BMI Baby
 

MUFC_fan

The last time I checked the BHX schedule had several gaps but
none for a daily flight at the same time. About a four hour gap was the largest so I doubt any "W's" unless any flights are re-timed.

I will take a look a bit later if I have time.

Pete

BMI Baby
 

Just checked one week at the end of June and a much tighter schedule
now with the only gaps 14.10-20.00 Mo, Thu & Fri plus possibly Wed 20.30 onwards (BHX - BFS departs 21.00 Mo-FR). Not checked the
weekend.

Mon

1) BFS AGP ALC 2) PGF NQY BFS BFS
3) PMI BOD PRG 4) NOC JER XXX ORK

Tue

1) BFS AGP ALC 2) LIS BFS BFS
3) PMI BOD PRG 4) JER NOC NQY ORK

Wed

1) BFS AGP ALC 2) JER NOC BFS BFS
3) PMI BOD PRG 4) PGF NQY ORK ???

Thur

1) BFS AGP ALC 2) NOC JER XXX ORK
3) PMI BOD PRG 4) PGF NQY BFS BFS

Fri

1) BFS AGP ALC 2) NOC JER XXX ORK
3) PMI BOD PRG 4) PGF NQY BFS BFS

Hopefully at least one more route and quite a spacing for Madrid
or Poland.

BHX gaps are a mess 1525-2015 Mon, Tue 1050-1445, Thu 1525 onwards
and Fri 1050-1445 & 1840 onwards. Hardly a gap in the weekend schedule

Pete

Pete,
stupid question but are these schedules for bhx or man ?

As it is only 4 aircraft I would imagine its MAN. BHX has double that number I think.

BMI Baby
 

Sorry for the confusion - they are for Manchester (4 based aircraft).

The question was asked if it was there a possibility of any of the BHX based craft routing through Manchester on a "W" pattern and hence
why I also mentioned BHX but all I have heard is a rumour of 3 more
routes with an announcement soon.

BHX currently has 7 based rising to 8 at the end of May but like
Manchester there are gaps in the schedule for potential new routes
and hopefully both airports will see more announcements.

Pete

Pete
thanks for clearing that one up!

any ideas if baby are likely to use NQY from any other domestic airports?

i might be wrong but havnt they previously flown from other places into NQY?

Q Has Manchester peaked..?

Lets be honest if MAS could not "supposedly" make money on 80% load factors and they end up in bloody Gatwick , we have no chance of attracting the other big players like QANTAS, SAA, Air India etc etc back......

The long hall market appears to have peaked as has the target of 40M pax a year !

...and now sadly it appears SAUDIA is going back to 1 a week so clearly that is also about to go down the pan as indeed are JETT8 (although appreciate that is a different area) !

...and whats happening with SIA ?

The ONLY way that Man can compete against London is on price, we are already penalised because of the dominance of the South East, it is such a massive hub but there is something seriously wrong when you hear all these stories of poeople from the North Of England ramming flights that originate in the South East and yet services from Manchester cannot make money.

So what is going wrong ?

Does anyone know what happended with the landing fees ?

There are some bright spots Re EMIRATES BUT generally its a gloomy outlook.

Landing fees must be more competitive !

There is little point banging on about long haul services such as THAI etc..... if almost everybody else has failed, on what possible basis does anybody hope that they might have a cat in hells chance of success given the current backdrop of airlines which have "tried and failed".

With the recent influx of long haul cargo it "looked" as though that was a bright spot but even that is now looking dodgy.

Can somebody cheer me up please !

Man Long Haul woes
 

You just have to cross your fingers for a few years until the smaller 787 comes online. Maybe then the airlines will be able to get good LFs.

Things still look rosy with flights across the pond so its not all bad.

From experience at looking at longhaul flights to Asia ex MAN the seem to be several hundred pounds more than flights to the same destination ex LHR, so maybe the airlines need to look at their pricing structures before pulling out of MAN.

Steve

If there is any comfort to be found in it, Gatwick was not a decision based on a competition between them and MAN. Malaysian planned the extra schedule for LHR, but the slots weren't available for it to work.

Whether the decision to open LGW is a good one remains to be seen, although with the various EZY options at LGW, I would have thought it might become the "backpackers'" route of choice both ways.

But as we all know, high loads and low yields don't necessarily spell success.

