BIRMINGHAM - 6

[nigel osborne]

E75

Assume you haven't seen the recent pictures MAN spotters have put on their thread of massive queues inside MAN Immigration.

Or perhaps you have never experienced 2 hour queues at many US airports either.

I could go on, its a real pain at many World Airports now.

Nigel

[5711N0205W]

Passed through BHX, in and out last week (UK Domestic), can't say it's improved in the last few years.

Inbound, off an E195 on to a bus then up stairs on to an air bridge, no other entrance for bus arrivals?

Outbound, slooow security, maybe just a bad time but made T5 at LHR seem speedy. Through security and into the shopping nightmare from hell, obviously designed to disorientate with no obvious clear way to the gates

The old domestic terminal is tired and grotty, have to assume it's waiting for an upgrade but not a pleasant place at the moment

[E75toDUS]

Inbound inefficiency

5711: This very much mirrors my recent experiences of BHX, although the outbound security has been pretty good except in July.

Nigel: No, haven't seen any MAN coverage - and would agree that whilst UK has got worse, I wouldn't say that the rest of Europe at least has got worse. My rarer experiences in the US recently (LAX and MSP) are much better than ATL and BOS 10 years ago (post 9/11, Iraq etc). But the real frustration is

1- It's not just a 1-off nightmare, it's week after week

2- It's not just UK Border, it'll be the waiting for somebody to turn up so we can move onto stand, or the airbridge taking ages, or nobody to bring the passengers from the aircraft to arrivals, or waiting on the bus for 5-10 mins until somebody arrives to let you into the terminal. Agree that immigration queues are a fact of life sometime, the other things aren't

3- That arrivals can effectively be overwhelmed if three regional jets arrive within about 15 minutes of each other. When this sometimes combines with an inbound Ryanair, it's mayhem. They took away the e-passport gates too, which was another move seemingly designed to annoy people.

The point is, the USP of a smaller airport compared to an LHR/AMS megalopolis can be that you can get through it quickly if you're customer focused, but in my experience BHX systematically fails to deliver.

Luckily for BHX, the only worse recent experience I've had was EMA.

OK, rant over... :-)

[groundhogbhx]

E75, all your problems seem to be down to the handling agent of the airline you use. Maybe you should direct your comments to them. Handling agents are not perfect all the time and problems do happen that are out of their control, but if you see a regular pattern forming.....

[nigel osborne]

Groundhogbox,

Agree overall but its not as simple as you suggest. Passengers will blame BHX, whilst the handling agents and immigration will say that they are not being given enough money by BHX/GOVTto recruit more.

Know a number of handlers at BHX and I take my hat off to them, having to often work with minimal staffing and basic level of equipment, a lot of which isd not fully serviceable.

The A380 tug at BHX brought over from AMS a year ago, just sits by stand 70L not being used and when they have tried to start it up recently it didn't work.

Stories of deck loaders having to be borrowed from other operators as they can't afford to get them repaired, etc.

Im told Swissport lease in brand new equipment, so at least on the equipment front BHX should end up with more up to date stuff when they take over Servicair..doubt if the manpower will be increased though.

Nigel

[E75toDUS]

Understaffing

E75, all your problems seem to be down to the handling agent of the airline you use.

Groundhog, you are almost certainly correct. Given some of the main airlines at BHX, and T2 in particular are also having to cut costs to the bone, you are probably right that this means the service level agreement from their contractors is the lowest possible cost, with consequences for staffing. Ditto Border Force, who are going to be well down the pecking order behind nurses etc...

That being said, to most passengers, most passengers would associate the ground staff with the airport (except maybe check-in & gate agents). And I do hear a lot of tutting and griping from fellow passengers as we wait to de-plane or enter the UK.

I think part of the issue with T2 is that I recall there was a plan to knock it down, back in the good old days (before Global Fiscal Armageddon), and replace it. So upgrades etc were neglected. Then once Armageddon actually happened, the business case disappeared in a puff of smoke, and the airlines using are either not interested in a good customer environment, or cannot afford it.

[groundhogbhx]

Nigel,

I think I might know what I am talking about having worked there since 1985 Since when has the Government or BHX paid handling agents? I'm also sure that if your car was only started every three months or so it wouldn't be very happy, having to have a piece of equipment as part of your contract but not having anything to use it on doesn't do it any good.

[nigel osborne]

Groundhogbox,

"I'm also sure that if your car was only started every three months or so it wouldn't be very happy, having to have a piece of equipment as part of your contract but not having anything to use it on doesn't do it any good".

Sure it could be used on other types not just A380s ??

