FlyBe - 6
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Greater Aldergrove
Age: 52
Posts: 851
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there no plan-B to fill the gap left by the Gatwick exit? Surely the whole Gatwick route structure could not have been unprofitable? And if so, is there no scope to fly into Luton / Stansted / City?
As a regular BHD- LGW user, flights always seemed to have healthy loads...I know LGW charges were reportedly growing significantly, but to pull all those services in one fell swoop, without offering an alternative, seems to be something of an over-reaction?
Withdrawing the entire Gatwick operation had to have an impact on staff, and sadly we're now starting to see the whole picture.
As a regular BHD- LGW user, flights always seemed to have healthy loads...I know LGW charges were reportedly growing significantly, but to pull all those services in one fell swoop, without offering an alternative, seems to be something of an over-reaction?
Withdrawing the entire Gatwick operation had to have an impact on staff, and sadly we're now starting to see the whole picture.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Somewhere up there
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew BHD-MAN with FlyBe this week and I knew of the impending job losses at the airline as of course did the crew.
Can I just say that given the circumstances I was deeply impressed with the professionalism, courtesy and even cheerfulness and humour of both the flight crew and the CC.
I think they were a MAN based crew (second flight out of BHD) operating an Emb.
Good luck to all affected.
Can I just say that given the circumstances I was deeply impressed with the professionalism, courtesy and even cheerfulness and humour of both the flight crew and the CC.
I think they were a MAN based crew (second flight out of BHD) operating an Emb.
Good luck to all affected.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Up North UK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding is that LGW charge Flybe the same per movement for a Dash 8 as they do easyJet for an Airbus with twice the seats. That cost plus the APD charge which is charged both ways on Flybe routes (because they originate in the UK) whilst most (I guess) of easyJets flights are to/from elsewhere in Europe. Add to those costs all the recently publicised inefficiencies in Flybe, and it's easy to see why LGW is unsustainable as a destination.
It also needs to be said that LGW don't want small aircraft with 78 (or 118) mainly 'suits' who arrive at the airport 30 - 45 minutes before departure and go straight to the Gate, they want hundreds of leisure travellers who arrive 2 or 3 hours beforehand and spend loads of money in the terminal retail outlets.
Flybe do seem to be testing the water with their GCI - LTN application, perhaps other routes to LTN will follow though I just can't see it as an airport for London-bound travellers.
It also needs to be said that LGW don't want small aircraft with 78 (or 118) mainly 'suits' who arrive at the airport 30 - 45 minutes before departure and go straight to the Gate, they want hundreds of leisure travellers who arrive 2 or 3 hours beforehand and spend loads of money in the terminal retail outlets.
Flybe do seem to be testing the water with their GCI - LTN application, perhaps other routes to LTN will follow though I just can't see it as an airport for London-bound travellers.
NWSRG -
FlyBe applied for a daily GCI-LTN in early October. Maybe things have changed since then, especially with GCI ceasing to be a base. All of LTN's FlyBe routes link to what will be non-bases (IOM, JER, GCI).
Is there no plan-B to fill the gap left by the Gatwick exit? Surely the whole Gatwick route structure could not have been unprofitable? And if so, is there no scope to fly into Luton / Stansted / City?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 822
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the presentations and stats on the BE website, they are addressing the very low crew hours compared to other airlines in the UK. This could mean longer days or longer sectors on any of the fleet that remain.
Therefore, all routes even those linked to a 'non core base' should still be achievable. In the case of:
IOM-LTN this could be operated MAN-IOM-MAN-IOM-LTN-IOM-MAN
The new application for the LTN GCI route could operate in a similar fashion, such as SOU-GCI-SOU-GCI-LTN-GCI-SOU-JER-SOU as an example. Longer hours on the aircraft = better crew and aircraft utilisation.
It also allows for those key early morning flights to continue (allowing business men or those on onward connections to meet the morning meetings/flights) but still allows for other supplementary routes to be continued.
Therefore, all routes even those linked to a 'non core base' should still be achievable. In the case of:
IOM-LTN this could be operated MAN-IOM-MAN-IOM-LTN-IOM-MAN
The new application for the LTN GCI route could operate in a similar fashion, such as SOU-GCI-SOU-GCI-LTN-GCI-SOU-JER-SOU as an example. Longer hours on the aircraft = better crew and aircraft utilisation.
It also allows for those key early morning flights to continue (allowing business men or those on onward connections to meet the morning meetings/flights) but still allows for other supplementary routes to be continued.
SOU will no doubt continue to play a big part in the future shape of Flybe, but it's somewhat limited opening hours may hinder that increased airframe/aircrew utilisation that the airline says it needs to achieve.
