Manchester-3
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: manchester
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rumour Egypt Air & Royal Jordanian
Both had slots Royal Jordanian to start 01/04/23 with A319 think 2 a week and Egyptair 01/06/23 A320
Doubt very much we will wee them this year
Considering LGW/BHX/EDI have had a quite afew new long haul routes and airlines added to there portfolio nothing much happening at MAN except the usual Ryanair/Easyjet/Jet2 additions to bucket and spade destinations and increased frequency on already served routes
Doubt very much we will wee them this year
Considering LGW/BHX/EDI have had a quite afew new long haul routes and airlines added to there portfolio nothing much happening at MAN except the usual Ryanair/Easyjet/Jet2 additions to bucket and spade destinations and increased frequency on already served routes
G-VEII arrived from Toulouse on delivery into LHR today so that's one more frame. The reason MAN-ATL went to VS was that it lowered the operating costs by using a UK carrier on the joint venture. There's absolutely no guarantee any released airframe would stay at MAN sadly, they go where they can make the most money.
However, the Virgin operation is not fulfilling its potential at MAN. Basically, they're left operating a skeleton service with just four based aircraft, and that in a market which has seen most of the competition melt away. Not just the US carriers, but also the substantial Thomas Cook A330 operation which competed head-to-head with Virgin pre-covid - and they both prospered on MAN Transatlantic back then. It is in the interests of Delta not to let that advantage slip away, and ATL is the most obvious route which they could 'babysit' until Virgin recovers strength. As you know, Virgin must above all protect its LHR slot horde with the reduced fleet available, but the problem goes deeper than that. Virgin cites crew shortages at MAN and that does make sense. The pre-coronapanic fleet at MAN was dominated by sub-fleets which have since been withdrawn from service. So many of those pilots would need to cross-train for new type ratings before being fully useful to the airline again. Hopefully that process must be well advanced by now, but it would make sense for Delta to help out until Virgin can recover fleet availability and crew strength.
It was a logical decision for Delta to prioritise destinations favoured by US-domiciled travellers when the UK and EU lifted covid restrictions for them whilst Biden failed to reciprocate the favour for those of us on this side of the Atlantic. But that roadblock has been removed now, and whilst you're correct to point out that scarce aircraft resources will be deployed on the most lucrative routes, MAN was certainly a contender on that metric prior to artificial restrictions preventing travel. Delta has the historic data to be confident that MAN will deliver, particularly with so much competition stripped away. They should be encouraged to step up.
Four based long haul units isn't a skeleton operation.
US transatlantic is currently skewed to US POS so Virgin are not the strongest of brands to lead that, although in a JV with Delta that shouldn't be a deal breaker. Thomas Cook's strength was high volume UK based holiday traffic which is still there but price sensitive due to the strength of the dollar.
Am not quite sure what you mean by "until Virgin recover". I don't think they've ever been that much bigger fleetwise, even with the B744s retiring early.
10xA330
4xA339
9xA350
17xB789
Total = 40
MAN is stuck between not being a classically attractive inbound destination for US holidaymakers in the EDI/DUB mould and the traditional UK based POS being hit hard by cost of living and poor exchange rate. Double whammy!
US transatlantic is currently skewed to US POS so Virgin are not the strongest of brands to lead that, although in a JV with Delta that shouldn't be a deal breaker. Thomas Cook's strength was high volume UK based holiday traffic which is still there but price sensitive due to the strength of the dollar.
Am not quite sure what you mean by "until Virgin recover". I don't think they've ever been that much bigger fleetwise, even with the B744s retiring early.
10xA330
4xA339
9xA350
17xB789
Total = 40
MAN is stuck between not being a classically attractive inbound destination for US holidaymakers in the EDI/DUB mould and the traditional UK based POS being hit hard by cost of living and poor exchange rate. Double whammy!
