Dundee-2

[ld0595]

Originally Posted by AirportPlanner1

Is it to give flexibility to the PSO allowing Loganair to consolidate at SEN? Remember they’ll have SEN-ABZ, CAX, GLA + SYY with Dundee and Derry up the road at STN.

That said, STN offers the worldwide connections via EK.

I would've thought that changing to SEN airport would make sense in order to consolidate all of Loganairs London ops into the one airport. I can't imagine too many people connecting onto the EK service especially given that you can go direct from Edinbrugh and Glasgow just down the road and that the prices appear to be quite a bit more anyway.

[southside bobby]

Comparing STN/SEN it would make no sense from the passenger perspective to operate the PSO into Southend as it would total zero gain in benefit & short change passengers.

PSO is for the passenger/user not for the operational suitability of an incumbent airline.

But as I have said before everyone had better ask Lorraine what she wishes.

[bad bear]

Looking at the passenger numbers from the CAA website there were 1438 passengers in all of January ( 23 each way each day??). 21185 passengers for the whole of 2018 which spread over half of the £3.7m equates to a subsidy of £87 per passenger ( each way??) and that's before subsidising the airport itself which looses money .

bb

[southside bobby]

Dundee is listed as a destination on the Emirates website because of the thru service.

Passengers can travel via STN to Emirates network of 155 destinations on a single ticket & with thru checked luggage.

Because DND/STN is a PSO passengers flying to London & onward with EK save APD of £78 in economy & £515 in business..charges which of course will be paid in EDI.

[southside bobby]

bad bear helps make the point...how then does a switch to SEN improve those figures?

But misses the point generally tho with PSO.

A/C type utilised in January SB340.

[AirportPlanner1]

The route averaged 15 per flight in Jan, a drop-off is to be expected because the first week or two are slow for business travel plus at least one flight must be missing as it went to SEN (I was flying to GLA that foggy morning). 17-18 seems the ‘normal’ average.

[SWBKCB]

I can't imagine too many people connecting onto the EK service especially given that you can go direct from Edinbrugh and Glasgow just down the road and that the prices appear to be quite a bit more anyway.

Doesn't this point undermine the whole reason for the PSO? EDI and GLA are just down the road, so why are we subsidising flights?

PSO is for the passenger/user not for the operational suitability of an incumbent airline

Absolutely! What has the operational convenience of the airline got to do with it? Only argument would be if they could offer the same level of benefit at a reduced cost to the taxpayer.

[AirportPlanner1]

Originally Posted by SWBKCB

Absolutely! What has the operational convenience of the airline got to do with it? Only argument would be if they could offer the same level of benefit at a reduced cost to the taxpayer.

I would argue SEN could offer that. I imagine the bulk of pax will be London-bound, so the overall journey should be quicker and SEN has to be a lower cost option. Fees must be relatively astronomical to take a Saab into STN.

I’m also sceptical many people use the EK service, especially as northbound there is a 6+ hour connection.

[mullac30]

Originally Posted by bad bear

Looking at the passenger numbers from the CAA website there were 1438 passengers in all of January ( 23 each way each day??). 21185 passengers for the whole of 2018 which spread over half of the £3.7m equates to a subsidy of £87 per passenger ( each way??) and that's before subsidising the airport itself which looses money .

bb

Isn't the whole point of having a PSO is because the loads mean the route wouldn't normally be viable?

[goldeneye]

I would suspect that most passengers as mentioned above are London O&D so moving to SEN is not really going to make much difference to the passenger experience as travel time in to Liverpool St is roughly the same as from STN.

If SEN is offering better fees than STN then surely this is better for the tax payer.

[southside bobby]

Whilst it is 100% certain that the use of the peak time slots would be hugely productive to STN in pax numbers if the slots were allocated elsewhere (18 then v the average factor 180+ ) might it be the case the slots & costings to the airline are Government controlled as part of PSO obligations.

Regarding EK timings northbound that will change nicely with the start of the second daily UAE 67 from 1.7

The reason for using EK as an illustration is clear however as the DND operator is extremely happy "promoting" their airport with EK/DXB & worldwide connections thru STN so therefore if a change of airport in the South is to be considered a better connector over STN would be LHR with multitudes of the same possibilities.

My contribution was essentially STN v SEN & that Southend brings nothing extra to the table.

[virginblue]

The Dundee PSO has existed long before any EK flights to STN, so it was never intended to provide longhaul connections in the first place (remember that when the London route was operated on a purely commercial basis by Suckling/Scot Airways, it went into LCY). Obviously the primary purpose of the route is to provide a connection to the UK capital. If connections were of any real importance, the PSO tender would have specified a gateway better suited for that. So I really don't see a reason why not to move to SEN. For a short domestic flight, SEN would be a better travel experience anyway as time required at the airport for getting through the terminal, check-in and security and onwards to the gate area would be much shorter at departure and on arrival it would be a matter of five minutes from the aircraft to the train station.

