DURHAM TEES VALLEY AIRPORT - 5
Back of the envelope calculation
From Aug 2011 to July 2012, MME-AMS had 99,850 passengers and NCL-AMS had 273,054 passengers, suggesting MME has a 26.8% market share of the NE England - Amsterdam route.
Assuming KLM operate a 20x weekly F70 year round except Xmas, that equates to 166,400 seat capacity on MME-AMS. 99,850 passengers gives a 60.0% load factor for the last 12 months.
Recall that Easyjet will open a NCL-AMS route 5x weekly in 4 months time, supplying approx 6,800 seats per month on the route
If Easyjet attain a 75% load factor over a 12 month period on a 5x weekly NCL-AMS A319 route, they will capture about 60,000 passengers per year.
If we assume 50% of those who will choose Easyjet to AMS are currently flying on KLM from NE England then 13.4% (i.e. 0.5 x 26.8% x 60,000) of these passengers or 8,040 people would switch from the MME-AMS route. If KLM's current capacity to NE England is maintained, it implies KLM's MME-AMS will have 99,850 - 8,040 = 91,810 passengers per year, or a load factor of 55.2%.
Can KLM's MME-AMS route survive with its current capacity against Easyjet's NCL-AMS route ?
Assuming KLM operate a 20x weekly F70 year round except Xmas, that equates to 166,400 seat capacity on MME-AMS. 99,850 passengers gives a 60.0% load factor for the last 12 months.
Recall that Easyjet will open a NCL-AMS route 5x weekly in 4 months time, supplying approx 6,800 seats per month on the route
If Easyjet attain a 75% load factor over a 12 month period on a 5x weekly NCL-AMS A319 route, they will capture about 60,000 passengers per year.
If we assume 50% of those who will choose Easyjet to AMS are currently flying on KLM from NE England then 13.4% (i.e. 0.5 x 26.8% x 60,000) of these passengers or 8,040 people would switch from the MME-AMS route. If KLM's current capacity to NE England is maintained, it implies KLM's MME-AMS will have 99,850 - 8,040 = 91,810 passengers per year, or a load factor of 55.2%.
Can KLM's MME-AMS route survive with its current capacity against Easyjet's NCL-AMS route ?
Last edited by davidjohnson6; 14th Aug 2012 at 17:31.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Barton Upon Humber
Posts: 1,984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The overwhelming number of AMS passengers are connecting however. On HUY-AMS connecting passengers account for 96% of passengers (Source: recent article on Humber Business). Passengers who in most, but not all, cases would probably prefer to use KLM and have through checked baggage and frequent flyer points
While EZY could have an impact on MME-AMS, it will probably be minimal
While EZY could have an impact on MME-AMS, it will probably be minimal
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
davidjohnson6, alot of calculations there, but not everything can be as black and white. Yield is the missing formulae.
EZY adding AMS from NCL in itself shouldn't have any impact on either NCL or MME-AMS as most of the traffic is connecting. Someone mentioned something like 90% of traffic is connecting. So easyJet are doing the right thing and addressing a missing segment of the market - point to point LCC. This market should grow the overall pie size of the NE England-AMS market.
The more relevant question, in my opinion, is whether the economic downturn is having an affect on KLM's yield, and the propensity to travel of people within the MME catchment area. The propensity may simply be falling away and needs to be stimulated with ever lower fares to maintain loads.
Having said that, as long as LHR and the London airports remain restricted to UK regions, KLM should be able to protect and grow their UK-AMS-Onward market.
EZY adding AMS from NCL in itself shouldn't have any impact on either NCL or MME-AMS as most of the traffic is connecting. Someone mentioned something like 90% of traffic is connecting. So easyJet are doing the right thing and addressing a missing segment of the market - point to point LCC. This market should grow the overall pie size of the NE England-AMS market.
The more relevant question, in my opinion, is whether the economic downturn is having an affect on KLM's yield, and the propensity to travel of people within the MME catchment area. The propensity may simply be falling away and needs to be stimulated with ever lower fares to maintain loads.
Having said that, as long as LHR and the London airports remain restricted to UK regions, KLM should be able to protect and grow their UK-AMS-Onward market.
