Has the Middle East Peaked as a Hub ?
 

Prior to the 1990s the ME was simply a refueling stop rather than a transit hub. The latest generation of aircraft with increased range allowed it to be overflown, however they also allowed non stop from the ME to anywhere enabling any two airports to be connected through that location. EK, EY and QR took full advantage of this and built themselves into major hub airlines with a global reach.

The COVID - 19 pandemic has brought all that to a crashing halt, and even as the recovery starts, the hub model of bringing in passengers from all over the world to a central location and then redistributing them all across the network will be out for a long time to come as travel bubbles will favour non stop flights or fuel stops only where this isn't possible. Governments will want to assist their national airlines by permitting their direct flights whilst placing heavy restrictions on other countries airlines connecting flights. One case of COVID - 19 in the cabin crew accommodation would be disastrous for any ME airline as crews typically share apartments in a few common locations.

The A380 concept hasn't worked and possibly the days of the mega international hubs are numbered as well. The latest generation of aircraft, B787 and A320neo have better range and economics than earlier series and allow greater flexibility and more point to point routes. Hubs will still be needed but are likely to be smaller, more numerous, more widely spread out and focused on less distant destinations. One stop connections will still be possible but will likely involve a hub in a more direct line and smaller aircraft.

Filling B773s will be difficult enough, and filling of them enough to maintain frequency and reduce connecting times will be even harder. Moving 800 pax takes 2x B777 or 5x A320/B737, if the loads drop removing 1 B777 flight is a 50% capacity cut and a 2 hour connection turns into an 8 hour one whereas removing one narrowbody is a 20% cut with a much smaller increase in the transit time.

Various locations have risen to prominence and then fallen again as aircraft capabilities increased, Shannon Ireland was once a vital fuel stop for aircraft making the Atlantic crossing but was bypased as range increased.

Are the best days of the ME hubs now behind them with growth turning into a very slow decline ?

Anchorage in Alaska was until the 1990s a major passenger hub purely due to its location. It was
once known as the crossroads of the world handling 500 747's a week.

Times and technologies change and its glory days are now over.

With regards to the ME hub we are talking about a harsh new reality that no one was prepared for.

Yes I agree this crisis might very well be the beginning of the end.

Probably the best days of the ME are over. I don't know. But there will be a lot of city-pairs between Europe and Asia, and between Africa and Asia that won't justify a daily non-stop flight.

I thinking the best days of any routing, whether the transatlantic market, the Kangaroo route or the ME hubs are over. Sure, they will all return o some degree, but never to 2019 levels again.

Maybe, maybe not.
Thing is, to change the present model requires airlines to replace existing fleet prematurely. Presuming passenger loads are slow to return to pre-Covid19 levels then it may be hard to justify this cost. Cheaper to run what you’ve got until things pick up, by which time those older airframes will have paid for themselves.

The M.E. airlines have the advantage of cheap fuel, cheap labor, no pesky unions and are government owned. Quite a formidable combination to compete against.

yeah yeah sure.

Anchorage in Alaska is still a major hub but for cargo, not passengers. Any change is likely to be gradual and EK seem to have realised this with the new fleet shifting towards smaller A350s and B787s. The line on the growth graph may be shifting from steady and upward into a slow decline.

Unfortunately there isn't much for the ME 3 in the immediate surrounding area, and they rely on connecting people from cities which are a considerable distance from their main base. The long haul and premium traveller segments have been hit hardest and will take the longest to recover. Where non stop flights aren't possible, transits are likely to be restricted to virus free countries with strong controls. Taiwan is one of the least affected countries in the world and there would be little concern about joining pax or crew layovers in Taipei for example.

The ME 3 are global airlines and a large portion of their networks will be off limits for some time to come, airlines which are more focused towards regions which are virus free will be less affected as a smaller proportion of their networks will remain closed.

Ethiopian Airlines will be even worse off due to their location and focus on Africa. China Airlines and EVA Air may experience a surge in demand. Vietnam was largely spared from the virus and could be an increasingly popular destination. Fiji could replace Bali for Australian holiday makers.

The next couple of years will see some major changes in travel patterns.

In a Nutshell?


No.......

WK why not ? ME is done ! Dubai is about to be reclaimed by the desert and not just because of air travel . Hang on to your hats ! And by the way there are some good buys on Dubai properties.

Thanks but already been there and done that:}

How do you come up with this little gem?:rolleyes:

Always good for a laugh
 

Even before Covid there was plenty of experts predicting the end of the ME super hub due to the 787/350.

Anchorage may have been a hub in the past but it clearly lost out when longer range aircraft appeared.

Geography never changes. Regardless of what aircraft are in service or will come in the future, the fact remains, the ME is within 8 hours of 2/3rds of the world’s population. Despite the USA being so awesome, Anchorage did not have that advantage. It has been mentioned many times by industry experts that the ‘sweet spot’ for most wide body flights is around 8 hours. This is because the extra fuel required to go further starts to become exponentially more expensive.

