Edinburgh-4

[SWBKCB]

Edinburgh Airport has been ‘flooded’ with piles of unclaimed luggage, after baggage delays saw passengers forced to go home without their items.

Some passengers have taken to social media to complain about Scotland's busiest airport being full of baggage. One posted photos of baggage piled up in the terminal and told the Evening News the airport was ‘flooded’ on Thursday with cases and bags.

Airport bosses advised passengers to contact handlers directly. A spokesperson for Edinburgh Airport said: “The transportation, delivery and secure storage of baggage is the responsibility of handling agent companies which are contracted by airlines. As an airport we will continue to support our partners where we can, and this includes by sourcing and providing additional resource for them.”

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.c...uggage-4244486

[GoEDI]

Not entirely the case, as I believe a lot of the bags are rush bags (ie unaccompanied, hence them being unclaimed) being sent from other airports, most likely caused by misconnects at hubs. The sheer volume of them appears to be too much for the handling agents to cope with. Yes they should be getting managed better at EDI, but they are unlikely to have bargained on hundreds of rush bags being sent in each day because the airlines are failing to manage their hub connections better. Just another sign of the disruption industry wide currently, I would wager a lot are off the US flights.

[Planeraz]

New US routes

Before flying out of EDI to LHR this morning and chatting to a couple of BA gate agents, they mentioned that a route to LAX and a TX airport is very much being talked about the airport. A couple of airlines is in talks. One of the agents is a long term employee at the airport who I’ve known for a number of years. This is of course speculation, but not new. If true, realistically, it could be UA to Houston or AA to DFW. LAX, I really don’t know who with.

[Flightrider]

It sounds from many of the postings above as though they have a serious job to do to sort out the infrastructure before piling more growth into peak times. Taking the airport to Level 3 slot coordination sounds to be eminently sensible but one suspects this wouldn't fit with the airport's agenda as it would constrain growth.

With one existing TATL link being described as a low-yield basketcase by those working for the airline in question and another related operation not exactly achieving loadfactors becoming of the size of the aircraft deployed, it will be fascinating to see whether capacity increases or declines next year, regardless of the airport's ability to cope with it.

[laviation]

Makes the most sense for UA to both IAH and LAX.
AA will re-enter EDI from PHL
BA, VS no chance
DL have other hubs to start from (cough cough Detroit)

[Exasperated]

Originally Posted by Flightrider

It sounds from many of the postings above as though they have a serious job to do to sort out the infrastructure before piling more growth into peak times. Taking the airport to Level 3 slot coordination sounds to be eminently sensible but one suspects this wouldn't fit with the airport's agenda as it would constrain growth.

With one existing TATL link being described as a low-yield basketcase by those working for the airline in question and another related operation not exactly achieving loadfactors becoming of the size of the aircraft deployed, it will be fascinating to see whether capacity increases or declines next year, regardless of the airport's ability to cope with it.

This comment on Airliners.net was only relating to O&D traffic and the following was then added

I think its important to note that these numbers do not say how good or bad a route preforms, only how well the route preforms on O&D alone. DL could be pulling high numbers of high yielding connections. That only DL has access to.

Makes a big difference.

Ex

[Flightrider]

I don't read the a.net forums - what I'm hearing came directly from someone at the airline in question. And yes, what you say is correct in that connections can make a difference but it's very rare that connections are higher yield than O&D traffic.

[VickersVicount]

Originally Posted by Flightrider

I don't read the a.net forums - what I'm hearing came directly from someone at the airline in question.

Wonder what these routes are in question? IAD, ATL and /or YYC yields would be interesting Id guess despite fag packet load figures.
Can’t see Detroit or LAX any time soon.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

No US network carrier will add LAX get your heads out of the clouds. It's a delusion, it's not a hub for any of them, a focus city for all but predicated on O&D. United are huge at SFO but there's not enough UK traffic to make that work IMHO. Use DUB as your guide and stop looking at LHR, neither DTW nor IAH are offered into Ireland.

If American do rejoin the party at EDI, one of the existing Delta / United routes will be consolidate or dropped. You can't keep adding net new forever, something will pop. As the United B757 fleet continues to age and become unreliable, expect one of the four daily to be looked at closely.

