PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Airlines, Airports & Routes (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes-85/)
-   -   BIRMINGHAM (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes/154464-birmingham.html)

we_never_change 4th Dec 2004 21:42

Alitalia will be using an ERJ145 on the twice daily service during Feb '05 with the A319 being used in the Summer.

Anybody knows what Skyways will be using next year? They are to get rid of the ERJ145s (believe two have already gone from the fleet) & it has been rumoured that they are looking at Fokker 100s or that SAS (who they currently codeshare with) will operate the service with a B736.

Any news who will replace FlyBE on the BHX-CDG from April 1st (the current agreement between Air France & Flybe ends on 31st March & will not be renewed by mutual agreement)? Various rumours floating around, Air France will operate the service themselves using A318/319, City Ireland with 146s or Regional/Britair with ERJ145/CRJ.

What BHX could do with (& it's not a long haul!!) is an Eastern European carrier such as Transaero, Air Baltic etc to tap into this growing market.

Last point, BHX accepted various diversions today from Coventry, an Atlantic Electa & a Pa34 on cargo flights, a Hapag Lloyd B737, a Thomsonfly B737 & an Atlantic ATR42 all on passenger flights. Not that bad as people occasionally complain that BHX usually turns diversions away :ok:

WNC

future_pilot17 4th Dec 2004 22:40

BHX definatley needs a runway extension, no questions asked to attract more long haul services. The managment seem to want to settle to be the small airport between MAN and LHR/LGW, it can be more than that and long haul services that start here do well, all you have to do is look at EK and CO.:ok:
Aside from that though there are other important issues with T1 such as more gates to handle larger aircraft and this will have to be addressed in the future, they have started work recently though. When i was there on Tuesday i could see them building a new taxiway of RWY 15 and aswell as that they are going to build a high-speed turn-off taxiway.
They could also do with a new satillite pier similer to the one's they have at STN. Have to remeber though this all comes at a cost and i think the airport are prioritising at the moment and i believ the new taxiways being built are a good idea. I think a runway extension is needed in under 10 years at maximum.

we_never_change 4th Dec 2004 22:53

There ISN'T going to be a high speed exit off the current runway at BHX, where would they put it?

At the end of 33 you have the A & B exits, then the 06/24 turnoff, then E at the end & then you have the current exit being constructed which doesn't leave much (if any) room for a high speed exit.

The exit currently being built was to be a high speed exit but with the desired angle, there wouldn't have been enough space for it to fit in between R15 & Taxiway E so it is now just a conventional exit just like all the others :hmm:

WNC

future_pilot17 4th Dec 2004 23:31

I wasn't talking about the end of RWY 33????

I saw the new taxiway being built towards the end of RWY 15 from the viewing area, that still leaves room before that new taxiway and the RWY 24/6 cross-over. IF! that was built it could lead to the main taxiway infront of T1. Either way even if one taxiway was built its good news as most aircraft miss the last turnoff being RWY 24/6 and have to taxi all the way to the end.

we_never_change 5th Dec 2004 00:09


I wasn't talking about the end of RWY 33????
Neither was I, I was just stating all the exits of 15/33 on the terminal side.

Unfortunetly, the area between the 16/24 runway & where the new exit is being created is where the ILS Glidepath beacon (for 33) is located so no chance of a high speed exit going there!

Aswell as the current construction of the new runway exit, some of the taxiways are being widened so that ALL the taxiways (on the terminal side) can take B777-300 type aircraft. I understand that when Emirates used a B773 in BHX, it could only use certain taxiways due to its size.

WNC

runway14141414 5th Dec 2004 08:00

==============================================
They could also do with a new satillite pier similer to the one's they have at STN. Have to remeber though this all comes at a cost and i think the airport are prioritising at the moment and i believ the new taxiways being built are a good idea. I think a runway extension is needed in under 10 years at maximum.
==============================================


There was I think £290 million for the Millenium link/Satellite pier upgrade which due to 9/11 wasn't completed so some funds must remain. It wouldn't be enough for the whole package but would make a decent start.

30W 5th Dec 2004 09:48

The new Twy 'C' that is under construction is quoted as being a 'Fast Turn-Off Taxiway' by BIA. The angle it is designed as however, is such that realistically we can't exit on it at any higher speed than we can at the R/W end, as we currently do. The ONLY advantage is that the exit will be reached quicker than the R/W end, so perhaps about 20secs of R/W time will be saved. A full RET would have been better, but is not possible given the run off length needed.

It's disadvantege is that it's use ties up TWY 'E' so further reducing ATC's ability to juggle ground movements. BHX is already ground movement limited due to it's poor cul de sac system, and this WILL make matters worse. R/W capacity is only worth having if you can move aircraft to/from it to serve that capacity. BHX fails in that respect. Expansion will only make the issue worse as the stand/terminal expansion proposed is purely an extension on the current structure.

The current R/W extension is YEARS away, and will be subject to a FULL Public Enquiry. Commercially NEMA wins every time until then. Firstly, I can do the same long haul flight from NEMA and carry in addition to my pax, 10 tonnes of revenue cargo. Secondly BIA's fees are more costly than NEMA's, so sadly my airlines long haul work will all be done from NEMA. If the airport wanted to compete it could offer much reduced fees for long haul routes, but chooses not to(it would still make money from these passengers due to retail sales) - it will therefore suffer. Wish it were not so, but it does make commercial sense to NOT use BHX.

