to the money spent on it, so with the infrastructure in place BHX has what it needs.

4) I have not once said BHX doesnt need to evolve its services, again if youd bothered to read my posts properly at all, you would see areas I think BHX could improve itself and maybe try and get a niche to offer something other airports cant (eg more double jetbridges to offer multiple A380 docking, quicker terminal navigation, fully state of the art terminals etc)

Lastly, my location on my profile bears no relevence to my opinions of BHX, or any other airport for that matter, so get that chip off your shoulder and grow up will you!

[Daza]

BHX

wanna-be-there

I wasn't particularly aiming this at you. Maybe you feel you have been too harsh in your criticism of BHX looking at your reaction to my post?

As I say we don't need to go over old ground as to why US and other long haul services are thin on the ground at BHX. There are so many long haul flights from London less than 2 hours by car. BHX cannot compete on an equal footing. Runway length, payload uplift and cargo capacity are contributory factors to operating profitability of any flight.

Maybe you don't know, but scheduled and charter flights to Mexico and other US and Caribbean destinations suffer payload restrictions off Birmingham's short runway. American Airlines service from BHX-ORD (767-200 and -300) often incurred payload restrictions during its period of operation. (BHX dispatch staff will back me here). Thomas Cook with its high density passenger A330s do not operate any long haul service at all from Birmingham and Im sure will do when the runway is lengthened.

Historically in the UK London, Manchester and Glasgow Prestwick (and later Glasgow International) were designated "gateway airports" and took ALL long haul flights to and from the UK so it has taken Birmingham Airport some time to catch up.

I repeat that BHX has managed to secure funding so business must have confidence in BHX and its infrastructure plans even if you don't.

Im afraid that free speech means that you don't always get the answers you like on an online forum. That doesn't make me immature, it just means that we have a difference of opinion.

Daza

[wanna_be_there]

Daza, My last post was mearly re-iterating my points incase anyone missed the point.

That doesn't make me immature, it just means that we have a difference of opinion.

I havent got a problem with your defence of BHX, but this is what made me think you had a chip on your shoulder:

It would appear that some contributers on this forum (mainly from London and Manchester) seem to feel that BHX doesn't need to expand and evolve its services.

Anyway, you have posted something that reverts back to my original statement:

As I say we don't need to go over old ground as to why US and other long haul services are thin on the ground at BHX. There are so many long haul flights from London less than 2 hours by car

So back to the original point, does BHX need the extention? HSR or no HSR extention or no extention, the above statement will always be true and LHR will always have the superior choice. Hell, BHX cant even secure an India route thanks to LHR, even though LHR-ATQ's yields are lower than BHX was.
Also:

I repeat that BHX has managed to secure funding so business must have confidence in BHX and its infrastructure plans even if you don't

Is this investment off projected future demand, otherwise I stand by what I said and BHX should look at MAN, a second runway it doesnt need based on future projections, ala BHX having an extention it may not need.

[Daza]

BHX development

The point is that BHX is playing catch-up with inferior infrastructure. The runway extension will allow airlines to operate their wide bodied aircraft with their full product, at realistic cost offering a real alternative to London and Manchester.

At the moment some of Birmingham Airports long-haul services make use of smaller aircraft, often with inferior product sold at higher prices. CO EWR and US PHL are good examples. All this stacks up against the success of new routes. Emirates 777s can use BHX, they don't need full fuel upload as Emirates aircraft are not in all economy high density lay-out they operate BHX-DXB well within their maximum range. Emirates ex BHX don't have long-over-ocean sectors as Trans-Atlantic services do.

ONE major hurdle to new long-haul scheduled and charter flights will be removed when the runway is extended. This will allow for a level playing field for flights to compete and Midlanders will be able to travel from their local airport.

It is strange how many people who don't live near Birmingham or use Birmingham Airport have such strong views upon its development. Maybe it says something about local pride (or lack of) here in the midlands in our infrastructure. Perhaps more of us need to put the case for expansion and development?

Daza

[Jamie2k9]

Air India

Air India new european hub will be decided by the end of Augest.

Air India are in talks with:

DUBLIN
BIRMUNGHAM
MADRID

The new hub will begin in November 2010.

[getonittt]

Air India

The problem they are not happy with FRA is that when 5 of their 777's land at the same time there are not enough gates available. .... Good luck to either of DUB or MAD as that counts BHX out too.

[Skipness One Echo]

Wrong wrong wrong

The point is that BHX is playing catch-up with inferior infrastructure. The runway extension will allow airlines to operate their wide bodied aircraft with their full product, at realistic cost offering a real alternative to London and Manchester.

At the moment some of Birmingham Airports long-haul services make use of smaller aircraft, often with inferior product sold at higher prices. CO EWR and US PHL are good examples. All this stacks up against the success of new routes.

This is high comedy. Continental fly the B757 through MAN twice daily having dropped the daily B777 a few years back. It's not the case that BHX would then get a B777 if they lengthened the runway, they'd get a double daily B757 if the traffic was there. They tried this and it didn't work. To say the B757 is inferior simply because it isn't twin aisle is to misunderstand the business model. Is BHX really too grand for an AA B757 service? Would you really say no unless they brought the B777-200? Good grief. In what way is the CO B757 used at AMS, GLA, MAN, BHX, DUB, and don't miss this one, LHR, inferior?

The reason it's more expensive to fly direct from BHX rather than go through a hub elsewhere is generic. It's often way cheaper to fly over a hub than fly direct because you are paying a premium not to connect. This is a standard business model across the world and BHX is not a special case that will suddenly see cheaper non stop long haul simply becuase they put down more tarmc. That's just naive.

The reason BHX got the B757 is that this is the most appropriate aircraft for the market. I would be intrigued to know how often the AA B767 was weight restricted getting out of BHX-ORD? As in what % margin was lost. They're still in DUB after all.

[Guest 112233]

Re the 767

As only a customer on the AA from BHX to ORD, ( I used the service 4/5 times during its initial period before the suspension and not the 767-300), did the weight restrictions really depend on the varient of the 767 being flown.

Accounting for all other factors being equal i.e. Temp, RWY in use, Fuel loading and Pax & Cargo for the trip. If any ppruner could enlighten us with their actual operational experence, it would help make sense of many of the discussions. Not forgetting the 787 or A330-300 Series too. - General terms please, I don't want any thing commercially sensitive.-

Is it just a stistical thing - e.g. Hot day (BHX), Full House , adverse winds on route and therefor no capacity to carry some high revenue urgent cargo. - You can imagine better permutations I'm sure.

Were the weight restrictions commercially critical ? or did the service lack in attracting those essential High fare business Pax - This argument could also be applied to many routes from the regions outside MAN.

CAT III - EX AA customer.