Edinburgh-4

[ld0595]

Originally Posted by nighthawk117

Although it is interesting that BA brought the 787 up to Edinburgh prior to launch.

Wasn't that done for crew training purposes though? I recall them bringing it to Glasgow in 2016 as well.

[Planeraz]

Originally Posted by nighthawk117

Not on their own metal, but AA will be back soon to pick up those that dont want to go via LHR.

Although it is interesting that BA brought the 787 up to Edinburgh prior to launch. I dont expect any long haul - but Im surprised they havent done more from Edinburgh with the CityFlyer fleet.

Visit Scotland, businesses and EDI have been “networking” in the Dallas metroplex for the past few months. TV commercials from visit Scotland. I’m led to believe that a direct route with AA to/from DFW is under discussion. DFW is their mega hub with another terminal being constructed. Massive potential for additional growth.
https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/business...ments/3258817/

[Sk1schoolsam]

Originally Posted by nighthawk117

Not on their own metal, but AA will be back soon to pick up those that dont want to go via LHR.

Although it is interesting that BA brought the 787 up to Edinburgh prior to launch. I dont expect any long haul - but Im surprised they havent done more from Edinburgh with the CityFlyer fleet.

IMO Don’t ever foresee London Airways (sorry British Airways) putting on TALA or long haul from EDI, MAN or GLA again unless code share on someone else’s metal. We don’t even have BA feeder flights to their LGW flights.

Will AA return with PHL or other next year??

Would be great if more Cityflyer destinations come in the future; although from experience when they run late on Sunday causes havoc with the LCY schedule on Monday am! (Min flight crew rest periods.)

[pabely]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

don't you mean the M4, or the M23?

Those don't have a Max pax capacity rule. The one off the M1 does but theoretical could go to 21m with some terminal add-ins. It has recently had 4 more stands built, 3 more under construction and areas marked out for 7 more.

[tartan 201]

US route passenger numbers for June, with %age split US/non-US citizens:

• ATL 12,601 88%/12%
• BOS 11,156 82%/18%
• ORD 9,966 87%/13%
• JFK 11,782 72%/28%
• EWR 17,046 71%/29%
• MCO 1,460 17%/83%
• IAD 9,740 84%/16%

Impressive first full month for the ATL service.

Same data for May:

• ATL 2,566 90%/10%
• BOS 8,479 87/%13%
• ORD 7,956 83/%17%
• JFK 13.062 79%/21%
• EWR 11,262 67%/33%
• IAD 7,980 83%/17%

​

[A350Saltire]

Great start for ATL long may it continue.

[Planeraz]

Originally Posted by tartan 201

US route passenger numbers for June, with %age split US/non-US citizens:

• ATL 12,601 88%/12%
• BOS 11,156 82%/18%
• ORD 9,966 87%/13%
• JFK 11,782 72%/28%
• EWR 17,046 71%/29%
• MCO 1,460 17%/83%
• IAD 9,740 84%/16%

Impressive first full month for the ATL service.

Same data for May:

• ATL 2,566 90%/10%
• BOS 8,479 87/%13%
• ORD 7,956 83/%17%
• JFK 13.062 79%/21%
• EWR 11,262 67%/33%
• IAD 7,980 83%/17%

​

Some impressive pax numbers. As highlighted in previous posts, the Atlanta route has performed very strongly. DL will surely start earlier in S24. Conditions and metal availability allowing, this must be a route EDI will target to turn into year round in some form. If pre clearance is secured at EDI, this must be one of the target routes to grow moving forward.

Some approx LF’s for June based on the totals shown above. N.B. United Newark and Washington routes did have a small number of cancellations in June.

Delta

ATL - 99%
JFK - 98%
BOS - 92%

United

EWR - 94%
ORD - 97%
IAD - 97%

Virgin

MCO - 76%

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Guys that's wildly US-centric, the exchange rate needs to favour the dollar for that to continue BUT it does mean lots of high spending US visitors for Scotland. Thanks for posting!
Might also explain MAN's relative struggle to get back the US majors and why Aer Lingus and Virgin are the operating carriers as they take the British stateside on holiday more?

[tartan 201]

Originally Posted by Skipness One Foxtrot

Guys that's wildly US-centric, the exchange rate needs to favour the dollar for that to continue BUT it does mean lots of high spending US visitors for Scotland. Thanks for posting!

Thankfully, there's up to 330 million of 'em! The June data for the US carriers at DUB shows an almost identical split between US and non-US citizens as above for EDI. (Numbers below relate just to passengers carried by US-flagged carriers and so exclude, for example, EI and ET):

• ATL: 19,732 87%/13% (daily DL A359)
• BOS: 12,768 82%/18% (daily DL 763)
• JFK: 11,997 76%/24% (daily DL 763)
• EWR: 25,080 73%/27% (daily UA 777 and 757)
• IAD: 12,002 80%/20% (daily UA 764)

Originally Posted by Skipness One Foxtrot

Might also explain MAN's relative struggle to get back the US majors and why Aer Lingus and Virgin are the operating carriers as they take the British stateside on holiday more?

% US citizens / non-US citizens for June for MAN (all carriers):

• ATL: 51%/49% (markedly more non-US than DUB or EDI)
• IAH: 65%/35%
• JFK: 75%/25% (similar to DUB and EDI)
• MCO: 85%/15% (similar to EDI)

Originally Posted by Planeraz

Some impressive pax numbers. As highlighted in previous posts, the Atlanta route has performed very strongly. DL will surely start earlier in S24. Conditions and metal availability allowing, this must be a route EDI will target to turn into year round in some form

ATL's currently on sale from 23rd May next year, which is around the same time it started this year. Given they chopped JFK for most of January to March next year, I can't see them attempting a year-round ATL (would be great if I was wrong) but I wonder if they may start it earlier.