The airport also has limited runway capacity and parking in it's current layout, although I think its fair to say it could accomodate a significant increase to the current Flybe operation before that becomes a problem.
The airport is closed between 2230 and 0630, so any increased utilisation (eg, overnight runs on the Spanish trunk routes) will have to be timed to fit around this.
I recall some years back (it was operated on the 146), there was a night-time SOU-IBZ run on a Saturday night, but the aircraft had to sit on the ground downroute for about 4 hours in order fit around SOU's hours of opening.
I wonder what creative scheduling we will see? Presumably there will also be a lot more "W's" out of SOU (and the other remaining larger bases), to serve the bases that are closing?
The airport also has limited runway capacity and parking in it's current layout, although I think its fair to say it could accomodate a significant increase to the current Flybe operation before that becomes a problem.
The airport is closed between 2230 and 0630, so any increased utilisation (eg, overnight runs on the Spanish trunk routes) will have to be timed to fit around this.
I recall some years back (it was operated on the 146), there was a night-time SOU-IBZ run on a Saturday night, but the aircraft had to sit on the ground downroute for about 4 hours in order fit around SOU's hours of opening.
I wonder what creative scheduling we will see? Presumably there will also be a lot more "W's" out of SOU (and the other remaining larger bases), to serve the bases that are closing?
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2,782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The airport is closed between 2230 and 0630, so any increased utilisation (eg, overnight runs on the Spanish trunk routes) will have to be timed to fit around this.
This is a challenge for BE in that it is a limiting factor and when management compare BE to comparable airlines and identify opportunities for greater utilisation, they need to be realistic in what they can achieve .
Given they have no competitor specifically at SOU a balance had to be struck between the limited opening hours and the fares they can collect as essentially they have the market to themselves...
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Not far from the airport
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think it's worth pointing out that while there is a need to improve crew utilisation let's not make the presumption that we simply are not worked hard enough.
Flybe crews do an awful lot of positioning duties encompassed within their operating day, and while the documented low pilot hours suggests room for improvement, a good look at average DUTY hours reflects a need to simply roster us better.
There's several 12 hour duties I've completed over the summer that resulted in less than 2 hours of block flight time.
Flybe crews do an awful lot of positioning duties encompassed within their operating day, and while the documented low pilot hours suggests room for improvement, a good look at average DUTY hours reflects a need to simply roster us better.
There's several 12 hour duties I've completed over the summer that resulted in less than 2 hours of block flight time.
I'm sure somebody who flies them will back me up (or tell me I'm wrong), but I think you'll find that on the sectors that Flybe operate with both the Q400 and the Embraer, the turboprop is only about 10% slower.
I can only speak as a pax, but I've done quite a few SOU to EDI and GLA trips with flight times of around 1hr 15mins. The jet would not shave much off that, I would suggest.
I can only speak as a pax, but I've done quite a few SOU to EDI and GLA trips with flight times of around 1hr 15mins. The jet would not shave much off that, I would suggest.
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wycombe
I agree, the speed of the Q400 is not the problem, but the seats are tiny, legroom restricted, overhead bins too small and (IMHO) biblically noisy
This might not matter on some routes where there isn't much obvious competition, but if you're going head-to-head with LH/KLM etc on business routes from BHX/MAN, or trying to tempt business passengers from LHR to Southampton, then I think the jets can justify their extra costs.
I agree, the speed of the Q400 is not the problem, but the seats are tiny, legroom restricted, overhead bins too small and (IMHO) biblically noisy
This might not matter on some routes where there isn't much obvious competition, but if you're going head-to-head with LH/KLM etc on business routes from BHX/MAN, or trying to tempt business passengers from LHR to Southampton, then I think the jets can justify their extra costs.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for the spotters on here, show some empathy, stop wittering on about night stopping aircraft or which aircraft flies to CDG, morons
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 39
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find the BE dashes to be more than adequate for 2 hour plus sectors. Let's not end up like the States where turboprops are demonised. Theyre pretty quiet, every seat is a window or aisle. Never a toilet queue. If BE are returning to their roots and going back to being a short haul regional airline then they need the right plane for the job. And the e Jets are not the right type.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The dash is suitable for 2+ hours sectors... are you stark raving mad? 
The jet is the way forward for regional travel, quiet, smooth, fast and used correctly economical. The Ejet is the only one in town, but the future of regional jets will change in time away from Emb.
A spotter as 'Network Planner' perish the thought...
The jet is the way forward for regional travel, quiet, smooth, fast and used correctly economical. The Ejet is the only one in town, but the future of regional jets will change in time away from Emb.
A spotter as 'Network Planner' perish the thought...
