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


Old 23rd Mar 2021, 11:25
  #341 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: UK
Posts: 53

Starting 23rd May:
Tuesday and Sunday: departs MAN @10.30 arrives PMI @14.10.
Tuesday and Sunday: departs PMI @08.00 arrives MAN @09.40.

PMI based aircraft used (A320).
MANFAN is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 11:46
  #342 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,624
Theres no denying, our industry has been decimated. There may well be some long term structural changes on its way and the 787/350 have opened up the possibility of more point to point services. However, to suggest that the 'hub & spoke' model is dead is somewhat premature at best. I think we need to be careful what we wish for here. All the heavies we all love to see at MAN, SQ, EK, QR, EY, TK etc are all "cross contaminating shuttles". Furthermore, if it wasn't for the hub & spoke model, I doubt we would see (for example) QR or SQ and a much thinner schedule from the likes of KL and LH.

You mention Virgin/Delta which again rely upon connections, certainly on ATL and JFK and I think the success of EI will probably rely to an extent on some kind of connectivity stateside.

Short term, there may well be scope to formulate some sort of quasi-charter programme but I would say that is best driven by the tour operators.
easyflyer83 is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 13:30
  #343 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Age: 39
Posts: 739

British Airways hub and spoke = BAD
Everyone but British Airways hub and spoke = GOOD
Emirates, Qatar, Etihad, Singapore, Lufthansa, Swiss, Iberia, even Aer Lingus are all hub and spoke carriers as are all American, Delta and United who I assume you want to see return. OK, so you hate Heathrow, we get it. But let's favour overseas carriers and jobs over UK bases ones is Manchester localism gone too far.
Give your head a shake Bagso. The "dead" model you hate so much would kill connecting traffic on MAN-JFK-FLL/MIA/ORD/LAX/SFO/PHX/PIT/TUC etc etc You're literally asking to support a hub and spoke model, and you don't seem to know it. Unless I've got this wrong and Aer Lingus will be flying daily non stop to all of the above? Is the whole Shamrock fleet coming to MAN to fly point to point?

Last edited by Skipness One Foxtrot; 23rd Mar 2021 at 15:41.
Skipness One Foxtrot is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 15:05
  #344 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 5,820
Other than the last few lines, that is not how I read it.

SWBKCB is online now  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 18:19
  #345 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 61
Posts: 599
Skipness 1Foxtrot or is it Skipness1Echo.....

and who are "THE WE" to which you refer, would that actually be just you ?

There is an inconvenient truth that you miss in respect of Heathrow insofar as it is/was purely connecting traffic, that is a very different model to the other hubs you listed and it was, as im sure you are aware , specifically the Heathrow hub and spoke model and its relationship to Manchester to which i was referring.

l doubt anyone is actually flying to London from Manchester as a FINAL destination, that is a totally different model to hubs at JFK, Madrid, Frankfurt, Istanbul, Dubai, Singapore et al where there is/was a significant amount of end to end traffic supplemented by connecting passengers.

That is a major difference in a pre /post covid world.

i appreciate you are Heathrows number 1 fan and in your eyes it can do no wrong, in contrast i have been highly critical of Manchester not least in respect of freight. You to promote yourself as a reasoned individual but would i be correct in saying this only holds water as long as its a pro Heathrow agenda ?

Last edited by Navpi; 23rd Mar 2021 at 18:36.
Navpi is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 19:18
  #346 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,624
Oh come on, that’s tenuous. I would hazard a guess that on most MAN-HUB route most passengers will be connecting. If you believe we would have Singapore at all and a 3x Daily A380 with EK without all those connecting passengers then you need to give your head a shake MAN.
Your made specific reference to the “cross contaminating shuttle”. My question would be, how is LHR a cross contaminating flight but FRA is not? Indeed, from a border perspective, I’d argue that the LHR shuttle is a less contaminating flight (on paper) given it transports folk who have already entered the country.

BA has every right to fly here in the same way that it doesn’t have an obligation to have a hub here. Even as someone who has flown in BA colours whilst based in MAN, I’ve never really understood the hostility towards the airline. Because I think the undercurrent of your comment was indeed hostility towards BA and LHR.

We sometimes forget that we are less than 200 miles away from one of, if not the, worlds city and a City that is always going to be home to the UK’s hub.

