BELFAST AIRPORT INTERNATIONAL
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Belfast, Ireland
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Article in today`s Irish Examiner states that Norwegian is planning to fly to 4 Irish airports from the USA to Cork, Dublin, Shannon and Belfast.
Low-fare Ireland-US flights to be announced within weeks | Irish Examiner
Low-fare Ireland-US flights to be announced within weeks | Irish Examiner
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: liverpool
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now also being reported by Northern Ireland Travel News. NYC and BOS from BFS. If the Norwegian/Ryanair deal is likely to come to fruition, would it be a possibility the two could feed each other at BFS. Could be a possibility especially if FR add a few other UK city's to the network along with the early Bergamo Wroclaw Berlin rotations.
Last edited by DC9_10; 1st Feb 2017 at 19:52.
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Especially with the plans I've seen Jamie2K10, several cities at 3/4pw, having a based aircraft per route in Belfast one of the most marginal markets, maybe only bested by Cork, just doesn't add up.
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A couple of articles mention that Norwegian will open four transatlantic bases; two in Europe (EDI and RIX) and two in the US (PVD and SWF). The logistics of a Belfast base wouldn't make any sense. Basing the aircraft in the US would allow them to fly to BFS, ORK, SNN and would give them room to expand to other European markets. Their transatlantic Belfast operation probably won't expand beyond two destinations, so why would they base the aircraft on this side of the Atlantic if their operation is much bigger on the other side.
Norwegian set to open up to four 737MAX bases for 2017 transatlantic growth :: Routesonline
Norwegian set to open up to four 737MAX bases for 2017 transatlantic growth :: Routesonline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is reasonable demand for a Transatlantic flight from Riga? Really?
I was thinking basing one aircraft in Belfast could work if the aircraft is alternated between Boston and New York? I can't imagine there is enough demand to full a daily flight to Boston and New York year round.
Although, maybe lower fares from Norwegian might induce more passengers up from Dublin?
I was thinking basing one aircraft in Belfast could work if the aircraft is alternated between Boston and New York? I can't imagine there is enough demand to full a daily flight to Boston and New York year round.
Although, maybe lower fares from Norwegian might induce more passengers up from Dublin?
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Riga actually already has year-round B763 flights to JFK operated by Uzbekistan Airways, and the Baltic states are showing strong growth in passenger traffic, so I'm not surprised that Norwegian are looking at the airport.
I will explain to you why basing a single aircraft at Belfast does not make any economic sense.
Let's say Norwegian open a base at Belfast. There are fixed costs associated with operating a base - office leases, admin staff etc.
There are also variable costs associated with operating a base. These are costs associated with how many aircraft are based at Belfast. Let's say Norwegian bases one aircraft, operating one daily transatlantic roundtrip. They need to hire pilots, cabin crew, maintenance staff, ground handling staff, check in staff etc. The cost of basing one aircraft at Belfast is equal to the fixed costs plus the variable costs (fuel, wages, airport fees) i.e. TC(1)=FC(1)+VC(1)
Now let's say Norwegian bases a second aircraft. The fixed costs stay the same, but the variable costs increase. However, fewer extra staff need to be hired, as ground staff can handle two daily round trips. Now, the cost of basing two aircraft is, as before, equal to the fixed costs plus the variable costs. However, the costs per aircraft are equal to 0.5(FC(2)+VC(2))<(FC(1)+VC(1)), meaning the cost per aircraft has decreased. All of the costs are split between the two aircraft. As more aircraft are added, the average cost continues to fall, meaning each aircraft's net profits increase.
This is called 'Economies of Scale' - producing more output (in this case basing more aircraft and adding flights to increase revenues) will reduce average costs, increasing the efficiency and net profits of the firm (in this case Norwegian).
It makes more sense for Norwegian to open a base at PVD and SWF, each with 2 or 3 aircraft, flying to BFS, ORK, SNN with the potential for expansion into more European markets. From Belfast, Norwegian will probably only fly to two destinations, meaning the base would not grow beyond one aircraft. This means that, in comparison to a 3 aircraft base at PVD, the cost of a Belfast base per aircraft would be much greater than the cost of a PVD base.
