Flybe-V2
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Nantgarw
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: BMA
Posts: 989
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for the picture, that’s the problem with using the name of a bankrupt carrier.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: BMA
Posts: 989
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Sunny spain
Posts: 786
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When you look at the delays from Birmingham today and the cost of eu261 claims for the dozens of flight cancelled over the coming weeks you wonder how they can afford this.
correct me if I am wrong but I was under the impression Birmingham is their hub however there doesn't seem to be much of a schedule from this airport
correct me if I am wrong but I was under the impression Birmingham is their hub however there doesn't seem to be much of a schedule from this airport
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 59
Posts: 3,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BHX
When you look at the delays from Birmingham today and the cost of eu261 claims for the dozens of flight cancelled over the coming weeks you wonder how they can afford this.
correct me if I am wrong but I was under the impression Birmingham is their hub however there doesn't seem to be much of a schedule from this airport
correct me if I am wrong but I was under the impression Birmingham is their hub however there doesn't seem to be much of a schedule from this airport
- they operated a whole sector yesterday from BHX
. Okay A few months ago they planned 10 and in the end managed just 1 inbound Belfast City but 4 sectors at least (EDI & GLA) were cancelled more than 2 weeks in advance.Still another day to forget for Flybe at BHX and worse still, one cancellation was Amsterdam a route they are doing well on and the competitors have slashed frequencies so little chance of pax getting back into BHX at the end of half-term. The worrying aspect to me is that Flybe couldn't find a suitable airline to sub-in on that would have been full inbound and a decent outbound load as well, of course if that was considered. On the bright side all 6 sectors operated today, okay none anywhere near their schedule timings but an improvement on Sunday
Pete
Looking ahead to what is planned by March, they will need at least 10 airframes to cover all the early morning departures. Quite a tight program of mostly 8 sector days so presumably mainly 4 sector days for crews. Mostly out and backs so fairly simple but not a lot of spare down time so I wonder if they will have twisted the money man's arm enough by then for a crewed spare. If so, things might settle, and it could be quite efficient by then if they get it right. It certainly looks like there will be more possibilities from SOU but I guess the bigger picture will depend on what sort of alliances they are negotiating (if any). If there is to be a further spat with Logan, I imagine that will start around SOU. There are still quite a few single rotation routes which surely will have to be built upon to become viable.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the things I don’t understand about Flybe v 2 is why they need to schedule so tightly - I am referring to the comment above about lots of 8 sector days. Traditionally there are 2 basic approaches to scheduling. Either 1/ you have new, very reliable aircraft which you can work hard and which you need to because the fixed cost of the aircraft (lease or whatever) is high and the unit needs to fly a lot of hours to cover these costs or 2/ you use older aircraft which are much cheaper. You don’t therefore need to fly them as hard to cover the fixed cost and instead accept that more of you costs will be variable (hours related maintenance, fuel etc). You accept that these older aircraft will be less reliable than newer aircraft but that’s an acceptable trade off because you can afford a much looser schedule and back up aircraft (the greatest ever exponent of this approach was probably Dan Air with the comet).
So, it’s quite a while since I was actively involved in leasing aircraft but I imagine Dash 8 400s are not expensive (unless lessors perceive Flybe v 2 to be so high risk that they need a very long barge pole to touch them). As such, given that there are clearly a number of contributors to this thread who either work for or have a vested interest in Flybe v 2, could one of them explain exactly why they are pursuing the strange business model of trying to intensively operate cheap, unreliable aircraft rather than going for a more relaxed and thus more reliable schedule?
So, it’s quite a while since I was actively involved in leasing aircraft but I imagine Dash 8 400s are not expensive (unless lessors perceive Flybe v 2 to be so high risk that they need a very long barge pole to touch them). As such, given that there are clearly a number of contributors to this thread who either work for or have a vested interest in Flybe v 2, could one of them explain exactly why they are pursuing the strange business model of trying to intensively operate cheap, unreliable aircraft rather than going for a more relaxed and thus more reliable schedule?
There are some simple steps they could take.
1. Don't keep announcing new routes if you have continually had problems securing aircraft on time. Have a decent buffer of time between aircraft due to arrive and operate (of course this costs money but its better than continually destroying your brand) and if the plane doesn't come or seems highly unlikely with two weeks to go then postpone (at least cancelling more than 2 weeks in advance you won't have to pay compensation to all the passengers who did book)
2. Lease in support to cover for delayed aircraft (surely the leasing contract should have some kind of clause to cover such needs if it is as we are told and all the lessors fault - and if it is delayed aircraft why completely scrap the route rather than just postpone.
1. Don't keep announcing new routes if you have continually had problems securing aircraft on time. Have a decent buffer of time between aircraft due to arrive and operate (of course this costs money but its better than continually destroying your brand) and if the plane doesn't come or seems highly unlikely with two weeks to go then postpone (at least cancelling more than 2 weeks in advance you won't have to pay compensation to all the passengers who did book)
2. Lease in support to cover for delayed aircraft (surely the leasing contract should have some kind of clause to cover such needs if it is as we are told and all the lessors fault - and if it is delayed aircraft why completely scrap the route rather than just postpone.
In terms of 2, again perhaps a commercial decision based on lack of bookings (where it would make no sense to go to the expense of a lease-in - depending on how much of that a lessor may or may not cover)
I'd like to see Flybe 2 succeed, but in some respects at least they're not helping themselves by making a better job of managing the headwinds they currently face.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: BMA
Posts: 989
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And now they’ve announced Belfast - Newcastle and Newcastle - Heathrow from 7 Nov. So all this blame about leasing issues is not true as they evidently have aircraft available just a week later.
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: 41000ft
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by cavokblues; 1st Nov 2022 at 12:21.
Utter desperation strategy, hoping against hope someone solvent will pay them to just go away. I mean LHR-NCL on a Q400 against BA is adding nothing new to the market. Their whole core strategy seems to be to make life a massive pain for others hoping there'll be a pay out before the money runs out, they're trashing what goodwill was left from the original brand. Now if they'd tried NCL-LGW and gone all in to to market a niche new option then fair play, but the train is the better option on Newcastle-London and BA does OK on connections to long haul making the balance.
Cancellation of flying from Isle of Man statement
Cancellation of flying from Isle of Man statement
Flybe cancels planned winter schedule from Isle of Man
Due to further delays with planned aircraft deliveries, Flybe has decided not to proceed with its inaugural services to the Isle of Man that were scheduled to begin on 30th October 2022.
As a result, Flybe will be cancelling all flights currently scheduled from the Isle of Man to London Heathrow and Belfast City this winter.
Flybe deeply regrets the inconvenience that will be caused to passengers affected by this decision. The airline will provide full refunds, as well as applicable compensation, to all those impacted by these unexpected cancellations. Passengers can claim refunds by following the link provided in their cancellation email.
Flybe has been forced to take this decision due to additional delays in the delivery of planned de Havilland Dash-8 400 aircraft.
Due to further delays with planned aircraft deliveries, Flybe has decided not to proceed with its inaugural services to the Isle of Man that were scheduled to begin on 30th October 2022.
As a result, Flybe will be cancelling all flights currently scheduled from the Isle of Man to London Heathrow and Belfast City this winter.
Flybe deeply regrets the inconvenience that will be caused to passengers affected by this decision. The airline will provide full refunds, as well as applicable compensation, to all those impacted by these unexpected cancellations. Passengers can claim refunds by following the link provided in their cancellation email.
Flybe has been forced to take this decision due to additional delays in the delivery of planned de Havilland Dash-8 400 aircraft.
