Southampton-3

[MadB]

Don’t think there is really a need for attacks and certain language.

Think we can all be adult and discuss things without offending each other.

One point is clear.
Connectivity for last 3 years, less than 700k pax annually, loosing millions and far from break even.

Investors won’t stick around if runway extension doesn’t start to yield profits.

Can AGS (the ones actually negotiating) afford to be picky?

[Mr A Tis]

That might be the timetabled cross country schedule. In reality many are regularly cancelled-totally unreliable service at ridiculous fares.
Two recent trips, 7 hours Bournemouth to Manchester. The next one 4.5 hours Winchester to Stockport, standing in first class for 4.5 hours. Most passengers denied boarding after Basingstoke due to overcrowding. People having to stand in toilets. This is reality of the so called train service.
The sooner someone gets back on the SOU-MAN route the better.

[SKOJB]

Originally Posted by Mr A Tis

That might be the timetabled cross country schedule. In reality many are regularly cancelled-totally unreliable service at ridiculous fares.
Two recent trips, 7 hours Bournemouth to Manchester. The next one 4.5 hours Winchester to Stockport, standing in first class for 4.5 hours. Most passengers denied boarding after Basingstoke due to overcrowding. People having to stand in toilets. This is reality of the so called train service.
The sooner someone gets back on the SOU-MAN route the better.

Whether we like it or not, can see a time not too far away when MAN/GLA/BFS are double daily with orange. High frequency and 49 seats will not be sustainable in to the future, fact and reality!

[RW20]

Originally Posted by SKOJB

Whether we like it or not, can see a time not too far away when MAN/GLA/BFS are double daily with orange. High frequency and 49 seats will not be sustainable in to the future, fact and reality!

You could be right,but for the airport to become profitable it needs a number of Sun/European routes,simply the domestic routes are not enough.
Let's wait and see!

[SotonFlightpath]

Originally Posted by Mr A Tis

That might be the timetabled cross country schedule. In reality many are regularly cancelled-totally unreliable service at ridiculous fares.
Two recent trips, 7 hours Bournemouth to Manchester. The next one 4.5 hours Winchester to Stockport, standing in first class for 4.5 hours. Most passengers denied boarding after Basingstoke due to overcrowding. People having to stand in toilets. This is reality of the so called train service.
The sooner someone gets back on the SOU-MAN route the better.

Oh, I quite agree. I used to use most of the domestic routes from SOU as they offered such great flexibility. I remember organising an event for a client in Manchester which was over three days, but I needed to be back in Bishops Waltham for a short meeting over that period and it was all so easy to do. Up to Manchester on the Sunday afternoon, back to early Tuesday morning, back to Manchester that same afternoon and back again on the Wednesday morning. Similarly, day trips to Amsterdam, Newcastle and Dublin, and one-night trips to Düsseldorf made business travel so easy.
Nowadays I have to use LHR.

[rog747]

Yoohoo I'm back ---- Have I missed 'owt?

(The Greek Islands were rather nice)

I gather that LYS from BOH, and FAO from SOU has been added by EZY which is nice.
BACF culls more flights from SOU for S24 (Predicted)
Still no SOU-MAN flight yet, UGH!

I think I mentioned I wanted to go T'up North from SOU a while back to see an old pal in LPL.
Driving up there>? NO Way.
Train>? Are you MAD (Just read the Posts above about Cross Country Trains YUK)
Plane>?
Well, here's the thing --- Fly SOU-JER and then a nice quick connection on to EZY from JER to LPL and it's quicker than any other way possible,
and the cost was not too bad. (Under £100)

Apart from that, other news whilst I was away?,
TUI 737 goes off the runway on to the grass at LBA (Been there, done that twice in the early 1980's at BMA with 2 x Viscounts) Tea and Biscuits>? or Just Tea....
TUI's last 767's go to the Cargo Cash Converters, or in the case of 'YK' maybe now to the scrap man it seems.
A few more Ryanair winglets chopped off here and there.

[Rivet Joint]

Originally Posted by Albert Hall

I seem to recall an earlier debate where you’d suggested LM should have taken Q400s and I think someone from there had pointed out what a bad idea that was!