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 39
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe so but a jet is expensive to run especially if your yčilds are trash. I was in 5A 1hr20min last week. Didn't bother me at all. Some people should get on a Twotter or a Islander if you want to know what loud is! Jets are all well and good but if they don't make you money then all the benefits are a bit pointless. I don't think the UK public in general would avoid a TP thankfully. SK used to do longer sectors on a prop did them no harm. And let's not forget the days when long hauls used to be on piston propelled four engines aircraft. I think we've been spoiled!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Down a Tin mine......
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dash8 reliability.
One thing you seem to be forgetting fa2fi, is that the dash is extreamly unreliable !!. They spend more time on the ground tech than actually in the air earning there keep.
The great thing about the Embraer is it is so reliable, it has a dispatch reliability in the order of 99.99 %, whereas the dash barely makes 92% reliability. It is also costly to maintain compared to the Embraer and trying to get any part's out of Bombardier or in fact anytning approaching some form of customer service from them is nigh on immpossible.
The average customer cant stand the dash, it's noisy it's cramped and they all seem to think it is something out of the 1940's - and again in a passenger's word - 'They are prehistoric' !.
Accountant's only like them as they 'appear', i use that word lightly - to be the cheap option based on there hourly in flight costs. But when you factor in there poor reliability, add in the cost of part's and down time required to maintain them, The compensation having to be paid to passengers due to delayed or cancelled flight's they are anything but cheap - there is also the prestige, you may think that may sound vein - but from a passenger point of view - they will more than likely want to travel on a nice shiney new looking jet, than a prehistoric looking aircraft that is like a emu - as it spends most of it's time on the ground.
The jet's do make money - you just need to use them on the right route. They make money when used on routes to the sunshine - but they will never make money running between say Edinburgh and Birmingham. This is a lesson both Easyjet and Ryanair learnt - why do you think they dont do anywhere near as many domestic routes that they used to.
Unfortunatly due to our previous (mis) managment they did nothing about this even when pointed out to them numerous times in the past.
The great thing about the Embraer is it is so reliable, it has a dispatch reliability in the order of 99.99 %, whereas the dash barely makes 92% reliability. It is also costly to maintain compared to the Embraer and trying to get any part's out of Bombardier or in fact anytning approaching some form of customer service from them is nigh on immpossible.
The average customer cant stand the dash, it's noisy it's cramped and they all seem to think it is something out of the 1940's - and again in a passenger's word - 'They are prehistoric' !.
Accountant's only like them as they 'appear', i use that word lightly - to be the cheap option based on there hourly in flight costs. But when you factor in there poor reliability, add in the cost of part's and down time required to maintain them, The compensation having to be paid to passengers due to delayed or cancelled flight's they are anything but cheap - there is also the prestige, you may think that may sound vein - but from a passenger point of view - they will more than likely want to travel on a nice shiney new looking jet, than a prehistoric looking aircraft that is like a emu - as it spends most of it's time on the ground.
The jet's do make money - you just need to use them on the right route. They make money when used on routes to the sunshine - but they will never make money running between say Edinburgh and Birmingham. This is a lesson both Easyjet and Ryanair learnt - why do you think they dont do anywhere near as many domestic routes that they used to.
Unfortunatly due to our previous (mis) managment they did nothing about this even when pointed out to them numerous times in the past.
Tabs please !
I need to go to Inverness on business within the next two weeks and have the option of Bristol or Exeter as my departure point. The cost with Flybe from Exeter is in excess of £400 and I would have to change at Manchester. At least one leg in each direction would be on the Dash-8. I don't mind a bit of discomfort on a short flight but I would need to have my laptop bag under the seat in front of me as it does not fit in the oddments tray that passes for an overhead bin. Given that the time of year means I'll be wearing a heavy overcoat, there's no chuffing way I'll be sitting comfortably.
The orange alternative fly direct from Bristol with an A320 where I can get everything in the overhead bin with a bit of jiggling. There's a huge difference in fares and my company will get change out of £100. I will spend part of the saving on a better hotel and a nicer hire car. They can stick their speedy boarding charges as I don't really care who gets on first.
I do hope Flybe can turn things around as the market needs the competition but until they sort out their fleet and the fares, the future does not look bright.
The orange alternative fly direct from Bristol with an A320 where I can get everything in the overhead bin with a bit of jiggling. There's a huge difference in fares and my company will get change out of £100. I will spend part of the saving on a better hotel and a nicer hire car. They can stick their speedy boarding charges as I don't really care who gets on first.
I do hope Flybe can turn things around as the market needs the competition but until they sort out their fleet and the fares, the future does not look bright.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 39
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well maybe someone should tell BE they're getting rid of the wrong plane! My memory isn't what it once was but I'm pretty sure FR and EZY reduced domestic flying due to APD. PIK-STN had many rotations a day, and was canned blaming APD. EZY have recently added or increased frequency on domestic routes recently.