Aer Lingus goes A330 ... again.
 

Well, after all the waiting, it looks as if we have white smoke.

Aer Lingus, according to this morning's Sunday Times, is to announce an order for four A330s (model not specified) for delivery beginning later this year and running into next. This will be an interim fleet and Aer Lingus claims it is still negotiating with Airbus and Boeing for the long haul deal. The Sunday Times quoted $400m (E330m), although if this is part of a wider deal (even at some future stage) involving A350s and more A32X aircraft (13 more required to reach target fleet strength), that price is probably well over the mark. Airbus has been offering some very good discounts on the A350 (not that it made any difference to its success in getting orders).

It's good news for EI, since it gives them the ability to add new US flights from this Winter. However, there may still be the need to add A330s (or A340s, if they can't get 330s) to grow the fleet, since the current A333s will need to be replaced, as they can't be updated with modern IFE for weight reasons.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspap...003500,00.html

Got to love the accurate reporting!

It's almost like The Times was a newspaper who thought that everything American was good and everything European was bad. :rolleyes:

Which is why that newspaper is no longer a paper of record.

Do you guys think it's the best idea to replace 330's with more 330's:confused: I mean it's the 333's that need to be replaced as akerosid said, which means for capacity reasons, they'll probably replace them with more 333's and not 332's, but A.L. want to expand on the routes and there's talk amongst folk in there of flying further afield, would it not make more sense to go with the 340 :ugh:

Oh, and what do you think the chances are of them forking out a little extra to have individual display screens for each passenger to enjoy more than 1 or 2 movies on a medium/long haul flight. I know it's a little thing to some, but when your stuck in the middle row down the back with the TV screen 8 rows away from you and the seat in front occupied by a 4 year old that keeps standing up so he can see the screen, little bas:mad: I mean come on, it's 2006 not 1986 :{ :{ I'm sorry, that happened to me a few years back :ugh: brings back bad memories:(

S.C. :p

The A340 would have marginal performance off the relatively short runway at Dublin. It is not suitable for Dublin Airport. The A330 is already limited off the Dublin runway in what it can do for EI on total take off weight. I think EI have no choice but to go for A330 and I would imagine they will go for the cheapest version they can find. As EI have little money for this cpital spending. The AIRBUS will be much cheaper and more avbl than 777. Also lower costs crew etc... A330 is their only choice sadly.
enplaned who seems to know a little about this matter says on A340 & A330 orders etc in 2005:-
* A340 and A330-300 orders number just 30, 777 orders number 154
* Boeing twin-aisle dominance in 2005 gives it much larger share of value than of numbers of aircraft. CSFB estimates Boeing got 54% of 2005 orders by number, 70% by value.
* Airbus supersalesman John Leahy says that Boeing was resurgent in 2005 because it cut prices. But WSJ notes Tim Clark of Emirates says the 777 is more reliable than the A340 and that the 777 has exceeded all planned performance criteria. Air Canada Chairman Robert Milton says the 777 has considerable economic efficiencies over Airbus models. Air France CFO says that A340s "from the 1990s" (presumably A340-300s, since Air France does not fly the second-generation A340) burns 15-20% more fuel ( enplaned comment: holy cow!) than similar vintage 777s.
Airbus's mid-sized long-haul product range doesn't seem to be working, as we've said before. WSJ says Airbus is considering tweaking the products again.
It's hard for us to see Airbus making its money back on the A340-500/600 program. Yes, it was a derivative from the A340-200/300 program, but it involved a heavily modified wing (wing root extension, as opposed to a wing tip extension), new engines, new landing gear and a big weight increase (so a significant number of other components were likely beefed up). And it will be difficult for Airbus to devote more resources to the A340 given all its other commitments. Plus, we kinda doubt there's an economic way to tweak the A340 to make up the performance gap on the 777.

