TUI Airways

[737 400]

No doubt there is a significant cost factor with having to make an additional fuel stop at MAN. Therefore wouldn't it be more cost effective to use an airport with a far more suitable and longer runway such as CWL (2392m) or even EXT (2076m) given that a fair percentage of passengers probably travel a some distance anyway to reach BRS?
Just a thought....

 

[Tinkerman]

No doubt there is a significant cost factor with having to make an additional fuel stop at MAN. Therefore wouldn't it be more cost effective to use an airport with a far more suitable and longer runway such as CWL (2392m) or even EXT (2076m) given that a fair percentage of passengers probably travel a some distance anyway to reach BRS?
Just a thought....

110% of course it does.

Far too logical for airline economics that is mate. If the services were to switch to CWL then they'd be able to operate non-stop (all of the time) and retain a largely similar catchment.

Be interesting to see how this one does decide to play out, but the B787 runway performance does seem to be considerably less than what airlines with an interest in BRS once thought.

Also, TOM/TUI would not have budgeted for a fuel stop en-route on these services, everytime it occurs it is costing them a fair old sum of cash that pretty much renders any margin on the flight elements of the package to nil.

 

[Foxlimayankee]

If you operate from CWL you will lose a percentage of the Southwest catchment that would reconsider BHX or LGW. If you operate from EXT you would do the same with the South Wales catchment. BRS is in the middle of both so perfectly placed for the Southwest and Wales catchment.
I can't see TCX getting the A330 in to do SFB on its own, and I would raise an eyebrow as if the A330 could do SFB direct from BRS as well. TCX don't do long haul from BHX either, so that's a big chunk of the UK Midlands and Southwest market they are missing out on. Norwegian aren't a big package tour operator (If at all?). TOM basically have the market to themselves from a holiday package perspective. I imagine the routes are doing well enough to counter the odd tech stop.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Being more or less half way between CWL and EXT does help BRS to pick up some routes that its core catchment alone might not support. As Foxtrotlimayankee points out, CWL would not pick up many passengers from Devon/Cornwall and EXT would not pick up many from South Wales (EXT's runway is only 65 metres longer than BRS's anyway although at a lower elevation). BRS's larger and generally more prosperous core catchment than CWL's or EXT's also encourages airlines to operate from there rather than from the other two when routes might be marginal because BRS would need less 'topping up'.

I don't know whether CUN would not be viable left to to the BRS core catchment alone but airlines seem to have this default mechanism that says we go to BRS if there is a doubt: if it was marginal from BRS it would be likely to be marginal from either of the other two.

Having said all this I still find airline and airport economics an arcane art.

As for TUI and the B787-8, they had been operating the type for 2-3 years before they announced the BRS routes to CUN and SFB in the spring of last year so must have had a good idea of its performance by then, which presumably included the fact that there might be certain weather conditions preventing the aircraft from reaching CUN non-stop from BRS.

As mentioned elsewhere they persisted with the B767 on BRS-CUN for a number of years despite a fuel stop being needed on every outbound flight.

 

[big g]

I can't see TCX getting the A330 in to do SFB on its own, and I would raise an eyebrow as if the A330 could do SFB direct from BRS as well.

Those who are well in the know and have spent weeks in the sim say it can be done direct to MCO.

 

[Marko1]

At the end of the day tui or Thomas cook would operate these routes from Cardiff if they make money. Clearly they might not have otherwise they still would. Also I understand Thomas cook was planning an Orlando route but tui announced their routes first.

 

[Jerry]

Thomas cook would operate these routes from Cardiff if they make money.

Thomas Cook did operate a MCO route from CWL during March and May but it was when they had slack in their schedule at MAN. With their expansion at MAN they needed the aircraft for there so dropped it. Hopefully we will eventually find out who the mystery airline is that CWL is talking to about North American routes. Florida and New York were mentioned.
Thomson's long haul operations in the South West actually may show where they feel the markets are. Florida and Mexico are operated from BRS with it's wider catchment but in the winter they will be operating 5 Caribbean flights from CWL 2 to Barbados and 3 to Jamaica (not cruise flights) but only 2 from BRS, both to Barbados. So it may be an indication that most of their customers for the Caribbean flights are coming from South Wales while Mexico and Orlando are more spread over the area.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

I think you are right about the cruise customers at CWL. It's been like this for a number of years and I've commented on it before in other forums. The flights always seem full or pretty near.

