PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Airlines, Airports & Routes (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes-85/)
-   -   Manchester-2 (https://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes/599775-manchester-2-a.html)

OzzyOzBorn 20th Jun 2020 01:43

United Airlines is in a difficult place financially. It is reported that they will try to get a $5Bn bond issue away next week. Goldman Sachs is on the case according to Bloomberg. Solvency cannot be taken for granted.

Boeing's CEO was recently rapped for suggesting that he expected one of the major US carriers to fail due to the C-19 crisis. Perhaps the anger directed towards him was more a case of "not in front of the children" rather than his authoritative opinion being wide of the mark in reality.

We'll have to see how things pan out. Feeling within the US is that passengers will drive rather than fly on journeys conducive to that until a vaccination programme has been completed. And stubbornly high C-19 infections in key areas such as Florida and New York could amount to a 'lost summer' for vacation travel. The market outlook for US carriers is tough. Unless they're deemed too big to fail by government.

On the plus-side, fuel prices appear set to remain relatively low in the medium term. That helps.

chinapattern 20th Jun 2020 19:15

Rumour has it neither Cathay or Hainan (in pax form) will be back either.

Navpi 21st Jun 2020 07:04

The way things are going you do wonder if CX and HU will even exist.

Mr A Tis 21st Jun 2020 10:19

According to Simple Flying - Air Transat to resume operations from July 23rd.

For passengers flying from Montreal where the carrier is based, the available destinations will be; Athens in Greece and the French cities of Bordeaux, Lyon, Nantes, Marseille, Paris, and Toulouse, and a flight to Lisbon. From Toronto, there will be flights to Athens, Glasgow, London, Manchester, Porto, and Rome.

Passengers will also receive a small care kit on board. This will contain disinfectant, gloves, face masks, and hand sanitizer.
Anyone know if the Air Canada merger is a dead duck or not? Don't think Rouge has been doing much flying, if any.

chinapattern 21st Jun 2020 11:43

All up in the air at the moment but Rouge have withdrawn the 767s thus effectively ending all transatlantic operations.

spannersatcx 21st Jun 2020 16:35


Originally Posted by chinapattern (Post 10816293)
Rumour has it neither Cathay or Hainan (in pax form) will be back either.

what rumours are these and where are they from, as someone with a vested interest?

spannersatcx 21st Jun 2020 16:36


Originally Posted by Navpi (Post 10816548)
The way things are going you do wonder if CX and HU will even exist.

well CX has just received US$5B which, at todays costs, should last 12 months at least?

zfw 21st Jun 2020 19:33


Originally Posted by chinapattern (Post 10816293)
Rumour has it neither Cathay or Hainan (in pax form) will be back either.

Emirates continue two per week to 12Jul, 15-31Jul is four per week all B777-300 at lunchtime.

Qatar a/w currently operates daily at lunchtime but increases to x11pw from 02Jul with morning flight added.

Etihad restarts 01Jul with retimed service once per day 1040/1225z B787-10 during July.

Cathay cutback to 01Aug, Singapore to 17Jul, Turkish to 01Jul, Oman to 01Jul, Air Transat 26Jul, Biman 16Jul, Ethiopian 02Jul, Saudia 01Jul.



Hainan adhoc charters 20Jun, 10Jul and 25Jul with A330-300.



VickersVicount 21st Jun 2020 21:40


Originally Posted by chinapattern (Post 10816787)
All up in the air at the moment.

Just the other day was reported as going ahead and plan for conclusion by W20. I expect this to go through. Think AC have the routes already planned for the A321LRs!

Una Due Tfc 21st Jun 2020 22:26

Delta are the only US major who so far have not retired the 757. As such UA and AA will be significantly reducing routes to non hub / primary airports one would imagine. AA are also retiring the 767 and A330. Until both start getting A321XLRs in 2023, things could be tough. UA have pulled EWR-SNN, SFO and EWR to DUB appear to be continuing on the 787, they ran ORD and IAD to DUB on the 757, haven't read what is likely to happen there so far, but their 767s are very premium heavy and are pretty much set up for LHR and other premium hubs, so probably not suitable for the likes of DUB/SNN/MAN/EDI/GLA. With business travel likely in the doldrums for quite a while, who knows whether that fleet will survive.

AA are taking delivery of several 787-8s right now, but I'd be wary of making any assumptions about them, rumours are rife that they'll be into chapter 11 once the CARES act expires on 1st October.

Very tough times ahead. The recession/depression resulting from the virus hasn't really bitten yet because everything is effectively in stasis due lockdowns.

