BRISTOL - 4
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's 45m wide. Just another of its endearing quirks.
Interesting report. It demonstrates what we all know that the airport is in completely the wrong location. It is quite vocal about not only the length, but the lack of visibility on the approach to 09 and undulating topography. It demonstrates the lack of foresight 20 - 30 years ago when it should have moved to Filton.
Long haul from the regions is a waste of time and the reason Bristol is so vibrant and busy and profitable is because it hasn't been distracted by pipe dreams about long haul. Are you listening Birmingham?
I believe that BRS has done extremely well to build up its route network to numerous important European business cities (I hope the local business community is supporting the new BMI Regional German and Italian routes) and it does provide some options for inter-continental travel via hubs such as AMS, BRU, DUB and CDG, though with only one daily rotation to the last-named now.
It also has a wide-ranging leisure network to Europe and North Africa.
LHR is not a million miles away with its world-wide route network.
All this means that both the business and leisure travellers of the Bristol city region are probably more fortunate than those in many other areas of the country.
As I mentioned in my previous post, I believe the important omission in all this is a Middle East hub and it might be possible to rectify that in the future even if wide-bodied aircraft are unacceptable operationally..............if they are because we don't know with any certainty that TOM has decided that they won't be used at BRS after this summer as a matter of policy.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Monte Carlo
Age: 65
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see from the charts that they have still managed to get away without a displaced threshold on 09. Is the undershoot there still as dramatic or have they re-profiled the land ? It's a while since I've been !
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Report
MV, I didn't mean it to sound like the usual..."wow, if only it had been moved to Filton we'd have shiny jumbo jets to spot" post. The report comments that the runway does not conform to current best practice because of its undulating appearance, which causes problems with the ILS below 200ft. It recognises that the use of the 767 at Bristol on a regular basis is questionable, especially as there have been an unusually high incidence of hard landings. This has been directly linked to the runway. The point about Filton is that there was an opportunity before Bradley Stoke and the Mall were built, because you had land to expand, plus very good connections by road and rail. I think there would be 7m plus passengers a year at a Filton based airport, because you would have drawn more people from the M4 corridor and Gloucester north who use Birmingham now with the better road connections at Filton. I agree there wouldn't have been much more long haul, although we might have seen Emirates by now!
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello bristolflyer.
I will certainly say that if the city council had relocated its airport to Filton in 1957 when they closed Whitchurch because it had become too small for the aircraft even of that era Bristol might have a busier airport now in terms of passenger numbers and atms. We have the benefit of hindsight which suggests the decision of the city councillors of the 1950s appears deeply flawed as they were storing up the same problems for future generations as those that had led them to close Whitchurch.
But would it have been that simple?
The council bought Lulsgate and gradually developed it although they eventually and reluctantly accepted that for it to really grow only the private sector could provide the means. Had the airport remained in the council's hands there is little doubt that the new terminal building would not have been built, nor the A38 diverted, nor the new control tower constructed, nor would most of the other £100 million developments of the past 15 years have occurred. Neither would we be looking at a further infrastructure expansion that could cost up to £150 million.
There is a story that circulates from time to time (it might be as mythical as the one the local news media love to perpetuate that Filton has one of the longest runways in the country, or did have until it was closed) that the Bristol Aeroplane Company (BAC) that owned and operated Filton in the 1950s had invited the city council and its airport to become tenants for a peppercorn rent.
Had the council become tenants we can't know how things might have developed over the ensuing decades, not least because the airfield owners themselves changed on several occasions through mergers and takeovers.
As with Lulsgate the city council would have reached a stage where they could not inject the cash needed to develop a Bristol Filton Airport further - this might have become apparent at an earlier stage than at Lulsgate because Filton might have grown quicker as an airport but there was serious political opposition within the council to privatisation which remained well into the 1990s leading to only part privatisation initially in 1997.
At whatever stage a Filton Airport had been placed into private hands there remains the question of whether the owners would have wanted to operate it (and inject considerable sums of money to build an aiport infrastructure) or whether they would have engaged a separate operator in some form of partnership at whatever financial and other arrangements were agreed.