On the face of it you would think the BRS catchment is made for the cruise market - a lot of older, comfortably-off residents with the time and means to cruise - although I'm told that in recent years cruising is becoming more and more popular with other generations and is no longer the main preserve of older people.

I've asked a number of people down the years why CWL's winter cruise market outpoints its other winter market in this way but I've never discovered a definitive answer. It's both fascinating and intriguing. It would also be interesting to discover how many of the cruise customers live outside Wales.

 

[big g]

Thomson's long haul operations in the South West actually may show where they feel the markets are. Florida and Mexico are operated from BRS with it's wider catchment but in the winter they will be operating 5 Caribbean flights from CWL 2 to Barbados and 3 to Jamaica (not cruise flights) but only 2 from BRS, both to Barbados. So it may be an indication that most of their customers for the Caribbean flights are coming from South Wales while Mexico and Orlando are more spread over the area.

You say that but TOM have added Jamaica to 2019 along with DOM,CUN and SFB. Not sure if the Jamaica route is weekly yet, but TOM must feel that BRS has good demand for the Caribbean.

 

[Foxlimayankee]

Lets not forget that once upon a time, less than 10 years ago, CWL had a huge Orlando following. 1x 767, 1x A330 through the season and 1x 747 during the height of the season. At a guess that would be about 1100 seats a week.

I fully agree with TLY, the cruise market has always done well from CWL, but it wouldn't surprise me if we start to see this shift to BRS. CWL still maintains it's P&O flights which only a few years ago P&O reduced to the main UK bases, only to realise that CWL had a big following and the flights were quickly reintroduced. Now the 787 is proven at BRS it wouldn't surprise me if P&O offer both BRS and CWL flights to widen and simplify it's following.

I would expect the next step for TOM at BRS would potentially be a weekly MBJ, maybe even a second weekly CUN or SFB.

 

[Jerry]

You say that but TOM have added Jamaica to 2019 along with DOM,CUN and SFB. Not sure if the Jamaica rout is weekly yet, but TOM must feel that BRS has good demand for the Caribbean.

The Jamaica route as far as i remember wasn't weekly it was a one off date in April. For winter 2018/19 BRS had 1 Barbados flight and 1 Jamaica flight. CWL had 3 of each over the course of the winter. For some reason though what Thomson loaded up provisionally for both airports has been taken down.

 

[Jerry]

I fully agree with TLY, the cruise market has always done well from CWL, but it wouldn't surprise me if we start to see this shift to BRS.

They aren't cruise flights. Thomson cruises aren't doing any cruises from Barbados or Jamaica matching those dates. The current winter offerings are beach holiday packages.

 

[Jerry]

Now the 787 is proven at BRS it wouldn't surprise me if P&O offer both BRS and CWL flights to widen and simplify it's following.

P&O Cruises are offering 4 cruises from Cardiff for winter 2018/19 and none from Bristol and i'm not sure P&O would change because they might change their carrier to someone who can't operate from Bristol if they under cut TOM.

 

[737 400]

This mornings Thomson/TUI flight TOM644 from BRS to Cancun worked by B787 G-TUIG is currently making the additional re-fuelling stop at MAN.

 

[Tinkerman]

It’s farcical that they don’t use CWL for this service.

This additional fuel stop is now becoming regular.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

It’s farcical that they don’t use CWL for this service.

This additional fuel stop is now becoming regular.

It seemed that way when the B767 operated to CUN for several years with an outbound fuel stop at MAN on every flight yet TOM persisted with it.

Without access to the figures it's impossible to know whether operating one of the flights from CWL but the others from BRS (Sanford and from next summer Punta Cana plus Sal, Cape Verde being switched to the 787 from the current 757) would be better (for the operator) than the fuel stop.

 

[big g]

Probably lots of reasons. I don’t think TOM engineers at CWL are all 787 trained. Also if the aircraft did have a technical issue it would be easier to fix in MAN or do an aircraft swap.

I have seen in the paper today that Qantas will be offering 787 service LHR-PER direct from March 2018. But when reading the small print the return leg will be via SIN. However it is being sold as direct!

 

[Marko1]

Orlando went non stop today. That's good enough for me

 

[Foxlimayankee]

Orlando has always gone non stop on the 787. CUN is the issue.

 

[Aviador]

Orlando has always gone non stop on the 787. CUN is the issue.

Isn't Cancun an extra couple of hours flying time?