The point made was around the cost and extra hassle of having a new type of aircraft which of course is valid. However, Logan in only the last 5 years have shown they can still survive operating a wide range of aircraft at any one time. Various Saabs, embraers, dorniers, twin otters, islanders and ATRs. I understood the ATR selection on the basis the 42 model was the closest they could get to replacing the Saab 340s but they seem to be adding more of the 72 variety which is double the capacity of the 340s they are meant to be replacing. I haven’t got the figures to hand but the SOU Scotland routes have the potential to be the highest passenger demand routes they now serve. From memory they were seeing 200k annual at their peak. The 72 is clearly seen as not an option despite these routes warranting a larger aircraft. If Logan are happy to have 3 twin otters and 2 islanders then why not circa 8 q400s. The same argument applies in having the right equipment for the specific routes. My main point was that an EZY would see a q400 as much more of a contender than a tiny old business jet. Personally I’m glad EZY do not have much competition as I believe they and SOU are a perfect match and we will see a sizeable operation one day. We need to remember from a fleet standpoint they are playing catch-up post covid when all new deliveries were delayed.

[SWBKCB]

Any views as to why EZY's ski operation at BOH is bigger than SOU. Is it that specialist a market?

[MARKEYD]

EasyJet have been operating from BOH for over 18 years and most definitely have built up a strong customer presence
They also have contracts with Crystal Ski & Ingrams and use Ski club of Britain to advertise

Local ski clubs in France and ski apartments have a strong South coast presence a bit like ex pats who use the Bergerac route in the summer

[Saabdriver1]

I sometimes wish there was a guide to airline economics and why airlines do things. If there was, I wouldn't have to keep explaining to someone who seems very long on opinions but very short on practicalities of life!

Loganair flies a small fleet of Islanders and a small fleet of Twin Otters because it's paid to do so under PSO contracts on the routes they fly. The very nature of a PSO is to step in to make sure an air service exists on a route where none would be provided if the commercial market was left to itself. So by extension if Loganair wasn't paid to fly Islanders and Twin Otters under PSOs (and that's all those aircraft do) then it wouldn't do it. The inefficiency of a small fleet is taken into account in that process. Can we all agree that there's no way DFT or Eastleigh Borough Council would step in to cover that inefficiency for a small fleet of Q400s operating from Southampton?

Can you point me to any other airline which flies both ATR72s and Q400s in the same fleet? There may be one that I can't think of, but the illogical nature of having two aircraft of broadly similar size in a fleet means I don't believe there is. Loganair took the ATR because unlike the Q400 it was an aircraft type that was still in production and supported by the manufacturer and had a proven freighter variant as well. 4 of the ATRs are dedicted freighters. If you need an example of why manufacturer support is so important then you only need to look back as far as the disaster that was Flybe 2 which made much of its own bad luck but had some terrible trouble with spares and on-time delivery of Q400s.

The E145s have one big advantage which is speed. When you're operating GLA or EDI to SOU, it makes a big difference versus the ATR - so much so that the 145 can do four roundtrips in a day on those routes where an ATR could only do three.

It's pie in the sky to keep suggesting that a small fleet of Q400s is the way forward to serve Southampton. You must really hate Loganair to keep wishing Q400s on it so.

[RW20]

Originally Posted by Saabdriver1

I sometimes wish there was a guide to airline economics and why airlines do things. If there was, I wouldn't have to keep explaining to someone who seems very long on opinions but very short on practicalities of life!

Loganair flies a small fleet of Islanders and a small fleet of Twin Otters because it's paid to do so under PSO contracts on the routes they fly. The very nature of a PSO is to step in to make sure an air service exists on a route where none would be provided if the commercial market was left to itself. So by extension if Loganair wasn't paid to fly Islanders and Twin Otters under PSOs (and that's all those aircraft do) then it wouldn't do it. The inefficiency of a small fleet is taken into account in that process. Can we all agree that there's no way DFT or Eastleigh Borough Council would step in to cover that inefficiency for a small fleet of Q400s operating from Southampton?

Can you point me to any other airline which flies both ATR72s and Q400s in the same fleet? There may be one that I can't think of, but the illogical nature of having two aircraft of broadly similar size in a fleet means I don't believe there is. Loganair took the ATR because unlike the Q400 it was an aircraft type that was still in production and supported by the manufacturer and had a proven freighter variant as well. 4 of the ATRs are dedicted freighters. If you need an example of why manufacturer support is so important then you only need to look back as far as the disaster that was Flybe 2 which made much of its own bad luck but had some terrible trouble with spares and on-time delivery of Q400s.