By the 1990s, BAE who by then owned Filton, applied to turn it into a city airport so they obviously had their eye on the sector. The local opposition was immense and a public enquiry was held following which the secretary of state rejected the application.
Although Filton is within the contiguous built-up area of Greater Bristol it lies within the jurisdiction of South Gloucestershire unitary authority. They might not have been as accommodating towards major expansion planning applications as their counterparts at North Somerset unitary authority were for Lulsgate.
These are just some of the imponderables that lie in the way of a definitive answer that Filton would have been an improvement on Lulsgate.
If all things were equal few people would deny that Filton would have been a far better bet.
But we are where we are and Lulsgate is the only game in Bristol Town so the city region has to make the most of it and I believe, as do others, that it's done extremely well and punches above its weight.
I will certainly say that if the city council had relocated its airport to Filton in 1957 when they closed Whitchurch because it had become too small for the aircraft even of that era Bristol might have a busier airport now in terms of passenger numbers and atms. We have the benefit of hindsight which suggests the decision of the city councillors of the 1950s appears deeply flawed as they were storing up the same problems for future generations as those that had led them to close Whitchurch.
But would it have been that simple?
The council bought Lulsgate and gradually developed it although they eventually and reluctantly accepted that for it to really grow only the private sector could provide the means. Had the airport remained in the council's hands there is little doubt that the new terminal building would not have been built, nor the A38 diverted, nor the new control tower constructed, nor would most of the other £100 million developments of the past 15 years have occurred. Neither would we be looking at a further infrastructure expansion that could cost up to £150 million.
There is a story that circulates from time to time (it might be as mythical as the one the local news media love to perpetuate that Filton has one of the longest runways in the country, or did have until it was closed) that the Bristol Aeroplane Company (BAC) that owned and operated Filton in the 1950s had invited the city council and its airport to become tenants for a peppercorn rent.
Had the council become tenants we can't know how things might have developed over the ensuing decades, not least because the airfield owners themselves changed on several occasions through mergers and takeovers.
As with Lulsgate the city council would have reached a stage where they could not inject the cash needed to develop a Bristol Filton Airport further - this might have become apparent at an earlier stage than at Lulsgate because Filton might have grown quicker as an airport but there was serious political opposition within the council to privatisation which remained well into the 1990s leading to only part privatisation initially in 1997.
At whatever stage a Filton Airport had been placed into private hands there remains the question of whether the owners would have wanted to operate it (and inject considerable sums of money to build an aiport infrastructure) or whether they would have engaged a separate operator in some form of partnership at whatever financial and other arrangements were agreed.
By the 1990s, BAE who by then owned Filton, applied to turn it into a city airport so they obviously had their eye on the sector. The local opposition was immense and a public enquiry was held following which the secretary of state rejected the application.
Although Filton is within the contiguous built-up area of Greater Bristol it lies within the jurisdiction of South Gloucestershire unitary authority. They might not have been as accommodating towards major expansion planning applications as their counterparts at North Somerset unitary authority were for Lulsgate.
These are just some of the imponderables that lie in the way of a definitive answer that Filton would have been an improvement on Lulsgate.
If all things were equal few people would deny that Filton would have been a far better bet.
But we are where we are and Lulsgate is the only game in Bristol Town so the city region has to make the most of it and I believe, as do others, that it's done extremely well and punches above its weight.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MV, I agree hindsight is a wonderful thing! If you asked an infrastructure planner in the fifties to predict the future he probably won't have foreseen mass air travel. It was only the arrival of GO that saw a real increase in traffic at BRS. The LCC's have really made the airport. BAe were shrewd when they made their application to turn Filton into an airport. I remember at the time they said that there would only be scheduled operations, at a time when charter movements far outstripped scheduled at Lulsgate and no LoCo's existed. Perhaps they saw the potential for LCC's? I agree whole heartedly that BRS has punched well above it's weight and long may that continue!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SOUTH WEST
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's a shame to loose the l/h series, wonder if anyone else could step in, Monarch,TCX etc with suitable equipment as Thomson/First Choice have proved the market is here to support the operation over the last seven or eight years.
