Except I don’t think it has been.

As per SeanM on X:

https://x.com/seanm1997/status/17352...s3HZjZirllAO3Q

I've taken this from the DXB report as the EDI one is not public.

It doesn't show EDI as a cancelled destination, but suggests they aren't returning in S24.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....931f142255.jpg

I'm not sure it does suggest that. As I understand the data, the changes shown are the data in the S24 Initial Coordinated Schedule as cleared on the 23rd October 2023 against the S24 Historical Schedule as cleared on 17 August 2023. I don't know what the historical schedule showed for any EK EDI service, but it could be surmised that it showed more than 241 movements, given that the subsequent initial coordinated schedule shows a reduction of 241 movements but EDI is not showing as a cancelled destination (implying that there must be one or more movements still in the schedule for that route).

There are 30 weeks in the S24 schedule, so a daily service operating throughout that period would represent 420 movements. A reduction of 241 movements from that would leave 180 movements, which equates to a daily service over 90 days (or a <daily service for more days). Working back 90 days from the end of the S24 season takes you to around the end of July. So the data you've shown could be interpreted to mean a return in August rather than no return at all. Two other observations: this post suggests a possible EK return to EDI on the A350 in S24 and this post states the first A350 is due in August 2024.

Would you expect EK to launch a new route with a new type? Airlines normally put new types into main bases - though not to say the 350 couldn't displace another a/c to be used into EDI.

I'm not sure if they will launch with an A350, however it's probably about the same size as a 777 so no point swapping aircraft around to upgrade an existing route. Regardless, I think its more than likely that once they start receiving deliveries of the A350 you will see a lot of expansion. They have 60 A350s on order, and also 35 787s due in 2025.

If it doesnt relaunch then I'd be shocked.

https://www.executivetraveller.com/n...outes-adelaide

Worth noting though that the DXB slot report lists the allocated slots for ADL as cancelled. Given they appear to have been considering it for being "among the first destinations" for the A350s, they clearly don't have an in-principle issue with resuming a route with a new aircraft type.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....b58ed9c1da.jpg

SQ have been flying A350's to ADL for some time - its a very good fit for the traffic and the route

NCL -180 can someone explain what that means at Newcastle currently has a daily service and continues to be daily ?

Long Haul Summer Load Factors
 

Now that October CAA figures are out I've got the total percentage of seats filled on each route throughout the season.

For these calculations we have taken the figure from the ACL Start of Season report, then added together the monthly totals from the CAA to work out the load factors.

ALL LOADS ARE APPROXIMATE

Calgary - 91.21%
Toronto - 97.23%

Beijing - 64.39%

Cancun - 84.96%

Doha - 76.51%

Atlanta - 93.09%
Boston - 84.63%
Chicago - 89.08%
New York JFK - 89.03%
New York Newark - 79.51%
Orlando MCO - 75.75%
Orlando MLB - 83.21%
Washington - 92.14%

Are you sure about your DOH calculation? None of the monthly load factors I've seen for S24 have been below 85% and most have been about 95%.

Agreed. The DOH load factor is almost certainly wrong. It’s been constantly in the 90s.

Based on our calculation method it's correct. I've put the ACL screenshot and out spreadsheet screenshot below.

As I say that's per our calculation method.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....d1a4c36a30.jpg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....274dbc2863.jpg

Doesn't that depend on what aircraft type was used to determine the slot allocation and what turned up on the flights?

Absolutely. The start of season report gave the anticipated number of seats for the season. In the case of QR, I recall on several occasions they adjusted or changed aircraft type, which potentially impacts or could result in an adjusted number of seats. Unexpected Cancelations won’t have been taken into account. They planned to operate 359’s with a higher pax capacity earlier than the actual December start date. A whole host of reasons why a planned start of season seat number could change.

I see this paragraph was lost on people."For these calculations we have taken the figure from the ACL Start of Season report, then added together the monthly totals from the CAA to work out the load factors."

I made it glaringly obvious how we calculated it but some people decided that despite being shown the actual numbers to complain anyway

Not lost on me (I don't think!) - our posts crossed, I was responding to the point about 90% load factors.

Can't both answers be right e.g. if the seats available on the ACL report are based on the flights being op by 777, but the majority of flights are operated by something smaller, the load factor determined from trhe ACL figures will be different from the operational load factor.

The number of seats in the ACL report might not be what operated though, in which case calculating the load factor based on the ACL report isn't very illuminating. A more accurate and useful calculation could be done by looking at what actually operated based on the records here: Log Archive

And even better would be the number of seats sold against those offered for sale.

Apologies, your response was posted while I was writing my reply.

You are correct that both points can be correct. I'm on holiday so doing all the work from my phone.

I'll be flying back to EDI tomorrow

I noticed that the number of PAX to DOH was a few hundred more than the number using EK to DXB. Has this happened before?