[tartan 201]

Originally Posted by Skipness One Foxtrot

Any return of American is likely the point that someone else downsizes, net new can't go on forever, bubbles tend to pop.

Originally Posted by Skipness One Foxtrot

If American do rejoin the party at EDI, one of the existing Delta / United routes will be consolidate or dropped. You can't keep adding net new forever, something will pop. As the United B757 fleet continues to age and become unreliable, expect one of the four daily to be looked at closely.

Are we certain that we're in a bubble though? If we are then it hasn't yet inflated to 2019 proportions. Comparing EDI/GLA<>US route passenger numbers for January-May 2023 with the same period in 2019 shows that the number of passengers this year is down about 13% compared to 2019 (data below). The key change is that previously the central Scotland-USA market was split 80:20 EDI:GLA and so far this year it's split 96:4

Originally Posted by Skipness One Foxtrot

Part of me wants to dampen down excitable chatter BUT I always think of Dublin when I was growing up with two Aer Lingus B747s out to BOS and JFK via SNN where NWO also flew onto PIK. Same old slog year after year for ages. Over time, that long haul market changed massively for the better and the dead seasonality has been evened out. Perhaps something similar is finally happening to Scotland, long overdue and without a based flag carrier to help. Sometimes we don't believe change can happen even as we live through it. It would be interesting to see the pull factor EDI now exerts all the way from NCL and the borders to Ayrshire and beyond. United don't need to serve GLA/NCL anymore if they can pull traffic to EDI.
I grew up watching the NW/AC/AA/BA/UA bubble burst at GLA in the '90s, perhaps this is finally the real deal in growth?

I suppose it's only in hindsight that we'll be able to tell if the current period is a bubble or the 'real deal'.

Originally Posted by Flightrider

It sounds from many of the postings above as though they have a serious job to do to sort out the infrastructure before piling more growth into peak times. Taking the airport to Level 3 slot coordination sounds to be eminently sensible but one suspects this wouldn't fit with the airport's agenda as it would constrain growth.

With one existing TATL link being described as a low-yield basketcase by those working for the airline in question and another related operation not exactly achieving loadfactors becoming of the size of the aircraft deployed, it will be fascinating to see whether capacity increases or declines next year, regardless of the airport's ability to cope with it.

The "operation not exactly achieving loadfactors becoming of the size of the aircraft deployed" could refer to VS's MCO service, although one would expect higher load factors for the remainder of the summer than those reported earlier for June. A "related operation" to that could be one of DL's three routes (JFK, BOS and ATL). Of those, BOS started three weeks earlier this year than last and operates daily this year rather than five-weekly last year. The frequency of ATL was increased from five-weekly to daily prior to the first flight. None of those would be rational actions for a route if an airline considered that route to be "a low-yield basketcase". So that leaves DL's JFK route or one of UA's routes (they doubled the frequency of EWR this summer compared to last so that would presumably fail the 'rational action' test too).

[Planeraz]

Wizz Air

It is being reported that Wizz have removed EDI-Tirana from sale. No surprise at all. Classic Wizz behaviour. Ryanair flights remain on sale - for now, with the flights operate subject to regulatory approval message still showing.

[pabely]

Originally Posted by Planeraz

Wizz Air

It is being reported that Wizz have removed EDI-Tirana from sale. No surprise at all. Classic Wizz behaviour. Ryanair flights remain on sale - for now.

Operation by Ryanair UK so probally aircraft doing a STN - EDI - TIA - EDI - STN route.

[natmci]

Originally Posted by pabely

Operation by Ryanair UK so probally aircraft doing a STN - EDI - TIA - EDI - STN route.

There's a couple G- reg Ryanair UK frames at EDI now so probably using those rather than STN based, they're needed for non-EU routes such as TIA and RAK and the domestics to BOH, STN and NQY where EU registered AC can't be used

[pabely]

Originally Posted by natmci

There's a couple G- reg Ryanair UK frames at EDI now so probably using those rather than STN based, they're needed for non-EU routes such as TIA and RAK and the domestics to BOH, STN and NQY where EU registered AC can't be used

Never noticed the RUK presence! That makes sense then.

