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

Flybe-9

Old 17th Jan 2020, 19:16
  #2861 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: On the road
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by brian_dromey
How has flyBe managed to get slots back at LGW for a multiple daily service? IAG paid £4.5 million for the 'NQY' slots last year. At the time I think the route operated 3x daily on an E-Jet. There is also the odd situation that flyBe are operating a seasonal daily service to SEN from NQY, against their own LHR/LGW PSO flights. MAN seems to support multiple daily flights on commercial terms. I appreciate that Cornwall is several hours closer to London by rail and car than MAN is, but does that really explain the need for the PSO? Is there really anything in the PSO to stop BA flying LHR-NQY, say twice daily with an A319 against flyBe to LGW?
All EU laws are being transferred to the UK statue books, so the status quo in relation to the BA purchase of BMI will remain, unless someone wants to revisit it.
Simple answer is that LGW isn't completely full. It is at certain times but if you're smart and aren't precious about operating exactly the same schedule every day then there are still slots to be had.
TartinTon is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 11:07
  #2862 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Leeds, UK & Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,079
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by TartinTon
Simple answer is that LGW isn't completely full. It is at certain times but if you're smart and aren't precious about operating exactly the same schedule every day then there are still slots to be had.
We’ll have to see what the schedule is like once it’s bookable. I’m surprised that LHR weren’t able to keep this route. The addition of NQY, IoM, GCI were good news stories for LHR and propaganda for the third runway.
brian_dromey is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 11:16
  #2863 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,445
Received 68 Likes on 46 Posts
So what could LHR do if the airline doesn't want to fly there? As has been discussed, what will be interesting is what happens to the slots - why else would they move?
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 11:44
  #2864 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: cornwall, uk
Posts: 1,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Don’t forget that WW was spouting off about wanting to offer a heathrow - newquay seasonal service outside of the pso so if there really is the appetite for the route I would suggest BA is the way forward.

cs
cornishsimon is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 14:07
  #2865 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: UpNorth
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by TartinTon
Simple answer is that LGW isn't completely full. It is at certain times but if you're smart and aren't precious about operating exactly the same schedule every day then there are still slots to be had.
True, but the NQY schedule announced by Flybe doesn't match your assessment of the situation.
The published timetable uses 4 arrival and departure slot pairs operating at exactly the same time 7 days a week.
Flybe sold all their previous LGW slots to easyJet. So how have they obtained these slots ?
Given the price paid in recent years by IAG for the ex Monarch slots and easyJet for the ex Thomas Cook LGW slots, how can a company which was supposedly on the verge of collapse just a few days ago afford to gain such slots ?
Something underhand going on. I just hope us taxpayers haven't footed the bill.
Returntostand is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 14:13
  #2866 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 43
Posts: 752
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cornishsimon
Don’t forget that WW was spouting off about wanting to offer a heathrow - newquay seasonal service outside of the pso so if there really is the appetite for the route I would suggest BA is the way forward.

cs
Do you ever change the record? Always railroading this thread into discussing a little airport that is a speck in the grand scheme of BE's operations. It is very simple, if a route has to be subsidised, it is clearly not a money maker. Arguably these are the sort of routes that have contributed to bringing BE to its knees. In the glory days BE focused on growing their proper bases at BHX, MAN, SOU, EXT etc. Then a shift in strategy to start operating at bases at the likes of NQY, DSA, CWL etc where they were clearly enticed financially into contracts to operate that surprise surprise become burdens on BE's profitability. Also with the increased environmental scrutiny arguably a NQY - LON flight should be the first to be replaced by trains. I cannot imagine many people would justify a NWI - LON route! It therefore baffles me that a time of great financial uncertainty you are railroading the BE thread into talking about a route that is not only insignificant but likely a contributing factor to BE's problems. Maybe take a break and get out some more
Rivet Joint is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 14:24
  #2867 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,445
Received 68 Likes on 46 Posts
If BE are losing money on subsidised routes, they deserve everything they get!
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 14:40
  #2868 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 59
Posts: 2,709
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
a NQY - LON flight should be the first to be replaced by trains
Have you any idea how infrequent/convoluted that service is (esp at this time of year) and how long it takes?