Join Date: Mar 2023
Location: GB
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think this will be a summer of consolidation. We have some nice capacity increases from EasyJet, Jet2 and Ryanair. I believe we will have Southwind, Egyptair and possibly El Al (rumoured to have gotten slots) as the new names. Winter 23, I can see us getting Air India (BOM and DEL like originally in the S23 report) BA Euroflyer are one possibility too. Even just 3 or 4 320/321 based and routes to more ‘luxury’ Med destinations would work. There is certainly the market for it in the catchment area, as flying the BA brand may be an attractive proposition for some. Aer Lingus could very well launch Chicago and/or Boston depending on A321 deliveries. Delta would be a very welcome surprise however given Virgins obvious issues on MAN-ATL, it may be best to let Delta take on the route, A330neo would be nice. Air China and Juneyao might opt for something too. I can see Hainan going back to daily at some point, Juneyao would be really good to PVG, even if it is via Helsinki as originally planned. Cathay Pacific will inevitably opt for even more capacity with the recent influx of BNO holders from Hong Kong, specifically in the MAN catchment area which is proving popular. 10x weekly flights could be in order for W23, maybe even extending to double daily next year. Others? I’m not sure. Virgin could always surprise us and commit a few of the LHR A330s that have been replaced by 330neo to MAN, maybe even opening up LAS and SFO as well as BOM, but I think any Virgin/Delta expansion is down to Summer 24.Unfortunately, looks as if Royal Jordanians slots have gone. No mention of them on the MAN departures site. Egyptair still there with 5 weekly flights on A320neo
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Ireland
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Four based long haul units isn't a skeleton operation.
US transatlantic is currently skewed to US POS so Virgin are not the strongest of brands to lead that, although in a JV with Delta that shouldn't be a deal breaker. Thomas Cook's strength was high volume UK based holiday traffic which is still there but price sensitive due to the strength of the dollar.
Am not quite sure what you mean by "until Virgin recover". I don't think they've ever been that much bigger fleetwise, even with the B744s retiring early.
10xA330
4xA339
9xA350
17xB789
Total = 40
MAN is stuck between not being a classically attractive inbound destination for US holidaymakers in the EDI/DUB mould and the traditional UK based POS being hit hard by cost of living and poor exchange rate. Double whammy!
US transatlantic is currently skewed to US POS so Virgin are not the strongest of brands to lead that, although in a JV with Delta that shouldn't be a deal breaker. Thomas Cook's strength was high volume UK based holiday traffic which is still there but price sensitive due to the strength of the dollar.
Am not quite sure what you mean by "until Virgin recover". I don't think they've ever been that much bigger fleetwise, even with the B744s retiring early.
10xA330
4xA339
9xA350
17xB789
Total = 40
MAN is stuck between not being a classically attractive inbound destination for US holidaymakers in the EDI/DUB mould and the traditional UK based POS being hit hard by cost of living and poor exchange rate. Double whammy!
Of the route packages in my opinion Atlanta should work very more favourably with Delta over Virgin metal.
The current less than daily, indeed about to be suspended for 8 weeks offering is exceptionally sub optimal and rather out the play book of a certain competing Texas based business. It’s very very disappointing and will drive the few frequent flyers away if they continue down this path.
Atlanta is a massive point of entry/exit to the US and can sustain a daily flight irrespective of primary point of sale.
Parallel re Chicago though is the opposite; it’s been dehubbed by that inferred Texas business and Manchester is far from alone in losing that route .
Personally not sure what United are gaining from the limited service to Edinburgh to be honest.
General opinion re US- Manchester current offering are without doubt sub optimal however current UK economic conditions are significant in part.
New York capacity is scheduled to increase with Aer Lingus using the 330 in addition to Virgin
* Alliance will return imho opinion however not before June 2024
Boston is imho the glimmer of hope for Aer Lingus UK and even DL/VS however both require UK point of sale to strengthen
Atlanta see comment above
Orlando (wider area) may see a decline in traffic during 2023 however that will probably ease into 2024
Houston - I am of the opinion Singapore will eventually drop this to be honest . Could United take over? Doubt it as it’s not a primary Trans Atlantic hub for them and they don’t ( can’t ) benefit from a full blown codeshare on the current flights in any case.