I’m proud of MAN. They don’t always get it right but until the covid mess, we did very well. Arguably, we punched above our weight.
easyflyer83 is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 22:51
  #347 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2007
Age: 58
Posts: 37
As a BHX regular, I personally would be happy if they reinstated the BHX/LHR flight and its connections. Personally ,I think there are very few international routes that would be sustainable on purely A-B traffic alone and probably even less post Covid. Even at fortress LHR ,there are a number of African and other carriers who survive purely on connecting traffic and would not be there otherwise. Think the UK does well in having regional airports that offer the services they do compared to Europe. As an example , if you live in France then its accepted as the norm that you fly to Paris to connect to anywhere. Dont forget MAN is only 200 miles from LHR and in aviation terms thats nothing. MAN does very well ,and hopefully will continue to prosper, but any ideas of wall to wall A350s or 787s is probably in reality unlikely
MARK 101 is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2021, 23:09
  #348 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Age: 39
Posts: 739
Look Bagso, your key point is that for MAN to succeed you have to go on the attack against BA even being allowed to offer a one stop connection to their long haul network, inferring that they're spreading disease. I mean come on! You don't even pause for breath before extolling the virtues of attracting competing foreign based long haul network carriers in to take existing market share from a UK carrier.

I am pro having LHR as a world class hub, competing with similar peer airports. There's a load wrong with LHR and am not a fan boy per se, I want my country to succeed. Which is why I read your rant as an attack on a UK registered carrier supporting thousands of British jobs in difficult times, to bar them from even serving MAN in favour of the likes of the ME3 who treat their employees frankly appalingly. I found that worth challenging. I want MAN to succeed but am not looking to run down someone else's business and job to do so.
Skipness One Foxtrot is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 07:22
  #349 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 310
MARK 101

I can assure you connecting over CDG/OLY is not accepted in much of France , However even with TGVs there remains a core domestic market for day returns to the capital to supplement onward connection banks. French regionals notably Nantes, Bordeaux, Lille, Lyon, Marseilles and Nice have a differing dynamic when it comes to international traffic flows to that of the UK - Focused on the Francophone world and the Megreb no surprises. And there remains a healthy competition for traffic by none other than Easyjet while the AF/KL group and partners continue to operate a reasonable domestic network of routes avoiding Paris completely and the Transavia brand provides substantial international traffic from the regions for the AFKL business .
Being “forced” over Paris isn’t the reality it first seems.

The animosity to BA|(IAG) is now steeped in the fog of time among those in the late forties and above that might remember dirty tactics obfuscation and indeed deceitful behaviour to block competition ( well carriers stealing their jewels perhaps ).
The carrier made huge mistakes in the rapidly liberalised markets particularly from the regions, including wrong sizes aircraft unsustainable frequencies and high fares. Continuing to target foreign long haul operators head on where they saw threats. While competitors and the flexible fares ( non network) airlines were rapidly eating their lunch and offering a vast array of point to point routes and affordable fares.

The development of the alliances ( which allegedly removed Qantas, and Cathay for some years) was another way to control traffic and manipulate customer choice to accept inconvenienced multi stop long haul often with a promise of a discounted flight at some later date across the superhubs.

Well this concept was imported from the US domestic market where it functions to allow the big three to operate railway type service in a vast country - Fundamentally its domestic with a few international links as an add on.
BA closed regional services and tried to apply similar approach to within EU traffic and in general that bit hasn’t worked .

Indeed it took external (NONE UK) legal changes to allow much of the genuine growth seen in the last thirty five years, and more so the last fifteen years without BA .

US/EU Openskys and the European single aviation market , the EU openskys treaties with Morocco and Israel, and the UAE bilateral have been the key.

Right now through we have COVID19, we have the changed European status the impact of the end of freedom of movement for EU citizens and a weakened US service agreement to overcome- these will also effect the UK hub in Slough Windsor Spelthorne and Hounslow !

In my opinion aviation is going to be hit for some years ahead from the UK even as we return to some sort of societal normality in 2022 and beyond.

Forget 30 million indeed forget 25 million terminal passengers for Manchester for some years .

