CARDIFF
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only Palma, Alicante, Gerona and Las Palmas, up for sale on flight section now. Palma , and Las Plamas only operated by MYT (Others by TOM) It seems that saturday will see the only based MYT aircraft from this starting in the early hours finishing late. However these plans could change.
They seem to be closing many bases, and contracting and defending LGW and MAN. It was only a rumour, and TBH I doubt it.
(Maybe XL are coming back??
)
)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was always under the impression that the charter market at CWL was stronger than that at BRS, so why the pull-out by MYT at Cardiff? Strange to see them consolidating their Bristol base as well?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Travel will never close the CWL base - it is actually making a good profit for the airline compared to other airports.
Anyone else heard of the Isles of Scilly Skybus rumour, daily to NQY and onto IOS from early next year.....................
Rugby World Cup looks even busier - Servisair taking approx 98% of the extra traffic, Aviance just having x1 Jet 2 flight
Anyone else heard of the Isles of Scilly Skybus rumour, daily to NQY and onto IOS from early next year.....................
Rugby World Cup looks even busier - Servisair taking approx 98% of the extra traffic, Aviance just having x1 Jet 2 flight
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Wales
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It could depend on how many of those routes were actually flying on behalf of TOM and FCA because with the extra 757 Thomson can gain all the capital themselves.
Saying that i do hope we see TCX next year and maybe an all year round base.
Saying that i do hope we see TCX next year and maybe an all year round base.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh right, I was just wondering because Smile posted that there were only 4 flights for sale now on their website, and there would only be a based a/c on saturdays so it looked as if it would be downgrading from this summer! But even if TCX pulled out or don't open a year round base then they would be covered by MYT now due to their merger?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Wales
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If i am correct, some of the flights that MYT currently offer from CWL are those sold by FCA and TOM but i'm not sure how many so as TOM have their own third based a/c at CWL next year there will no need for them to use the likes of MYT, AEA, FCA the same as FCA pulling out so there will not be any need for the MYT a/c to fly their flights.
I'm not sure how many flights MYT operate that are their actual flights.
Wouldn't it be down to the new board whether or not they stay at CWL or not? How many A/C do BRS have now is it 1xTCX and 1xMYT a/c?
(If i am wrong i do appologise and will delete the post)
I'm not sure how many flights MYT operate that are their actual flights.
Wouldn't it be down to the new board whether or not they stay at CWL or not? How many A/C do BRS have now is it 1xTCX and 1xMYT a/c?
(If i am wrong i do appologise and will delete the post)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Myt S08
Schedule is the very much the same as this year if you check for packaged holidays - must be trying to protect against too many seat onlys at present.
MIR gone, FUE & SFB back on MYT aircraft
MIR gone, FUE & SFB back on MYT aircraft
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 was always under the impression that the charter market at CWL was stronger than that at BRS, so why the pull-out by MYT at Cardiff? Strange to see them consolidating their Bristol base as well?
In 2006 CAA stats show BRS handled 1,374,281 terminal charter pax and CWL handled 1,057,674. Both airports also saw a small number of transit charter pax (around 11,000 each).
BRS had 8498 charter air traffic movements and CWL 6041 in 2006.
In fact, the gap did close a bit in 2006 on 2005 when BRS again had just over 1.3 million charter pax but CWL had 819,000. 2002-2004 show broadly similar figures at both airports to those of 2006.
I'm not sure how many flights MYT operate that are their actual flights.
There is no TCX aircraft based at BRS this summer. A couple of flights a week are operated on a 'w' pattern using aircraft from another base or bases.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Wales
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Iflycwl
Where did you year of the scilly skybus rumour? And what aircraft would it be operated on?
____________________________________________________________ ____
MV
So do you think that the CWL base will remain or just until next year? If BRS are having a 2 based A/C could that mean an end to a summer based TCX/MYT. Afterall there is a growing tendancy now for the larger charter airlines to have big basses rather than a lot of smaller ones. (or am i getting the wrong idea)?
Where did you year of the scilly skybus rumour? And what aircraft would it be operated on?
____________________________________________________________ ____
MV
So do you think that the CWL base will remain or just until next year? If BRS are having a 2 based A/C could that mean an end to a summer based TCX/MYT. Afterall there is a growing tendancy now for the larger charter airlines to have big basses rather than a lot of smaller ones. (or am i getting the wrong idea)?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SOUTH WEST
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M.V. Info came from a reliable source who back up the the present TCX/MYT operation at Brs, they say they are gearing up for 2nd a/c next summer with possibility of 3rd FCA to cover Tui 757 withdrawl. was not saying Cwl base gone, but just adding to the Myt thread at Cwl, make of it as you will, and lets not forget this is a rumour network, not a breaking news network.
