No just Manchester with I think Copenhagen next

Ian

Do you mean Genoa (GOA) or Goa (GOI)? I guess both would be interesting, but the latter more exciting than the former; and probably not pie in the sky, unlike a few others on this thread!

No chance of Manchester - Singapore direct?

It is currently direct, but not "non-stop".

I think yes, when the A350 appears in greater numbers. Whether it will be daily, and what the effect will be on MUC services remains to be seen.

Is is exactly what I was thinking if there were plans to decouple the Manchester-Munich-Singapore and make the Manchester flight direct, to compete with CX into the Asian market.

I'd like a proper weekly service over the summer on EDI-MCO.

Norwegian to introduce EDI-BOS.

One of the Chinese Airlines to start EDI-PEK or PVG! I think this is going to happen sooner or later anyway.

I have previously put this on another forum but it may be of interest here. Credit Scotty Dog (SSC) for the numbers.

I have an update on the route performance of CX and SQ Ex MAN in 2015. Suffice to say SQ does not come out too well, but considering the factors at play against the current SQ operation I feel there is much to be optimistic about for the future.

I should be clear that these figures are credited to "Scottie Dog" (SSC) and my understanding is that they are based upon the official CAA figures for the relevant period. This means that they include direct routes from MAN to the destination, they do not include indirect routes (e.g. MAN-DXB-SIN). In the case of MAN, only one airline service HKG and SIN directly and so calculations can be undertaken reasonably easily. It does not include PAX from MAN-MUC carried by SQ but does include PAX ex MAN who transfer at SIN.

(Hope that is all clear?!!)

SQs performance

In 2015 SQ carried 108,950 PAX from MAN-SIN. This is up 5,998 from 2014 (102,962). Based on a daily frequency, this works out at roughly 150PAX per flight (i.e. 300 per day). Although It has not been used for the entire period under review, if it had been, a 4 class B77W (268 seats) you are looking at a load factor of around 56%. We do not know how many were premium PAX.

By way of historical comparison, in 2005 SQ carried 161,671. Over the past decade there has been a drop of 52,721.

This is disappointing. The overall market size ex MAN has not dropped (it did dip from the GFC) and long haul routes from MAN generally are booming. So what can be done to improve this? Fortunately, CX have provided the template for SQ to follow.


CX performance

In 2015 CX carried 124,172 PAX from MAN to HKG. This was the routes first full year of operations. It was 4x weekly on a 3 class B77W (no F) with 340 seats.

Based on this, they carried roughly 298 PAX per flight, representing a load factor of 88%. CX have been reportedly delighted with this, and want to make the route 8x weekly either with the B77W or A359. Crewing issues have frustrated that until 2017.

The non-stop element has been cited as a key factor in this success, but they have also code shared with a feeder airline into MAN and the departure time (12 noon ish) permits those connections. HKG is also an obscenely strong market for the UK in general.


Is there hope for SQ?

I think yes. The main issue facing SQ is that they are offering a stopping service which brings them into direct competition with a huge number of airlines, including the ME3, TK, BA, Swiss, KLM etc. This is irrespective of whether SIN is the O/D as for places like Australia or NZ (I.e. The major market) SQ essentially offer a two stop service whereas the ME3 offer a 1 stop).

Taking SIN on its own as a sector, the scheduled journey time for SQ MAN-SIN is 14:55. Without the stop it would likely be around 13:00. By comparison for MAN-SIN you are looking at the following connecting journey times:

Via AMS with KL: 15:00
Via LHR with BA: 15:05
Via FRA with SW: 15:15
Via ZRH with SW: 15:20
Via DOH with QR: 15:25
Via DXB with EK : 15:55

I have no figures to hand for EH or TK but they are not likely to be too far off this.

In summary, despite the serious competition faced by SQ and the relatively uncompetitive journey time and departure/connection options (in particular offering a two stop kangaroo service- but also to its
Own hub at SIN!!!) they do very well from MAN, and over half of the plane on the MUC-SIN sector is travelling ex MAN despite the issues above. As an example of the competition, EK report that SIN is in their top 10 connections Ex MAN.

My feeling is that it can standalone on a daily basis using an A350. Making this change is likely to result in a significant boost to PAX numbers, particularly if it uses a brand new type of aircraft.

Of more concern to SQ, may be the MUC route. Could it standalone? of course we have no idea about the general yield of MUC including premium passengers, but we will see what they do.

Bring the SQ SIN-MUC-BHX if / when MAN starts direct !

I don't think anyone other than SQ/SIN, MAN, or MUC will know how this route will be going forwards.

I doubt SQ would start via BHX as a direct reaction to any de-coupling of the MAN/MUC service, purely because it is sandwiched between MAN and LHR and the existing competition from Emirates, and (soon) Qatar. SQ suffered at MAN due to the emergence of the MEB3 and they have only recently started to recover. Still significantly down on 2005 though.