As for "the PSO is not for the airline" - it is a tender and if Loganair feels fit to submit a bid for SEN that is cheaper than for STN, it would reduce the subsidy required. Unless there are compelling reasons why public money should be spent on a more expensive STN link, it would be a non-brainer to go for SEN. And I don't feel that allowing a few people a connection to a Ryanair flight for a tenner or to do a two-stop-connection on EK from Dundee instead of a one-stop connection from EDI, is such a compelling reason. Plus, unless there are other bidders (which apparently has not been the case for quite a few UK PSOs recently due to a lack of regional airlines). Loganair would be free anyway to only bid for a SEN route as the London gateway in those PSO tenders is never specified.

[southside bobby]

The history of Dundee-London is a given of course.

Again I mention EK only to illustrate the kudos thus enabled for DND marketing.

Attitudes & expectations do change too of course.

Many cities in the UK are keen again to promote themselves with hoped "prestigious" connections to LHR.

I wonder why the NQY PSO is switched to LHR certainly for connections.

No problem LOG removing to SEN though I would still regard it as ultimately inhibiting for the passenger when other more attractive options for Dundee are available.

Ask Lorraine is she is happy if so then we all are.

[AirportPlanner1]

Originally Posted by SealinkBF

6 pax disembarked from the DND STN, 10 of us boarded northbound.
Back on Thursday evening - I think the plane sits on the apron all day after it's morning arrival - and about 15-20 pax boarded.

I get the impression loads are really variable...random, possibly. On the foggy midweek morning I referenced above there were at least 15 waiting to go northbound. Also perhaps 25 northbound am on a Bank Hol which I found surprising (although only a handful got off the inbound). I’ve seen 20-odd a couple of times northbound in the evening which seems more normal and to be expected.

Sadly I have no cause to use the route.

[virginblue]

Originally Posted by southside bobby

I wonder why the NQY PSO is switched to LHR certainly for connections.

No problem LOG removing to SEN though I would still regard it as ultimately inhibiting for the passenger when other more attractive options for Dundee are available

The difference is from my point of view that Loganair is building up a sizeable operation at SEN whereas Flybe's NQY service is the only remaining BE route at LGW. Consolidating at LHR therefore makes sense for BE, particularly if BE needs to grandfather slots there.

[southside bobby]

I acknowledge that for LOG it may be a good option for themselves if the new SEN routes become successful...(that discussion not for here)

Good point perhaps though regarding BE & grandfather rights at LHR.

Has that been proved though that PSO grants those rights?

My question regarding slots for DND at STN at peak times & associated landing charges too being perhaps protected by Government & not endangered by commercial ops remains unanswered too.

[virginblue]

Not sure where Flybe's slots for NQY come from (GCI is operated with ex Cobalt Air slots). Just tried to find something out about it and found an article from the Independent that they were part of the IAG/BD merger remedy slots portfolio. Straightforward use of such slots is unlikely though, as those slots are route specific and NQY and GCI are none of the handful of routes that are covered. However, the FT mentioned in an article that the government allowed Flybe to "repurpose" its existing slots at Heathrow, which suggests that the slots are indeed former remedy slots (but probably not those for ABZ and LHR as those routes continue to be operated by BE). Before, my suspicion was that BE was babysitting/grandfathering slots for VS, but this does not appear to be the case. If they are using remedy slots, the interesting question is what owuld happen if an airline shows up that intends to serve one of the orutes for which they were designated as remedy slots in 2012 (e.g. Cairo, Riyadh, Nice).

As for PSOs at LHR, I don't think there is currently a mechanism for automatic access to LHR if the route is operated under a PSO scheme. Making slots available for PSOs in the future has been used as a bait by the airport in the discussion about an expansion of LHR, though.

[southside bobby]

Thanks for the research & reply & agree finding answers does appears rather opaque.

UK cities & airports hoping for access at some stage to LHR particularly with the 3rd R/W have as you state been baited by the airport & authorities to enhance their (LHR`s) credentials.

Not sure if those slots are to be PSO or normal commercial ops granted/allocated under coercion from Government.

[BAladdy]

BE’s NQY slots

The slots for BE’s NQY Service are former remedy slots. This extract from the original IAG / bmi remedy explains why they were allocated them:

"Where a New Air Services Provider has operated Competitive Air Service on two or more Identified City Pairs using Slots in accordance with these Commitments for at least two (2) consecutive IATA seasons, it shall be entitled to apply for any Slots still available… to operate Frequencies on any European Short-haul City Pair…”

So once Flybe had done one summer and one winter on LHR-ABZ and -EDI, it had access to the remaining remedy slots to use for European routes of there choosing - and it chose Newquay.

The slots were held by IAG, which had to give up for them

[davidjohnson6]

Flew from Dundee to Stansted and all pax were asked to fill in a survey form which mentioned there was to be a new round of bidding later this year for the route

I had thought the main source for the PSO money was to end in spring 2019, and the emergency funds from Dundee council would expire in late October 2019

Has a fresh source of funds been found, or is Loganair just trying to encourage somebody to find funds ?

The most obvious airlines to fly this route (even if UK stays in the EU) are presumably Eastern or Loganair... seems unlikely many other airlines with aircraft with 30-40 seats would be particularly interested unless money was significantly increased