The A330s are intended as an interim solution; I doubt very much if the stated cost of EUR330m is correct. That would be fine if they needed the aircraft indefinitely, but these will be leases for about 7 years, until the 350s become available.
My guess is that EI is doing a pretty long term deal with Airbus, with will cover its short and long haul fleet and this deal is only the first stage of it. This will cover supplemental capacity, but they will need to replace the earlier A330s, as I don't think these can be fitted with PTVs and a modern IFE without weight penalties which would rule them out on the ORD route.
The A340 isn't much use to EI; it's a pretty poor performer (the -300 anyway) and Dublin's runway length would limit its performance considerably. You certainly couldn't get it to fly any further than Chicago and east coast routes (incl. FL). They might, if nothing else were available, lease some for a short time, but in the long term, it's long haul twins like the A330-200/300X and A350.
As to PTVs, certainly these have to be fitted. Only one of the 332s is fitted now - 'DAA and with the new DXB route starting in late March, they need to have the other two retrofitted. Starting a new route like this (where there is so much competition from the likes of EK) would be a very bad move; this is (literally) a new departure for EI and it needs to get itself known as a respectable brand; starting with a second rate Y class would be a false economy. DM knows only too well what an aggressive competitor EK can be and there are lots of alternatives from DUB; VS is starting to DXB this Summer as well.
(Don't forget that when flying to the US, it's a pain to have to travel via LHR, but when flying east, it's pretty much the same direction, so EI can't count on people settling for a second rate product if they can get much better via LHR, CDG, AMS or wherever.)

In response to Neidin's comment (which I didn't see as I was posting this at the time), I totally agree, but I've always wondered why there is such a muted protest by EI - or even IALPA - to the whole runway issue. It's not just EI's issue; it really makes DUB a very undesirable destination for long haul carriers. Only recently, Comrade Minister was in Singapore and BKK talking to SQ and TG; how do you sell an airport like DUB to airlines that have aircraft than can fly n/s - but can't because of rwy limitations? :mad: :rolleyes:

Or what about the Dreamliner 787 for Aer Lingus? Questions though are Aer Rianta planning to expand Dublin Airport and including the Runway? And what new routes into US are they planning have heard BGI mentioned?

Is that a new rumour for BGI Barbados or Ben Gurion International Tel AViv.
Both seem curious and whimsical but welcome.
I guess Ryanair are somewhat unlikely to compete on those routes.
LCC airlines to Israel ..... difficult. Although I imagine Ryanair would call any new Gaza strip airport opened Jerusalem East:)
A 20 minute turn could be a good idea!

I can't understand why anyone think EI would go for Boeings. They have just completed a move to an all-Airbus fleet, with easy transtion for flight and cabin crews from any one aircraft type to the next, and common flight crew ratings for a lot of them. Throwing Boeings in the fleet would only undermine that, possibly blow any price deal they have with Airbus, and add massive additional costs in preparing crews to fly them. At this point in time, Boeings and EI seem like a totally illogical option to me.

Isn't BGI Barbados? It wouldn't surprise me if they went for some Caribbean destinations, but I would say that they will prioritise the new US potential first.

Most of what I've heard suggests SFO is a virtual dead-cert, plus one FL destination (Miami more likely than MCO) and another, possibly back to BWI?

As for the Dreamliner, I've afraid that selection of the 350 (which admittedly isn't confirmed) would rule this out; it's a one or the other choice. The Dreamliner is an all-new design, but the fact that it has done so well last year puts EI at a disadvantage, in that Boeing doesn't feel the same pressure to make an "offer it can't refuse" to EI, whereas if Airbus were to lose EI to the 787, it would be slap in the face with a large, wet fish to them.

The good news anyway is that EI is looking forward.

The same can't be said about the DAA; despite the fact that 10/28 was built only in 1989, they just didn't have sufficient vision to recognise that DUB could be a long haul hub (some believe it was deliberately kept short, to avoid SNN being overflown); that's the kind of BS that holds Irish aviation policy back. Unfortunately, the new runway (about which very little has been heard recently) won't be open until 2012-13 (it's slipping further back), so we're stuck with a runway that's too short for the next 6-7 years. The chances of the minister ordering the DAA to do the needful are pretty slim.

DM has said any new Airbuses will have crew rest (for CPT for instance).

The existing EI 332s and 333s are some of the first off the line so the 330-343Xs being built now with higher MTOW and engine ratings will probably have about the same range as the existing 332s.