Stoney

I think the problem is that over the years we have been somewhat 'spoilt' at MAN in terms of the variety of routes on offer. When all said and done it is just a regional airport and cannot compete on the same scale as the airports in the south-east. But look at the services we have/have had over the years. The likes of EK double daily, QR, SQ, Malaysian, Ethiad, CX... Not to mention the considerable amount of west bound traffic too. How many other regional airports can boast such a list. Look at the likes of BHX, NCL, GLA. All of these airports have hugh catchment areas and in the case of Birmingham many would argue that this indeed is England's second city yet services and passenger numbers from there have always been years behind those offered from MAN. I guess what I'm trying to say is, is it a case of we are all being far too expectant? Did we really expect services, particularly long-haul, to continue to grow at pace? MAN is not LHR and despite it being in an economically important region, long-haul services were always going to level off at some point. I believe now is that point and because we have been spoilt with so many long-haul offerings in the past, we are now feeling disappointed with this stagnant period. If we all stand back and gain some perspective on the situation, MAN still offers more long-haul routes than any other regional airport in the UK. Surely that's an achievement in itself. We will always play second fiddle to the south-east. The majority of long-haul carriers will find it more viable to operate into LHR and feed pax down from the regions to there. We have to just accept that. When you look at the London bias mentality of our own national carrier, maybe we should all be grateful that we have so many long-haul services in the first place. And finally, the slight drop in pax numbers through MAN has very little to do with long-haul. This is mainly down to the consolidation of charter carriers plus the short-sighted attitude of the big bosses in their failure to attract LCC's. The latter is being addressed. MAN still has 22M pax per annum passing through its terminals, again for a regional airport is this really all that terrible??

SAA - won't be returning anytime soon, they have been in dire straits for a while and cutting European flights rather than adding them

Qantas - likely to return through Jetstar once the equipment is available

Air India - rumours of a return have been going on for a while but nothing yet.... maybe another Indian carrier will get in there first?

Malaysian - unlikely to return, especially if Air Asia X are poised

However I don't think long haul from MAN is a write off just yet, for a regional airport there is a very good network of destinations served. I think in the future however we may potentially see a change in the profile of long haul operators towards the likes of Air Asia X, Oasis Hong Kong and Jetstar rather than traditional legacy carriers returning to routes. All three of these carriers appear to be showing an interest in operating into MAN so hopefully some good news will be just around the corner.

WW MAn to LIS announced and on sale.

Not sure BHX is really comparable to MAN. The former suffers by being within 1-1.5 hours drive from LHR, though admittedly doesn't have the shuttle flights.
The problem I have with MAN , as already pointed out above, is that it almost always costs more to fly from there than LHR. I have seen BA prices to JFK cheaper routing MAN-LHR-JFK than flying on the direct MAN-JFK. I also got quoted cheaper fares on EK and SIA from LHR than MAN.
As for QF, there's no point, EK/SIA took the MAN - Australasia market when they left with the strange notion that people in the NW would still use their services, even when they'd have to transfer at LHR from T4 to T1 after already travelling for nearly 24 hours.
I suspect MAN, in terms of L/H development, would be better off without domestic flights to LHR. If you cannot get a route in directly pax could still route via AMS/FRA/CDG. It;s also quicker to get to/from LGW by train from Manchester, even though it's via central london than on the comically late BA flight, cheaper too.

Keep up Vuelo - see post #2004:ok:

What Manchester needs and more importantly needs to sustain is a long haul carrier of it's own. Lets face the fact we will be waiting forever if we rely on BA, BD and VS. Overseas based airlines cannot be relied on either as witnessed by SQ,s strange decision to drop two of it's seven weekly flights (Is this so it can help fill it's London originating A380,s).

Yes i know raising the finance for a startup airline is hard at anytime, but i can see a carrier with six Boeing 787 ,s flying non-stop to west coast USA, HKG, and competing with the incumbent airlines to New York, Dubai etc.
Take off and landing slots are far easier to come by at MAN than LHR and as regards ticket prices a new start up carrier will be able undercut the legacy airlines.

Full roll out of the biometric system has only started this month. Possible to transfer data card-to-card but this can take longer than a re-scan. System can not hold biometric data.

Jet Airways
 

This link showing LHR lost out to Brussels. I also think MAN missed out on a chance aswell.


http://www.uk-airport-news.info/heat...ws-220208b.htm

A little birdy tells me that Zoom UK may be looking at expansion at MAN :oh:

If MH wanted slots at LHR instead of LGW maybe they shouldn't have flogged those LHR slots last year.

