CARDIFF - 2
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quoteYou do seem quite keen on making snide comments about things you don't care diddly squat about, though, don't you.
][/quote]
Who said so, heading 125?
And there you have it, back to the aircraft enthusiasts belief that CWL and BRS are in direct competition with each other and back to the same old "Welsh" p1ssing contest.
Sure CWL can take aircraft up to the likes of B777's, B747's, A380's but can CWL take such types up to MTOW or isn't that something the aircraft enthusiasts concern themselves with?
][/quote]
Bristol's runway is not suitable for aircraft bigger than B757
Whereas it has been proved that any aircraft can operate from Cardiff. Even the A380
Sure CWL can take aircraft up to the likes of B777's, B747's, A380's but can CWL take such types up to MTOW or isn't that something the aircraft enthusiasts concern themselves with?
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just quoting from the official document no scores to settle. Debate is good and the runway and weather record is the one advantage that Cardiff does have over its nearby Bristol. Bristol Florida flight is run half full whereas it could depart full to Florida from Cardiff and has done so in the past.
Now back on topic - Cardiff has regularly run long haul to Canada etc any news about get these long haul flights back. Are these flights planned for the future.
Now back on topic - Cardiff has regularly run long haul to Canada etc any news about get these long haul flights back. Are these flights planned for the future.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure MV can comment on the BRS loads. But I'm pretty sure loads on the route from BRS were good, whether they were making money from it is a different matter.
For once, I have to agree with Phileas. The BRS/CWL competition is no longer a competition. CWL is way behind the mark and BRS has steamed ahead. There is a clear difference in the economy of the areas CWL and BRS serve. Wales with a population of just over 3million and a news article yesterday saying how 700,000 are living in poverty, nearly 1/5.
I'm not sure of the difference between 747-300 and 747-400 but Travel City used to operate full, high capacity loads to Florida, but from what I remember Zoom couldn't operate a full 767-300 to Vancouver, which is why it went via BFS.
That argument doesn't really come into it anyway because I doubt CWL would be able to fill a 777, 747 or A380!
The 767 or 787 is the perfect aircraft for CWL. I a few years to come we may see some operators that can make money using the 787, but for now those are on different niche routes from busier airports.
CWL is slowly making it's mark and attracting different markets. It's never going to be anything spectacular and if anything the only saving grace for now will be VY.
For once, I have to agree with Phileas. The BRS/CWL competition is no longer a competition. CWL is way behind the mark and BRS has steamed ahead. There is a clear difference in the economy of the areas CWL and BRS serve. Wales with a population of just over 3million and a news article yesterday saying how 700,000 are living in poverty, nearly 1/5.
I'm not sure of the difference between 747-300 and 747-400 but Travel City used to operate full, high capacity loads to Florida, but from what I remember Zoom couldn't operate a full 767-300 to Vancouver, which is why it went via BFS.
That argument doesn't really come into it anyway because I doubt CWL would be able to fill a 777, 747 or A380!
The 767 or 787 is the perfect aircraft for CWL. I a few years to come we may see some operators that can make money using the 787, but for now those are on different niche routes from busier airports.
CWL is slowly making it's mark and attracting different markets. It's never going to be anything spectacular and if anything the only saving grace for now will be VY.
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
So far as I'm aware TOM uses the former First Choice Boeing 767-300 aircraft from BRS with 258 seats. I understand they are configured 2-3-2 unlike the original TOM aircraft that are 2-4-2 and have about 25 additional seats. That may have given rise to the earlier comment from a poster that they run 'half full' from BRS whereas they could depart full to Florida from CWL (ie by using the 'larger' aircraft). Load figures from the CAA website suggest there is no requirement to carry fewer than 258 from BRS if there are enough takers.
I believe the Sanford flights normally operate non-stop from BRS whereas the outbound Cancun flights have to route via MAN to take on fuel.
Someone else said a few posts ago that the flights are heavily discounted. I have no knowledge of this so can make no meaningful comment, other than ask a question (see later). Looking at the CAA stats the BRS loads to SFB and CUN seem pretty decent.
Going back over the past two decades or so the transatlantic charters from Severnside were 'traditionally' the preserve of CWL. There was a time about ten years ago when there were three weekly charter flights to Florida with one being a B 747 in peak summer.
This began to change from 2007 when First Choice commenced summer transatlantic charters from BRS to Florida, Cuba and the Dominican Republic - prior to that some limited transatlantic charter programmes had existed at BRS in some years, including some by Thomson, almost certainly requiring an en route fuel stop outbound. The Cuba and Dominican Republic routes were dropped the following year and replaced by Cancun which has operated each summer since along with Sanford.
2007 was the year that Thomson and First Choice merged and very soon the TOM transatlantic charter programme from CWL was stopped altogether. This surprised many people given CWL's much longer history of such routes on a regular basis and its physical advantages (over BRS) for long haul.
Although the BRS routes will cease after this summer it's been seven summers of heavily discounted fares if the particular poster is correct. Could any tour operator business sustain that over such a period and why would they? It's a genuine question - I'm not in the industry.
