Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

DONCASTER SHEFFIELD

Old 18th Apr 2016, 20:58
  #961 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Doncaster
Age: 37
Posts: 346
Sounds as though the Flybe flights haven't made the best start. Around 30 passengers on a lot of flights. Hopefully they will pick up
TimmyW is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2016, 09:31
  #962 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 610
Isn't it Flybe intention to get rid of the ERJ-190's next year?

If so - they probably only see this base as a temporary 1 yea promotional exercise which provides much needed investor satisfaction and probably covers a lot of the operating costs because of the incentive.
Nakata77 is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2016, 09:54
  #963 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Leeds/Birmingham
Age: 34
Posts: 76
I don't know if they plan to get rid of them next year but I know they have wanted to off-load the E195s as soon as possible, but making deals with Cardiff and Doncaster means that the deals are covering the costs so the airline doesn't have to worry about them costing the airline anything. I suppose it depends how long those deals last for...? once the deals end, they will get rid of the aircraft. I suspect its then up to the airport/airline to broker deal to see if the routes can be retained with other aircraft.


This is a big test for DSA in my mind, but also a great opportunity for DSA to prove/show what markets exists in what has been an under served/untested south Yorkshire market for years!
nwoody2001 is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2016, 10:41
  #964 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: London
Posts: 313
It's a 10 year agreement with both CWL and DSA. The airline is no longer seeking to get rid of the E190s as they have now found gainful employment for them.

Let's get behind the services and the base will grow ...
cumbrianboy is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2016, 12:17
  #965 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 2,331
making deals with Cardiff and Doncaster
....and EXT, NWI (same owners) and NQY.
Wycombe is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2016, 03:45
  #966 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: sheffield
Posts: 112
How many seats on Flybe's' E190's?
Barnstable is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2016, 04:07
  #967 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2,590
31 rows of 4, so 124..
EI-BUD is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2016, 07:04
  #968 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brighton uk
Posts: 869
Its actually 118 seats
1 row of 29 and 1 row of 30
MARKEYD is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2016, 10:43
  #969 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 315
There's a fair bit of conjecture and guesswork going on here. Firstly the deals done with the various airports are a 5 year deal for EXT/NWI, a ten year deal with CWL and the DSA deal is an undisclosed term. The CWL deal is a base deal and not an aircraft specific deal.
As for the E195 costings, nwoody2001, I don't know how you can say the E195 costs Flybe nothing, this simply is not true. There are routes that are being funded by PSO (NQY-LGW) but this is a route and not an airport specific deal. By way of airports offering subsidies like no landing or passenger fees etc will in no way even begin to cover the astronomical costs of leasing the E195. The ONLY reason Flybe have these aircraft and are flying them to mitigate astronomical losses on them is because there was no way in a million years they were going to be offloaded; nobody wants E195s and the delivery figures over 11 years proves it. The longest lease left on the newest of the 195s is about 3˝ years, once this is up you could probably bet your right arm that they will be leaving the business.
Reversethrustset is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2016, 12:39
  #970 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: sheffield
Posts: 112
It's disappointing if some loads are only about 25% but I expected this, and some will of course be higher.

New routes take time to gain in popularity, and I am guessing they have factored this in. They don't need to fly with virtually full planes to make the routes viable and the break even figure will be different for each route.
Barnstable is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2016, 13:23
  #971 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brighton uk
Posts: 869
Don't be to sure about that when it comes to Flybe look what happened to at Bournemouth

Loads were just beginning to pick up and head in the right direction , yields and prices were certainly no different than the fares at Cardiff and Doncaster that are being charged at the moment so never ever assume when it comes to them ( Ok they did have an agenda with Southampton but Bournemouth paid the price )
MARKEYD is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2016, 13:31
  #972 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 103
Rather than doom mongering isn't it worth waiting until the first set of CAA stats can be analysed?

Even then it shouldn't be over-analysed until services are bedded in.
egcntristar is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2016, 18:13
  #973 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: sheffield
Posts: 112
I think we can doom monger now! At least until they put the correct figures up...

https://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/...Statistics.pdf
Barnstable is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2016, 20:34
  #974 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 4,770
LA - that's how a free market works.

Are you advocating central planning of airline routes and airport capacity?
SWBKCB is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2016, 21:00
  #975 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 4,770
But you don't say how that will be done? Surely the only way is by state intervention i.e. legislation??
SWBKCB is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 08:42
  #976 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 103
So this would mean scrapping the new LBA-NQY service which is being propped up by the Regional Connectivity Fund?
egcntristar is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 10:12
  #977 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: London
Posts: 313
So you're happy for monarch to leave LBA? They are only there because the airport subsidised them. And jet2 had a lot of support when they started out. I'm sure BA are getting help to be at LBA as are BMI ... It happens everywhere. Even MAN support new carriers.

The only route in yorkshire that is being helped with public funds is LBA-NQY. all the rest is private money and private companies can soend their money as they see fit, there is no need or grounds for regulation, apart from the fact 'leeds approach' wants more aircraft to spot at LBA which isn't exactly a sound commercial driver for making decisions.

LA you need to accept LBA is not the epicentre of the world and that DSA has just as much claim to its market as LBA does to it's own.

Competition is good, the flybe services at DSA are new and it's a huge commitment. It's a well known fact amongst professionals that new airline routes take upto 3 years to reach profitable maturity, so the stats that come out in month one are meaningless, plus as ever, no one knows the yield.
cumbrianboy is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 10:16
  #978 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: stockport
Posts: 169
Don`t tell me I know Church Fenton
Newquay is one of the fastest growing UK markets as can be seen by the loads being carried out of MAN/BHX. Cornwall is very badly connected by train and if
anything goes wrong on the line cuts them off from the world, driving is a long
drive 7hrs from Leeds or 45 mins by plane and the cost is quite often less
chaps1954 is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 11:17
  #979 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Doncaster
Posts: 192
Gents I'd just like to point out that this particular round of debate was started by the Doom Monger in residence on the basis of what he'd 'heard' about one particular flight on one particular Monday morning. Now I can't be sure but I believe that particular route frequency was increased even before the launch date because of 'increased demand'.
Teevee is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2016, 12:50
  #980 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 54
Posts: 909
Originally Posted by LEEDS APPROACH View Post
Inefficient civil aviation strategy. This country needs to reduce the number of airports and make them more accessible and more functional and not have lots and lots fighting after the same passengers while losing money.
This may be true in an ideal world, but we don’t live in an ideal world. Our aviation infrastructure has developed in a particular way and we have to live with that and accept that the best we can do is fiddle around the edges of what we’ve already got. We’re way past the point of being able to implement a grand masterplan for air travel; to do so now would require government intervention on an unparalleled scale with huge associated costs. Simply won’t happen.
Andy_S is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.