FlyZB. I admire your positivity mate, but I can't take comfort in the fact that it's got more than other regional airports so we should be happy. MAN is the biggest and most important airport outside London, so it should be better than other regionals. Long haul air travel globally is booming, MAN is becoming stagnant.

We've been so bl**dy close on CX (flight numbers and times announced), to a lesser extent on TG (CEO admitting MAN was one of the next batch on the list) and recently lost MH (who now announce twice weekly LGW flights) that you start to think it's never gonna happen. We live in hope...

BTW, nice of that AA 767 to block the main runway with a duff tyre today while the other runway is out of action.... :uhoh:

FlyZB

Your last post was 'about right' for me.

MM

At the risk of being flamed, comments such as this

just don't stack up to reality, sure MAN is a two runway operation, but it clearly isn't considered "that" important, purely because the premium yields out of MAN are pathetic..and always have been :{

You can't judge the importance of an airport purely on its premium yields.

Wouldn`t say that premium is pathetic, not as good as LHR but are getting better as there are more and more business moving to Manchester/Salford

Ian

You know it really irrritates me that people assume there is no premium traffic ex Manchester and that everyone with money (so called) wants to fly from London.

I am fortunate that my job allows me to fly on business and I frequently have problem getting seats in Business on flights ex manchester and I usually find business quite full.

lets not forget that Cheshire is one of the most afluent parts of the country,

There is premium traffic from the regions and if the services are made available at the right times then they will be used.

Autoglide,

BHX 1 - 1.5 hours drive from London!!?? A one a hour drive would require a licence-losing 100mph+ performance - 1.5 hours perhaps possible, at 02:00 on a Sunday morning - with all roadworks lifted!!!

Realisticly, add one hour to both times.

BHX isn't comparable to MAN, partly because of the London proximity issue, and partly because whilst the Birmingham City Concil was twiddling their thumbs and navel gazing in the 1960s, Manchester had the foresight to build an International airport and runway to match. Since then MAN has always had the edge over BHX.

Things might had been different if thw two sets of councillors had been in opposite council chambers.

I agree with pwalhx,

I frequently fly (twice a month) business class on EY MAN AUH MAN and its always full, i do think on the other hand that the likes of Air Asia X and Oasis Hong Kong will do much better out of MAN than MH and CX ever did as passengers from the North are more money conscious than the South.
As somebody else said in this thread. You can find it cheaper to fly via LHR on carriers such as SQ then direct from MAN and pax in the North will do that if it saves them money.
If Oasis and Air Asia came to MAN it would be cheaper still and therefore cut out the necessity to transit through LHR. Why would any one want to fly via LHR. The flight takes 30mins, when you get there you are in the hold for another 30mins, you get off the plane and have to change terminals......thats another 30mins. Once you are boarded and you push back its at least 40 mins before getting airbourne, then you have a twelve hour flight ahead of you. All that to save a bit of cash.
Come on Oasis and Air Asia......bring it on.

Well the numbers don't reflect your sentiments, nor might I add do the yields.

You are completely correct, which is why I wasn't, I'm looking at the big picture..however, until such time as the average premium yield improves at MAN, it will continue to be a rather poor regional cousin to LHR and LGW comparatively speaking.

pwalhx, I'm not surprised, the lack of frequency and lack of passengers means the airlines will do their best to maximize the loads they can generate.

Well the numbers don't reflect your sentiments, nor might I add do the yields.

Obviously the numbers and yield are adding up for some airlines

Lack of frequency? What are you suggesting....6 times a day to long-haul points? I would have thought that minimum 4 weekly up to 2 daily would be the required amounts for each destination. Obvsiuouly, New York is different as we have 3 757s and a 1 767 each day.

Lack of passengers? Better tell Emirates that then as they must be completly potty to have decided to go from 2 weekly A310 via FRA to 2 daily non-stop 77W as there are apparently this perceived "lack of passengers" wanting to fly.

What might be the problem for most airlines is that there is a tremendous number of passengers wishing to fly out of the regions on long-haul routes but to service them means that inappropriate aircraft and/or configurations would have to be used. If there were multiple destinations (5 to 10?) where a general profile mix of 15% to 20% business class with the rest economy then airlines might find it more economic to develop a mini-fleet configured that way. Where some people go wrong is to always compare MAN with LGW/LHR. THere is no way that MAN would ever be able to attract the yields they do....I would like to think that MAN could raise yield levels to those comparable with MUC.