This is one of the reasons why Ryanair closed their Belfast City base back in 2010. Because they were unable to expand their network into Europe, they were unable to base more aircraft and fly to more destinations, which would have allowed them to spread the costs of the base over more aircraft and higher revenues.
I hope this makes sense, but long story short a larger base reduces average costs, therefore increasing net profits and efficiencies. SWF and PVD will serve more destinations and frequencies than BFS, so it makes a lot more economic sense to base aircraft in the US than at BFS.
I will explain to you why basing a single aircraft at Belfast does not make any economic sense.
Let's say Norwegian open a base at Belfast. There are fixed costs associated with operating a base - office leases, admin staff etc.
There are also variable costs associated with operating a base. These are costs associated with how many aircraft are based at Belfast. Let's say Norwegian bases one aircraft, operating one daily transatlantic roundtrip. They need to hire pilots, cabin crew, maintenance staff, ground handling staff, check in staff etc. The cost of basing one aircraft at Belfast is equal to the fixed costs plus the variable costs (fuel, wages, airport fees) i.e. TC(1)=FC(1)+VC(1)
Now let's say Norwegian bases a second aircraft. The fixed costs stay the same, but the variable costs increase. However, fewer extra staff need to be hired, as ground staff can handle two daily round trips. Now, the cost of basing two aircraft is, as before, equal to the fixed costs plus the variable costs. However, the costs per aircraft are equal to 0.5(FC(2)+VC(2))<(FC(1)+VC(1)), meaning the cost per aircraft has decreased. All of the costs are split between the two aircraft. As more aircraft are added, the average cost continues to fall, meaning each aircraft's net profits increase.
This is called 'Economies of Scale' - producing more output (in this case basing more aircraft and adding flights to increase revenues) will reduce average costs, increasing the efficiency and net profits of the firm (in this case Norwegian).
It makes more sense for Norwegian to open a base at PVD and SWF, each with 2 or 3 aircraft, flying to BFS, ORK, SNN with the potential for expansion into more European markets. From Belfast, Norwegian will probably only fly to two destinations, meaning the base would not grow beyond one aircraft. This means that, in comparison to a 3 aircraft base at PVD, the cost of a Belfast base per aircraft would be much greater than the cost of a PVD base.
This is one of the reasons why Ryanair closed their Belfast City base back in 2010. Because they were unable to expand their network into Europe, they were unable to base more aircraft and fly to more destinations, which would have allowed them to spread the costs of the base over more aircraft and higher revenues.
I hope this makes sense, but long story short a larger base reduces average costs, therefore increasing net profits and efficiencies. SWF and PVD will serve more destinations and frequencies than BFS, so it makes a lot more economic sense to base aircraft in the US than at BFS.
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: N.Ireland
Posts: 1,753
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting article on BBC website re LHR third runway, suggesting more domestic routes, including Belfast!! Assume BFS???
"More UK airports will be served by Heathrow if proposals for a third runway are approved, the Department of Transport is due to promise.
Six airports - Belfast, Liverpool, Newquay, Humberside, Prestwick and Durham Tees Valley - could be added to Heathrow's network by 2030"
Full article
Heathrow's third runway will mean 'more domestic airport links' - BBC News
"More UK airports will be served by Heathrow if proposals for a third runway are approved, the Department of Transport is due to promise.
Six airports - Belfast, Liverpool, Newquay, Humberside, Prestwick and Durham Tees Valley - could be added to Heathrow's network by 2030"
Full article
Heathrow's third runway will mean 'more domestic airport links' - BBC News
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ballymena
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just more lies and spin to make the whole project look more appealing. By the time 2030 comes around, all this will have been forgotten. Who knows what will be needed by 2030 anyway. In the Brexit vote, they couldn't get their projections correct for six months ahead, yet they try to convince us that they know what will happen 13 years from now. Complete lies.