Akerosid, why is it every time we comment on something that affects Irish aviation, other than Ryanair, the blame always comes down to the DAA and the Goverment :rolleyes:

Some very valid points made by all about why the 330 is the proper move forward for EI, but I hope DM did have the forsight to look into increasing passenger comfort on these new aircraft. This raises the question, will he refit the remaining aircraft in the long haul fleet to have a standardised layout?
I think those A350 posters around the airport is a good enough indication :hmm:

What a shame, I always love seeing that big Delta 777 push it's way between busses onto the B pier on a summers morning :) Do I take it your a 777 fan neidin?
S.C. :ok:

If you look at the development of Irish aviation and in particular, aviation policy, over the last few decades, there is a history of lost opportunity; what has been achieved has been as a result of forcing the government (mostly due to EU regulations) and what has been lost has largely been due to obstacles placed for political reasons by successive governments.

I don't think it's unfair or unreasonable to say that Irish aviation policy has been irresponsible, shortsighted and obstructive. The interest simply isn't there; you need only look at a map to see how important aviation policy should be to Ireland.

Why is it that it has taken until 2006 - and then under extreme protest, becoming the only EU nation to negotiate a delay to the Open Skies deal - for the stopover to be wound down?

Why is it that a runway was built in 1989 which was/is a good 1500' shorter than it should be?

Why is it that while govt ministers and the Taoiseach go to India, China etc etc, to build new trade links, but the DAA plans an expansion of terminal facilities which obstruct the development of cargo facilities; while pax numbers have gone up very impressively, cargo handling has flatlined.

The minister said, within the last year, that DUB is part of the state's critical infrastructure; that being the case, why doesn't the govt take a hands on interest in the airport's development and ensure that it has the capacity and infrastructure to move development forward.

I'm not saying that everything that goes wrong is the govt's fault, BUT I maintain that Irish aviation policy has been extremely badly run, lacking in interest, vision and energy and that has cost us - and continues to do so.

While its great that EI are getting some badly needed new airframes it looks like they are going to go with the A350. Bad move. This clapped out heap of junk only looks effecient against the MD-11(Finnair) and 767-200(US air). Airbus have been so busy with the A380 that they have lost the plot with a330/a340 I fear that the a350 will meet the same fate as the a345/6. Normally Aibus produce a fantastic product, the A320 is still wins more orders than the 737NG and its 20years old! Shows how ahead of its time the A/C was.
The 777/787 would be a much better choice, and while Boeing are probably not offering dealt that EI cannot refuse, the 777/787 will prob ahve better residule values and operating costs, long term. 777 also allows more flexability should a new runway be built in Dublin. Also EI will inevitabely be competing against EK/BA/SQ all with 380/748/77X they need any advantage they can get, and of late Airbus have not been delivering stellar products from cost or reliability point of view.

Ultimtely I do not believe that having an all Airbus(or Boeing) fleet is all that necessary, in terms of engineering and crew support both the A320 and A330 have their own spacific training and ratings. The CCC concept only makes it easier to train for both, as far as I know seperate line training is needed. So not such a big deal, as most other training is thrown in by the manufacturers.

Aha! But Boeing did not avail of all that fancy advertising that lines the pockets of the DAA!

I would certainly have preferred the 787. My big concern about the A350 is that it's still an eight abreast aircraft whereas the 787, with a wider cabin, can be operated in a 9-abreast configuration, should EI wish to go down the long haul low cost route. The principal concern is that FR has signalled its intention to go down this route and if they were to do this, being a 738 customer already, the 787-8/9 would almost certainly be their choice and having discussed this on the Orders yahoo-group, the 787 at 9-abreast would kill the 350 on costs per seat/mile.

That said, the A350 will be a better aircraft than the 330, which is already a superb aircraft, so while one can argue that it's a warmed over A330, it's still an improvement on an already very good aircraft and it's one which will serve EI very well indeed. It has a very healthy range and even if it can only be operated in an 8 abreast layout, its economics will still be pretty impressive just not quite as good as the 787.

One point to bear in mind, however, is that even if EI were to go Boeing, the 330 would still be a preferable interim aircraft to the 777, which EI may regard as too big. The proposed A330-200 deal, regardless of whether Boeing or Airbus is chosen, will most likely be a lease for about 6-7 years, rather than an outright purchase, so it doesn't preclude a 787 deal.