Considered prospects
Newark -United in next 18 months
Boston - either of both of Aer Lingus or Delta/Virgin
Chicago and Washington doubtful
Philadelphia - Outside chance of American or partner Aer Lingus 2025
Recovery of a West Coast service is almost certainly in the gift of Virgin at this point, whether SFO LAX or Vegas very much depends on UK economic growth and perhaps stability for a period .So beyond 2025 imho.
Replacing Thomas Cook in the leisure sector is a long way off; with UK outside the European market environment the one carrier that could have delivered “Condor” are scuppered very which way.
They knew the market and had access to the relevant data !
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot of tech and legal beagles flying from or onto Austin , including very wealthy tourists !
Manchester couldn’t hope to generate such traffic ( well no the legal beagles !)
Manchester couldn’t hope to generate such traffic ( well no the legal beagles !)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
15 years of easyJet at MAN
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ks-15-26601037
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ks-15-26601037
Personally not sure what United are gaining from the limited service to Edinburgh to be honest.
Nothing wrong with seasonality, ask Jet2. And both Delta and United offer year round service to JFK and EWR.
Interesting point about the ATL frequency though, what's driving the issue? The A330 seems a good sized aircraft and with the DL JV too, so why are VS undermining themselves?
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The four daily inbound United flights full of American tourists and business travellers? Or the three daily Delta ones?
Nothing wrong with seasonality, ask Jet2. And both Delta and United offer year round service to JFK and EWR.
Interesting point about the ATL frequency though, what's driving the issue? The A330 seems a good sized aircraft and with the DL JV too, so why are VS undermining themselves?
Nothing wrong with seasonality, ask Jet2. And both Delta and United offer year round service to JFK and EWR.
Interesting point about the ATL frequency though, what's driving the issue? The A330 seems a good sized aircraft and with the DL JV too, so why are VS undermining themselves?
No disrespect to Edinburgh from a US point of sale and leisure market view point.
VisitScotland are doing a fabulous job on selling the Castle, shortbread, whisky (nowhere near Edinburgh in reality) and tartan on global scale!
Only wish the wish the English tourist authorities could lift their head up internationally above the delights of London, Windsor and Stratford ( oh and a little shopping stop at Bicester ) !
As to the undermining it’s a very good question isn’t it ?
Delta 764 frames seem more appropriate imho.
Little difference in business and in the back of economy ( those going down to Florida and such) but 28 fewer of that odd premium economy range is ideal for the Manchester market imho.
Further the brand; joint venture or not will retail far better in the US.
I am under no illusions that Manchester as an Atlantic hub ( small case) has a longer uphill struggle to regain its prior glory of a few years back .
I am also under no illusions that Virgin seem to be underselling Manchester for well “reasons”
You are correct in arguing that economic headwinds justify a cut in available capacity as we move from boom times to recession. But the present scenario calls for prudent reductions from S2019 capacity, not a wholesale collapse. A typical week in Summer 2019 shows 88 MAN-USA departures, many of these on the high-density B747-400. My projections for a similar week in Summer 2023 shows 47 MAN-USA departures. My numbers there may be slightly adrift, but they're a fair reflection of the true picture. Available capacity on MAN-USA routes has near enough halved for S23 v S19. That is way overdone. Back in 2009, we saw similar economic conditions following the credit crisis ... a 50% capacity reduction on MAN-USA routes wasn't required then, and it isn't now.