I find it mildly interesting that BA complained about the proposed introduction of extra services to New York in the late 1980s as the market "wouldn't sustain 2 carriers" which I would have thought everyone taking to mean that BA would withdraw their service, yet they still plod on after seeing off AA and DL in the 1990s.

Well the Prestbury triangle boasts more Millionaires per sq mile than anywhere else in the UK.
Med-Longhaul fares on direct flights ex MAN are nearly always more expensive than flights ex LHR, sometimes substantially more. MAN-MAD was ALWAYS cheaper with BA via LGW than on their direct flights.
The Far East carriers have dedicated freighters into MAN. Substantial freight with pax could be carried on the right aircraft, thereby making pax flights more viable.
The last time I flew from HKG into LHR on a CX B744 there were less than 100 pax on board, so dont give me that guff about demand. Look at the poor load on the BA 777 accident aircraft. Many of the LHR routes are in fact over saturated but the slots held, have to be used & they are stupidly worth a fortune. MAN slots are worthless, its the LHR slot values that distort the market.

Monarch Man, if MAN isn't 'the biggest and most important airport outside London', would you care to advise us all which airport is then, in 'reality' ?.

This should be good...

AMS, FRA, CDG :ok:

MAN doesn't even rate a mention:D

Monarch Man,

I think you will find that AMS,FRA and CDG are in Holland, Germany and France, Unless something happened lastnight when i was sleeping. I think MAN flyer is talking about MAN being the most important airport outside London in the UK.
I am pretty sure we all agree on that

Autoglide,

BHX 1 - 1.5 hours drive from London!!?? A one a hour drive would require a licence-losing 100mph+ performance - 1.5 hours perhaps possible, at 02:00 on a Sunday morning - with all roadworks lifted!!!

Realisticly, add one hour to both times.

Sorry, didn't realise I would have to explain it in such detail. BHX is South of the city, it shares a lot of it's potential catchment area to the South with LHR. BHX to LHR is approx 110 miles at the most. The M40 is just about the fastest flowing motorway in the UK and aside from Oxford has a remarkable lack of congestion causing on/off ramp density. At any reasonable average motorway speed you can easily make it in 1.5 hours driving at the motorway average speed, unless you are stupid enough to try it at rush hour, are driving at old biddy speeds or are travelling there using the A40 on a moped. I drive past BHX on the way to LHR and back at least once a week, never taken anywhere near 2.5 hours, and you'd be very inept, daft enough not to bother seeing a way of avoiding the M25, or just plain unlucky for it to do so. I can make MAN to LHR in an average of 3 hours, never mind a quick tootle down the M40 from BHX.

Monarch Man,

Thanks for getting the week off to an amusing start, unusual for a Monday morning.

Could I respectfully suggest that you try and find somewhere you can learn to read English, and also maps.... ;)

More Baby routes!!

MAN - BCN and MAD being announced and put onsale today!

Baby goes MAD
 

Baby to MAD now bookable. 4 x a week Mon Thu Fri Sun. Afternoon departures.
BCN not quiet loaded at the minute.

FlyZB speaks sense.

I would add that MAN could also try competing on service rather than on price (there's a novelty eh?) Little Chef recently tried cutting prices to win back business - look what happened.

If people want to fly, a few extra pence off the landing fees (if the airline even passes them on to pax) won't make much difference.

In case you haven't noticed, real inflation (petrol, diesel, gas, potatoes, wheat, local and national taxes) is far higher than RPI or CPI would suggest, and with the recent credit scares, people are tightening their belts. I know I am. Travel suddenly becomes optional not taken for granted, and this will also have an effect on traffic levels at most airports.

Baby BCN
 

My post 2009 was fairly accurate and Madrid was of no surprise fitting
in nicely on Mo, Thu & Fri.

However I wonder how BCN fits in - latish departure, another aircraft,
cut route or did I miss something?

Still not bookable a minute ago.

Pete

WW
 

The BCN flights start in September. They operate on the same days and approx same times as MAD.

How can this be. The MAD took up the only gaps in the Schedule so how can BCN opreate without another A/C.

Viscount