BIRMINGHAM - 5
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: BHX
Age: 48
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have asked BHX about the taxiways and they are NOT widening them.They inform me that they comply with all CAA regs for all types of aircraft. 
(f) Operators should note that Birmingham Airport is unable to accept A340-600 aircraft due to limitation on taxiway curves.
Page 11
http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2013-01-10.pdf
2 Ground Movement
(h) A380 Aircraft Operations:
(i) Operators of A380 aircraft may designate Birmingham as a nominated diversionary aerodrome subject to prior agreement with the Head of Airfield Operations Tel +44 (0)121-767 7384 and assessment of facilities at Birmingham by the Airline. The use of Birmingham as an alternate for A380 operations is also subject to UK CAA approval on an individual airline basis.
(ii) Maximum of 5 A380s can be handled at any time (subject to stand availability).
(iii) Only one A380 can move around the aerodrome at any time. If 2 or more aircraft are handled at the same time, one must be on stand at all times whilst the other is moving or stationary on Taxiway Tango / Taxilane Uniform
(iv) Follow-me will be provided for all movements.
(v) Departing aircraft must use the CAT III runway holds at all times, irrespective of weather conditions.
(vi) Diverting A380 aircraft will be provided with RFF Category 9 in accordance with UK CAA CAP 168 Chapter 8.
Page 10
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Nuneaton / Fuerteventura
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EK
While waiting for my flight from bhx last week i got talking to a EK security guy waiting for EK37 to land, i asked when would it be likely to get a 380 his words were no good to us here we need more cargo space all flights are rammed.
EK
On the Emirates flights from BHX is there space/weight for more cargo to be carried ? so after the runway extension is completed they will be able to carry more
Simon
Simon
Simon
Generally, air cargo tends to bulk out, so the maximum capacity in volume terms is reached before the maximum weight.
I'm guessing that the ratio of passenger space to baggage / cargo capacity on the A380 is somewhat greater than the 777, so by the time you've put all the bags on, their's not much space left for cargo.
Generally, air cargo tends to bulk out, so the maximum capacity in volume terms is reached before the maximum weight.
I'm guessing that the ratio of passenger space to baggage / cargo capacity on the A380 is somewhat greater than the 777, so by the time you've put all the bags on, their's not much space left for cargo.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EK
Going on recent posts regarding EK and the documented stagnating pax loads a dedicated EK cargo flight could mean a reduction in pax flights to one daily as it seems that cargo is helping keep the two daily frequency going at the mo?
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: uk
Age: 34
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5 A380s at once? That I would love to see, considering it's bound to start snowing in the next few days 
BHX handles half of what it can manage (around 8.5 million compared to the 17 million it can handle). Putting that aside however, still holding out for a new specially-made spotting area.
When it comes to the US, which route would be most viable? ORD or JFK?
BHX handles half of what it can manage (around 8.5 million compared to the 17 million it can handle). Putting that aside however, still holding out for a new specially-made spotting area.
When it comes to the US, which route would be most viable? ORD or JFK?
When it comes to the US, which route would be most viable? ORD or JFK?
US Destinations
There are only two reasons for offering services from BHX to the USA.
First, to serve a major hub, ATL, ORD or EWR are the most obvious candidates, but as crewmeal has said, so far there is no sign of any carrier showing interest in re-opening service from ORD.
Second is point to point (charter or quasi scheduled services) to leisure destinations. These are limited realistically to the Orlando area (ORD or SFB) and Las Vegas. beyond that, the market is fragmented, with holiday makers from the UK generally flying scheduled to destinations anywhere from New England to California though either London or Manchester.
Inward, as I must have said umpteen times, the US public is so geographically challenged that they believe pretty well the only destination in England is London, then Stratford (half of them would probably wind up in E15 staring at the Olympic park) which they believe is not far from London. Getting significant inbound leisure traffic to chose BHX will be an uphill struggle.
Visit Britain does nothing to alter this perception.
I'm not sure why people are so obsessed with transatlantic. the USA is no longer the world's economic powerhouse, and manufacturing centre. That has shifted east - to India, China and other Far Eastern countries. it is to these areas that the development team needs to be addressing their (long haul) attention, not the USA.
First, to serve a major hub, ATL, ORD or EWR are the most obvious candidates, but as crewmeal has said, so far there is no sign of any carrier showing interest in re-opening service from ORD.
Second is point to point (charter or quasi scheduled services) to leisure destinations. These are limited realistically to the Orlando area (ORD or SFB) and Las Vegas. beyond that, the market is fragmented, with holiday makers from the UK generally flying scheduled to destinations anywhere from New England to California though either London or Manchester.
