BIRMINGHAM - 5
However I worry that the bean counters at EK are casting more than a beady eye at both BHX and NCL as both have seemed weak for a while now.
Laurie Berryman, the vice-chairman of Emirates who oversaw the Dubai link being established five years ago, has said that in three years it is possible it could go from a once-a-day to a twice-daily service as has recently been introduced in Glasgow. He said. “We’ve been delighted by how people, businesses and political organisations have got behind the route and made it a success, but now we want to increase passenger numbers by 15% this year and 20% next year – from 80,000 people to around 120,000 or 130,000 – and we definitely think that is achievable. You never know, in three years’ time we might be here again discussing a double daily service”
Last edited by SWBKCB; 25th Jun 2012 at 07:20.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Birmingham
Age: 53
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Birmingham Airport calls for focus on regions
BBC reporting on the below..
BBC News - Birmingham Airport calls for focus on regions
and this was mentioned in the headlines on Radio 5 this morning..
BBC News - Birmingham Airport calls for focus on regions
and this was mentioned in the headlines on Radio 5 this morning..
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Birmingham
Age: 63
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
25 June 2012
Birmingham Airport has today released a report that challenges orthodox opinion about aviation policy in the UK.
The report, authored by Paul Kehoe, Birmingham Airport’s chief executive, says that in order for the whole of Britain to capture the economic benefits of changes in global travel the Government must fully utilise existing airport infrastructure and pursue a balanced aviation strategy.
The report, Don’t put all of your eggs in one basket: a challenge to aviation orthodoxy, argues that:
• Complicated hub-and-spoke demand management policies are failing to adapt to the challenges of aviation in the twenty-first century.
• Britain needs several airports capable of delivering point-to-point connectivity to emerging markets.
• A third runway at Heathrow will only meet 7% of additional passenger capacity needs by 2050; it is not a national aviation strategy.
• The six largest regional airports could add 116 million of passenger capacity to the network by 2050.
Commenting on the report Paul Kehoe, Chief Executive of Birmingham Airport said: “This report is my challenge to policy-makers to think beyond a single hub model that has become rigid aviation orthodoxy, and to consider alternative approaches that can deliver the airport capacity we need, today.
“The alternative approach that I am putting forward is a balanced aviation strategy that makes full use of Britain’s existing airports and that will deliver benefits to the UK more efficiently, more quickly and at a lower cost than any other proposal on the table.
“We have a Government which is set on rebalancing the economy, and we have fantastic airports around the country with the spare capacity to deliver this growth. It is illogical that we are still trying to channel all traffic through the South East, which will only serve to reinforce the imbalance within the economy.
“At Birmingham Airport the number of passengers could double from nine million a year to eighteen million today. We have already started the construction of our runway extension and when completed, in 2014, this number will increase beyond thirty six million. Our runway extension will also allow us to fly to high-value new markets, including Brazil, China and India.
“This report challenges Government to draw a line under old-fashioned industry thinking. It is time to start recognising that there is more than one solution for UK aviation”
As part of the launch of the report, Birmingham Airport has laid out ten ‘tests’ for the Government to meet a balanced UK aviation policy:
1. Does it cater for the short-term, build towards the medium-term and lay the foundations for the UK’s long-term capacity needs?
2. Does it provide airports in the South East with the flexibility to replace low value routes with new, high values services?
3. Does it provide the aviation industry with suitable headroom to ensure the access to the UK is resilient to changes in the weather, accidents and or terrorist activities?
4. Does it ensure that customers are able to fly direct to markets of their choice, from their nearest major airport?
5. Does it provide support for the Government’s wider Growth Agenda by encouraging employment in areas that already suffer from acute economic depression?
6. Does it facilitate economic rebalancing within the UK by supporting the creation of direct connections between the UK’s industrial capacity and customers in emerging markets?
7. Does it allow all parts of the UK to compete for foreign direct investment?
8. Does it provide incentives for airlines to create point-to-point services between UK cities and cities in emerging economies to create new, city pairs?
9. Does it balance the environmental impact of aviation growth for residents across the UK?
10. Does it support the integration of road, rail and air transport networks within the UK?
The report is the latest part of Birmingham Airport’s political campaign that is due to run over the summer, during the Government’s aviation consultation. Earlier in the month, Birmingham Airport released a series of hard-hitting adverts on tubes in London, online and in political magazines.
Birmingham Airport has today released a report that challenges orthodox opinion about aviation policy in the UK.
The report, authored by Paul Kehoe, Birmingham Airport’s chief executive, says that in order for the whole of Britain to capture the economic benefits of changes in global travel the Government must fully utilise existing airport infrastructure and pursue a balanced aviation strategy.
