CARDIFF
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing as of yet. They have only annouced SFB. So there are many other long haul they could do. But SFB would have been nice in the apparent 'come back year' for TOM at CWL. 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FNC was year round, but now dropped completely.
FUE was winter only, but due to only 1 a/c next winter, will not be operating.
Cant see any long haul for 2010, despite the long running rumour.
Hopefully CWL will see the 3rd a/c back in 2010 though.
FUE was winter only, but due to only 1 a/c next winter, will not be operating.
Cant see any long haul for 2010, despite the long running rumour.
Hopefully CWL will see the 3rd a/c back in 2010 though.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: blaina
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Winter Sunshine options with Thomas Cook
Published: 01 May 2009
Thomas Cook Airlines introduces flights to Monstir, Tunisia and Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt
Those looking to travel further afield to enjoy some sunshine during the cold months now have Tunisia and Egypt to escape to from Cardiff Airport. For the first time, these destinations will be offered this winter by Thomas Cook Airlines between November 2009 and April 2010. good news for a change.
Published: 01 May 2009
Thomas Cook Airlines introduces flights to Monstir, Tunisia and Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt
Those looking to travel further afield to enjoy some sunshine during the cold months now have Tunisia and Egypt to escape to from Cardiff Airport. For the first time, these destinations will be offered this winter by Thomas Cook Airlines between November 2009 and April 2010. good news for a change.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sharm was looming anyway, TCX were planning on operate it last yr using XL before they went bust and TCX were left with no option but to cancel.
Nice to see MIR back on the boards. TOM operated a few years back using Karthago during the summer, but then dropped it. Hopefully TCX will keep it on for Summer 2010.
Nice to see MIR back on the boards. TOM operated a few years back using Karthago during the summer, but then dropped it. Hopefully TCX will keep it on for Summer 2010.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: WALES
Age: 57
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tcx @ Cwl
Encouraging news! Does that mean with MIR and SSH we will have a full time based unit for W09/10?
Hope they keep growing at CWL and give TOM competition as they have really let us down with thier inconsistent and diminishing presence!
Hope they keep growing at CWL and give TOM competition as they have really let us down with thier inconsistent and diminishing presence!
Mach 3
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Stratosphere
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WW cancelled yet another route that didnt get off the ground.
Or should they, in the worst climate the aviation industry has seen ever(?), have just operated the route empty...for the hell of it?
I'm curious as to how much of the airline's workforce should be shed just to offer a new route out of the airfield?
They've already shed 10% of the flightcrew workforce.
20%? 45%? 60%?
Welcome to the private sector.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: england
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tom Cwl
No long haul for CWL 2010 Looking bad for the guys down there as they have gone from 5 A/C in the past to 1 this coming winter. Theres some L/H in the winter but the crew down at CWL wont be operating it! shame
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: cardiff
Age: 42
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TOM PFO was diverted to BHX, due to WHX @ PFO it was diverted to LCA and crewing hrs. They used another crew who had plenty of hours to bring back the pax/aircraft but had to go back to BHX.
Plaincrazy
Plaincrazy
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: WALES
Age: 57
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Britannialad
What on earth is going on with TOM? as you rightly point out 5 A/C down to 1 next winter! - why? TOM has always done well at CWL,is this down to the FC influence that always favoured BRS locally between the two? The choice for longhaul at BRS seems mad especially if they may be operating part direct. CWL much better facility for the longhaul.
Looks as if TCX starting to see the gap and may move in....hope so!
What on earth is going on with TOM? as you rightly point out 5 A/C down to 1 next winter! - why? TOM has always done well at CWL,is this down to the FC influence that always favoured BRS locally between the two? The choice for longhaul at BRS seems mad especially if they may be operating part direct. CWL much better facility for the longhaul.
Looks as if TCX starting to see the gap and may move in....hope so!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TOM/FC clearly know what they are doing. If their aircraft are better placed over the bridge, then thats what they are going to do. They may get a better deal from BRS which is why that decision was made.
When were there 5 aircraft based?
2008 was x1 733, x2 757
2007 was x1 733, x1 757, x1 767 (part)
2006 was x1 733, x1 757/767-2
2005 was x1 767-2
Last year was 3 based aircraft during the summer, apparently the rumour was the airport charges were too expensive to base that extra aircraft this summer. But it could also have something to do with the change in business model....
TOM this year are still operating to the same destinations, but with much less frequency on the popular routes. - PMI last year was x8 per week. This year only 2/3. Similar with ALC/AGP/FAO. In the past BRS has always had a better choice of short/mid haul destinations. But comparing the timetable list, there isnt much difference anymore. CWL offers GRO and KGS over BRS. BRS offers MIR/SKB/NAP/AYT over CWL. So not that much difference.
As for long haul. TOM never really did much to make it work, bigger runway or not. TCX were the one with a huge following to SFB, and depending on how they are looking forward, whether they want to keep long haul in house or use Monarch once again will be the deciding factor.
When TOM operated SFB, it was against TCX(Using MON) and XL's 747's, and didnt compete very well as the new player. Being the only airline operating CUN, they still under performed and struggled to fill it. Obviously it works better to fill the aircraft, and maybe charge pax a bit more because demand is higher to at BRS, which offsets the fuel stop charges incurred en route.
as they have gone from 5 A/C in the past to 1 this coming winter.
2008 was x1 733, x2 757
2007 was x1 733, x1 757, x1 767 (part)
2006 was x1 733, x1 757/767-2
2005 was x1 767-2
Last year was 3 based aircraft during the summer, apparently the rumour was the airport charges were too expensive to base that extra aircraft this summer. But it could also have something to do with the change in business model....
TOM this year are still operating to the same destinations, but with much less frequency on the popular routes. - PMI last year was x8 per week. This year only 2/3. Similar with ALC/AGP/FAO. In the past BRS has always had a better choice of short/mid haul destinations. But comparing the timetable list, there isnt much difference anymore. CWL offers GRO and KGS over BRS. BRS offers MIR/SKB/NAP/AYT over CWL. So not that much difference.
As for long haul. TOM never really did much to make it work, bigger runway or not. TCX were the one with a huge following to SFB, and depending on how they are looking forward, whether they want to keep long haul in house or use Monarch once again will be the deciding factor.
When TOM operated SFB, it was against TCX(Using MON) and XL's 747's, and didnt compete very well as the new player. Being the only airline operating CUN, they still under performed and struggled to fill it. Obviously it works better to fill the aircraft, and maybe charge pax a bit more because demand is higher to at BRS, which offsets the fuel stop charges incurred en route.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: WALES
Age: 57
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caaardiff,
Everthing you say makes sense but comes back to the same irritating issue - the Management at CWL.
They must make CWL more attractive to the airlines....as you say
They should be getting a 'better deal' at CWL!
I am sure that BRS punters would cross the bridge to help fill a 767 operating long haul from CWL.
Everthing you say makes sense but comes back to the same irritating issue - the Management at CWL.
They must make CWL more attractive to the airlines....as you say
'they probably got a better deal at BRS'.
I am sure that BRS punters would cross the bridge to help fill a 767 operating long haul from CWL.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: england
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It aint gonna happen they will concetrate on there bigger bases its all gone tits up and with this merger the CAA are watching us very closely! As for the routes i would like to see TOM operating SFB POP CAN and the popular YYZ.
Theres a gap..... please fill it before someone else does. And as for the 5 A/C it was a 757 762 part 763 737 and a w 737 with cov
Theres a gap..... please fill it before someone else does. And as for the 5 A/C it was a 757 762 part 763 737 and a w 737 with cov