It's about time the airport got its act together and prepared for the future, it's alright having big announcements in the media saying they are starting this and that project ie the hotel,walkways etc then they do nothing, what do they say, you have to speculate to accumulate the facilities should be in place for potential new airlines and tour operators, not promise if they will come they will do the work, as the film said "build it and they will come"
It's about time the airport got its act together and prepared for the future, it's alright having big announcements in the media saying they are starting this and that project ie the hotel,walkways etc then they do nothing, what do they say, you have to speculate to accumulate the facilities should be in place for potential new airlines and tour operators, not promise if they will come they will do the work, as the film said "build it and they will come"
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 1,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's about time the airport got its act together and prepared for the future
1992 ... 1,068,604
2002 ... 3,445,945
2012 ... 5,921,530
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There has been a lot of development in recent years. The recession has slowed things down at BRS as it has everywhere else of course, though BRS has weathered the downturn of the past five years better than many airports. Whenever I go to the airport there seems to be something being built or altered.
The progress, lack of progress more accurately, of the hotel is the most mysterious aspect of the infrastructure development.
In October 2009 the local press was reporting that the airport had signed an agreement with Pederson Airport Hotels for a 250-room on site hotel. Pederson was expected to select an internationally recognised brand over the next few months to run it. At that time Pederson owned three hotels in Bristol (they may still do so, I'm not sure).
This might have been somewhat premature because planning permission was not granted for another 12 months at which time it was reported that work would begin in 2011 with an anticipated completion date of winter 2012/2013.
I can find no mention of the hotel in the airport consultative committee minutes since April 2012 when the CEO, in answer to a question, said the project was ongoing but there were no new developments to report.
As regards the expansion generally, the airport has always said it would be done incrementally as traffic dictated.
Three new aircraft stands were finished last year as part of the expansion and a number of other projects have been completed in the past year including including an extension to the security search area and a new immigration channel. The new lounge opened last month too.
Last year it was reported that a contractor had been appointed to carry out initial preparatory work on the first phase of the terminal building extension, and a few months ago a 'framework' of contractors (a device created to avoid the potentially cumbersome EU procurement rules) was named in the trade press who would carry out the various expansion tasks as they came on stream.
Earlier this year I heard an airport spokesman tell a local radio interviewer that the central walkway would be the next work to be carried out but no date was given. It actually formed part of the non-material amendments submitted to the local authority planners last January so that would have delayed things a bit anyway.
Perhaps they are now waiting until after the busy summer period before commencing this work.
The progress, lack of progress more accurately, of the hotel is the most mysterious aspect of the infrastructure development.
In October 2009 the local press was reporting that the airport had signed an agreement with Pederson Airport Hotels for a 250-room on site hotel. Pederson was expected to select an internationally recognised brand over the next few months to run it. At that time Pederson owned three hotels in Bristol (they may still do so, I'm not sure).
This might have been somewhat premature because planning permission was not granted for another 12 months at which time it was reported that work would begin in 2011 with an anticipated completion date of winter 2012/2013.
I can find no mention of the hotel in the airport consultative committee minutes since April 2012 when the CEO, in answer to a question, said the project was ongoing but there were no new developments to report.
As regards the expansion generally, the airport has always said it would be done incrementally as traffic dictated.
Three new aircraft stands were finished last year as part of the expansion and a number of other projects have been completed in the past year including including an extension to the security search area and a new immigration channel. The new lounge opened last month too.
Last year it was reported that a contractor had been appointed to carry out initial preparatory work on the first phase of the terminal building extension, and a few months ago a 'framework' of contractors (a device created to avoid the potentially cumbersome EU procurement rules) was named in the trade press who would carry out the various expansion tasks as they came on stream.
Earlier this year I heard an airport spokesman tell a local radio interviewer that the central walkway would be the next work to be carried out but no date was given. It actually formed part of the non-material amendments submitted to the local authority planners last January so that would have delayed things a bit anyway.