The report, Don’t put all of your eggs in one basket: a challenge to aviation orthodoxy, argues that:
• Complicated hub-and-spoke demand management policies are failing to adapt to the challenges of aviation in the twenty-first century.
• Britain needs several airports capable of delivering point-to-point connectivity to emerging markets.
• A third runway at Heathrow will only meet 7% of additional passenger capacity needs by 2050; it is not a national aviation strategy.
• The six largest regional airports could add 116 million of passenger capacity to the network by 2050.
Commenting on the report Paul Kehoe, Chief Executive of Birmingham Airport said: “This report is my challenge to policy-makers to think beyond a single hub model that has become rigid aviation orthodoxy, and to consider alternative approaches that can deliver the airport capacity we need, today.
“The alternative approach that I am putting forward is a balanced aviation strategy that makes full use of Britain’s existing airports and that will deliver benefits to the UK more efficiently, more quickly and at a lower cost than any other proposal on the table.
“We have a Government which is set on rebalancing the economy, and we have fantastic airports around the country with the spare capacity to deliver this growth. It is illogical that we are still trying to channel all traffic through the South East, which will only serve to reinforce the imbalance within the economy.
“At Birmingham Airport the number of passengers could double from nine million a year to eighteen million today. We have already started the construction of our runway extension and when completed, in 2014, this number will increase beyond thirty six million. Our runway extension will also allow us to fly to high-value new markets, including Brazil, China and India.
“This report challenges Government to draw a line under old-fashioned industry thinking. It is time to start recognising that there is more than one solution for UK aviation”
As part of the launch of the report, Birmingham Airport has laid out ten ‘tests’ for the Government to meet a balanced UK aviation policy:
1. Does it cater for the short-term, build towards the medium-term and lay the foundations for the UK’s long-term capacity needs?
2. Does it provide airports in the South East with the flexibility to replace low value routes with new, high values services?
3. Does it provide the aviation industry with suitable headroom to ensure the access to the UK is resilient to changes in the weather, accidents and or terrorist activities?
4. Does it ensure that customers are able to fly direct to markets of their choice, from their nearest major airport?
5. Does it provide support for the Government’s wider Growth Agenda by encouraging employment in areas that already suffer from acute economic depression?
6. Does it facilitate economic rebalancing within the UK by supporting the creation of direct connections between the UK’s industrial capacity and customers in emerging markets?
7. Does it allow all parts of the UK to compete for foreign direct investment?
8. Does it provide incentives for airlines to create point-to-point services between UK cities and cities in emerging economies to create new, city pairs?
9. Does it balance the environmental impact of aviation growth for residents across the UK?
10. Does it support the integration of road, rail and air transport networks within the UK?
The report is the latest part of Birmingham Airport’s political campaign that is due to run over the summer, during the Government’s aviation consultation. Earlier in the month, Birmingham Airport released a series of hard-hitting adverts on tubes in London, online and in political magazines.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“At Birmingham Airport the number of passengers could double from nine million a year to eighteen million today. We have already started the construction of our runway extension and when completed, in 2014, this number will increase beyond thirty six million. Our runway extension will also allow us to fly to high-value new markets, including Brazil, China and India.
What is the current capacity of the (two) joined terminals, given recent developments. Is it really 18m - with no new infrastructure?
How does that suddenly jump to more than twice this figure - essentially the size of LGW - without (a) needing any new terminals, (b) needing huge upgrdes to roads - or are 100% of these passengers coming on hs2? Given (a), how would BHX suddenly become the size of LGW without (a) needing a lengthy public inquiry to approve of this growth? Or is a new (third) terminal suddenly allowed within PDRs? And (c), if BHX does become the size that LGW is now, doesn't that automatically re-open the debate over the second runway, this defeating the very point of this policy?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rather obvious question is, why does Birmingham have spare capacity? Why is the mighty Emirates stalled in growth at BHX? Why did CO not succeed on twice daily BHX-EWR? Because the market wasn't strong enough.
As far as capacity to serve London goes, Stansted is a ghost town outwith the first and final FR waves. Capacity is not the problem, putting capacity where business can make a commercial return is the core issue.
As far as capacity to serve London goes, Stansted is a ghost town outwith the first and final FR waves. Capacity is not the problem, putting capacity where business can make a commercial return is the core issue.
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 25th Jun 2012 at 20:07.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as capacity to serve London goes, Stansted is a ghost town outwith the first and final FR waves. Capacity is not the problem, putting capacity where business can make a commercial return is the core issue.
1) Legacies that can't use LHR fill up LGW (as has happened on some Asian routes)
2) Yields for these legacies are better than BA sh at LGW, so that closes.
