Edinburgh-4

[R T Jones]

A 787 into Naples will be interesting.

[Sotonsean]

Originally Posted by R T Jones

A 787 into Naples will be interesting.

The runway at Naples is 2,641m/8,622 feet. Why would a Boeing 787 into Naples be interesting 🤔

[GrahamK]

Originally Posted by Sk1schoolsam

Thats disappointing- would have liked to see AA back next year. Did they cancel there slots request for S24?

I don't believe they had a slot request for S24

[inOban]

I guess IAG want to funnel Scottish traffic through Dublin to support the increased frequencies and additional routes announced for S24

[Rutan16]

Originally Posted by Sk1schoolsam

Thats disappointing- would have liked to see AA back next year. Did they cancel there slots request for S24?

Looks like a leisure preference with the exception of Copenhagen

Copenhagen will have a significant Pharma business with the like of Novo Nordisk and Astra Zenica

Every other one is a cruise liner boarding point.

American can’t do anything much till the 321xlr frames are on estate in numbers that wont be till spring 2025.

[inOban]

The press release from Aer Lingus emphasises the number of US companies whose European operations are based in Eire

[Planeraz]

Originally Posted by Rutan16

Looks like a leisure preference with the exception of Copenhagen

Copenhagen will have a significant Pharma business with the like of Novo Nordisk and Astra Zenica

Every other one is a cruise liner boarding point.

American can’t do anything much till the 321xlr frames are on estate in numbers that wont be till spring 2025.

I’m hearing from reliable sources (employees at EDI) that the airport believed the PHL route was in the bag. At the last minute, the Greens in the Scottish Govt demanded that subsidies be withdrawn. AA then walked away. No one should be in any doubt that the greens/SNP are intent on destroying the aviation sector. Pure politics being played.

[laviation]

Cant destroy the Union now they are resorting to destroying Aviation !

[inOban]

Are such subsidies controlled by ScoGov? Or is it up to EDI to decide whether to offer an introductory deal?
Anyway does the aviation sector need subsidising? And should it be?

[GeorgeNTravels]

Originally Posted by Planeraz

I’m hearing from reliable sources (employees at EDI) that the airport believed the PHL route was in the bag. At the last minute, the Greens in the Scottish Govt demanded that subsidies be withdrawn. AA then walked away. No one should be in any doubt that the greens/SNP are intent on destroying the aviation sector. Pure politics being played.

Both EDI and American Airlines are private businesses operating in a non-regulated aviation system.

Subsidy money shouldn’t be a deal breaker, especially if demand is as strong as some claim, after all Philadelphia is very, very easy to reach from Washington and New York direct from EDI and from Baltimore which is accessible with PLAY from GLA.

[willy wombat]

Given that EDI is struggling (failing?) to cope with the traffic it already has (see various posts passim), there seems little logic in anyone offering new route subsidies at the moment.

[cavokblues]

There are 7 Green MSP out of 129 MSP in the Scottish Government.

With that makeup I doubt any decision to withdraw any potential subsidy is solely because of them.

[BA318]

Originally Posted by cavokblues

There are 7 Green MSP out of 129 MSP in the Scottish Government.

With that makeup I doubt any decision to withdraw any potential subsidy is solely because of them.

well it would depend upon if their support is required for anything etc. then a small group can hold a lot more power than at first glance. Like when Theresa May did the deal with the DUP.

[willy wombat]

If it is the Scottish Government dishing out subsidies (and I’ve no idea if that is true) wouldn’t it be more sensible to offer subsidies for new routes at currently underutilised GLA, or does it not work like that in SNP land?

[tartan 201]

Originally Posted by Planeraz

I’m hearing from reliable sources (employees at EDI) that the airport believed the PHL route was in the bag. At the last minute, the Greens in the Scottish Govt demanded that subsidies be withdrawn. AA then walked away. No one should be in any doubt that the greens/SNP are intent on destroying the aviation sector. Pure politics being played.

The Bute House Agreement covers the grounds of co-operation between the SNP and the Scottish Greens. It can be read here.

There are several matters excluded from the agreement, where the two parties agree to take different views. One of those excluded matters states:

Recognising that an agreement to collaborate and cooperation on budgets and matters of supply does not prevent us from having different visions for the long-term future of Scotland’s economy and on support for certain sectors, aviation policy (except in respect of island aviation connectivity and Highlands and Islands Airports Limited), the future of green ports, and direct financial support to businesses involved in the aerospace, defence and security sectors are excluded from this agreement.

How could the Scottish Greens "demand that subsidies be withdrawn" on a matter that is specifically excluded from their cooperation agreement?

[tartan 201]

Originally Posted by willy wombat

If it is the Scottish Government dishing out subsidies (and I’ve no idea if that is true) wouldn’t it be more sensible to offer subsidies for new routes at currently underutilised GLA, or does it not work like that in SNP land?

​​​I think any subsidies are more along the lines of marketing support via Visit Scotland to support new routes in their initial years of operation. Hence it's a means of supporting routes that airlines want to operate rather than a means of directing routes to airports that have underutilised capacity.
​​​​

[ld0595]

I'm struggling to believe that to be honest.​​​​​​ I would've thought any sort of subsidy for a route that previously existed and operated successfully would've been in the hands of Edinburgh Airport, not the Scottish Government.

If it was the case, I'm sure we'd be hearing from Gordon Dewar crying foul in a couple of days.

​​​​​​I'm sure someone could also put in an FOI to get to the bottom of it if he doesn't say anything.

[cavokblues]

Also, wouldn't there have to be an official tender for the route as per the PSO lifeline routes?

I know the SNP aren't exactly great with managing their own funds but if a subsidy was going under the radar like this - the other political parties would be saying something, surely?

[SWBKCB]

If there is anything in the story it will be as Tartan201 says, market support for new routes rather than anything like a PSO. Maybe with a limited pool of funds, it's been decided that another US route isn't a priority? So a tourism issue rather than aviation policy.

[VickersVicount]

I don’t think there should be any government subsidies in this day and age for non essential routes to areas already well served. The east coast has three flights a day!
‘Visit Scotland’ is the only part if that rumour you need to know…
Interesting the route needed subsidy to make it worthwhile if true… Wonder how landscape will change when all the other subsidies run out…