Trains beyond Exeter/Plymouth are notoriously slow and if ever there was a case for a regional air connection to the capital (for business users and others), this is surely it.

The NQY operation may indeed be small in the overall Flybe scheme of things, but has been somewhat newsworthy this week!

Agree re. DSA, CWL (and also NWI), but these operations were established to provide work for some of the 195's that Flybe were financially tied to until recently.
Wycombe is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 14:46
  #2869 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wales
Posts: 1,316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rivet Joint
Then a shift in strategy to start operating at bases at the likes of NQY, DSA, CWL etc
What else should've they done with the E195s then?
And as for NQY-LON it takes over 6 hours to get there by train. If an air route against a 6 hour train ride isn't profitable especially if its subsidised then I can't see any other intra-England routes being profitable. They might as well stick with Scotland to southern England and Belfast to the rest of the UK and cut the rest!
PDXCWL45 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 15:29
  #2870 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Southampton
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rivet Joint
Do you ever change the record? Always railroading this thread into discussing a little airport that is a speck in the grand scheme of BE's operations. It is very simple, if a route has to be subsidised, it is clearly not a money maker. Arguably these are the sort of routes that have contributed to bringing BE to its knees. In the glory days BE focused on growing their proper bases at BHX, MAN, SOU, EXT etc. Then a shift in strategy to start operating at bases at the likes of NQY, DSA, CWL etc where they were clearly enticed financially into contracts to operate that surprise surprise become burdens on BE's profitability. Also with the increased environmental scrutiny arguably a NQY - LON flight should be the first to be replaced by trains. I cannot imagine many people would justify a NWI - LON route! It therefore baffles me that a time of great financial uncertainty you are railroading the BE thread into talking about a route that is not only insignificant but likely a contributing factor to BE's problems. Maybe take a break and get out some more
River Joint You should be focusing on Southampton,but of course your blind to its demise!
Bournemouth are now leading the way with more routes,pax increasing at a substantial rate and investment continues!
There is never a mention of Southampton figures,but I guess that's because they are falling away at a rapid rate.
You need to take a break full stop.
RW20 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 16:21
  #2871 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: UK
Age: 53
Posts: 1,415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by TartinTon
The block times would suggest that the SOU-MAH is on the Q400
Nasty. Noisy and limited overhead space. Wouldn't fancy that one bit.
VickersVicount is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 16:40
  #2872 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: South
Age: 43
Posts: 752
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by PDXCWL45
What else should've they done with the E195s then?
And as for NQY-LON it takes over 6 hours to get there by train. If an air route against a 6 hour train ride isn't profitable especially if its subsidised then I can't see any other intra-England routes being profitable. They might as well stick with Scotland to southern England and Belfast to the rest of the UK and cut the rest!
Well as has been discussed on this thread for years the Jungle jets are probably the largest factor in BE’s transformation from an all conquering regional airline to a basket case (mainly the 175s). I do not necessarily feel the 195s are the wrong size aircraft for BE, but it sounds like the cost of the leases were prohibitive. The 175s deal was even worst by the sounds of it, and certainly not an aircraft that was needed to be added. I do not think people here are as snobby about having a jet aircraft as they are in the states, like all successful airlines building your business around one type seems to be the way to go. BE were unstoppable when they built their business around the q400, and they should retrench to that model in my opinion. I agree that those hiding to nothing bases were partly used as a way to keep the 195s busy but surely they could have leased them out to another operator. Lots of other airlines lease out their unwanted types. Perhaps they tried this, who knows.

In terms of PSOs, I would welcome anyone presenting concrete evidence that any PSO routes in the world make a profit. No government is going to hand out taxpayers money to subsidise a private company’s profits. They do not make money and never will, because a negligible amount of people require the route.