I still think the 350 will get the green light; Boeing had a very good year last year and by all accounts (with the 787 likely to win at SQ next month and at EK - long expected to be a 350 customer - later in the year) this year will be good; the 350 has had a less good year and Airbus will be particularly keen to get new airlines on board; losing EI won't upset Boeing too much and they may not feel the need to offer EI a "killer" deal. Losing EI would be a lot more damaging to Airbus. Remember, it's not just the value of the deal but the fact that a 320/330 operator has dumped the 350 and the impression this creates.

Over MOL's dead body, I'd imagine.

Aer Lingus goes A330 again
 

Now with no announcement forthcoming about a 787/350 order that was supposed to happen at the end of December,then postponed to January and now not expected till the middle or the end of the year,let us have a look at a few things.

EI supposed to codeshare with EK thru DXB
Mr Mannion is supposed to have reached a deal with DAA about an upgraded/new bussiness class lounge and new transit area at DUB,one of EI's A332 away at the moment getting upgraded/lie flat seats in Premier class.
Maurice Flanagan of EK hints that 787 is a much better aircraft than A350 and if -10 goes ahead,which it more than likely will, EK will place an order in May/June for it and a roumor that Boeing has told EI that they have 3 x 777s that EI can avail of.

Now DM being schooled at EK is definitely in the EK frame of mind and familiar with EK workings,might this suggest something to someone.


You can take the man out of EK,but you cannot take EK out of the man.

This is no bad thing, as long as EI can get some acft to operate the new routes it is allowed, from November this year. So does this mean the rumour about the four A332s is out the window? Even if EI decides to go with the 787, the 332 is probably the best interim aircraft. But if Boeing can provide 777s as part of the deal, all the better ... They'll need more than three aircraft betwen now and 2011-13 though, with expansion and the need to replace the old 333s too.

Much as I'm sure the 350 will be a grand aircraft altogether (to be sure), the 787 looks like being better and with the heavy hitters going for the 787 almost entirely - AI, QF, AC last year and SQ, EK and (possibly) BA this year - does EI really want to be left with what most airlines perceive to be second best?

Good news that they're upgrading the 332s as well; I was hoping they wouldn't start the new DXB route with an un-upgraded aircraft.

Interesting times ahead. While Boeing has had a very good year last year, there is an incentive for them to push the 787 at EI; for an existing 320 and 330 operator to reject the 350 and pick the 787 would be a psychological kick in the nethers for Airbus ...

if A350s are a sign DM is reversing the WW Ryanair-ising of EI... I'm all for it :ok:

There was an Airfinance conference in Dublin this week: lots of lawyers and lessors and bankers.
DM made a speech to the assembled multitudes on Wednesday morning. No major revelations, but his points included:
- EI's cost base is highly competitive compared with other European carriers
- EI is expecting a Govt decision on privatisation within a few weeks
- In Jan 2003, interline feed was 20% of EI's traffic. It's now 10% and falling.
- By virtue of its geographical position, Dublin has the potential to be a transfer hub, a bit like Dubai - in fact Dublin currently has more direct destinations than Dubai (some raised eyebrows at the transfer-hub suggestion - he didn't comment on infrastructure needs for this or indeed on which transfer markets Dublin could realistically compete in)
- The hopefully-impending liberalisation will mean EI will need some short-term lift
- Any new long-haul aircraft will have an up-to-date business class to be able to offer a competitive product for premium passengers.

Brgds
C.

The limitations of Dublin airport aside, I don't see any reason that they shouldn't be able to develop a transfer business.

They offer some of the best value transatlantic fares nowadays. Also, they are starting to develop a decent number of destinations out of Dublin, particularly in central and eastern Europe. Many of those destinations don't have direct transatlantic flights, so Dublin would be as good a transfer point as any considering the fares and that it wouldn't mean setting off in the wrong direction.

Of course, the website only allows you to book connections to a range of UK destinations, many of which have gained transatlantic access in recent years anyway...

To become a transfer hub, Dublin will have to build a new terminal just like Dubai did

Interesting points, although I hope the refit isn't going to be confined to Business/Premier; Economy Class needs a good going over too!