[Planeraz]

ATL's currently on sale from 23rd May next year, which is around the same time it started this year. Given they chopped JFK for most of January to March next year, I can't see them attempting a year-round ATL (would be great if I was wrong) but I wonder if they may start it earlier.[/QUOTE]

Given that (for now) VS have MCO on sale from Apr 24, I’d be surprised if DL don’t re-start ATL earlier than S23. Another interesting thing to note is that, again for now, DL is using more premium heavy 763’s on all their routes next year. All destinations offer premium select or premium economy.

[VickersVicount]

I can’t recall if DL ATL was ever attempted year round when it last operated.
Current boom time US summer leisure bubble doesn't translate to year round route success, it never has done even at best of times. Just look at the numbers for stalwart NYC and DL’s decision to cut some of that.

[Breathe]

Pretty impressive numbers, especially from the restarted ATL route. As Skipness One Foxtrot mentions, I wonder how this will fair long term given the relatively low USD/GBP exchange rate. In the meantime, it's great to see these routes doing well.

[Downwind_Left]

Originally Posted by nivsy

Perhaps it's time BA looked at some direct transatlantic flights from EDI. Ha who am I kidding....London Airways doing that?! 🫣🤭

BA don’t have the right cost base, or appropriately configured aircraft, to make such a flight work. However the success of Aer Lingus UK in MAN have proven the model to IAG, and if the group saw merit in point to point trans Atlantic from EDI I’m sure that would be their chosen instrument.

Given that Aer Lingus are part of the Atlantic JV with American, BA, Finnair and Iberia, all the airlines share the revenues and bear their proportion of the costs… it doesn’t matter whether the aircraft is green or blue. Using the most appropriate equipment with the right configuration and cost base is the overriding factor.

[Sk1schoolsam]

DUB

• ATL: 19,732 87%/13% (daily DL A359)
• BOS: 12,768 82%/18% (daily DL 763)
• JFK: 11,997 76%/24% (daily DL 763)
• EWR: 25,080 73%/27% (daily UA 777 and 757)
• IAD: 12,002 80%/20% (daily UA 764)

In comparison with smaller aircraft on the routes I think EDI is holding its own.
I wonder if UA and Delta will ever increase the aircraft size and capacity on EWR and ATL similar to DUB in 24?

[Flightrider]

Interesting numbers. The only point to make is that you can still lose money flying at 100% load factors if the yields are on the floor. I was led to believe that at least one of the above routes is not in a good place for that very reason.

[Breathe]

Originally Posted by Sk1schoolsam

In comparison with smaller aircraft on the routes I think EDI is holding its own.
I wonder if UA and Delta will ever increase the aircraft size and capacity on EWR and ATL similar to DUB in 24?

A few more seasons of Outlander, a popular reception for the new Harry Potter TV series and who knows? If the Highlander reboot ever happens then they'll have to send an A380 over.

[tartan 201]

Originally Posted by Flightrider

Interesting numbers. The only point to make is that you can still lose money flying at 100% load factors if the yields are on the floor. I was led to believe that at least one of the above routes is not in a good place for that very reason.

Presumably an airline wouldn't persist with such a route at EDI as it surely wouldn't be difficult for them to find something more profitable to do with that aircraft? As I type, everything that's operating this summer is on sale for next summer (MCO with a longer season) although a lot can change between now and then. This summer ATL went from five-weekly to daily before launch, a second daily EWR was added and a 764 was allocated to the weekend IAD flights. Those developments don't suggest that those routes are 'not in a good place', although without access to the figures one can only surmise things from the airlines' actions.

This article quotes Gordon Dewar saying "One American airline said Edinburgh was the most profitable first year it ever had on a transatlantic route". It would be quite a contrast in fortunes for one route to perform at that level and another to be 'not in a good place' and with yields on the floor. In light of your comments it will be interesting to see if what's currently on sale for next summer actually operates.

[Flightrider]

I agree. It will be interesting. I suspect two routes from the above list won't be here next summer, but we'll simply have to wait and see.

There is also the not-insignificant issue that the facilities at Edinburgh are operating well beyond any reasoned assessment of their capacity - the place is beyond dreadful at the moment for everything ranging from security queues to baggage performance to handling agents. It simply cannot cope with the levels of traffic trying to be forced through the building. By rights, it should be a Level 3 slot coordinated airport with a proper capacity assessment, but the airport will no doubt fight that tooth and nail whilst they're trying to pump up the passenger flows to maximise shareholder value.

[tictack67]

Originally Posted by Flightrider

Interesting numbers. The only point to make is that you can still lose money flying at 100% load factors if the yields are on the floor. I was led to believe that at least one of the above routes is not in a good place for that very reason.

who or what has led you to believe this?

Airlines are ruthless at cutting non profitable routes.

The idea an airline is using aircraft on a non yeild performing route in the height of summer, when it could be using them on more profitable routes, sorry you've been misled

[Flightrider]

If you have already got high passenger volumes booked but at low yields, the impact of cancelling mid-season makes the change not worthwhile as the cost of re-protecting those customers over other routes is high. You also can't switch capacity at such short notice to another route, as you don't have the sales lead time for that to take effect. So therefore, you tough it out until you have the opportunity to exit, perhaps when an initial support package of funding to support a new route either expires completely or becomes less attractive. It's not quite as immediate a process as you seem to suggest when you're in mid-season. For a short term period, you've made your bed and have to lay in it.