Something most of you don’t seem to understand is the mix of passengers on any EK/QR service. It is very rare to see more than 20 passengers on any flight travelling between two destinations. For example a flight from SEA-DXB, would have passengers connecting to over 40 destinations, so the average is 7.5 pax per connection.

That means a direct flight between most parts of the world WILL NEVER HAPPEN. There just isn’t enough demand. So hubs will always exist. Hubs are designed to bring together passengers travelling to one destination to make the whole flight profitable.

Direct point to point flights WILL take some of the demand away from the ME. But it will never kill the business model as you are suggesting. Geography and pure economics will always win.

well said - do you work for EK Government Affairs aka OpenSky Magazine?

same was said in 2008! They will find a way.

Ideally as a passenger I would prefer to fly direct to my chosen destination. Flying east long haul from the UK, unless I fly from Heathrow or Manchester, and with the exception of TUI, ME carriers are the most practical choice. They offer a wide choice of destinations beyond their hubs, good aircraft and service, multiple services from UK airports and of course competition to keep prices at an acceptable level. No sign of this changing in my view for many years. And not forgetting that Dubai for one has become a destination Itself.

I certainly hope so! Airlines funded by Dictatorial regimes were modern slavery is still in practice. Capital punishment for gay people and basically no form of human rights.

but to answer the question: nope. Its geography in combination with cheap labour, cheap “loans” etc will make sure the ME still has a future. Maybe not in its current shape and form and maybe the unmentionable will be merged into EK but we have definitely not seen the end of the ME as a hub. Insh’allah

Well I would say Pakistan and India are in the " immediate surrounding area ". While these countries with huge populations struggle to find seats on their on their own carriers the ME 3 will have a large role to play.

HAHAHAHA!!! Whatever mate. ‘Cause anyone that disagrees with the original post is a paid troll??

I’ll make it simple for you:

Any airline based in the Middle East has similar advantages. Look at the history of Iran Air pre 1979 and you’ll see these things never change. The problem is the countries they’re based in aren’t as stable or nice as Singapore (and the old Hong Kong).

I still see the long haul hub business going on! Airlines are chopping routes left right and centre together with crews and aircraft! Direct city pairs with shrink and that's where EK & QR will pick up the extra, mix it in the ME and push out as they've done for years! I cannot see the other, not to be mentioned one, seriously competing mind you! I thinks it will take 2-3 years to get near 2019 levels mind you!

The hub business will certainly go on, some will gain in importance and some will reduce as new travel patterns emerge. Addis would be the natural one for Africa, Singapore for SE Asia, London for Europe to North America etc. Turkey is very well positioned between Europe and Asia, and Turkish Airlines fly to more destinations than any other.

A single location may be unable to support three mega carriers all chasing the same market, an EK/EY merger would make sense, even just code sharing and coordinating schedules would go a long way.

Survival over the next few years will depend on who has the deepest pockets and gets the most support.

I’ve lost track of how many times you’ve touted this over the last two months? Any reason for the obsessive posting about EK/EY? Personally I don’t see it ever happening........

I was just pulling your leg :O

If nationalistic pride wouldn't allow a merger, which would effectively be an EK take over of EY, then code sharing and an alliance would make sense particularly at the moment. Co-ordinate schedules, a full B777 for each airline is better than two half empty ones each, uneconomic routes for two might be profitable for one, connection times could be minimised and even if an airport transfer is needed the two hubs aren't that far apart. DWC reduces that distance even further.

Allow FF mile usage between either airline and lounge access to the other partners facilities. Both airlines are of a similar high standard so arriving at the airport and finding your flight is being operated by the other partner wouldn't bother the pax. An alliance would strengthen both airlines and it's difficult to find reasons against the idea, even QR are in one. EK already partner with QF, and EY have numerous code shares with other airlines. With everything put together, a ME alliance could rival the current OneWorld/Star Alliance/Skyteam trio and strengthen the regions hub position.

This is just too funny, EK effectively taking over EY! Dubai is the very poor cousin of Abu Dhabi and in fact I think Abu Dhabi made a loan to EK just recently, which is also what happened during the GFC. Abu Dhabi has nearly all the oil and the gas, which is why EK was started, to diversify its economy.

Abu Dhabi has the money but Dubai has the Emirates brand recognition. EK was profitable where as EY was losing billions. Almost all of EYs investments in foreign airlines have lost money. In the extremely unlikely event of a merger, which name would be retained and which management team would run the new entity ?

No. You said a TAKEOVER, not naming or brand recognition. If they were to merge it will be Abu Dhabi that would in the drivers seat. And it would be because EK has no cash.

Abu Dhabi would be in the back seat of the limo smoking a cigar, EK would be in the driver's seat wearing a peaked cap and dealing with the traffic. Unlikely to happen but at the moment, who knows ?