As to transfers, my recollection is that it was WW's policy to discourage interline feed, so the reduction can hardly be a surprise. DM's apparent policy of reintroducing this facility is very welcome. DUB is supposed to be introducing a much needed airside transfer facility from next month.

I think there are still a lot of opportunities, particularly in UK regional destinations. I was disappointed that EI messed up on the DXB hub opportunities; the departure from DXB (at c.0020) gets into DUB at 05.20. The first t/a flight is at 10.30 (and by a different acft), so that acft from DXB could still leave at a time which would allow it to accept feed from EK flights (c.0700) and get into DUB at around 12.00, which still allows it plenty of time to operate t/a flights; most of the EK feeder flights to DXB arrive in at c.0530. Some pax may prefer EK's direct flights from DXB, but there could be a viable transfer to other US (and Canadian) destinations, once liberalisation comes in.

While there are UK destinations such as NCL, EDI and BRI which have got new US routes, most of these are through NY. With the benefit of open skies, EI could offer a lot more than that.

Going back to the point made above, I think that as long as EI has acft which it can use from this Winter, it should be okay to defer the long term long haul deal; I'd much rather they waited and got a better aircraft. Even if they do a deal for 332s now, as has been suggested, that doesn't preclude a Boeing deal.

I wonder whether it would be possible to fit 9-abreast in the A350 using this new staggered seat design? The manufacturers suggest that it can make a 9-abreast 777 into a 10-abreast configuration for equivalent comfort.

I do not think that there is any reason why EI cannot be a massive transfer hub for europe/Mid east-US/Canada/Carribean destinations. An alliance with EK makes a lot of sense. EK can offer EI a shed load of cash and passengers, while EI gives EK transatlantic presence and a cost base close to the of FR, thanks WW:).
EI has a high reputation in indusrty circles, and although slightly tarnished by WW its passenger experience is certainly as good as IBERIA ALITALIA and BMI. What EI dosent have is money... EK do, and with DM already inside and code-shares with EK I'd say a trade sale to EK is highly likely. The this would be the most palitable solution for the unions and Government, as no one side seems to have completely lost... secure jobs and cash in the bank, not to mention an airline partner with huge devlopement plans and tons of cash. Quite honesty the two airlines could produce a mammoth global network.
With the right A/C!

All good points folks but have'nt we gone through this all before?

Bottom line is AL have made NO official announcement. Currenty we are all crystal ball gazing which IMHO is fruitless. I look foward to when there is a definite decision and then we can speculate.

Fruitless maybe, but interesting!
 

I know it's more than likely fruitless, but it is interesting to exchange thoughts on the old home team!

At the end of the day, this will come down to euros/dollars and cents and while we'll never know what the exact price each manufacturer's price is, I can't help thinking that I wasn't the only one to have thought, last Sunday, "good aircraft, glad they're finally making a move, but I WISH they had gone for the 787."? Okay, it's a gut feeling and they're generally not good news in aviation, but I still have this feeling - much as I'm sure that the 350 would do a grand job for EI if it were chosen - that the 787 is better.

If EK goes for 787s (and it now seems very likely that it will, if Boeing launches the -10 model), that will be the vast majority of "big hitters" going for the 787. It can't all be simply price; it was said at the time of the QF order that Airbus is sales led, but Boeing is engineering led, with the comment that "airlines that can't afford Boeings go for Airbus"; I don't think this is true in all cases (the A332 left its Boeing competitor, the 764, in the dust).

However, I think there is truth here; Airbus is at pains to promote the 350 as an all-new aircraft (if you look at the products listing on its site, it's A320, A330, A340, then "all new A350"!), but I think most carrier perceive it as a warmed over A330 and much as they may like it, particularly current A330 operators, it's still an aircraft for this decade, whereas the 787 is an aircraft for the next. If EI wants to choose an aircraft to last it for 10+ years down the road, surely that has to be a major factor.

Brian_Dromey, certainly good points on EK and EI, but I thought the govt (and its advisers) had ruled out a trade sale? Also, would the unions wear a deal with EK, which is a non-union airline? Would EK like the fact that EI is strongly unionised, in that the unions might perceive them as a cash rich company (which, arguably they are) that they could "bleed"?