As for the train journey from the West Country of course I appreciate that is long and arduous currently. Which is why investment should be being directed to improve the railway infrastructure rather than being directed to prop up a pointless and environmentally damaging flight in my opinion.
Rivet Joint is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 17:05
  #2873 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,465
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Those remedy slots which were route-specific for ABZ and EDI are locked to those routes for three years. Slots for the Newquay route were obtained under the provisions which allow an airline operating the route-specific services to then request any other remaining unused remedy slots, to be used on any short-haul route of its choosing. As such, the current Newquay slots can be used on any short-haul route of the operator's choice.
Flightrider is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 17:22
  #2874 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,445
Received 68 Likes on 46 Posts
In terms of PSOs, I would welcome anyone presenting concrete evidence that any PSO routes in the world make a profit. No government is going to hand out taxpayers money to subsidise a private company’s profits. They do not make money and never will, because a negligible amount of people require the route.
Laugh out loud funny - thank you
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 17:26
  #2875 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,465
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Slot allocation has nothing to do with the EU - its a historical stitch -up with limited legal validity agreed between the airlines
That's so inaccurate that it's quite funny. Slot allocation at EU airports is controlled by EU Regulation 95/93 as amended by 793/2004. There are further EU reviews under way on the slot allocation and grandfather rights process. Slot allocation at EU airports has everything to do with the EU!
Flightrider is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 17:28
  #2876 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Outer London
Age: 43
Posts: 600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rivet Joint
No government is going to hand out taxpayers money to subsidise a private company’s profits.
Best not mention Jennifer Arcuri then. Or Carillion. Or any of Chris Grayling’s ferries
AirportPlanner1 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 17:47
  #2877 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,259
Received 329 Likes on 194 Posts
Originally Posted by SWBKCB
Laugh out loud funny - thank you
Sorry I was thinking historically - the EU is playing catch -up on something that should have been properly regulated years ago
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 18:17
  #2878 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: cornwall, uk
Posts: 1,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rivet Joint
Do you ever change the record? Always railroading this thread into discussing a little airport that is a speck in the grand scheme of BE's operations. It is very simple, if a route has to be subsidised, it is clearly not a money maker. Arguably these are the sort of routes that have contributed to bringing BE to its knees. In the glory days BE focused on growing their proper bases at BHX, MAN, SOU, EXT etc. Then a shift in strategy to start operating at bases at the likes of NQY, DSA, CWL etc where they were clearly enticed financially into contracts to operate that surprise surprise become burdens on BE's profitability. Also with the increased environmental scrutiny arguably a NQY - LON flight should be the first to be replaced by trains. I cannot imagine many people would justify a NWI - LON route! It therefore baffles me that a time of great financial uncertainty you are railroading the BE thread into talking about a route that is not only insignificant but likely a contributing factor to BE's problems. Maybe take a break and get out some more

hmmmm how polite


get out more ?

i was simply quoting the IAG dude. I won’t be posting a link but I think if your able to use google you will be able to find articles to back up my contribution to this thread quite easily my ansum

have a lovely weekend
cs
cornishsimon is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 21:19
  #2879 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by brian_dromey
How has flyBe managed to get slots back at LGW for a multiple daily service? IAG paid £4.5 million for the 'NQY' slots last year. At the time I think the route operated 3x daily on an E-Jet. There is also the odd situation that flyBe are operating a seasonal daily service to SEN from NQY, against their own LHR/LGW PSO flights. MAN seems to support multiple daily flights on commercial terms. I appreciate that Cornwall is several hours closer to London by rail and car than MAN is, but does that really explain the need for the PSO? Is there really anything in the PSO to stop BA flying LHR-NQY, say twice daily with an A319 against flyBe to LGW?



All EU laws are being transferred to the UK statue books, so the status quo in relation to the BA purchase of BMI will remain, unless someone wants to revisit it.
Newquay is not closer to London than Manchester. The train to London from the northwest to Euston is around 2 hours.
BACsuperVC10 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2020, 21:26
  #2880 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Great Circle Mapper

Great Circle Mapper
lfc84 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.