Daza 5th Dec 2004 12:12

bhx NEGATIVITY
 
Negative comments about or own airport!! No wander that people who support MAN and its shell suited ALC bound passengers scoff we put this airport down our selves!!!

AZ plan to operate mxp 2x daily with a319 if pax numbers continue. BA are planning to expand @bhx this summer also. We have BMI Babys biggest base which aim to carry 1 million pax per year Flybe chose BHX to launch its new aircraft. GF will commence and by looking at some fares on expedia it looks as if some seats have already been sold. EK are to start 2x daily after only a few years of ops. I also know that the airport have at least 2 more major summer starter airlines to announce!!
Daza

future_pilot17 5th Dec 2004 12:39

I'm not being negative, i know we have all those operators starting next year and thats great especially with GF's arrival and Flybe's expansion:ok: :) , all i was saying was that runway length "might" of put off some airlines from operating from here.
Go BHX!!!

GrahamK 5th Dec 2004 15:47


No wander that people who support MAN and its shell suited ALC bound passengers scoff we put this airport down our selves!!!
BHX has shell suited passengers going to ALC also remember :}

What is the exact date of the start of the new Gulf Traveller flights to Abu Dhabi?

runway14141414 5th Dec 2004 15:58

GF
 
Gulf Traveller are due to start on 01/04/2005 Thur/Fri/Sat/Sun then daily as of June.

eggc 5th Dec 2004 16:00

snippet from the MAN happenings...

Air India have applied for slots from both MAN & BHX..

dont know if it is both or either or

Time will tell

MarkBHX 5th Dec 2004 16:19

Just a word about the new taxiway. The initial plan was to build a high speed exit, but this was shelved because a normal taxiway was cheaper!

I am lead to believe some movement of car parks could allow the building of a new terminal, baring in mind the NEC are trying to offload car parks for money, the car parks next to T2 could be scrapped and moved to whichever the NEC sells. Can't see a new terminal or any major projects in the next 5 years though.

I'm sure the airport would love to reduce charges, if only they didn' have shareholders!!!!!:ok:

tangocharlie 5th Dec 2004 16:33

Not bothered if positive or negative, as perceived by some:

BHX is expensive to operate from!

Although the Commercial Dept can see this (doesnt take great eyesight!) the airport continues to make money so that is why the 'top' are not reducing fees!

runway14141414 5th Dec 2004 16:51

4U
 
Does anyone know if Germanwings are planning a 2xDaily BHX-CGN service seem to remember it being mentioned but never heard an official announcement.

we_never_change 5th Dec 2004 20:48

There were rumours of Germanwings starting at BHX in competition to HLX down the road at Coventry & don't forget, Germanwings is related to bmi baby (Lufthansa both have stakes in the companies).

But, I understand that Lufthansa are looking at this closely as Cologne is situated quite close to Dusseldorf which is served by DLH from Birmingham & wouldn't want to its low cost partner Germanwings to start taking passengers away from its DUS route (where the passengers obviously pay more!).

WNC

BHXviscount 5th Dec 2004 21:17

Wow things really got heated, been away for a day

One thing I have noticed is that any expansion planned or happening is too little and when completed will be too late. If there are funds available then I think the airport board should seriously consider turning the old Elmdon site into a LCC hub with around 15 stands(no airbridges needed).
This would take the pressure off T1 so it could be reconstructed/rebuilt/extended -more widebodied stands passport controll security baggage reclaim etc etc with the current taiway being built couldnt the main pier be extended to accomodate? This needs to happen sooner rather than later as easier to extend when not at full capacity. It will also send out the right signals to potential airlines and those oh so much needed potential pax to make any new routes work.

BHXviscount

runway14141414 5th Dec 2004 21:21

Seem to remember some time back Maersk applying for permission to build a new maintainence hanger across the other side of 06/24 next to the now fire training ground that would free up the Elmdon site for T3.

we_never_change 5th Dec 2004 21:56

The main hangars are currently occupied by FlyBE where as well as visits by their own aircraft, the hangars have recently visited by Air Nostrum CRJs, BA 146s, Axis Airways 146s & in the past, Austrian & SAS DHC8-400s.

Don't think Signature (used to be Execaire) & Eurojet Aviation (with their nice shiny bizjets) would be too happy being chucked out of the Elmdon site though.
Also the nightly Fedex flight (operated by Air Contractors, formerly BAC Express) to Paris CDG operates from this site. However, during the runway works, this has been occasionally operating from Coventry so I suppose it could move there permanently.

The future plans do involve moving the current long stay carparks so that the apron/terminal can be extended southwards of T2. This will also mean that the fuelfarm will have to move (which would also be the case if the runway got extended) & possibly diverting the A45.

WNC

runway14141414 5th Dec 2004 22:11

It was applied for when Mearsk were there thought planning permission might already be there so the usual red tape could be avoided probably doubtful there would be room to accommodate the biz jets aswell.


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:16.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.