I havent heard anything to that effect, an FF/PD's certainly can not afford a telecom Éireann/eircom flotation disaster this close to such a make or break election, the opossision would have a field day, and on the other hand the national carrier can not be let waste away either. Looks like all Berties dithering has landed him in the deep:mad: ! I
I dont think that EK is non-union á la FR, as unions are not a huge concept outsde the US and old EU, and as much as SIPTU are an insufferable bunch, they aren't fools either, and if EI goes down because of them all hell will break loose at Lenster House.
On the issue of DUB as an intercontinental hub...it really, really could work... at SNN, think about it, an empty airport, except for FR, makes the workers effecient at least!!, some of the longest runways in europe and damn all cerfews, etc and plenty room for expansion. At least the SAA have seen their potential! As for Airbus lining the pockets of Aer Rianta??? They would prob be better off investing the money in a decent wide-twin! Aer Rianta and EI are seperate organisations and I doubt EI will be thinking too much about Aer Riantas advertising kitty! (Aer Rinata=DAA same bad lot, same crap airport, nice EXPENSIVE new look though)

I can't see EK getting involved at all, I really cant.

Sunday Business Post
Aer Lingus: Next stop Bangkok?


29 January 2006 By Ed Micheau
The Irish and Thai governments are close to an agreement that will enable Aer Lingus and other operators to fly directly from Dublin to Bangkok.
The Minister for Transport Martin Cullen met his Thai counterpart Pongsak Raktapongpaisal on a recent visit to Thailand to agree, in principle, a new bilateral aviation agreement.
A spokeswoman for the Department of Transport said Irish officials and their counterparts in Thailand were working on the issue ‘‘as a matter of urgency’’.
The bilateral agreement paves the way for Aer Lingus to open up a new route to the Far East.
The airline is believed to be examining a number of new destinations in the Far East including Bangkok, Singapore, Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur. Ireland already has bilateral agreements with Singapore and Malaysia. The agreement with Singapore has recently been updated to reflect policy changes at European level.
:ok:

Aer Lingus next stop Bangkok
 

Unless our Minister of Transport Martin Cullen can somehow get the DAA to produce another 1500 - 2000 feet of concrete onto one of the shortest runways of a capital city in the EU ,this is not going to happen any time soon,because I am sure the likes of Thai,SIA and Malaysian would want to fly this route nonstop and more than likely with 777s without restrictions,as the runway lenght at DUB has already deterred EVA from starting a cargo service to the far east.

With Mr Cullen and our union cuckholded prime minister,announcements like this tends to make them look good.




Expletives Please. Go raibh maith agut. Hogg

tell me this....if they wanted to could they extend the end of 28 right away as I believe they own the land staright ahead into infinity?

Yes, but who pays for it? That's probably the main issue; the DAA will want to add to the pax service charge; FR will blow a gasket and say "we don't need it" as will other low cost carriers.

That doesn't do away with the fact that it is needed. Now, I can't possibly estimate how much this extension would cost; EUR10m perhaps and the DAA might well argue that this is too much of a cost to bear, but the govt has already, publicly acknowledged that DUB is part of the state's critical infrastructure (they miss nothing, these guys!) and consequently, this issue should go beyond the DAA's balance sheet. There is a clear need for this and the potential loss over the next 6-7 years until the parallel runway is open is immense. As strong as our economic performance is, we're still an island and we're still peripheral; this means that we should be all the more sensitive to any issue which could undermine and growth and competitiveness. With oil prices rising (and likely to remain so, particularly if the Iranians need to be taken in hand), then airlines will be all the more sensitive to the risks involved with new routes.

If a potential new destination doesn't give them the ability to use their expensive aircraft to their utmost efficiency, why should they fly there? And it's not only new Asian airlines; what about the home team? Does EI have a view on 10/28? I'm sure IALPA does - they've told me, but why don't people go public? Is there a form of self-censorship in place? Ultimately, if you want to see something done, you're going to need to shout about it and frankly, if EI wants to be privatised, it needs to start asserting its independence, showing a vision and being willing to identify factors which stand in its way.

Where did you hear about EVA Air, by the way? Is that the only one?