As I said previously, the opportunity is there for Virgin / Delta to seize this opportunity and make MAN a genuine stronghold for the group. They aren't doing that, possibly because of the need to safeguard LHR slots and re-train flight crews to new type ratings. And that makes this an obvious situation for Delta to help out by babysitting MAN-ATL until Virgin can get their act together again. It serves the long-term interests of the group. Back in S19, MAN was supporting NINE A332's per week to Las Vegas alone. There were a further 11 weekly departures to West Coast USA. Exchange rates and cost of living issues have not reduced that demand to zero. A Virgin aircraft released from the ATL route could surely be filled at good yield on a roster of Vegas and either LAX or SFO; filling 4 or 5 flights per week to this market isn't a big ask versus 20 flights per week back in S19. Economic headwinds don't justify dropping from 20 flights per week to none. Australia is an expensive country for UK-domiciled customers to visit too ... but look how bookings have roared back in that market.
Yes, economic headwinds DO justify MAN-USA seat capacity being reduced from the S19 offering. But NOT by 50%. And NOT by 100% to the Western States. I stand by my assertion that Delta would be well-advised to help out Virgin on this one. It would be a win-win for group interests.
EXS 18; TCX 17; TOM 15; EZY 13; RYR 10; BEE 8; VIR 6; FPO 1; CFE 1 (weekend only); FDX/ASL 2 = 91.
Projections for MAN based fleet strength in S23 is as follows:
EXS 24; EZY 21; TOM 17; RYR/RUK 16; VIR 4; EUK 2 = 84.
Of course, some of the long-haul aircraft are flying overnight - but conversely, additional aircraft from none-based carriers do night-stop as well.
So ... your question is asking where any additional services in S23 would park. We know that TP construction work and dualing of taxiways has impacted availability of stands. But set against this, additional stands have been constructed as well - and these are available for use. So essentially, you appear to be arguing that MAN cannot physically accommodate additional aircraft parking at a time when based fleet strength is 7 fewer than in S18, and in a calendar year where passenger numbers are likely to end up around 3,000,000 short of the record MAT throughput reported in September 2019. All whilst MAG claims capability of handling upto 45M passengers per year across its three terminals.
I would respectfully suggest that MAN can accommodate a few more flights yet.
As an aside, I would also point out that consolidation in the industry which has seen the number of based carriers reduced to just SIX names in 2023 does re-emphasise the need for MAG to accommodate whatever additional capacity those six carriers are prepared to commit to MAN. It is increasingly essential to do whatever it takes. No place for telling carriers that Terminal [N] is full so you can't base any more here! Especially since two of those six carriers (VIR and TOM) have filed for smaller programmes than the equivalent requested last year. The heavy-lifting for further based growth falls to fewer names than we have seen in decades.
Join Date: Mar 2023
Location: GB
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we're talking a reasonable plan for VS at MAN:
Currently - 3x A333 and 1x A350 based. Current destinations include BGI, MCO, JFK and ATL. ISB terminated after S23.
Atlanta is a complete mess. 7x weekly was planned in the ACL S23 report, however this route is ditched for 8 weeks starting soon, because of 'piloting issues'. Delta need to take this route and fast, before VS ditch it completely. In a dream world Delta would take on the route beginning in June, give or take a few weeks, with a 767 or A330, although I think W23/S24 is more likely for this. Immediately this frees up an aircraft.
Virgin are taking on 17 A330neos. They have just received their 4th, VEII, a couple of days ago. VS have 10 A330-300s as of now. 3 are based at MAN. Once they get enough A330neos, it makes good sense to send 3 or 4 of these older 330s to Manchester, instead of scrapping them off. These aircraft are only around 10-12 years old.
So, what could be done with a 7 or 8 strong hub of A330 at MAN?
Virgin had 6 aircraft at Manchester pre-covid. Routes missing from that time are seasonal LAS and LAX. They would be reinstated immediately. 5x weekly each for the summer and 3-4 weekly in the winter seems right, which takes up roughly 1 and a half units.
Delhi and Mumbai were planned for 2020. These are very logical additions from a Skyteam point of view. Star Alliance Air India will start this route very soon. 5 a week to both destinations, year round, will fill every time. A mix of VFR customers from the catchment area, and even some VFR from the US could connect JFK-MAN-DEL.. This once again takes up roughly an aircraft and a half, so this leaves one more.