3) Some hard up airlines cash out LHR slots for remaining BA + VS to consolidate at LHR.
4) Other legacies keep moving in on LGW, forcing U2 to move some routes to STN & LTN.
5) STN at last can charge what it wants for FR and other locos.
Then and ONLY then do FR move to BHX for a major base operation, rather than the cold storage they have been opting for of late.
I think the chances that we'd go all the way from 1 to 5 without a new runway being approved at either LHR or LGW are slim anyway.
So under what circumstances does BHX pick up routes which are beyond its natural market?
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: solihull West Midlands
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jaibird,
I think that all BHX can realistically hope for is more Midland travellers choosing to fly from BHX. I think it unlikely that airlines would move from LHR to BHX due to capacity constraints in the SE.
The only possibility would be airlines or routes that BHX can nearly support and those airlines ,who are were in two mindsrisking BHX if LHR congestion gets too bad.
As for Ryan Air I certainly don't want an more services into BHX with them, unless they are routes not covered by existing airlines..otherwise they are a creeping cancer pushing out established carriers.
Nigel
I think that all BHX can realistically hope for is more Midland travellers choosing to fly from BHX. I think it unlikely that airlines would move from LHR to BHX due to capacity constraints in the SE.
The only possibility would be airlines or routes that BHX can nearly support and those airlines ,who are were in two mindsrisking BHX if LHR congestion gets too bad.
As for Ryan Air I certainly don't want an more services into BHX with them, unless they are routes not covered by existing airlines..otherwise they are a creeping cancer pushing out established carriers.
Nigel
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paul Kehoe, Birmingham Airport’s chief executive, needs to convince carriers other than EK and KL that there is business potential with sufficient yield ex-BHX.
As for longhaul at BHX, the problem is very simple, EK and KL have been funnelling longhaul pax through their hubs at DXB and AMS very successfully for a while. No carriers appear to want to take them on by offering direct flights. Maybe like (the much slated) BA, they also believe that they can't make money on BHX operations.
It's desperately sad, but a fact of life.
As for longhaul at BHX, the problem is very simple, EK and KL have been funnelling longhaul pax through their hubs at DXB and AMS very successfully for a while. No carriers appear to want to take them on by offering direct flights. Maybe like (the much slated) BA, they also believe that they can't make money on BHX operations.
It's desperately sad, but a fact of life.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: not entirely sure.....
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BHX does have spare capacity - but only if you want to fly in during the quiet periods - 02:00-07:00, 11:00-12:00, 20:00-21:30.
Assuming the runway can take an extra 9m passengers today, the terminal isn't big enough to cope, the immigration halls are definitely not big enough and the staffing levels aren't there (UKBA, Servisair etc). Arriving passengers are frequently queuing up the stairs and down the international pier during the busy periods at lunchtime and midnight.
9m extra passengers today? No, get the staffing levels right and you may have an extra 1-2m next year. Anything above that and you'll need to do some building work.....
Assuming the runway can take an extra 9m passengers today, the terminal isn't big enough to cope, the immigration halls are definitely not big enough and the staffing levels aren't there (UKBA, Servisair etc). Arriving passengers are frequently queuing up the stairs and down the international pier during the busy periods at lunchtime and midnight.
9m extra passengers today? No, get the staffing levels right and you may have an extra 1-2m next year. Anything above that and you'll need to do some building work.....
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for longhaul at BHX, the problem is very simple, EK and KL have been funnelling longhaul pax through their hubs at DXB and AMS very successfully for a while. No carriers appear to want to take them on by offering direct flights.
This story about the restoration of an Indian link includes this:
"Although its Birmingham-India route was more profitable than any of the London ones, Air India had to drop the service to avoid losing valuable slots at Heathrow because of the way the London airport is run."
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London
Age: 60
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don’t put all of your eggs in one basket: a challenge to aviation orthodoxy
Where can you see the full report and not just the summary/press release on BHX website?
The other thing is that if they are going to increase their numbers by over 10mppa, then they will need new infastructure and the application will automatically become a planning project described as Nationally Strategic Infrastructure Project, being taken direct to the Planning Inspectorate (what was the Infrastructure Planning Commission until April this year). Is BHX really going to go down that route?
The other thing is that if they are going to increase their numbers by over 10mppa, then they will need new infastructure and the application will automatically become a planning project described as Nationally Strategic Infrastructure Project, being taken direct to the Planning Inspectorate (what was the Infrastructure Planning Commission until April this year). Is BHX really going to go down that route?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Lichfield UK
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Load Factors: Q? for OP
Pete, when you are working out your load factors with Monarch, do you base these on the nominal A320 /321 capacities of the diagrammed aircraft?
