Route Development & Rumours

[LBAYORKIE]

I understand where you are coming from but if you ask yourself is LBA ever really going to be a cargo concern the answer is no. The days of Royal Mail cargo flights and British Midland are long gone. If Jet2 were to commit to a cargo operation then I'm sure the airport would jump at the opportunity due to the size of their operation but we are where we are.

The airport is up against other airports in the region with cargo facilities. If they want to attract wide body operators they have to make it as easy as possible for them. They cant do much about the runway or infrastructure but they can provide cargo facilities- albeit it may not be at a profit. If they could sort the staffing theres no reason why they cant operate the transit shed/cargo scanners only on days when the airline requires it to do so.

 

[Aviador]

The only serious cargo ops achievable from LBA is from belly freight on passenger carrying flights which is why there's really no point in providing the service without a commitment by more than one airline.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

The only serious cargo ops achievable from LBA is from belly freight on passenger carrying flights which is why there's really no point in providing the service without a commitment by more than one airline.

I agree pure cargo operations are unlikely. But...consider that instead of generating cargo revenue by operating freighters airlines now rely on the belly capacity, which is huge and often exceeds that offered by freighters in the past. So it's a vital component of any wide body operators profit and one they would be very reluctant to surrender.

The airport cant wait until they get 2 wide body operators, both starting ops at the same time as it will never happen!

As with any business there is a need to speculate to accumulate and I would suggest they open a cargo facility when they get their first customer (airline) but they need to be aware to obtain Customs and other permissions, and recruit/train staff notice of at least 4 months would be needed. They would have to hope that either another airline customer comes along or the initial one increases frequency to make the operation of the cargo facility economically viable. Ideally I would say one flight a day would be ideal but probably 5 a week would be enough.

 

[KARFA]

But a Tui 787 flying to Mexico will be different to an Emirates or Ethiad 787 flying into its hub, ME carriers will definitely fly non pax cargo along its passengers..... well because it makes them money. An A350 - 787 can definitely fly from LBA, but that's not the point I'm making.

except there is no cargo handling at LBA so that's a bit academic.

i am afraid the point your making is simply wrong. a 787 is not going to be at mtow departing LBA for the ME, in fact it could have 10T of cargo onboard and still be nowhere near mtow as i have shown.

can we stop with this nonsense please.

 

[KARFA]

As with any business there is a need to speculate to accumulate and I would suggest they open a cargo facility when they get their first customer (airline) but they need to be aware to obtain Customs and other permissions, and recruit/train staff notice of at least 4 months would be needed. They would have to hope that either another airline customer comes along or the initial one increases frequency to make the operation of the cargo facility economically viable. Ideally I would say one flight a day would be ideal but probably 5 a week would be enough.

Ok, so if I was in charge at LBA my response would be we speculated for many years with cargo handling until it closed only a few years ago, it didn't deliver any of the results we may have liked. why only a few years later are you now asking me to reinvest and start up something which didn't work for us last time?

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Ok, so if I was in charge at LBA my response would be we speculated for many years with cargo handling until it closed only a few years ago, it didn't deliver any of the results we may have liked. why only a few years later are you now asking me to reinvest and start up something which didn't work for us last time?

There was no speculation in the past. The cargo facility delivered revenue to the airport until the day it closed. The airport had been making money from cargo since the 1960's, unfortunately they became complacent and the air cargo market, which was mainly based on trucks distributing uncleared import and export cargo to provincial airports from LHR/LGW/STN changed. As wide bodied services to provincial airports increased these started to be used for imports and exports and LBA saw its cargo volumes drop to the point when approx 5 years ago the cargo handling agent withdrew.

A wide body operator expects to have cargo revenue and if they dont it seriously compromises profitability- and this is especially relevant to routes which deliver marginal passenger revenue where it can be the difference between flying a route or not.

I believe the airport must be able to handle import and export cargo if it is to attract a wide body operator, and that any operator of such aircraft will reasonably expect it to be handled.

Its a 'catch 22' situation but I dont think theres any choice really.

 

[Aviador]

Arguably while the terminal is in no fit state to handle wide bodied flights there really isn't any point in pursuing cargo ops. If this is ever rectified then maybe the airport will reconsider this as an option.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Arguably while the terminal is in no fit state to handle wide bodied flights there really isn't any point in pursuing cargo ops. If this is ever rectified then maybe the airport will reconsider this as an option.

I agree. The starting point has to be an expression of interest from a wide body operator. Having said that tyevtime from such an expression of interest being made to operations starting may not be enough time to get a cargo operation up and running, so a strategy needs to be developed in anticipation. In fact a feasibility study would be a good starting point, they would then be able to advise a prospective wide body operator how long it would take to have the facilities available. Better that than stating "we don't have the facilities and we don't know if/how soon we could make them available"

 

[KARFA]

There was no speculation in the past. The cargo facility delivered revenue to the airport until the day it closed. The airport had been making money from cargo since the 1960's, unfortunately they became complacent and the air cargo market, which was mainly based on trucks distributing uncleared import and export cargo to provincial airports from LHR/LGW/STN changed. As wide bodied services to provincial airports increased these started to be used for imports and exports and LBA saw its cargo volumes drop to the point when approx 5 years ago the cargo handling agent withdrew.