Last edited by Nakata77; 15th Aug 2012 at 07:22.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Hartlepool
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Health matters
Why bring it up? Why not if someones health could be affected, it could be a child who breathes it in? 
I've been supporting the airport not knocking it SWBDCK as I've pointed out before as I know people who work there so your way off the mark as usual.
Peel on the other hand have other motives, and it was only in January 2012 that they stated the place didnt fit in with their plans only to do a U turn when it became a hot local topic. So if you dont like whats posted thats your problem.
Agreed hangar 3 has a new roof when I've looked, as the roofs were not something I've looked at from the terminal building while using the airport.
If there isn't any asbestos then there shouldnt be anything to worry about, BUT if there is asbestos material there why not remove it for the sake of the people who use the airport, as it can kill you later in life
I've been supporting the airport not knocking it SWBDCK as I've pointed out before as I know people who work there so your way off the mark as usual.
Peel on the other hand have other motives, and it was only in January 2012 that they stated the place didnt fit in with their plans only to do a U turn when it became a hot local topic. So if you dont like whats posted thats your problem.
Agreed hangar 3 has a new roof when I've looked, as the roofs were not something I've looked at from the terminal building while using the airport.
If there isn't any asbestos then there shouldnt be anything to worry about, BUT if there is asbestos material there why not remove it for the sake of the people who use the airport, as it can kill you later in life
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Hartlepool
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
old man
Oldmanjoe says no need to worry, as hangar 1's asbestos roof will be replaced soon!! How soon and how long have the management known about the hangar being contaminated with it as its next door to the main terminal which the public use including my family?
As for Hanagr 2 my source says they didnt replace the side sections next to the curved section of roof, its still WW2 era material.
Troll eh, well if it saves someones life in later years thats got to be worth posting the facts on here, unless your immune to asbestos fibres like oldmanjoe
As for Hanagr 2 my source says they didnt replace the side sections next to the curved section of roof, its still WW2 era material.
Troll eh, well if it saves someones life in later years thats got to be worth posting the facts on here, unless your immune to asbestos fibres like oldmanjoe
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Hartlepool
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Health matters
Why bring it up? Why not if someones health could be affected, it could be a child who breathes it in?
How soon and how long have the management known about the hangar being contaminated with it as its next door to the main terminal which the public use including my family?
A bit more info about Jetstar.8's post.
Land&Buildings at Durham Tees Valley Aiport, Middleton St George, Darlington | Industrial property for sale.
Land&Buildings at Durham Tees Valley Aiport, Middleton St George, Darlington | Industrial property for sale.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Newcastle
Age: 53
Posts: 515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Northhbound, I assume you're prolling around on Google Earth offering such a similar life saving service for the general populace as opposed to just looking for some Peel Beating opportunity? have you checked for raised pavements or potholes too on the basis they may "save a life"?
You've made your point umpteen times and in various fashions. We've heard it. Move on.
You've made your point umpteen times and in various fashions. We've heard it. Move on.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: England, UK
Age: 60
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little bit disgusting that the Flybe diverted into Newcastle today due to a technical fault - to put in perspective, an aircraft coming from the South, bypassing it's destination airport - presumably on a pan pan pan - and landing north of where it's supposed to be - why??!!
It's not the airports fault as the airlines ops department make such decisions but nevertheless this was nothing short of ridiculous!
It's not the airports fault as the airlines ops department make such decisions but nevertheless this was nothing short of ridiculous!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: teesside
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tumbleweed even blowing through the forum now.
Went to the airport the other day, not to fly but to pick up a car, to drive to another airport where flights actually take place.
The place was like a ghost town, we parked in the 20 minute car park, it has a barrier so charging can take place, the barrier was left in the up position, looks like it would cost them more to empty any machine than the revenue stream would bring in.
The only car in the car park was ours and it was the middle of the afternoon. Went to the hertz desk, did not pass a single person on the way in to the airport or inside the terminal. I asked the Hertz lady how they make a living there and she said that it was because of local corporate clients that they were able to keep going rather than anyone from the few flights left. She said who knows how long we would have before the place closes bu it surely cannot keep going on like this.
We collected the car keys and left, without seeing another single sole. How many other airports could you go to through the main enterance in the UK at 2.00pm on a wednesday afternoon without seeing a single human being who is not a member of staff ?