I don't know whether the axing of the TOM BRS long haul is for commercial or operational reasons, or even a mixture of both. Furthermore, what is this likely to mean to the TOM B 787 at BRS which MD Chris Browne said in 2010 would feature, and by implication how might it affect CWL in the future if TOM has called time on BRS long haul forever? I asked some of these questions in the BRS thread yesterday (perhaps a more appropriate venue for such a discussion) but so far no-one has responded.
I believe the Sanford flights normally operate non-stop from BRS whereas the outbound Cancun flights have to route via MAN to take on fuel.
Someone else said a few posts ago that the flights are heavily discounted. I have no knowledge of this so can make no meaningful comment, other than ask a question (see later). Looking at the CAA stats the BRS loads to SFB and CUN seem pretty decent.
Going back over the past two decades or so the transatlantic charters from Severnside were 'traditionally' the preserve of CWL. There was a time about ten years ago when there were three weekly charter flights to Florida with one being a B 747 in peak summer.
This began to change from 2007 when First Choice commenced summer transatlantic charters from BRS to Florida, Cuba and the Dominican Republic - prior to that some limited transatlantic charter programmes had existed at BRS in some years, including some by Thomson, almost certainly requiring an en route fuel stop outbound. The Cuba and Dominican Republic routes were dropped the following year and replaced by Cancun which has operated each summer since along with Sanford.
2007 was the year that Thomson and First Choice merged and very soon the TOM transatlantic charter programme from CWL was stopped altogether. This surprised many people given CWL's much longer history of such routes on a regular basis and its physical advantages (over BRS) for long haul.
Although the BRS routes will cease after this summer it's been seven summers of heavily discounted fares if the particular poster is correct. Could any tour operator business sustain that over such a period and why would they? It's a genuine question - I'm not in the industry.
I don't know whether the axing of the TOM BRS long haul is for commercial or operational reasons, or even a mixture of both. Furthermore, what is this likely to mean to the TOM B 787 at BRS which MD Chris Browne said in 2010 would feature, and by implication how might it affect CWL in the future if TOM has called time on BRS long haul forever? I asked some of these questions in the BRS thread yesterday (perhaps a more appropriate venue for such a discussion) but so far no-one has responded.
Last edited by MerchantVenturer; 20th Sep 2013 at 19:47.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many moons ago there were Paramount Airways operating their "Scuds" in and out of BRS and on occasions, on such routes as BRS/TFS, their first port of call would be CWL for a refuel.
But, despite BRS's lack of runway performance did Paramount ever consider switching operations to CWL? ... No they didn't because BRS is the airport that is optimumly geographically located and despite being in the middle of nowhere and on top of a hill.
So the CWL enthusiasts can knock BRS on each and every occasion but CWL still isn't going to get the business, even if BRS wasn't there then there would be BHX or EXT, where is CWL again? ... Oh, it's that quaint airfield down on the coast located between Porthkerry and Aberthaw cement works and isn't actually anywhere near to Cardiff!
But, despite BRS's lack of runway performance did Paramount ever consider switching operations to CWL? ... No they didn't because BRS is the airport that is optimumly geographically located and despite being in the middle of nowhere and on top of a hill.
So the CWL enthusiasts can knock BRS on each and every occasion but CWL still isn't going to get the business, even if BRS wasn't there then there would be BHX or EXT, where is CWL again? ... Oh, it's that quaint airfield down on the coast located between Porthkerry and Aberthaw cement works and isn't actually anywhere near to Cardiff!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phileas you seem to be very angry about Cardiff. Things are getting better and a lot of us are supporters. It's actually a great place to live and work but obviously you didn't have that luxury, which is why I guess when every good thing comes along you knock it. I've flown Viscounts via Liverpool and Paris from Cardiff and B747 classics and 400s for maintenance and the occasional divert as well. My brother operates from there and our father flew from there from 1952 until BA pulled out in 1974. It has a great future and has it place. Perhaps as I have said more suited to long haul than Bristol, better weather, the runway length and larger Airspace is it advantage over Bristol.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BRISTOL
Posts: 763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BRS-SFB operates weekly with FULL loads direct with ex FCA aircraft and seating as MV states.
Also as MV states it is not clear whether the decision to pull longhaul from BRS is commercial or anything else, my personal thoughts is that it is a mixture of commercial and technical.
Logically huge delays have been experienced in delivery and consequent tech issues, TOM may want to get the few 787s they have off long runways until things have calmed down and with losing a good few 767s from the fleet in the process the South West/Wales is seen as a non essential area to run longhaul from, general public in the areas are already used to driving to London or BHX for longhaul needs, I believe BHX is not having the TOM Dreamliner either immediately but are running longhaul still with 767.
I think longhaul will return to BRS with the 787 in a year or two, and I also believe that if the investment is there to improve facilities at CWL then it will return to CWL too.
What will be interesting is whether TOM bring a 787 to either airport to operate any cruise flights over the winter period, theres usually a few BGI's dotted about over winter time so we'll see.