As has said been said,the four airlines had seats on each others a/c in the past, however now they have halved in number, rationalisation of operation must come into play, hence a/c redeployments and swaps. But at the end of the day we will know for sure what is happening next summer on the first day of the summer 08 season. After all there are enough pax out there for all to prosper and develope
As has said been said,the four airlines had seats on each others a/c in the past, however now they have halved in number, rationalisation of operation must come into play, hence a/c redeployments and swaps. But at the end of the day we will know for sure what is happening next summer on the first day of the summer 08 season. After all there are enough pax out there for all to prosper and develope
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MYT use futura during the winter to ACE and XL during the summer to PMI (formerly using Spanair in previous years)
MYT have an allocation on some TOM/FCA flights but as far as im aware, other carriers dont use an allocation on MYT's flights, its all MYT tour operators and flights are generally full.
The logical view of it all - This year -
TCX mainly use FCA
TOM use TOM/AEA/FCA
MYT mainly use MYT, with some allocs on FCA&TOM and the subbed PMI route with XL.
FCA use FCA
Next year -
FCA and TOM will use each other on TOM's a/c
MYT and TCX will use each other on MYT's a/c
If MYT can sustain an A321 by themselves, then with TCX they could probably support x2 A320's, but will definately support one a/c.
Thats my simple opinion, but as we all know this industry isnt that simple and this idea may not be viable.
The opinion that CWL has a stronger charter market is probably assumed because the majority of CWL's business these days and in recent years has been charter business. Lets face facts, BRS is way ahead of CWL in most areas and CWL has a long way to go to catch up.
As for MIR, this was operated by Karthago on behalf of TOM and MYT, and is not yet on sale for TOM either.
From the schedule on MYT's website, everything is practically the same as it was this year, with the exception of Sanford being on their own a/c ( at the moment)
MYT is here to stay and as TCX dont have an a/c at BRS or CWL during summer, this is probably where the extra a/c will come from.
MYT have an allocation on some TOM/FCA flights but as far as im aware, other carriers dont use an allocation on MYT's flights, its all MYT tour operators and flights are generally full.
The logical view of it all - This year -
TCX mainly use FCA
TOM use TOM/AEA/FCA
MYT mainly use MYT, with some allocs on FCA&TOM and the subbed PMI route with XL.
FCA use FCA
Next year -
FCA and TOM will use each other on TOM's a/c
MYT and TCX will use each other on MYT's a/c
If MYT can sustain an A321 by themselves, then with TCX they could probably support x2 A320's, but will definately support one a/c.
Thats my simple opinion, but as we all know this industry isnt that simple and this idea may not be viable.
The opinion that CWL has a stronger charter market is probably assumed because the majority of CWL's business these days and in recent years has been charter business. Lets face facts, BRS is way ahead of CWL in most areas and CWL has a long way to go to catch up.
As for MIR, this was operated by Karthago on behalf of TOM and MYT, and is not yet on sale for TOM either.
From the schedule on MYT's website, everything is practically the same as it was this year, with the exception of Sanford being on their own a/c ( at the moment)
MYT is here to stay and as TCX dont have an a/c at BRS or CWL during summer, this is probably where the extra a/c will come from.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cardiff does indeed have a strong charter traffic.
From the figures, more than half of CWLs PAX were on charter flights, while less than 1 in 5 BRS PAX were on charters.
Like you say just a rumour, not definate for two aircraft next year. With the airline joint, downsizing. I doubt you'd see much expansion. And FCA wouldnt have enough aircraft for an extra BRS one.
In 2006 CAA stats show BRS handled 1,374,281 terminal charter pax and CWL handled 1,057,674. Both airports also saw a small number of transit charter pax (around 11,000 each).
M.V. Info came from a reliable source who back up the the present TCX/MYT operation at Brs, they say they are gearing up for 2nd a/c next summer with possibility of 3rd FCA to cover Tui 757 withdrawl. was not saying Cwl base gone, but just adding to the Myt thread at Cwl, make of it as you will, and lets not forget this is a rumour network, not a breaking news network.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's fair to say that CWL are simular to LGW and BRS are simular to LHR in repect to traffic (not size!). There is nothing wrong with charter holiday traffic but variety is the spice of life. Both CWL and EXT have a better runway and easier to get to than BRS but BRS has won the overall war on numbers and that is not likely to change anytime soon. Does it matter who carries the most of this and that? The main thing is that aviation is stronger than ever before from South West regionals and people no longer have to drive for hours to go somewhere interesting! Why is there a constant need to CWL to catch up? It's not going to happen and everyone should be happy with the over all picture!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Asia
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
debate about numbers of pax and charter vs schedule
Interesting to read all your waffle about pax volumes and who has the bigger market shares..
what should be one of the most important factors for modern airports and such local economies they support is the revenue the pax generate. This in turn creates the cash flow which should in ideal worlds be used to be ploughed back into the facilities to help them grow further.
you can argue that volumes will generate the larger cash flows, however LCC carriers are good at driving down costs which leaves small and medium sized airports to rely on commercial revenue from pax with low desires to spend and limited dwell times. (typical Ryanair pax profile)
it is well known that charter pax can be far more lucrative for an airport than Ryanair pax, due to average dwell time.