Perhaps they are now waiting until after the busy summer period before commencing this work.
Bristol is unique in my experience in that the professional based pilots there actually think the airport management are pretty good at their job. There's not much money wasted on fancy offices and what is spent seems to go on the necessary but unglamorous stuff you actually need.
As an exercise in focusing on becoming the leading regional UK airport it stands comparison well. I contend that it's technical limitation to long haul product is actually key to its focus and its success in achieving its suprisingly comprehensive and sustained network map. It's better to be busy and vibrant and not do longhaul than it is to be something like the ghost town at Birmingham with its handful of marginal longhaul routes and otherwise uninspiring smattering of short and medium haul options.
WWW
As an exercise in focusing on becoming the leading regional UK airport it stands comparison well. I contend that it's technical limitation to long haul product is actually key to its focus and its success in achieving its suprisingly comprehensive and sustained network map. It's better to be busy and vibrant and not do longhaul than it is to be something like the ghost town at Birmingham with its handful of marginal longhaul routes and otherwise uninspiring smattering of short and medium haul options.
WWW
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 1,058
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's better to be busy and vibrant and not do longhaul than it is to be something like the ghost town at Birmingham with its handful of marginal
longhaul routes and otherwise uninspiring smattering of short and medium haul options
longhaul routes and otherwise uninspiring smattering of short and medium haul options
I wouldn't call Venice, Marrakech, Rome, Krakow, Lyon, Dubrovnik and Stockholm (all served from BHX) uninspiring unless you think frying yourself on the beach and larging it up in an Irish bar is what you call inspiration
Double daily DXB, daily (in summer) EWR and 4 x weekly ISB marginal long haul?
Admittedly there are glaring gaps in the short haul network at BHX. Yes, BRS has done a fantastic job in short haul route development with a quite a number of routes flown that BHX doesn't have and huge pax growth in recent years because of that (I have flown from there on a number of occasions when there was not a suitable option fron BHX). But get your facts right before you make such a sweeping statement about another airport that is also going (albeit not very spectacularly) from strength to strength. Unlike CWL.
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A poster on another aviation forum who is usually worth listening to re BRS matters said much the same thing today, CV.
He also said there will be three B 738s based at BRS in summer 2014 operating for TOM, replacing the two B 757s, though there was no confirmation that they would necessarily all be TOM's own aircraft.
He also said there will be three B 738s based at BRS in summer 2014 operating for TOM, replacing the two B 757s, though there was no confirmation that they would necessarily all be TOM's own aircraft.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SOUTH WEST
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TSR2,
Don't get me wrong, Bristol has done an amazing job with what it has, but they do keep saying promising new developments, ie the hotel that was supposed to be open next year and going back many years (20 years)they had planning granted for hotel, conferrence center and swimming pool in what is the original car park at the old terminal, together with other non proceeding projects seems to let Bristol down and in the past has led to services initially destined for bristol have gone elsewhere- Blukan Bulgarian for instance in the late seventies/early eighties with the TU 154 eventualy went to CWL along with Toronto amongst others etc. that seemed to usher in the change of fortune that saw CWL almost wipe BRS out untill Les Wilson arrived on the scene and clawed business into Bristol, though that should not happen again we could still loose out, it is often quoted 'Emirates' to middle east, now they will not go any where on a promise of having facilites when they start.
More recently it was mentioned when the Dreamliner was coming they were saying that the roadway next to the golf course would have to be moved further away and two large turning bumbells added at each end of runway to allow it to turn around backtrack the runway to holding point Charlie so it could taxi straight upto Stand 5, this was due to the wing overhang, this is what i was getting at, not the management.
Don't get me wrong, Bristol has done an amazing job with what it has, but they do keep saying promising new developments, ie the hotel that was supposed to be open next year and going back many years (20 years)they had planning granted for hotel, conferrence center and swimming pool in what is the original car park at the old terminal, together with other non proceeding projects seems to let Bristol down and in the past has led to services initially destined for bristol have gone elsewhere- Blukan Bulgarian for instance in the late seventies/early eighties with the TU 154 eventualy went to CWL along with Toronto amongst others etc. that seemed to usher in the change of fortune that saw CWL almost wipe BRS out untill Les Wilson arrived on the scene and clawed business into Bristol, though that should not happen again we could still loose out, it is often quoted 'Emirates' to middle east, now they will not go any where on a promise of having facilites when they start.