Inward, as I must have said umpteen times, the US public is so geographically challenged that they believe pretty well the only destination in England is London, then Stratford (half of them would probably wind up in E15 staring at the Olympic park) which they believe is not far from London. Getting significant inbound leisure traffic to chose BHX will be an uphill struggle.
Visit Britain does nothing to alter this perception.
I'm not sure why people are so obsessed with transatlantic. the USA is no longer the world's economic powerhouse, and manufacturing centre. That has shifted east - to India, China and other Far Eastern countries. it is to these areas that the development team needs to be addressing their (long haul) attention, not the USA.
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: uk
Age: 34
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's the chance that EK could replace the 77W with an A380 on a few occasions? I remember they did something similar many years ago when they would fly in the 772 instead of the A330 on a few occasions, before upgrading the daytime flight to it completely.
Planeaddict
Is it my imagination or are we going around and around in ever decreasing circles on this subject (Emirates and 380s)!!
Why, I am asking myself, would Emirates ever want to substitute the 773, with the 380 given the following which have already been mentioned:-
No upperdeck catering equipment
Lack of cargo uplift on the 380
3 class config on the 380 (BHX is a 2 class operation)
I fully appreciate that as a spotter you would love to see 380s operating through BHX - frankly, who wouldn't but this is (alledged) to be a professional forum, and I believe the professionals (of which I do not consider myself to be one) have answered this question innumerable times.
Is it my imagination or are we going around and around in ever decreasing circles on this subject (Emirates and 380s)!!
Why, I am asking myself, would Emirates ever want to substitute the 773, with the 380 given the following which have already been mentioned:-
No upperdeck catering equipment
Lack of cargo uplift on the 380
3 class config on the 380 (BHX is a 2 class operation)
I fully appreciate that as a spotter you would love to see 380s operating through BHX - frankly, who wouldn't but this is (alledged) to be a professional forum, and I believe the professionals (of which I do not consider myself to be one) have answered this question innumerable times.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: solihull West Midlands
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AT Notts,
Re EK A380,
yes have to agree with all this, there may be a prospect of seeing an A380 in BHX in 2014 on the day the runway extension opens, to promote it, Unless they have another trick up their sleeves for that date.
Nigel
Re EK A380,
yes have to agree with all this, there may be a prospect of seeing an A380 in BHX in 2014 on the day the runway extension opens, to promote it, Unless they have another trick up their sleeves for that date.
Nigel
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: uk
Age: 34
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone have any ideas on what airlines BHX might be in talks with?
Last edited by Planeaddict; 13th Jan 2013 at 14:39.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Stafford
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone have any ideas on what airlines BHX might be in talks with?
BHX always seem to be in discussion with airlines but the fact remains that we haven't had a new airline touch down here and last a considerable amount of time since 2008 when TK started. Hopefully they're trying to attract Jet2 but I'm guessing they're probably trying to convince someone more glamorous like Cathay Pacific to join the party. And we all know oneworld don't do BHX!
Perhaps in time the 787 could change things but in the short-term I think all we can hope for is continued expansion from existing carriers.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's hardly an encouraging sign when a lot of publicity is tied into the "come here because LHR is full" mantra and not because BHX has a sufficiently big enough catchment area with the correct passenger profile for a number of airlines (long-haul or otherwise).
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: uk
Age: 34
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BHX always seem to be in discussion with airlines but the fact remains that we haven't had a new airline touch down here and last a considerable amount of time since 2008 when TK started. Hopefully they're trying to attract Jet2 but I'm guessing they're probably trying to convince someone more glamorous like Cathay Pacific to join the party. And we all know oneworld don't do BHX!
Perhaps in time the 787 could change things but in the short-term I think all we can hope for is continued expansion from existing carriers.
Perhaps in time the 787 could change things but in the short-term I think all we can hope for is continued expansion from existing carriers.
Forgot TK only started in 2008. You would be able to say US Airways if they bothered to try BHX for another season.
I think there's more chance of expansion from the smaller carriers rather than the larger ones. Turkish flies 10 times a week - I suspect it doesn't operate that frequently from LHR or MAN but I may be wrong. Surely an aircraft upgrade is on the cards if the loads warrant it?
In terms of the long-haul carriers, Continental tried a second daily service (which would fly in just after the first flight had left) but that didn't last long, so that'll stay as it is for now. EK has been discussed. As mentioned, more services to Orlando would benefit. Not sure what PIA's loads are like but I suspect they aren't great, probably the reason why they only operate the 772 now rather than the 773.
Last edited by Planeaddict; 13th Jan 2013 at 15:47.