[GeorgeNTravels]

Originally Posted by Planeraz

Wizz Air

It is being reported that Wizz have removed EDI-Tirana from sale. No surprise at all. Classic Wizz behaviour. Ryanair flights remain on sale - for now, with the flights operate subject to regulatory approval message still showing.

A thought I just had about WIZZ and all of the Tirana - UK flights they announced, how on earth were they ever going to operate them.

Neither Albania nor the UK are members of the EU, therefore WIZZ (based in Hungary) and WIZZ Air Malta couldn't touch them as they are both EU based, for obvious reasons WIZZ Abu Dhabi couldn't touch them either, leaving just WIZZ UK. However, as these routes were TIA-based and not UK based they couldn't be operated by WIZZ UK.

Did WIZZ put them on sale not noticing or did they hope some form of deal could be reached about operating them? That's why Ryanair have been ok so far as they are UK based and operated by RUK.

[tartan 201]

Originally Posted by GeorgeNTravels

A thought I just had about WIZZ and all of the Tirana - UK flights they announced, how on earth were they ever going to operate them.

Others had the same thought - see the Wizzair thread: Wizzair-3

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

• Atlanta: 13,166 85% / 15%
• Boston: 12,420 79% / 21%
• Chicago: 10,344 82% / 18%
• New York JFK: 12,520 68% / 32%
• Newark: 17,844 68% / 32%
• Orlando: 6,372 15% / 85%
• Washington: 10,789 80% / 20%

[Planeraz]

Originally Posted by GeorgeNTravels

A thought I just had about WIZZ and all of the Tirana - UK flights they announced, how on earth were they ever going to operate them.

Neither Albania nor the UK are members of the EU, therefore WIZZ (based in Hungary) and WIZZ Air Malta couldn't touch them as they are both EU based, for obvious reasons WIZZ Abu Dhabi couldn't touch them either, leaving just WIZZ UK. However, as these routes were TIA-based and not UK based they couldn't be operated by WIZZ UK.

Did WIZZ put them on sale not noticing or did they hope some form of deal could be reached about operating them? That's why Ryanair have been ok so far as they are UK based and operated by RUK.

Tough on anyone who booked with Wizz. This is classic behaviour from them. They’ve done this so many times before with other routes, that in turn never start. They are also notoriously slow in refunding cash. I would never give them my business.

[GeorgeNTravels]

Originally Posted by Planeraz

Tough on anyone who booked with Wizz. This is classic behaviour from them. They’ve done this so many times before with other routes, that in turn never start. They are also notoriously slow in refunding cash. I would never give them my business.

Very true, the record for me is I booked BUD-EDI with them and they cancelled it 17 minutes after booking then tried to say I wasn’t entitled to a refund.

[GoEDI]

Originally Posted by tartan 201

Others had the same thought - see the Wizzair thread: Wizzair-3

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

• Atlanta: 13,166 85% / 15%
• Boston: 12,420 79% / 21%
• Chicago: 10,344 82% / 18%
• New York JFK: 12,520 68% / 32%
• Newark: 17,844 68% / 32%
• Orlando: 6,372 15% / 85%
• Washington: 10,789 80% / 20%

Those July figures give the following loads:

ATL- 94%
BOS- 89%
JFK- 89%

EWR- 89% - hard to get an accurate figure when this route is such a mess operationally. Cancellations accounted for, but not aircraft subs, this is based on all B752.
IAD- 93%
ORD- 95%

MCO- 89%

Whilst yields and route profitability are a different matter, it doesn't appear to me that any of the routes are "not exactly achieving load factors becoming of the size of the aircraft deployed", so I would certainly challenge that statement now.

Non-US pax total of just under 25k for the month. Yet some quarters will have you believe current there is next to no demand from non-US pax currently...

[Planeraz]

Qatar W23

QR making changes to operational aircraft for W23. Although subject to additional changes, 788 will continue to operate both flights up to and including 1st December. A359 showing as operating both flights from 2nd December.

Economy (inbound) for first 2 weeks in September is virtually sold out. Expect aircraft changes (773/351) on certain days during this period. Presumably boosted by students traveling for start of uni terms.