The industry has convulsed and the scars and negative economic impacts will be deep and long lasting

In the UK we now have fewer players than at anytime since the fifties; not particularly healthy yet tragically there are some that want the only carrier able to keep BA remotely honest to fail.

Rant over .

Last edited by Rutan16; 24th Mar 2021 at 07:44.
Rutan16 is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 08:01
  #350 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: bishops stortford herts
Posts: 1,873

Rose tints possibly.

IAG conducts its Company Board meetings in Spain & is incorporated as a Sociedad Anonima also in Spain for tax purposes.

Regarding the "support" of thousands of jobs at LHR care to comment on the fire & rehire polices being enacted there.
southside bobby is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 10:00
  #351 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Having grown up in the NW, I am naturally biased in this matter, but I seem to remember from the dim and distant past being told that BA used to object to (perhaps successfully lobbying against may be the correct phrase) any US carriers being granted rights to fly direct into Manchester, whilst not operating competing services itself. Is this true?
papabravowhiskey is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 13:33
  #352 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,624
I've heard that several times and I have no reason to believe it is untrue. BA weren't exactly the only culprits and even today, Lufthansa attempts to prevent frequencies of the ME3 in Germany. Bilateral agreements (more prevalent in the past) were in their very nature, restrictive to competition. LH also still seek to limit LCC activity in FRA.

Indeed, much of the criticism levelled by Rutan were/are actually relevant to most of the network carriers. Incidentally, BA were one of the first of that group of airlines to offer one way fares etc. By comparison, until relatively recently, KLM still stipulated the old Saturday night rule on it's cheapest fares. Again, the criticism is probably best levelled at the network carriers of old rather than just British Airways. But...again, the hostility among many comes from the fact that BA don't serve MAN much above the LHR shuttle.

You are right in saying that in the absence of a national network, the US carriers are that nations rail network, but the hub and spoke model is prevalent the world over and to say that having no national railway is the only reason that model works in the US is ridiculous. Where things changed in Europe was the LCC's and despite being based on Southwest, were different in many ways. Notably, offering non-stop services as opposed to Southwest which operated more like a Greyhound bus, stopping off at various places. The Brits embraced the LCC's and BA will have found it incredibly difficult to compete, at the time they offered a far superior service, a service that many weren't willing to pay, especially when considering the LCC's stimulated additional demand through lower fares, something BA struggled to do with the product it offered at the time.

When BA pulled its CitiExpress base at MAN and sold it to FlyBe, it did keep its code on flights for a while and I think perhaps its biggest mistake was to not then bring BE into the stable when that carrier was profitable. I would have adopted a hybrid BE/BA brand similar to HOP! by Air France.

But ultimately, the hostility towards BA, at least today, is because they don't really serve MAN and people believe that as the national carrier (which they are not) they should do. Hence the old "London Airways" mantra.
easyflyer83 is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 13:54
  #353 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 1,089
Going back to the debate about p2p against major hubs, a couple of points occur in the context of MAN.

I'm not sure the distinction is as clear cut as has been inferred. For example, over the years, my wife and I have enjoyed 4 or 5 day stays in Singapore, Hong Kong and Dubai as part of longer holidays further afield. I'm not sure whether it still applies but some airlines used to offer incentives for stop-overs with reduced hotel rates, excursions etc. Yes, we were using those airports as hubs as they had direct flights from MAN but we were not just transiting the terminals.

Secondly, pre-covid, and before the collapse of TCX and flybe, MAN had slowly been building up the number of connecting passengers at this end of the journey. VS & TCX were reportedly picking up not large but useful numbers of pax transferring at MAN from other domestic and international flights. Nothing remotely like LHR, but seen as sufficiently significant to incorporate improved transfer facilities in the design of the TP for T2. I would have thought that even a few regular transfer passengers onto a long haul flight, particularly if premium pax, could sometimes tip the scales as to whether or not a route is viable.

I don't accept that a direct long haul flight from say MAN or EDI to a hub in the Middle or Far East, somehow means all the jobs and benefits to the UK are lost. Surely, these services bring jobs and wealth to the UK regions they serve, rather more I suspect than a couple of extra shuttles to LHR. I hesitate to mention 'levelling up' but it is a subject which could be relevant in terms of whether non-London airports are encouraged to develop to their maximum potential while accepting it is ultimately airlines that decide where they fly to.