More recently it was mentioned when the Dreamliner was coming they were saying that the roadway next to the golf course would have to be moved further away and two large turning bumbells added at each end of runway to allow it to turn around backtrack the runway to holding point Charlie so it could taxi straight upto Stand 5, this was due to the wing overhang, this is what i was getting at, not the management.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: -
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Guys
Was just browsing the forums and read the last few pages... Some nice and educated comments by all!
Shame not to see the 787 coming to BRS, I remember the airport also mentioning in historical planning documents the runway would not need to be extended as the new generation of long haul aircraft could fly from what they already have.
With Luton been my local airport and having a reasonably short runway too, I also had hopes the 787 might operate from there, as I think a non-stop 767 to Florida is pushing it a bit off a 7000ft runway! But that really is just a pipe dream and as long as Gatwick remains, Thomson will almost definately keep Long Haul ops based there.
I was just curious on other peoples thoughts... I notice Exeter has had a long standing route to Toronto with Canadian Affair/Air Transat, which I think operates via another UK airport on the outward journey (Glasgow or Birmingham I think), in a similar manner to the Thomson LH flights.
It has always surprised me this route has not been switched to Bristol where is could potentially attract a far bigger market. Is this a route the airport has on its radar or tried to attract in the past? If they were to operate the A310 on the route and fill it up, it is debatable if the route could operate non-stop to Toronto as this type has a very similar performance to the 757.
Was just browsing the forums and read the last few pages... Some nice and educated comments by all!
Shame not to see the 787 coming to BRS, I remember the airport also mentioning in historical planning documents the runway would not need to be extended as the new generation of long haul aircraft could fly from what they already have.
With Luton been my local airport and having a reasonably short runway too, I also had hopes the 787 might operate from there, as I think a non-stop 767 to Florida is pushing it a bit off a 7000ft runway! But that really is just a pipe dream and as long as Gatwick remains, Thomson will almost definately keep Long Haul ops based there.
I was just curious on other peoples thoughts... I notice Exeter has had a long standing route to Toronto with Canadian Affair/Air Transat, which I think operates via another UK airport on the outward journey (Glasgow or Birmingham I think), in a similar manner to the Thomson LH flights.
It has always surprised me this route has not been switched to Bristol where is could potentially attract a far bigger market. Is this a route the airport has on its radar or tried to attract in the past? If they were to operate the A310 on the route and fill it up, it is debatable if the route could operate non-stop to Toronto as this type has a very similar performance to the 757.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 1,058
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Transat
Gilesdavies - you are right but that routing as axed last year or even the year before. It used to be YYZ-EXT-BHX-YYZ. Canadian Affair have over the past 2 years consolidated the majority of their UK operations into GLA, MAN and LGW, with BHX also retaining a weekly non stop flight to YYZ, this was on the A330 but this year goes down to an A310.
Having pulled out of ABZ, EDI, NCL, LBA, CWL and EXT over the years I doubt you will see Air Transat at BRS, the demand for flights to YYZ from UK regional airports seems to have died off along with the vast majority of the market that traditionally used these flights. At one time BHX boasted twice weekly Wardair 747's and Air Canada Tristars to YYZ!
Whether or not Air Canada Rouge will look at other UK airports to add to EDI where they will operate from this summer remains to be seen but I would think MAN, LGW and possibly BHX would be served ahead of BRS?
Having pulled out of ABZ, EDI, NCL, LBA, CWL and EXT over the years I doubt you will see Air Transat at BRS, the demand for flights to YYZ from UK regional airports seems to have died off along with the vast majority of the market that traditionally used these flights. At one time BHX boasted twice weekly Wardair 747's and Air Canada Tristars to YYZ!