BHX5DME 22nd Jun 2020 12:01

MAG Group - May 2020
 
Pax

Stansted – 20,607 down 99.2%

Manchester – 18,750 down 99.3%

East Mids – zero

Cargo

East Mids – 30,547 down 0.7%

Stansted – 21,210 up 14.1%

Manchester 1,342 down 85.9%

Traffic figures at all MAG airports were severely impacted by the outbreak of Covid-19 in May, as travel restrictions and a dramatic reduction in demand for flights impacted the Group’s passenger numbers. MAG’s reduction was reflective of world trends, with global travel demand reduced by 97% compared to previous year, according to UK Government data.

All MAG airports saw passenger figures reduce by at least 99.3% year-on-year in May, with MAG’s three airports serving 39,357 passengers between them, compared with 5.7 million last May.

At London Stansted Airport and East Midlands Airports, cargo figures held up well (STN: +14.1%, EMA: -0.7%) as key freight operators used the airports to keep essential goods flowing into the country and providing UK firms with a key route to export.

East Midlands Airport was one of the most resilient European airports by flight numbers in May, as its important role as the UK’s biggest airport for cargo aircraft continued.



OzzyOzBorn 22nd Jun 2020 13:52

Freight down 85.9%. Ye Gawds! People have been quarantined in place. Pallets haven't!

What isn't expressly stated is that MAN's cargo figures represent abject disaster. The decade-long policy of switch-selling freight-leads away from MAN is clearly exposed as the shameful failure which some on here have been scolded for calling it out to be. Absence of dedicated freighter services help protect long-haul passenger flights ... yes, that argument went well. Freighters occupy valuable aircraft stands ... yes, that's what aircraft stands are there for. EMA is just down the road ... yes, that road which is recognised as the worst in Europe linking two major conurbations. And MAN has ten newly-constructed stands ready to bring on stream at a time when demand from passenger fleets is in freefall.

Time for a complete change of direction. Time to enthusiastically welcome freighters back to the fold at MAN. Not just by resignedly acceding to inspiring initiative from enterprising growth companies such as THG (who refuse to be switch-sold elsewhere?). But by actively marketing to and incentivising operators whose services will benefit business in the NW region and beyond. MAG is arguably one of the biggest winners from the 'Northern Powerhouse' agenda, but that comes with a moral responsibility to invest in its success too. Maximising freight potential is low-hanging fruit in this respect.

A good start would be to ensure that they guy who answers the phone to Manchester Airport cargo inquiries isn't incentivised to switch-sell the business to EMA or STN. That has to stop. In the difficult economic environment we face now, the onus must fall upon MAN to move away from the frequently encountered: "NO - Now what is the question?" mindset to: "YES WE CAN!!!!!" (Apologies to Bob the Builder and Mr Obama).

No doubt a series of postings will now ensue insisting that MAN is absolutely correct to turn business away. That shows sophisticated group strategic thinking, you see. Well, we're in an economic recession for the ages now. Or is it a DEpression? Time to leave that particular business-school garbage behind till the next economic boom once again allows the luxury of such a damaging policy. Get out and compete for business again. Make sure that MAN offers robust capability to support the needs of northern business across the spectrum of aviation services ... including cargo. HMG wants to 'level up' the North. Come on MAN ... get on the case and help to make it happen!

brian_dromey 22nd Jun 2020 14:20


Originally Posted by OzzyOzBorn (Post 10817698)
Freight down 85.9%. Ye Gawds! People have been quarantined in place. Pallets haven't!

Clearly the majority of MAN's cargo business in below the feet of passengers. It is that combination of passenger and cargo demand that makes the flights viable. Obviously when passengers are prevented from travelling, that makes life difficult for airlines who dedicate the majority of their floor space to passenger carriage. We have seen airlines remove seats from the passenger cabin to transport PPE, etc. But this is fairly inefficient overall. I really done understand why MAN 'should' cater for this traffic when they were bursting at the seams? In the last 6 months the aviation business has changed beyond recognition - it seems reasonable to allow airport and airlines time to readjust their operations. Dedicated cargo facilities might play a larger component of the airports business in the medium term, but they have already made significant investments in dedicated freighter facilities elsewhere in the group, why change course now? It is worth bearing in mind that MAG is just one aspect, the freight integrators forwarders, warehousing and distribution networks also play a part. Why would someone open a new facility when they have a perfectly functional one 60 miles away they could use more intensively?

FFHKG 22nd Jun 2020 15:03

Routes are today reporting a weekly flight to Tehran operating by Iranair starting in July.