Even if they just codeshare and co-ordinate the schedules so they don't compete head on with each other, the benefits to each side would be enormous.

That I would agree with, but it would not be under EK branding. Have a look at any takeover and that's what it would be, and you will see that the company doing the taking over wins the day when it comes to naming. There may be dual branding for a while, but eventually it would be EY. EGO.

Having worked for both airlines I would have to disagree with that. EK through their years of sports sponsorship have become a world renowned brand - EY are unknown outside of aviation. Abu Dhabi has pumped Billions into EY to try and replicate the brand success at EK but totally failed. So if a merger is on the cards (and I can see the issues with local egos) then it will because it is a last throw of the dice and even Abu Dhabi are not going to throw away even more money on a failed enterprise.

Emirates is after all what Abu Dhabi and Dubai are both part of - it's not as though EK is called Fly Dubai...;)

So what your saying is that Al Nahyan is going to take the loss of face and merge EY into EK, with their branding, when he has no financial reason to do so, i.e. he can afford to continue to pour money down the toilet, while Maktoum looks like the winner and is the one who actually needs the money. Yeah, nah!

My guess is no merger, but another loan to EK to tide them over.

For any potential merger, first you'd need to get past the egos and willy waving about EK having the stronger brand and EY having the cash (well the AD govt having the cash - EY has basically been a cash furnace) and all the machinations of what it would be called - United Emirates?

The next issue is simply one of logistics in that Dubai and Abu Dhabi airports are still a relatively long way from each other. Would AD pax want to drive to Dubai to fly to Paris, or New York? Or would Dubai pax want to have to schlep to AD to fly to Manila? There would still be a lot of replication at each hub. You could shift all the DXB flying to DWC to move things closer to AD but it's still well over an hour to downtown from there, as well as being less convenient for DXB pax.

Smarter minds than mine would have to figure out how the flying program would work with two hubs so far apart. One option would be to have say a DXB-AUH-LHR or CDG-AUH-DXB routing that loops in both hubs but flying widebodies on short hops like this is horribly inefficient. Not to mention that it would be impossible to tag an additional AUH rotation on the end of a LAX-DXB sector without a fresh crew. Shhh, I shouldn't give them ideas.

Perhaps a high speed rail between the airports?

Glider, It’s always a good idea not to post when inebriated. If you are from the U.K. your English language is very poor.

37 K for Wizz Air. You have to be making this up. You could not live on 37k in the ME .. or probably anywhere else . If it’s true .. the race to the bottom has truely begun.

True, but at some point the virus will end either by a vaccine or just burning itself out - then the natural advantages associated with of location of the ME will reassert themselves. The airlines in the ME didnt grow into what they were by accident, there were specific reasons that made that growth possible and those reasons remain.

That being said, when they do come back I doubt that we will see the return of the generous 'expat' packages that we have seen in the past - I suspect that the present pay cuts will be with us for many years to come and will become the new normal.

Middle East airlines are suffering a lot because of the covid consequences and, thanks to the latest wrong decisions of various governments (see useless quarantine and useless restrictions) the loss will go deeper in the next months, that being said I think that there is no comparison with any other airlines in the world, those ME carriers are the best option for travellers in terms of quality, safety and network so I guess they will never stop being the most convenient option for years to come, once the crisis is gone (nobody knows exaclty when) they'll go back stronger than before because they have the capitals to do so (like Qatar with endless money) and they will pick up all the passengers of the failed airlines.
Some of them will suffer more than others (see Emirates) because of the wrong fleet choice, way too many A380's that are amazing for passengers but a blood bath for Airlines, they were ok 10 years ago but 115 of them ??? Come on...
Unfortunately the package for pilots will not be the same for a while, unless things recover faster than anticipated but the damage is unfortunately done.

No mate. It is cost and geographical location that makes the ME carriers sometimes the best option.

Long haul business travel will be the hardest hit. That will be a serious issue for any airline that relies on this segment, but probably even more for the ME3.

However the ME3 will continue to be a hub. Maybe not as huge as it was a few months ago. Maybe we see one airline not continuing under its current name or in its current form. Nevertheless the hub function will stay.

I agree, they’ll continue to operate at a reduced pace, nobody knows for how long but among the three, considering that all of them are not making any profit ( except for Cargo ) since a long time, the only one with a better fleet and with more money is Qatar Airways, Emirates is too big and has the most uneconomical fleet of all, Ethiad is a mess, Saudia is a complete disaster.
When passengers will start traveling again, for business or pleasure they’ll chose the best option, price and quality wise and no airline in the world can compete with them.
only time will tell.... Let’s wait and see.

Not sure about that. Both airlines have similar fleet sizes but Qatar have 6 different types in service compared with only 2 for EK thus leaving them with much larger fixed costs and inflexibility. Average age of the fleet isn't a lot different either at 6 and 7 years. OK presently EK cannot fill the A380 but given the size of the 777 fleet it will be a long time before they run out of capacity on any route.