That is all pre-covid operated & planned routes covered. We still have an unfilled aircraft, so where could it fly?
Islamabad: Meh. Virgin will not operate to Pakistan even from LHR after this summer.
Austin, Texas: Really out there, but would actually do really well in my opinion. In recent years I have noticed quite a lot of Brits moving to Texas. Furthermore, Singapore's IAH route does quite well being a large A350 from a regional UK city to Texas. Austin is a very nice upcoming city, specifically in the tech sector. 2-4 per week and could pair up with another route.
San Francisco: A TCX route left unserved. It did well for them, why wouldn't it now?
Boston: Most likely out of any listed here, however it won't be on Virgin imho. A daily Delta 757 (as planned for Summer 2020) think will come 2024 to combat EIUK.
Montego Bay / Punta Cana: I feel as if one of these would be nice to pair SFO/AUS on this final aircraft. I flew with TCX to PUJ a few years before their demise and it was rammed full.
Overall, a dream scenario for VS at Manchester would be to see one of the T2 piers chock a block with their A330s, almost as if you couldn't tell the difference to being at LHR T3 lol.
Currently - 3x A333 and 1x A350 based. Current destinations include BGI, MCO, JFK and ATL. ISB terminated after S23.
Atlanta is a complete mess. 7x weekly was planned in the ACL S23 report, however this route is ditched for 8 weeks starting soon, because of 'piloting issues'. Delta need to take this route and fast, before VS ditch it completely. In a dream world Delta would take on the route beginning in June, give or take a few weeks, with a 767 or A330, although I think W23/S24 is more likely for this. Immediately this frees up an aircraft.
Virgin are taking on 17 A330neos. They have just received their 4th, VEII, a couple of days ago. VS have 10 A330-300s as of now. 3 are based at MAN. Once they get enough A330neos, it makes good sense to send 3 or 4 of these older 330s to Manchester, instead of scrapping them off. These aircraft are only around 10-12 years old.
So, what could be done with a 7 or 8 strong hub of A330 at MAN?
Virgin had 6 aircraft at Manchester pre-covid. Routes missing from that time are seasonal LAS and LAX. They would be reinstated immediately. 5x weekly each for the summer and 3-4 weekly in the winter seems right, which takes up roughly 1 and a half units.
Delhi and Mumbai were planned for 2020. These are very logical additions from a Skyteam point of view. Star Alliance Air India will start this route very soon. 5 a week to both destinations, year round, will fill every time. A mix of VFR customers from the catchment area, and even some VFR from the US could connect JFK-MAN-DEL.. This once again takes up roughly an aircraft and a half, so this leaves one more.
That is all pre-covid operated & planned routes covered. We still have an unfilled aircraft, so where could it fly?
Islamabad: Meh. Virgin will not operate to Pakistan even from LHR after this summer.
Austin, Texas: Really out there, but would actually do really well in my opinion. In recent years I have noticed quite a lot of Brits moving to Texas. Furthermore, Singapore's IAH route does quite well being a large A350 from a regional UK city to Texas. Austin is a very nice upcoming city, specifically in the tech sector. 2-4 per week and could pair up with another route.
San Francisco: A TCX route left unserved. It did well for them, why wouldn't it now?
Boston: Most likely out of any listed here, however it won't be on Virgin imho. A daily Delta 757 (as planned for Summer 2020) think will come 2024 to combat EIUK.
Montego Bay / Punta Cana: I feel as if one of these would be nice to pair SFO/AUS on this final aircraft. I flew with TCX to PUJ a few years before their demise and it was rammed full.
Overall, a dream scenario for VS at Manchester would be to see one of the T2 piers chock a block with their A330s, almost as if you couldn't tell the difference to being at LHR T3 lol.
Last edited by laviation; 1st Apr 2023 at 18:49.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Uk
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With full acknowledgment to archived information provided by 'Mikey Humphries', a typical night in Summer 2018 saw MAN based fleet strength as follows:
EXS 18; TCX 17; TOM 15; EZY 13; RYR 10; BEE 8; VIR 6; FPO 1; CFE 1 (weekend only); FDX/ASL 2 = 91.