Nigel

[RealFish]

'Does this highlight that BHX needs to invest in internal infrastructure as well as throwing tarmac on the ground?'

I think it might.

A couple of weeks ago I briefly popped into BHX to see No 1 son off on EK40 (en route to SIN) only to be met by a polite young man guarding the car park SM1, who having ascertained that I hadn't pre-booked turned me away, directing me to Long Stay 1. This I circled for around 20 mins before finding a space.

By the time I'd found a space, got to the terminal and back to the car, my 25mins with little Realfish had cost me £7.40.

[E75toDUS]

By the time I'd found a space, got to the terminal and back to the car, my
25mins with little Realfish had cost me £7.40.

After 10am I think you'd have only paid a fiver to park in Birmingham International. It's never more than £8 So if it's your own money, for most short trips it's the best solution (well for me at least) as it's nearly always cheaper than on-airport and is certainly easier than the far reaches of Long-Stay.

[chris50]

hi

Sure it could be used on other types not just A380s ??

Nigel
well said dear chap we had a 747 tug in the BA days pushed back most things with it but most off all we looked after it A380 once a year these guys need to look after there eqp cheers chris

[groundhogbhx]

Nigel, said tug is rather large and not the easiest piece of equipment to maneuverer. There are 2 tugs which are more than capable of pushing aircraft of up to 744's and a lot easier to use. The problem using tugs which are rated to push large aircraft is that they also have the brakes to stop them, push the pedal slightly too hard on a smaller aircraft there is a good chance it will stop faster than the nosegear can cope with. One of the most scary pushes I ever did was an aircraft that was less than a quarter of the weight of the tug, unfortunately he was ready to go and that was the only tug available, stopping was mainly by engine braking and even then the nose of the aircraft lifted by an alarming amount Just because you have equipment that is capable of doing a certain job doesn't necessarily mean that you can easily use it on anything else.

[nigel osborne]

grounfhogbox,

Many thanks for your inside knowledge.

Wonder whether the 2 tugs you mention could push back an A380 in heany rain or ice re traction.

I also assume as BHX does not yet have a deicer vehicle capable of reaching the top of an A380 tail , (so Im told), BHX couldn't turn one around in cold weather ,and with no 2nd deck loaders couldn't load top deck with food in a reasonable time.

Suppose if we don't get regular A380 flts then you don't need these machines, yet BHX should stop boasting they can handle them.

NATS/CAA quote BHX can handle is it 5 at once..thats silly stuff to put in.

Chris 50,

yes a bit bemused too why its not at least turned over once a month, it ain't going to work if an A380 suddenly diverts in. ,although thats unlikely.

Nigel

[groundhogbhx]

Nigel, no they can't. Both could handle up to around 400 tonnes, an A380 would range between 450 and 550 depending on load and destination.

[Burpbot]

Infrastructure! You struggle to park your car these days! Parking has become a joke!

[crewmeal]

I read that the Transport secretary is going to China to drum up business for the UK. I wonder if BHX willbe on the list or even get a mention.

Transport secretary hopes to boost China flights - www.travelweekly.co.uk

[OltonPete]

September route analysis

Passenger figures: CAA

Average per flight: SBS records and a BHX BLOG

Load factor: estimates based on seat-maps

Air India at 76% seems reasonable for the second month of operation. PIA operated less flights this September hence the modest figure and only the one Air Blue. BMI Regional figures are quite low for a month that traditionally sees alot of business traffic.

SAS Stockholm is the one worry of the full service operators and soon changes to a very odd three a week schedule.

Not sure how this will format - 2013 pax first then average per flight followed by load factor then 2012 in the final column.