Runway at DUB
 

The DAA (Aer Rianta by another name) deliberately kept 28 short despite acquiring the land to build a long enough runway at the time.This was all part of the Shannon strategy,this is the same organization that is manned by political apointees,the same company that spent millions on elaborate duty free shops,when duty free was being abolished within the EU,the same company that is expanding the car parking spaces at DUB for its own employees and making the public pay for it.(All the prime car parking spaces in the multi story car park ,across from the terminal and opposite the main door at DUB are reserved for Aer Rianta employees) "The Airport Managers" as their slogan used to be,can I am sure with the right political instruction provide the much need improvement to this critical element of our transport infrastructure.

On another note BMI wre refused permission at one stage to put a UA codeshare flight number on their LHR-DUB flights,because it did not stop at SNN.

Direct to Bangkok??? Oh dear, it will become the Priest mobile!!! :}

But seriously talking for a second. I would be surprised if EI operated any route to the far east nonstop, I would imagine that this flight to DXB is only a starter and that soon it will become the new Shannon stopover for the far east!!!

What are you talking about Irishair 2001???

"All the prime car parking spaces in the multi story car park ,across from the terminal and opposite the main door at DUB are reserved for Aer Rianta employees"

Thats complete crap!

DAA staff car parking is behind the Great Southern Hotel!

I've heard a lot of rumours that the runway being kept artificially short, but is there any proof of this? I know a lot of very obstructive things have been done in Irish aviation policy over the years, but would they really go to this length. I'm just concerned that this is one of these things that someone might say - and get sued over, because it's the type of things that would never be minuted. Just a behind the scenes deal that could easily be denied.

I've always wondered whether it was just plain simple lack of vision? One way or the other, the job needs to be done now. The problem people overlook is that even though we're doing well economically, there are places like Bratislava, Warsaw and other new EU nations - on the continent, with long runways, cheap labour and excellent land transport links. And what do we do? We solidify our disadvantage with obstructionism and even more lack of vision.

As for BKK and other Asian destinations, I wonder if DM's choice was influenced by the possibility of EK coming in here; if they did, they'd hoover up and there'd be sod all chance of EI flying to Asia at all. I think the main reason for choosing to interline with EK at DXB is to do whatever it takes to keep EK out of Dublin ... and to build links to Asia. With the experience they've had on transatlantic routes, the last thing they need to place limits on their own growth potential.

To be honest the BKK route is not going to be a priority at EI, of much more importance would be HKG with its network oppertunities with CX and dragonair to China and QF to Australia and New Zealand. Mind you QF did studies in the past on SYD-DUB and concluded that there was a demand there, definately for a seasonal service. I imagine that runway lengths /scuppered that. Maybe the new 777 could be used, to the mid east and then onwards.

On the subject of the codeshare to DXB is this bookable thro' EK? I heard that EI were pushing oneworld connections through DXB in the latest Cara, havent read it myself tho...

On the issue of the runway at DUB, it was probably left short partly as a lack of vision("sure were only Heathrow West!") and partly as a desire to keep the SNN lobbyists quiet.

Asian routes
 

Hong Kong is certainly a far more attractive route for a variety of reasons, not least HK's geographic location, the fact that CX is a one world carrier and the extent of routes available from HKG, BUT HKG is a pretty expensive airport to operate from. Not sure how expensive the new BKK will be, but almost certainly less than HKG.

BKK, if the schedule is done properly, EI can interline with BA/QF routes to Oz, CX/AY to HKG and AY to SIN. Not as much as HKG, but still workable.

What is the situation re-CPT? Is that still on the radar? I guess the main factor against CPT - apart from the fact that it's a stand-alone route (as opposed to Asian routes which offer onward connections) - is that it's primarily tourist orientated and that the scheduling is quite aircraft intensive; i.e. the aircraft has to spend most of the day in CPT and even if (like KL and some BA flights) it comes back the same day, there's no prospect of another flight being operated ... unless of course an Asian route was being operated.

Just for illustration:
DUB-CPT (est. 12h20, based on 12h for VS 343 from LHR)
1500-0520

CPT-DUB (est. 12h40)
0800-1840

No US flight viable at that time, but Asian flight could be operated, dep. c. 2130-2200 and still able to connect with flights to Australia, from HKG.

Just a thought.

Still need the airplanes though ...!