Projections for MAN based fleet strength in S23 is as follows:
EXS 24; EZY 21; TOM 17; RYR/RUK 16; VIR 4; EUK 2 = 84.
Of course, some of the long-haul aircraft are flying overnight - but conversely, additional aircraft from none-based carriers do night-stop as well.
So ... your question is asking where any additional services in S23 would park. We know that TP construction work and dualing of taxiways has impacted availability of stands. But set against this, additional stands have been constructed as well - and these are available for use. So essentially, you appear to be arguing that MAN cannot physically accommodate additional aircraft parking at a time when based fleet strength is 7 fewer than in S18, and in a calendar year where passenger numbers are likely to end up around 3,000,000 short of the record MAT throughput reported in September 2019. All whilst MAG claims capability of handling upto 45M passengers per year across its three terminals.
I would respectfully suggest that MAN can accommodate a few more flights yet.
As an aside, I would also point out that consolidation in the industry which has seen the number of based carriers reduced to just SIX names in 2023 does re-emphasise the need for MAG to accommodate whatever additional capacity those six carriers are prepared to commit to MAN. It is increasingly essential to do whatever it takes. No place for telling carriers that Terminal [N] is full so you can't base any more here! Especially since two of those six carriers (VIR and TOM) have filed for smaller programmes than the equivalent requested last year. The heavy-lifting for further based growth falls to fewer names than we have seen in decades.
EXS 18; TCX 17; TOM 15; EZY 13; RYR 10; BEE 8; VIR 6; FPO 1; CFE 1 (weekend only); FDX/ASL 2 = 91.
Projections for MAN based fleet strength in S23 is as follows:
EXS 24; EZY 21; TOM 17; RYR/RUK 16; VIR 4; EUK 2 = 84.
Of course, some of the long-haul aircraft are flying overnight - but conversely, additional aircraft from none-based carriers do night-stop as well.
So ... your question is asking where any additional services in S23 would park. We know that TP construction work and dualing of taxiways has impacted availability of stands. But set against this, additional stands have been constructed as well - and these are available for use. So essentially, you appear to be arguing that MAN cannot physically accommodate additional aircraft parking at a time when based fleet strength is 7 fewer than in S18, and in a calendar year where passenger numbers are likely to end up around 3,000,000 short of the record MAT throughput reported in September 2019. All whilst MAG claims capability of handling upto 45M passengers per year across its three terminals.
I would respectfully suggest that MAN can accommodate a few more flights yet.
As an aside, I would also point out that consolidation in the industry which has seen the number of based carriers reduced to just SIX names in 2023 does re-emphasise the need for MAG to accommodate whatever additional capacity those six carriers are prepared to commit to MAN. It is increasingly essential to do whatever it takes. No place for telling carriers that Terminal [N] is full so you can't base any more here! Especially since two of those six carriers (VIR and TOM) have filed for smaller programmes than the equivalent requested last year. The heavy-lifting for further based growth falls to fewer names than we have seen in decades.
Although there are new stands I believe there has been a loss of wide body capable contact stands at T2 with only 8 now, remembering that the LS 757’s can’t use the far side of the new A pier.
Also the terminal split, is different. In 2019 LS and TCX were in T1. EUK has replaced the loss of the two VS. That means any new entrant, particularly to the US may have to park remote, which the likes of US, DL probably wouldn’t want to do. I also believe they both used T2 in the past so wouldn’t want to use T1 or Ryanair HQ (T3) if they returned. There is already a massive amount of towing too/from remote stands early morning.
At T2 this summer you could have up to 4 TUI 787’s and 2 767’s, 4 VS, QR, EY, CX, 2 SQ, 2 EUK, 3 EXS A330’s plus EXS 757’s all who can only use 8 contact stands in T2. Surely that 2nd pier needs to be built before much more morning heavies come in?