The E145s have one big advantage which is speed. When you're operating GLA or EDI to SOU, it makes a big difference versus the ATR - so much so that the 145 can do four roundtrips in a day on those routes where an ATR could only do three.

It's pie in the sky to keep suggesting that a small fleet of Q400s is the way forward to serve Southampton. You must really hate Loganair to keep wishing Q400s on it so.

Good points,It's essential that we keep loganair ,Q400 is a non starter, Easy and others for Sun routes,but there is big competition down the road which will have a major effect on destinations.

[Albert Hall]

One way or the other, the competition won’t last. Beyond a short term push for volume it also won’t be in SOU long term interest.

Look at the number of routes easyJet has gone on against Loganair and pulled off less than a year later. They do this to hold down smaller rivals - exactly what they’re doing at SOU on BFS and GLA and just like they do at LBA on BFS. You only need look at NCL-BRS for an example of a route once well served and now with a poor schedule from eJ but no other airline likely to go near - spoiling tactics all over the place.

And spare a thought for Newquay. They thought the arrival of easyJet was a route to big things. Their eJ Manchester service has been cut from five to two a week for next summer and the only other thing they do is Glasgow for about six weeks. That’s hardly generating much.

For all those saying Southampton wants volume, they might get it for a very short time. Just as Belfast City with easyJet trying to disrupt Emerald building a solid base there.

[davidjohnson6]

I get that spoiling tactics aren't ideal... but this is one of the consequences of free market competition. In any industry, dominant players always try to squeeze out weaker players to reduce competition - airlines are no different.

No competition regulator can regulate all industries perfectly all the time - to some extent players in a market have to deal with whatever happens instead of crying to Mummy.

Or would you prefer to go back to the 1970s when every potential new route had to spend months or years waiting for a rubber stamp from a bureaucrat ?

[SWBKCB]

Don't think anybody is crying to Mummy - just pointing out the consequences of a dominant player dumping capacity to stifle competition.

If EZY are truly interested in SOU there are plenty of routes they could chose to establish themselves (FAO and ALC being good examples) rather than existing routes. SOU are more likely to lose out from this approach than Emerald or Loganair. Neither are dependant on SOU, and can move on if EZY stick around whereas SOU could end up with a worse service on key routes.

Might all be fine, just seems like an odd move from EZY.

[SKOJB]

Originally Posted by SWBKCB

Don't think anybody is crying to Mummy - just pointing out the consequences of a dominant player dumping capacity to stifle competition.

If EZY are truly interested in SOU there are plenty of routes they could chose to establish themselves (FAO and ALC being good examples) rather than existing routes. SOU are more likely to lose out from this approach than Emerald or Loganair. Neither are dependant on SOU, and can move on if EZY stick around whereas SOU could end up with a worse service on key routes.

Might all be fine, just seems like an odd move from EZY.

You may be right although I personally believe there is more behind these recent domestic announcements and easyJet are planning something bigger at the airport. They have already committed further capacity for next summer on GLA/BFS and launched ALC/FAO with probably more to follow. They are definitely looking at the bigger picture and entrenching themselves for the future, at the possible expense of all smaller players. Whether that is good for SOU I guess only time will tell but it’s early days to be suggesting the airport has gone in the wrong direction!

[cavokblues]

That's certainly a positive spin. But it's the babiest of baby steps so far.

The airport really need easy on the PMI, Malaga, Tenerife style routes. That's where the growth is, in theory.

[SKOJB]

Originally Posted by cavokblues

That's certainly a positive spin. But it's the babiest of baby steps so far.

The airport really need easy on the PMI, Malaga, Tenerife style routes. That's where the growth is, in theory.

Not really baby steps when you consider that up until recently the airport had only one orange route for the last 6 years. I do think the routes you mention will materialise sooner rather than later although I’m not saying it will happen in the next round of announcements that we are lead to believe will happen at the end of month?

[cavokblues]

1 flight per week to Faro and Alicante is, at this point, fairly underwhelming. Hopefully more to come.

[RW20]

Originally Posted by cavokblues

That's certainly a positive spin. But it's the babiest of baby steps so far.

The airport really need easy on the PMI, Malaga, Tenerife style routes. That's where the growth is, in theory.

It certainly won't be Canaries,due to runway length ,also the highly popular Turkey is out of range.
So I don't see much inroads into.the vastly expanding BOH Summer operations.

[cavokblues]

I thought someone said on here last month all distances at SOU are now longer than SEN and Easy operated SEN - TFS.