I do believe that the area seriously needs to nail an Emirates flight, but again would they want to send a brand new a/c in to BRS?Looking at their model they usually chuck an A330 on a new route and build it up as with NCL.
Also as MV states it is not clear whether the decision to pull longhaul from BRS is commercial or anything else, my personal thoughts is that it is a mixture of commercial and technical.
Logically huge delays have been experienced in delivery and consequent tech issues, TOM may want to get the few 787s they have off long runways until things have calmed down and with losing a good few 767s from the fleet in the process the South West/Wales is seen as a non essential area to run longhaul from, general public in the areas are already used to driving to London or BHX for longhaul needs, I believe BHX is not having the TOM Dreamliner either immediately but are running longhaul still with 767.
I think longhaul will return to BRS with the 787 in a year or two, and I also believe that if the investment is there to improve facilities at CWL then it will return to CWL too.
What will be interesting is whether TOM bring a 787 to either airport to operate any cruise flights over the winter period, theres usually a few BGI's dotted about over winter time so we'll see.
I do believe that the area seriously needs to nail an Emirates flight, but again would they want to send a brand new a/c in to BRS?Looking at their model they usually chuck an A330 on a new route and build it up as with NCL.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Wales
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfure if this is due to Air Passenger Duty. Seems as if the cruise companies have opted either to back to the main airports such as Gatwick & Manchester instead of operating from regional airports.
Other cruise companies are setting sail from the UK too.
Thomson Cruises will have a one-off flight from Cardiff Airport operating in January.
Other cruise companies are setting sail from the UK too.
Thomson Cruises will have a one-off flight from Cardiff Airport operating in January.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 60
Posts: 3,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cruise
fly_guy_021
Sorry to hijack the Cardiff thread but you have indicated re cruises "All being operated via LGW, BHX or MAN onthe 787"
I thought BHX was not due to get the 787 until next July and the BHX - CUN, BGI, MBJ & SFB this winter (when they operate) still indicate the 767.
As an aside TOM's 5th 787 is almost finished final assembly per another site
Pete
Sorry to hijack the Cardiff thread but you have indicated re cruises "All being operated via LGW, BHX or MAN onthe 787"
I thought BHX was not due to get the 787 until next July and the BHX - CUN, BGI, MBJ & SFB this winter (when they operate) still indicate the 767.
As an aside TOM's 5th 787 is almost finished final assembly per another site
Pete
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
heading 125,
How could any sane person possibly be "very angry" about a place?
Great place to live? For 23 years I owned a CF62 postcode but for the life of me I can't figure out what "luxury" you refer to!
If you refer to "knocking it" as being realistic then I hold my hands up, it's just so amusing to read these enthusiasts trying to think of ways to praise CWL yet "knock", yes they are the ones "knocking", yourself included, any opposition (BRS) and for any reason and, much the same as what has recently been going on between the STN and SEN enthusiasts, this "my dick is bigger than your dick" regarding runway performances is an extremely childish line to take.
Yes BRS is something of a joke developed from an ex military airfield and in the middle of nowhere but it's a successful joke, isn't CWL also developed from an ex military airfield and in the middle of nowhere?
Alas BRS has a catchment area not only from it's surrounding areas but all the way down to Land's End and CWL is never going to enjoy such a catchment area being in the remote location that CWL is in.
Phileas you seem to be very angry about Cardiff. Things are getting better and a lot of us are supporters. It's actually a great place to live and work but obviously you didn't have that luxury
Great place to live? For 23 years I owned a CF62 postcode but for the life of me I can't figure out what "luxury" you refer to!
If you refer to "knocking it" as being realistic then I hold my hands up, it's just so amusing to read these enthusiasts trying to think of ways to praise CWL yet "knock", yes they are the ones "knocking", yourself included, any opposition (BRS) and for any reason and, much the same as what has recently been going on between the STN and SEN enthusiasts, this "my dick is bigger than your dick" regarding runway performances is an extremely childish line to take.
Yes BRS is something of a joke developed from an ex military airfield and in the middle of nowhere but it's a successful joke, isn't CWL also developed from an ex military airfield and in the middle of nowhere?
Alas BRS has a catchment area not only from it's surrounding areas but all the way down to Land's End and CWL is never going to enjoy such a catchment area being in the remote location that CWL is in.
Last edited by Phileas Fogg; 24th Sep 2013 at 03:55.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love the age old Cardiff/Bristol debate. The sad thing is that if we lived in a nation who had political leaders with foresight rather than just an aim of getting re-elected every five years, then we would have a Severn estuary airport. It could even link in with a barrage scheme to generate it's power. If we were Chinese it would have been built in the time it has taken me to write this email!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London
Age: 51
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bristolflyer - that is the best thing I have read on here in a long time. Truly accurate and logical. Here could be sited Boris Johnsons airport in the estuary, 24 hour operation, no overflying of large cities, green and self sufficient in energy trumping the environment card. On the main transaport networks too with fast links to London, the South West, the Midlands and North, covering a massive cathcment area along with the electrification of the GWR mainline. Indeed if this was China, we would have had it built!