Can never recover until de linked as it is just about at it`s limit pax wise

Ian

Quite. With the MUC stop, they are no faster on a MAN-SIN sector than anyone of the MEB3, or via LHR, CDG, AMS with the added bonus that the other options offer a choice of departure times.

They also offer a slower journey on the Kangaroo route than the above and are under pressure from CX (soon to be Hainan and Air China).

My prediction is a 2016 announcement for a 2017 decoupling.

I was thinking about the future of Eurowings and they are venturing into non-German airport bases, like Vienna, what other bases do you think could be successful? They could also operate long-haul routes like DXB, JFK from these potential bases.

Here are my suggestions:

Milan-Malpensa
London-Stansted
Zurich
Budapest

I would like to see the MAN - LGW service re-instated, i believe there is a demand for it. It could be done by BA or EI (With EI operating a triangle service between DUB - MAN - LGW - MAN and in reverse) a A319 would be perfect on the route. or maybe if BE wanted to operate considering they handle transfer PAX.
For BA to operate it, it probably would be a loss making route, but then again the feed would help other flights.

Yes, but what market would MAN/LGW serve. Virgin Trains offer a far quicker city centre to city centre service than any of the airlines, given the faffing around that is part and parcel of flying these days, hubbing at LGW is again quite limited these days, and with MAN having such great connections both east and west these days I can't see the point.

Perhaps the best chance for success on MAN/LGW would be package tours to Brighton, or away days to Man. United home games!

Manchester - Heathrow sees something in the region of 75% of the users making a connection at LHR, the remaining 25% are either passengers making separate connections of their own or point to point, hence I'd suggest a Gatwick route would be a challenge for this reason and those stated in relation to the trains etc.

However, only a minority of traffic is heading for city centres nowadays, and only a fraction of that is centre-to-centre. London/SE England is big enough to be separate markets in separate areas. If you live in say Maidstone and have a business meeting in Northwich, try doing that by train.

The Manchester trains eliminated their stop at Watford, and that cut out the whole west-of-London market from them.

London City is often quoted as an airport that just serves those in Canary Wharf, yet talking to fellow passengers they come from far and wide, well out into Essex or Kent, and all across London.

So the Dubrovnik link has come to fruition thanks to easyJet. What next?

VLM seem to be getting into IOM - could there be room for the restoration of an IOM-LTN service at some point?

Are there any gaps in Europe for any of the US3 to operate successfully? One that comes straight to mind is JFK/EWR - BUD, strong demand and unserved.

Can anyone suggest what routes are next for Norwegian's long-haul operations? Maybe Las Vegas since BA have announced they are axing the route.

BA are only discontinuing LGW to Las Vegas but still operating LHR to Las Vegas plus VS serve it from LGW so is there any need for Norwegian to enter this market!

I think DY are not really that bothered with another airline competing. They have entered markets like LGW-MCO which has both BA and VS operating. Norwegian also offer cheap air fares to North America and will also beat the likes of BA & VS on price, which is another advantage over the full-service airlines. I do think that with Norwegian's latest routes from Oslo to Las Vegas, they will be thinking of serving it from Gatwick in the future.

It has been a great 2 years for Manchester, after securing many long-haul routes including Hong Kong, Beijing and most recently San Francisco & Boston. Also Shanghai has been on the cards for a while. What long-haul route is next for Manchester? Any suggestions?

South Africa seems to be a notable gap in the network, I expect Thomas Cook will give Cape Town a go at some point if Gatwick works for them.

I think it is more about consolidation of existing routes (e.g. Multiple carriers, increased frequency) than new routes such that when the next downturn comes they are robust enough to withstand it.

If I had to put my neck on the block, South Africa and the Indian Sub-continent seem to be the most obvious missing long haul routes. Other possibilities include Tokyo, Kuala Lumpur and Bangkok but I doubt we will see these any time soon.

I was thinking of how it would be quite fitting for Vueling to open up a base at Gatwick. They could compete with easyJet on many Spanish and Italian route, but also on important business routes to cities. They could also work in conjunction with British Airways' operation out of LGW and could could code-share with BA meaning flights and holidays could also be booked via BA's website. I think even if they did not decide to set up base operation, they could still offer a lot more flights from their current bases to Gatwick.

Here are just some of the routes I think Vueling could operate out of Gatwick:

LGW-CDG (flights launching very soon, could potentially add an early morning rotation for business traffic)
LGW-BRU (easyJet previous operation shows there is demand, easyJet offered poor timings to do with business traffic, Vueling could make this work with good timings for business traffic)
LGW-AGP (could complement British Airways' service by adding a mid-afternoon rotation out of Gatwick)
LGW-ALC (could complement British Airways' service)
LGW-LPA (capture leisure traffic, code-shared through BA,)
LGW-MAH (capture leisure traffic, code-shared through BA)
LGW-MXP (only served by EZY, 500,000+ passengers annually, code-shared with BA)
LGW-PMI (capture leisure traffic, code-shared through BA)
LGW-DME (easyJet showed from previously operating that there was demand, even when the flights were reduced to one daily due to the problems with Russia, flights were still full and fares were quite steep)
LGW-LCG (Vueling to end the LCG-LHR to make a daily slot available at Heathrow for other BA/IB/EI flights and could switch to LGW)
What other routes could there be and what are your thoughts on this?