BRUSSELS.... 10605....47 pax....57%
TORONTO...... 1887...236 pax. .90%
DUBROVNIK.....3280...126 pax...87%
SPLIT............3034....126 pax...73%
LARNACA........7945...185 pax.. 93%
PAPHOS.........4754....182 pax...92%
BILLUND..........779......19 pax...38%
COPENHAGEN...6761.....75 pax.. 79%
SHARM EL S.....4408...170 pax...79%
AVIGNON...........82......41 pax...53%
BERGERAC.........213.....53 pax...68%
BORDEAUX.......1138.....81 pax...47%
LA ROCHELLE.....274.....69 pax...79%
LYON..............3586.....47 pax...61%
MONTPELLIER...1881....105 pax..55%
NICE...............6670....111 pax..62%
PARIS (CDG)...31692.....95 pax..79%
PERPIGNAN.......2326...114 pax..60%
TOULOUSE.......1085.....21 pax..43%
BERLIN (TXL)... 5074.... 85 pax..68%
DUSSELDORF...18083....57 pax...64%
FRANKFURT.....26616...111 pax..74%
HAMBURG.........2949.....57 pax..64%
HANOVER.........4119.....69 pax..85%
MUNICH.........15218.....94 pax..77%
STUTTGART.... 4494.....49 pax...61%
GIBRALTAR.......3440...132 pax...76%
HERAKLION.......2821...176 pax...91%
DELHI..............6641...195 pax...76%
CORK..............6297.....53 pax...74%
DUBLIN..........46434....106 pax...71%
KNOCK............2417......40 pax...65%
SHANNON........2745......46 pax...74%
WATERFORD....2036......57 pax...73%
BERGAMO........3725.....155 pax..82%
MILAN (MXP)...5243.......87 pax..77%
ROME (FCO)....9729......162 pax..90%
TRIESTE.........2447......136 pax..72%
VENICE..........5424.......160.......87%
KAUNAS.........2836.......158...... 83%
MALTA...........3220.......179.......95%
AMSTERDAM..40529........90.......81%
ISLAMABAD.....6869.......264......75%
BYDGOSZCZ....4001.......154......81%
GDANSK.........2582.......161.......85%
KATOWICE.....4224........162.......86%
KRAKOW........3013........167.......89%
RZESZOW......3139........174.......92%
FARO...........19607........183......92%
FUNCHAL.......2793........155.......89%
BRATISLAVA...4100........171......90%
ALICANTE.....29455........169......90%
ALMERIA........3473........193......90%
BARCELONA...15378........148.....78%
GIRONA..........2478........155......82%
IBIZA...........13425........172......87%
MAHON..........6235........183......90%
MALAGA.......29555........180......93%
MURCIA........5669.........167......88%
PALMA ........24710........164......87%
REUS............3681.........142......75%
ARRECIFE......11379.......190......96%
FUERT'NTURA..6674.......191.......95%
LAS PALMAS...7693.......183.......94%
TENERIFE (TFS).15699....187......96%
GOTEBORG.......1305.......25.......51%
STOCKHOLM.....3469.......67.......47%
ZURICH...........8768.......74........76%
BODRUM ........3389......154........88%
DALAMAN......10328......172........90%
ISTANBUL......10679......121........78%
ASHKHABAD....3244........90........49%
DUBAI...........45085......376.......88%
NEW YORK (EWR).8967...160.......95%

Pete

[nigel osborne]

groundhogbox,

Thanks for the tug info,so if the other tugs can't push an A380 then even more important to keep our only one that can at least in serviceable condition

Nigel

[Guest 112233]

Thanks Pete

The Stockholm service seems to have spluttered on the edge of failure since its inception , what about 12 months ago.

Poor passenger load factors and constantly fluctuating service levels. Yes I know load factors are not the whole story.

Perhaps it was an experimental utilisation extender for SAS with a minimum of pre service statistical analysis of passenger flows from the catchment area.

Looking at the stats; I see that MAN to Stockholm shows a very healthy increase.

Are the BHX CEO's recent public statements about 35 million passenger area catchment area somewhat wide of the mark.

We are talking about a major Scandinavian industrial country and the Midlands cannot support say a twice daily say 130 seater or even a 90 Seater

Likewise the potentially relative poor performance of BMI's regional services, indicates that while the catchment area as a whole; does produce some passenger demand, for a wide range of services. The levels of demand in many cases, are such that, economically, the best solution is to concentrate diversification of most services; in the south east and MAN.

Of course the Airport has a role economically, LH, EK & AI ? prove that, but hopes for a European wide range of scheduled services from Birmingham are for the foreseeable future totally unrealistic and not helped by apparently poor levels of passenger service l that are starting to emerge on PPRuNe.

MAN seems to be benefiting from a halo effect, were increasing diversity of service provision generates additional interconnectivity and more demand.

CAT III

[Edit:Nothing has really changed since the 1970's - Service commences, mild optimism, warnings "use or loose", schedule cuts and finally cessation. Sadly the facilities are in place but there is insufficient demand]

[ATNotts]

We are talking about a major Scandinavian industrial country and the Midlands cannot support say a twice daily say 130 seater or even a 90 Seater

Problem is that Stockholm isn't the major industrial centre. Gothenburg has more industry than Stockholm - bit like comparing Rome and Milan, where the major industrial / commercial centre is the latter and the former is just the seam of government and a great tourist destination.

Industry is widely spread in Sweden, but much is in the south, in the strip between Malmoe and Helsingborg, and the bridge across the Kattegat makes Malmoe more easily reached via Copenhagen than a Swedish airport.