OzzyOzBorn 22nd Jun 2020 16:19


Clearly the majority of MAN's cargo business in below the feet of passengers.
That is self-evident. But it wasn't always so.


It is that combination of passenger and cargo demand that makes the flights viable.
My point is that the policy prioritising mixed-use flights exclusively at the expense of pure cargo ops has been exposed as a disaster. A business failure of epic proportions. DOWN 85.9% in the midst of a global air cargo boom. Some disgraced cargo strategist needs to acknowledge the reality of this abject failure and step aside from the wasteland they leave behind. Time for new talent in marketing cargo at MAN. Yes, cargo is a factor in the viability of scheduled passenger services. But not sufficiently to justify the exclusion of all competing business as a matter of airport policy. Airports should be a broad church welcoming all business leads and let the market sort the winners from the losers. Playing God has never worked out well for MAN. Remember protecting BA by turning away EasyJet and Ryanair back in the day? Did keeping freighters out deliver retention of Thomas Cook long-haul, Jet Airways, United Airlines, Air Canada Rouge, (some) Virgin Atlantic routes, American JFK, and very likely other long-haul services which haven't yet been confirmed? MAN needs to encourage ALL business opportunities, including servicing cargo intended for businesses in the conurbations of NW England and North Wales.

It is a myth that all-cargo services and long-haul passenger services cannot successfully co-exist. See Milano Malpensa. And they have a big cargo specialist airport 76km away at Bergamo too. I deliberately chose a broadly comparable airport vis-a-vis MAN rather than the likes of AMS which is huge in all-cargo and scheduled passenger services alike. Only Manchester seems to preach the myth that the two must be segregated at all costs. Everyone else is getting it wrong. And the results prove it. Oh ... hang on a sec ...


they have already made significant investments in dedicated freighter facilities elsewhere in the group, why change course now?
Because MAG's airports are not interchangeable. Each offers a unique business proposition based upon its geography. Stansted best serves the South-East. East Midlands best serves ... err, the East Midlands and the M1 corridor.


Why would someone open a new facility when they have a perfectly functional one 60 miles away they could use more intensively?
Rather, you should ask why did they wilfully run down the perfectly good cargo operation which thrived at MAN as recently as 2008. There are people who leave behind a rich legacy in business. And there are others who leave disaster like this in their wake. Business mistakes need to be acknowledged with honesty and transparency. Then corrected. Defending failed strategy with religious zeal until your market share is decimated generally doesn't work out well from a business perspective.

You say you are in Cork / Leeds. How often do you drive an artic over the Snake Pass? There is sixty miles. And there is sixty miles. EMA is a very challenging 60 miles for a heavily-laden HGV. That Pennine road tunnel towards Sheffield can't come soon enough - but that's another discussion.

inOban 22nd Jun 2020 16:49

EMA isn't just the cargo airport for the East Midlands. It's the airport for the major logistic bases which serve the whole of the UK. From these sites an LGV can reach more of England in an out and back shift than anywhere like Manchester. The specialist freight airlines use EMA because they want to.
​​​

SWBKCB 22nd Jun 2020 17:01


You say you are in Cork / Leeds. How often do you drive an artic over the Snake Pass? There is sixty miles. And there is sixty miles. EMA is a very challenging 60 miles for a heavily-laden HGV. That Pennine road tunnel towards Sheffield can't come soon enough - but that's another discussion.
Snake Pass? In an artic from EMA to Manchester?

750XL 22nd Jun 2020 17:21


EMA is a very challenging 60 miles for a heavily-laden HGV
Very challenging? For whom? It's a 2 hour drive :*

If any HGV driver struggles with that they'd best find another career :O

ATNotts 22nd Jun 2020 17:22


Originally Posted by SWBKCB (Post 10817856)
Snake Pass? In an artic from EMA to Manchester?

A42/M42M6/M56 or A50/A38/M6 Toll/M6/M56 Easy peasy lemon squeezy! (Especially at the dead of night).

Curious Pax 22nd Jun 2020 17:43


Originally Posted by ATNotts (Post 10817875)
A42/M42M6/M56 or A50/A38/M6 Toll/M6/M56 Easy peasy lemon squeezy! (Especially at the dead of night).

Easier than that - done it many times. Straight up the A50 from East Mids to junction 16 on the M6, then off at 19, up the A556 link road (the new Road is so much better than the old one) onto the M56 and job’s good ‘un! 80 miles on good standard dual carriageway and motorway the whole way. In normal times the rush hour on the M6 will slow things down, but at the moment even an artic would struggle to take much more than 90 minutes.



All times are GMT. The time now is 03:10.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.