Went to the airport the other day, not to fly but to pick up a car, to drive to another airport where flights actually take place.
The place was like a ghost town, we parked in the 20 minute car park, it has a barrier so charging can take place, the barrier was left in the up position, looks like it would cost them more to empty any machine than the revenue stream would bring in.
The only car in the car park was ours and it was the middle of the afternoon. Went to the hertz desk, did not pass a single person on the way in to the airport or inside the terminal. I asked the Hertz lady how they make a living there and she said that it was because of local corporate clients that they were able to keep going rather than anyone from the few flights left. She said who knows how long we would have before the place closes bu it surely cannot keep going on like this.
We collected the car keys and left, without seeing another single sole. How many other airports could you go to through the main enterance in the UK at 2.00pm on a wednesday afternoon without seeing a single human being who is not a member of staff ?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many other airports could you go to through the main enterance in the UK at 2.00pm on a wednesday afternoon without seeing a single human being who is not a member of staff ?
Teeside is not looking good and would appear to be only a matter of time before the terminal closes. What a shame but I do hope I am wrong.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Crowle United Kingdom
Age: 50
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DURHAM TEES VALLEY AIRPORT - 5
It's crazy that with all the capacity problems in the south that they dont make more of regional airports . You could have cargo traffic shifted to smaller regional airports , freeing slots at places like east midlands.
In turn traffic from southeastern airports can shift there etc etc . I'm not sure exactly where DTV is in terms of decent road n rail links but why they haven't made more of it is madness .
Ditto HUY that has two destinations only mainly yet survives ok .
And before I get shot down for suggesting this idea , look at the thread on Leylstad . The Netherlands government wants to shift some flights there to free up Schipol .
In turn traffic from southeastern airports can shift there etc etc . I'm not sure exactly where DTV is in terms of decent road n rail links but why they haven't made more of it is madness .
Ditto HUY that has two destinations only mainly yet survives ok .
And before I get shot down for suggesting this idea , look at the thread on Leylstad . The Netherlands government wants to shift some flights there to free up Schipol .
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: southern spain
Posts: 1,986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sorry David to bang on about this but practically all passengers coming from abroad especially the USA and Asia want to fly into the South East of England it is where most business etc. is done - FACT! It is about time people in other parts of the UK realise this and quicker the third runway is completed the better wherever it is. But to add to that we will have ATC issues, road and rail transport problems etc. I do not think hardly anybody would want to land at DTV or anywhere else and then want to jump on a 250 mile train journey to get to there destination. I would assume most would say is there a connecting flight!
compton - I completely agree with you. I was rather hoping that by comparing 22 miles against 250 miles in a matter-of-fact way, people would realise that the much greater distance means London-MME is not comparable to Amsterdam-Lelystad and so the idea of moving London or East Midlands based traffic to Teesside, be it passenger or cargo, is not economically viable.
The only aiports from which MME might possibly gain spillover traffic from a purely geographical proximity standpoint are Newcastle, or at a push, Leeds. Neither of these 2 airports seem particularly capacity constrained and there seems to be little reason for any traffic from these 2 airports to need to move to MME. For passenger and cargo MME has to survive almost entirely on economic activity in Teesside and the surrounding area alone.
The only aiports from which MME might possibly gain spillover traffic from a purely geographical proximity standpoint are Newcastle, or at a push, Leeds. Neither of these 2 airports seem particularly capacity constrained and there seems to be little reason for any traffic from these 2 airports to need to move to MME. For passenger and cargo MME has to survive almost entirely on economic activity in Teesside and the surrounding area alone.
Last edited by davidjohnson6; 28th Aug 2012 at 12:00.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newcastle NI
Posts: 824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A third runway at LHR might well benefit MME but only if they bin APD there will never be international flights from MME but there is a need for flights to hubs be it AMS or LHR the Goverment just doesn't get it and that dippy mare Greening is a joke, was it not Barbra Castle who was appointed transport secretary and she couldn't drive ?
Now we have a minster with responsibilities for Aviaition who feels she would have to resign if the government backed a 3 rd runway at LHR well get on with it I say !