:ok:

Point to point pax would be (at the LHR end) residents of the Thames Valley from Middlesex to Oxfordshire who don't want a long tedious journey up to London before taking the fast train to Manchester.

Probably also works in reverse with residents of Cheshire and parts of staffordshire, etc. (?).



Good point!

Yes, this is a big pain in the arse for many!

MAN
 

Some speculation from MAN:

The VS aircraft at MAN next summer are apparently going to be more intensively utilised. In practice, it is speculated that this means a Detroit service will start.

Hainan are not yet done. They want to go daily at MAN - PEK from 1 January 2017 and also want to introduce a service to Xi'an.

China Southern are interested in a 3x weekly service to MAN from Guangzhou using the B788. Start rumoured to be summer 2017.

Air China have had issues with slots at Shanghai, but are due to start in October. Like Hainan, they too want to go daily sooner rather than later.

Thomas Cook have not yet given up on west coast USA. Their strategy is supposedly to go daily to the west coast (e.g. 3x San Francisco 4x Los Angeles) which together with their nearl daily service to Vegas gives a good coverage of a popular region.

Singapore Airlines current plan is to run the A350 to MAN nonstop 4x weekly, with the remaining 3x days covered with the existing Munich tag on. Eventually, they want to go daily non stop as in the early 2000s.

Cathay Pacific remain keen to increase to daily, as and when aircraft and crew let them. They essentially prioritised a slot grab at Gatwick ahead of 8x weekly MAN. Eventually, MAN stands to gain from the indecision of London airport expansion, but not in this occasion.

Emirates and Etihad have had very high loads for a long time, and despite recent increases in capacity. Something seems likely to give. Emirates also priorities a Gatwick slot over Manchester. Look out for that 4th daily flight soon enough.

American Airlines are keen to run between Dallas and MAN. No details.

That's about it. Plenty in there. Still keeping eyes open for JAL, ANA, Thai and the myriad of other long term targets. Even BA(!)

All good for Ringway, and not before time! Good to see several new China routes, not holding my breath for any India routes though. Think that SQ will go nonstop sooner rather than later, especially as CX plans to go daily soon. Keep up the good work

It is in part related to the restrictions in capacity in the South East. New or extended routes cannot get into LHR or LGW look at MAN and BHX.

Clearly some demand exists for LHR outside of the south east it is, in part, simply reallocating services in a more geographically appropriate way.

Agree with SQ. If CX go daily and the likes of Emirates and Etihad keep increasing frequency, not to mention all of the Chinese carriers, they need to change something. Offering a daily service non stop on a brand new aircraft seems like a very strong response.

With British Airways' adding routes like Billund, Inverness & Krakow in recent months, what other short/medium haul routes from Heathrow are they still missing that would be viable to operate, keeping in mind the routes they operate out of Gatwick already?

Avgeek

Some possibilities to add to your BA ex LHR list some already having been served.

Belgrade, Dresden, Granada, Jersey, Nantes, Perpignan, Strasbourg, Zaragoza.

How does LGW-JER perform? Could the route move to LHR and do without the orange tailed competition?

BA LHR-SCL: no longer speculation, starts next year.

Leeds-Berlin no longer speculation after Yesterday's announcement from Jet2.

In Spanish....

Emirates plans to fly to Valencia.

http://www.expansion.com/valencia/2016/06/17/57644648268e3ed8138b45ec.html

I don't have figures but the Gatwick- Jersey route is always very well patronized (for both BAW & EZY). Heathrow was always a traditional route & would do well for BAW. There is certainly a big demand for it within the island. Although LGW is expanding its routes worldwide, islanders would very much appreciate the ability to connect with many more (& more frequent) long distance routes from LHR. There is also a very great demand for LHR within the business community - especially the finance industry.

Islanders? Gibraltar is connected to mainland Spain, its a peninsula!

The island being discussed is Jersey.

JER
 

I wonder if the current LGW BA schedule could be maintained and also add say twice daily LHR return to cater for connections?

Certainly BA now offer a wider range ex LGW for JER with the addition of JFK which with properly constructed tickets will allow onward US connections without the need to transfer to LHR by road.

Also LGW is soon to get CX which would also allow decent ex JER eastbound connections.


cs

You are correct to question the ability of BAW to operate from both LGW & LHR to JER. I feel that a doable frequency would be 3/4 services from each. LGW does offer more connections now - but nowhere near as many as from LHR .Certainly as far as BAW are concerned. Another suggestion would be for BAW to concentrate on LHR-JER with 5/6 flights per day, & leave the LGW-JER service to EZY. It would then be possible to connect with all the flights we could possibly want to connect with from both airports.
None of this is likely to happen until the 3rd. runway at LHR.

With a third rwy, U2 could be on the LHR-JER route as well.