I notice Monarch have been substituting with 757 / 767's recently. Presumably these will carry their 320's worth of pax (unless (if forward planned) they are taking advantage of, and selling the extra seats).
I notice Monarch have been substituting with 757 / 767's recently. Presumably these will carry their 320's worth of pax (unless (if forward planned) they are taking advantage of, and selling the extra seats).
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: solihull West Midlands
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Govt considers cutting APD for Regional Airports
Well seems the Govt may have decided to try and force some services from congested LHR and Gatwick..Proposal announced today to look at cutting APD for Regional Airports and put it up at LHR,LGW.
This might help BHX in attracting a few more airlines if it comes off
North’s airport passengers to pay lower tax - Liverpool News - News - Liverpool Daily Post
Nigel
This might help BHX in attracting a few more airlines if it comes off
North’s airport passengers to pay lower tax - Liverpool News - News - Liverpool Daily Post
Nigel
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 60
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RealFish
In May I used the capacity for the scheduled aircraft and not the replacement. I have no idea if they have taken advantage of the extra seats on Air Finland although that might be coming to an abrupt end if airlineroute is correct.
To be honest I do the same for the flybe figures as they chop and change fro the Q400/175/195.
Nigel - Sounds far too sensible but fingers crossed and I am sure it will help a little
Ringwayman I for one never believed that re Air India. Even less so after last weeks quote that 80% of AI's losses came from a handful of routes all of which were long-haul including Delhi - Toronto, which morphed from the DEL-ATQ-BHX-YYZ.
I know you have to treat anything with a pinch of salt from press releases but this is an airline that has 777's sitting around and if ATQ-BHX was so profitable it would have re-started ages ago. We know the market is there but as many have said not a very profitable one although with India, never say never.
Pete
added link
Air Finland out of business | Yle Uutiset | yle.fi
In May I used the capacity for the scheduled aircraft and not the replacement. I have no idea if they have taken advantage of the extra seats on Air Finland although that might be coming to an abrupt end if airlineroute is correct.
To be honest I do the same for the flybe figures as they chop and change fro the Q400/175/195.
Nigel - Sounds far too sensible but fingers crossed and I am sure it will help a little
Ringwayman I for one never believed that re Air India. Even less so after last weeks quote that 80% of AI's losses came from a handful of routes all of which were long-haul including Delhi - Toronto, which morphed from the DEL-ATQ-BHX-YYZ.
I know you have to treat anything with a pinch of salt from press releases but this is an airline that has 777's sitting around and if ATQ-BHX was so profitable it would have re-started ages ago. We know the market is there but as many have said not a very profitable one although with India, never say never.
Pete
added link
Air Finland out of business | Yle Uutiset | yle.fi
Last edited by OltonPete; 26th Jun 2012 at 16:09. Reason: added link
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flew a positioning flight to MAN to readiness to operate a Thomas Cook flight but it's still there now I believe. Don't know if the snow ploughs are out as part of the impounding of it.
Last edited by Ringwayman; 26th Jun 2012 at 20:46.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: u.k.
Age: 56
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE : Cutting APD for regional airports
This has been lobbied by BHX for some months now, ever since the decision to cut APD on long haul from Northern Ireland was made last year. Ever since this lousy tax was introduced it has crept up and up as it seems it was easy prey, like tax on cigs and booze. But , combined with the recession , it has had a detremental effect on our long haul pax routes. Speaking for myself my last 3 trips to the states have been from LHR hubbing through EWR instead of from BHX purely because of cost . in reply to skipness one echo :
The market IS there, already on this thread we have been told that the fares for EK from BHX are higher than those of London . So , if the chancellor reduces APD on long haul from the regions there is no need to spend 32 Billion on HS2 taking brummies to catch their planes in London and no need for southerners to come to BHX to catch theirs.
Sound sensible? bound not to happen then....
The rather obvious question is, why does Birmingham have spare capacity? Why is the mighty Emirates stalled in growth at BHX? Why did CO not succeed on twice daily BHX-EWR? Because the market wasn't strong enough
Sound sensible? bound not to happen then....
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for longhaul at BHX, the problem is very simple, EK and KL have been funnelling longhaul pax through their hubs at DXB and AMS very successfully for a while. No carriers appear to want to take them on by offering direct flights.
Will the runway extension bring it back? Will it
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: u.k.
Age: 56
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well looking the other way, did BHX even get a full season out of the PHL route? Why did that one vanish faster than a Philly cheese streak roll down a tubby gullet?
Give us a level playing field and we will build our runway extension on it .