My bet is we will get R3 but not for another 5 wasted years
Now we have a minster with responsibilities for Aviaition who feels she would have to resign if the government backed a 3 rd runway at LHR well get on with it I say !
My bet is we will get R3 but not for another 5 wasted years
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: On the flightpath
Age: 61
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I often visit this thread in the hope that I might hear news of new services from Teesside; I'm clearly either an eternal optimist or addicted to disappointment.
There is, of course, no way that Teesside can relieve pressure on Heathrow. However, those pushing for extra capacity at Heathrow need to realise that while a big airport means lots of flights, good connections and numerous destinations to choose from, there is a point at which a big airport becomes too big. Planes stacking to land, queueing for take-off and waiting for bus transfers mean that passengers miss connections, baggage gets delayed, and journey times get extended as the time it takes to transfer gets longer and longer. When this happens, it is time to stop growing and consolidate.
Every hub airport depends on two things: A good basis of local traffic, and a good network of destinations. If Heathrow's catchment area generates enough yield to justify three flights a day to Warsaw, and transit passengers enough to justify two more, then they all benefit from the convenience of having five flights a day. That in itself generates employment. The crazy thing is that some of those passengers will have travelled from Lincoln, Middlesbrough or Chesterfield to London by train, then across London by Tube, adding to the capital's public transport congestion; others will have come by car from Kent, Oxfordshire or Dorset, adding to traffic on the South East's busy motorways.
The point is that Heathrow does not just serve West London and Berkshire. People travel there from all over England and Wales because of an historic lack of alternatives. The advent of the Locos in the last twenty years has shown that there is (both existing and generated) demand from the regions; but the high yield (mainly business) traffic has continued to be London-centred.
All Teesside has to offer is a long runway, and a small catchment population. However, as a 'UK gateway' it offers as much as any other. Two examples: A Japanese business visitor with appointments in Leicester, Swindon, Preston and Newcastle could enter at any point on that circuit, particularly if there was a direct flight to Amsterdam from their Japanese regional city; likewise an American tourist doing a tour of the country could start and finish at Edinburgh or Birmingham (or Dublin!) and still include London without having to queue for hours at Heathrow immigration.
If Teesside and some other regional airports were to get together (instead of directly competing) and market themselves to airlines and passengers as 'gateways to the UK', then perhaps some of the pressure currently being suffered in South East England could be averted.
There is, of course, no way that Teesside can relieve pressure on Heathrow. However, those pushing for extra capacity at Heathrow need to realise that while a big airport means lots of flights, good connections and numerous destinations to choose from, there is a point at which a big airport becomes too big. Planes stacking to land, queueing for take-off and waiting for bus transfers mean that passengers miss connections, baggage gets delayed, and journey times get extended as the time it takes to transfer gets longer and longer. When this happens, it is time to stop growing and consolidate.
Every hub airport depends on two things: A good basis of local traffic, and a good network of destinations. If Heathrow's catchment area generates enough yield to justify three flights a day to Warsaw, and transit passengers enough to justify two more, then they all benefit from the convenience of having five flights a day. That in itself generates employment. The crazy thing is that some of those passengers will have travelled from Lincoln, Middlesbrough or Chesterfield to London by train, then across London by Tube, adding to the capital's public transport congestion; others will have come by car from Kent, Oxfordshire or Dorset, adding to traffic on the South East's busy motorways.
The point is that Heathrow does not just serve West London and Berkshire. People travel there from all over England and Wales because of an historic lack of alternatives. The advent of the Locos in the last twenty years has shown that there is (both existing and generated) demand from the regions; but the high yield (mainly business) traffic has continued to be London-centred.
All Teesside has to offer is a long runway, and a small catchment population. However, as a 'UK gateway' it offers as much as any other. Two examples: A Japanese business visitor with appointments in Leicester, Swindon, Preston and Newcastle could enter at any point on that circuit, particularly if there was a direct flight to Amsterdam from their Japanese regional city; likewise an American tourist doing a tour of the country could start and finish at Edinburgh or Birmingham (or Dublin!) and still include London without having to queue for hours at Heathrow immigration.
If Teesside and some other regional airports were to get together (instead of directly competing) and market themselves to airlines and passengers as 'gateways to the UK', then perhaps some of the pressure currently being suffered in South East England could be averted.