I'm sure Rutan 16 is right. MAN, (and indeed aviation in general), face a huge challenge in winning back routes that were withdrawn and rebuilding passenger numbers and confidence.
MANFOD is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 14:00
  #354 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 61
Posts: 599
"Your key point is that for MAN to succeed you have to go on the attack against BA even being allowed to offer a one stop connection to their long haul network, inferring that they're spreading disease"

As usual SKIP you seem to misunderstand and reinvent your own narrative dressing this up as a supposed response that someone else has said.

Navpi is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 14:11
  #355 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Age: 39
Posts: 739
southside bobby

And how many British jobs are dependent on the continued existence of IAG's subsidiary? The British registered one? How many jobs Bobby?

Fire and rehire is immoral and awful, indefensible IMHO. So, given that, and that Emirates are doing the same, I assume you'll be leading the campaign to ban them from Stansted? Thought not.

We're all familiar with BA stopping Sabena operating long haul out of MAN, they stopped KLM and SAS doing the same out of PIK, it was Government policy as BA was a state enterprise that lost money being forced to operate routes and equipment on less than commercially driven terms. In the end BA dropped MAN because BA was uncompetitive, but even that was years ago now. How long is it rational to hold an emotive grudge for? I occasionally hate BA because they cancel flights on me or pitch up late. Almost no one alive today was responsible for fighting against Singpaore, Qantas and American flying to MAN. Is there ever a time to let a grudge go?
Skipness One Foxtrot is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 14:25
  #356 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: SYD
Posts: 199
It is true that MAN has enjoyed a very turbulent relationship with British Airways over the years. But that is a discussion best left to the historians. All the personalities of that era are long gone (most are six feet under). It is highly unlikely that any of the senior executives at today's BA or MAG would have any meaningful knowledge of events back then. For the purposes of contemporary considerations and for planning ahead, we need to think of BA as just another airline brand and Manchester Airport as another business opportunity which may or may not interest that brand.

Note that I speak of the brand, not the airline. That is because the true contemporary entity is IAG - a grouping within which 'British Airways' is just one constituent brand. And, as it happens, today is a rather momentous day to be debating IAG's attitude towards MAN. Because this is the day that the group has finally gone public with details of the new Aer Lingus Transatlantic programme of scheduled flights to JFK, MCO, BOS and BGI, with the possibility of more to come. When C-19 subsides, MAN can also anticipate resumption or continuation of regular schedules by various IAG brands: British Airways to LHR; BA CityFlyer leisure schedules (not resuming S2021 but may return post-pandemic); Sun-Air of Scandinavia (BA franchise) to BLL, GOT?; Aer Lingus to DUB; Aer Lingus (Esken franchise) to ORK, BHD, DUB; Iberia Express to MAD with the possibility of additional leisure routes; Vueling to BCN.

This IAG portfolio which we see today is far removed from the old British Airways days of yore. MAN is evaluated purely as a business opportunity with potential profits to be made, to be compared with alternative airports bidding for the aircraft assets committed. Decisions are made based on projected ROI, often by executives who are neither British nor based in the UK. Those making the calls have no knowledge of the big characters of BA's past, nor of the business practices they implemented back then. Likewise, few executives at MAN are aware of the policies enacted by high-profile forerunners such as Gordon Sweetapple and Sir Gil Thompson back in the day. They're just names from ancient history.

So we all need to move on and consider today's IAG and today's MAG. Some positives, some negatives in both cases, but essentially two businesses trying to make their way in the most challenging environment seen by commercial aviation in living memory.

I was directly inconvenienced by BA's tactics back in the '80's with one journey severely disrupted (rerouted with a change at LHR whilst accompanying a passenger with mobility problems). I was livid, and I have only once made a long-haul booking with them since ... though to be fair, a cruise line made that booking and I didn't have much say in it! So I understand the depth of feeling. But today I would be happy to book the British Airways brand if the itinerary and pricing ticked the right boxes. With connections over LHR, I always take account of the elevated likelihood of the domestic Shuttle leg being cancelled at short notice ... this service always seems to be first in line for the chop when LHR needs to reduce its movements rate. Apologists shrug and say those affected can drive or take a train to London ... well, not in time to make their long-haul connection they can't. So, for me, connections over LHR still come across as higher risk than those offered by competing options. But I'll still take the risk for high frequency short-haul connections where later flights are available if required.