The average charter pax turns up between 3 and 2 hrs prior to departure while the averag lcc pax between 90 mins and 60 mins prior to departure.
In addition, Charter will also mostly be on family holidays and be of a certain mindset that is wanting to "splash cash." this results in eating and drinking in volume.
Where an airport such as BRS, is dominated by LCC pax, the pax profile will determine commercial yield which will become critical to the management. Most LCC pax don't want to spend too much time in the terminal, have little ambition to spend in the shops and tend to be in a "penny-pinching" mindset. However the further influencing factors will be security and check-in process times.
the last time I used CWL, the process times were quick which resulted in reasonable dwell time. Last time I used BRS we had a quick check-in however a very long time in security. this resulted in about 10 mins spare air-side with the wife wanting to sit at the gate to calm the kids prior to boarding.
The only further factors that will influence this would be the service levels at the air-side catering areas being bad which stop the spend being good.
Ideally CWL would be best positioned to have a good mix of pax.
They are in a relative niche at the moment as they pax process times are much shorter than BRS which actually make CWL the more attractive airport to use as a consumer.
what should be one of the most important factors for modern airports and such local economies they support is the revenue the pax generate. This in turn creates the cash flow which should in ideal worlds be used to be ploughed back into the facilities to help them grow further.
you can argue that volumes will generate the larger cash flows, however LCC carriers are good at driving down costs which leaves small and medium sized airports to rely on commercial revenue from pax with low desires to spend and limited dwell times. (typical Ryanair pax profile)
it is well known that charter pax can be far more lucrative for an airport than Ryanair pax, due to average dwell time.
The average charter pax turns up between 3 and 2 hrs prior to departure while the averag lcc pax between 90 mins and 60 mins prior to departure.
In addition, Charter will also mostly be on family holidays and be of a certain mindset that is wanting to "splash cash." this results in eating and drinking in volume.
Where an airport such as BRS, is dominated by LCC pax, the pax profile will determine commercial yield which will become critical to the management. Most LCC pax don't want to spend too much time in the terminal, have little ambition to spend in the shops and tend to be in a "penny-pinching" mindset. However the further influencing factors will be security and check-in process times.
the last time I used CWL, the process times were quick which resulted in reasonable dwell time. Last time I used BRS we had a quick check-in however a very long time in security. this resulted in about 10 mins spare air-side with the wife wanting to sit at the gate to calm the kids prior to boarding.
The only further factors that will influence this would be the service levels at the air-side catering areas being bad which stop the spend being good.
Ideally CWL would be best positioned to have a good mix of pax.
They are in a relative niche at the moment as they pax process times are much shorter than BRS which actually make CWL the more attractive airport to use as a consumer.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ms, I hope that you are not reffering to my post, as where in it did I say Charter = Bad?
You are right charter PAX are far better for an airport to to the time they spend in the airport, and they are in a 'spending mood'. Commercial yield is indeed greater with charter PAX. If anything this is even better for Cardiff, with a far higher proportion of passengers being charter ones.
Correct.
You are right charter PAX are far better for an airport to to the time they spend in the airport, and they are in a 'spending mood'. Commercial yield is indeed greater with charter PAX. If anything this is even better for Cardiff, with a far higher proportion of passengers being charter ones.
Ideally CWL would be best positioned to have a good mix of pax.
Correct.
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those who read but do not heed.
Just as if you are out to test our resolve I repeat what I said earlier on behalf of 'us mods' - THIS!
"So, this is what will happen. There will be no more questions or answers or posts concerning FFB unless and until they get an act together - in other words a fully effective AOC.
Then, and only then, can the subject be bought up like any other recognised airline.
Till then please refrain from making any comments about them. NO FFB posts!
And that means NO comments innuendo or otherwise.
They will be deleted and if you do not take heed you will be banned from this thread."
We should also add that there are very good reasons for this action so your co-operation is appreciated.
AA&R Mods
"So, this is what will happen. There will be no more questions or answers or posts concerning FFB unless and until they get an act together - in other words a fully effective AOC.
Then, and only then, can the subject be bought up like any other recognised airline.
Till then please refrain from making any comments about them. NO FFB posts!
And that means NO comments innuendo or otherwise.
They will be deleted and if you do not take heed you will be banned from this thread."
We should also add that there are very good reasons for this action so your co-operation is appreciated.
AA&R Mods
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Warrington, UK
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to a polish website, in today's news, centralwings will open a base in both GDN and KRK, and CWL is listed as a destination.. however no mention of MAN, which has been launched in these days.
so lets wait and see whats gonna happen. i think CWL definitively needs a direct link to Poland, mainly as an answer to the many poles living in wales.
so lets wait and see whats gonna happen. i think CWL definitively needs a direct link to Poland, mainly as an answer to the many poles living in wales.