Whether or not Air Canada Rouge will look at other UK airports to add to EDI where they will operate from this summer remains to be seen but I would think MAN, LGW and possibly BHX would be served ahead of BRS?
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bristol has had a Toronto service in the past at various times but never non-stop so far as I can recall.
For example, around 1990 Odyssey International operated from BRS via NCL with a B 757.
In summer 2000 Royal Air did so via Glasgow with an A310. The airline was then absorbed by Canada 3000 who operated the route in summer 2001 with a B 757, again via GLA, only to go out of business later that year.
The last attempt was in summer 2008 when Globespan operated from BRS via Dublin to its version of Toronto at Hamilton. It was not a success and wasn't brought back for 2009 though Globespan went out of business soon after.
I believe the Exeter route to Toronto is not operating this summer.
Incidentally, the TOM B 767s do fly from BRS to Sanford non-stop nearly all the time, possibly all of the time. Cancun though requires an outbound fuel stop at Manchester.
For example, around 1990 Odyssey International operated from BRS via NCL with a B 757.
In summer 2000 Royal Air did so via Glasgow with an A310. The airline was then absorbed by Canada 3000 who operated the route in summer 2001 with a B 757, again via GLA, only to go out of business later that year.
The last attempt was in summer 2008 when Globespan operated from BRS via Dublin to its version of Toronto at Hamilton. It was not a success and wasn't brought back for 2009 though Globespan went out of business soon after.
I believe the Exeter route to Toronto is not operating this summer.
Incidentally, the TOM B 767s do fly from BRS to Sanford non-stop nearly all the time, possibly all of the time. Cancun though requires an outbound fuel stop at Manchester.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: -
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Long Haul and Toronto...
I believe the Exeter route to Toronto is not operating this summer.
However at £489 each way, Im not sure I would want to be on a 9 abreast A310 for 8 hours, when I could fly with a scheduled carrier for less and in more comfort!
However saying that, I have flown with them before when I got a bargain return ticket for £250 from Manchester and was very impressed. Very professional, good leg room and the A310 was a pleasant experience, if a little cramped.
I just think its a shame Air Transat didn't think of switching to Bristol as could make a real go of it, with the larger catchment area. Operating to Toronto from Exeter has always seemed a bit of an odd ball to me, but there must be demand I am missing.
Incidentally, the TOM B 767s do fly from BRS to Sanford non-stop nearly all the time, possibly all of the time. Cancun though requires an outbound fuel stop at Manchester.
Do they limit the loads on this flight or does it fly out full?
Saying that Monarch did operate their A330 from Luton to Orlando in the early 2000's on behalf of Airtours and they operated non-stop, so anything is possible!
Brunel to Concorde
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Virtute et Industria, et Sumorsaete Ealle
Posts: 2,283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe they use the former First Choice B 767s with 258 seats and the CAA stats suggest that the passenger load is not limited to less than this.
Continental's Boeing 757-200s operated for five and half years between BRS and EWR, admittedly configured for 175 seats which I believe was their standard for this type of operation, and so far as I know the outbound flights never had to call in somewhere en route for a fuel stop.
As for Exeter and Toronto there seems to be no aircraft operating into EXT this summer from/to Canada - the airport's own website doesn't show Canada or Toronto as a destination either.
Canadian Affair will sell seats between Exeter and Toronto (I did a dummy booking on their website), either via Glasgow or Manchester. However, they seem to utilise Flybe on the EXT-MAN/GLA sectors.
Continental's Boeing 757-200s operated for five and half years between BRS and EWR, admittedly configured for 175 seats which I believe was their standard for this type of operation, and so far as I know the outbound flights never had to call in somewhere en route for a fuel stop.
As for Exeter and Toronto there seems to be no aircraft operating into EXT this summer from/to Canada - the airport's own website doesn't show Canada or Toronto as a destination either.
Canadian Affair will sell seats between Exeter and Toronto (I did a dummy booking on their website), either via Glasgow or Manchester. However, they seem to utilise Flybe on the EXT-MAN/GLA sectors.