My bookings with IAG brands are a straightforward business decision. They depend on the attractiveness of the deal offered in terms of price, reliability and timings (and ... errr ... interesting aircraft types! :-) ). There is no place for exercising grievances from ancient history in this process. It is just another airline brand operated by staff with zero knowledge of failures brought about by executives who occupied their roles over forty years ago.

Of course, contemporary failings would very much be taken into account. Air Europa still haven't refunded me for a booking which they cancelled eleven months ago (they're really bad). Though I do wonder whether IAG realise what a duffer they're buying there.
OzzyOzBorn is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 14:32
  #357 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 342
I think MAN's passenger recovery may be quicker than some forecast although maybe in a different form to before the pandemic.
The likes of Ryanair / Jet2 / Easyjet will when able offer low fares to entice the travelling public back into the air. So low cost and charter to Europe will likely return quicker. A key point that has been mentioned before is that a based low-co aircraft can operate a number of flights each day offering considerably more seats / passengers / revenue than one long-haul service might do. Yes, these long-haul services are important destinations to the region and yes they will return in the longer term but the airport needs passengers to make money and I dare say it will take whatever is available when the happy day arrives that we can all travel more freely once again.
commit aviation is online now  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 15:34
  #358 (permalink)  
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: SYD
Posts: 199
commit aviation: I would agree that the LCC contingent does (currently) offer the prospect of bringing back short-haul volume at a brisk pace. And there is certainly a ready market for their offerings if that is allowed to happen.

But government interference will be key - both here in the UK and in other jurisdictions. Unpredictability and quarantine requirements are a killer for holiday bookings. The requirement for expensive C-19 testing is a killer for the budget short-breaks market (not to mention the hassle factor of arranging a test -H72 before).

There is a serious risk emerging that the SH leisure sector faces another summer season wipeout. We had presumed that a successful vaccination rollout would bring liberation, but instead the trend appears to be towards more draconian restrictions than those in force last Summer when nobody had any protection against the virus at all. This defies logic, but it is what it is. The likes of Professor Adulterer seems to want us locked down forever (with just him being allowed out to indulge his passions). Meanwhile, our real PM Princess Nut Nuts and her willing chancellor (Caroline Lucas in drag) Sunak are waging a campaign of annihilation against aviation in the UK. Assistance for airlines and airports has been negligible beyond those measures offered to businesses generally, despite HMG being 100% responsible for their extinction-level plight. Even in instances where PR-friendly assistance is proposed at the margins - eg. a cut to domestic APD, we quickly learn of proposals to pay for this by hitting long-haul rates even harder instead.

In order for these LCC's to do what they're capable of doing post-pandemic, we first need them to survive. If they lose a second successive summer season, that can not be presumed even for the strongest names. No airline is safe if revenue is crushed for two consecutive years. If even "unthinkable" names fall by the wayside, the return of passenger volumes post-pandemic could be very laboured indeed. Limited by lack of supply. And our dear leaders will preen and boast of how "green" they are, lauding the carbon targets they will now meet. One day, someone will explain to these eejits about the role of WATER VAPOUR in shaping climate. But we'd better not hope for any apology from them.
OzzyOzBorn is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 15:42
  #359 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 310

Yes its true compounded by the government agencies bias during bilateral negotiations
Rutan16 is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2021, 18:02
  #360 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 61
Posts: 599
Good points sensibly argued Mr Ozzy although I would waiver the return of BA shuttles as a priority , maybe IAG agree, it is possibly the reason Aer Lingus are making such a fist of Manchester ?

My original point holds sway that the majority of hubs with direct access to Manchester ALSO support end to end traffic, it's a point seemingly lost on our friend in the south.

The BA shuttles are for connections only therefore i am of the view that a service post covid such as Finnair to Helsinki, Iberia to Madrid etc whilst providing connectity to China and South America also directly support the economy of the North of England making direct air services viable between both countries and supporting UK BUSINESS UP HERE.

That is not a bonus that LHR shuttles can provide.

With aviation on its knees the worth of those services "when"" they hopefully return cannot be understated despite the best efforts of Government to trash the industry.
Navpi 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 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.