By deliver revenue do you actually mean profitable?

When you say the airport became complacent do you mean carriers were not actually bringing cargo in on aircraft?

And cargo volumes dropping with a handler eventually withdrawing doesn’t sound like a successful profitable operation to me.

 

[White Heather]

By deliver revenue do you actually mean profitable?

When you say the airport became complacent do you mean carriers were not actually bringing cargo in on aircraft?

And cargo volumes dropping with a handler eventually withdrawing doesn’t sound like a successful profitable operation to me.

According to LBA management at the time, the cargo agents withdrew from LBA, ans several other airports, because the cargo industry had changed in how it operated, focussing on the major cargo hubs such as EMA, and with less and less being directed to the smaller regional airports. The only flight that carried any significant cargo was the PIA and once that left 8 years ago, there was no future for that particular agent, who left despite LBA attempting to dissuade them from doing so. After that, no other agent could see any attraction at LBA presumably in the absence of any wide body operators on scheduled flights where cargo could be carried.

LBAs only hope is firstly to build the terminal extension, so that a wide body operator is more likely to fly here, secure a contract with one and then, the numbers might stack up to start up a cargo operation again. There needs to be guaranteed cargo over a guaranteed time span to make setting it up viable. LBA have said that they still view cargo as a valid part of their future business but at present the situation makes it very difficult to achieve.

 

[KARFA]

Thanks for the information WH. Rather backs up my point from yesterday.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

According to LBA management at the time, the cargo agents withdrew from LBA, ans several other airports, because the cargo industry had changed in how it operated, focussing on the major cargo hubs such as EMA, and with less and less being directed to the smaller regional airports. The only flight that carried any significant cargo was the PIA and once that left 8 years ago, there was no future for that particular agent, who left despite LBA attempting to dissuade them from doing so. After that, no other agent could see any attraction at LBA presumably in the absence of any wide body operators on scheduled flights where cargo could be carried.

LBAs only hope is firstly to build the terminal extension, so that a wide body operator is more likely to fly here, secure a contract with one and then, the numbers might stack up to start up a cargo operation again. There needs to be guaranteed cargo over a guaranteed time span to make setting it up viable. LBA have said that they still view cargo as a valid part of their future business but at present the situation makes it very difficult to achieve.

Thats basically what I said- the whole situation changes as/when a wide body operator starts ops. A wide body operator will expect a cargo facility so LBA should plan for that contingency.

An airline isnt going to give a cargo guarantee. Why would they? The airports' LBA is competing with dont require one. Even less likely they will commit to serving a route for a minimum period, we all know how airlines chop and change- but only schedules but also equipment. If we are going to attract a wide body operator we have to put as few hurdles in the way as possible so LBA need have an implementation plan in our back pockets.

Ive been closely involved with cargo ops at LBA since 1977 and have seen all the ups and downs. My comments draw on that experience.

 

[White Heather]

Thats basically what I said- the whole situation changes as/when a wide body operator starts ops. A wide body operator will expect a cargo facility so LBA should plan for that contingency.

An airline isnt going to give a cargo guarantee. Why would they? The airports' LBA is competing with dont require one. Even less likely they will commit to serving a route for a minimum period, we all know how airlines chop and change- but only schedules but also equipment. If we are going to attract a wide body operator we have to put as few hurdles in the way as possible so LBA need have an implementation plan in our back pockets.

Ive been closely involved with cargo ops at LBA since 1977 and have seen all the ups and downs. My comments draw on that experience.

Yes we know you have.

But you should also know then that nobody is going to invest in a cargo operation at LBA only to find it's sitting there doing nothing if the only airline flying cargo of any significance disappears off to MAN, as PIA did.

Once again it's a chicken and egg situation, as it is with parking bays for aircraft. If LBA can attract carriers that make it worthwhile investing, they will do so. If not, they will maintain the status quo. An airline signing a contract to operate for 2 or 3 years might encourage investment but they're not going to do it on the basis of some Micky Mouse start up airline such as IPS - who, incidentally were advertising cargo facilities on their proposed flights with nothing to suggest that applied only to EMA.

 

[mdobuk21]

Getting boring this thread now, same old comments regurgitating every other month. Wake me up when Wizz appear or we get a route to Islamabad!

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

Wake me up when Wizz appear or we get a route to Islamabad!

Hopefully we get a 4th based Ryanair and new routes as well as some increased on others. Wizz air, for me, are not welcome at LBA.

As for the Islamabad, yeah, that also won't be happening for a while. So I guess ... enjoy your nap

 

[LBA4EVER]

Hopefully we get a 4th based Ryanair and new routes as well as some increased on others. Wizz air, for me, are not welcome at LBA.

As for the Islamabad, yeah, that also won't be happening for a while. So I guess ... enjoy your nap

Why do you not want wizz at LBA? Do they have a poorer customer service rating or are you afraid they will affect ryanair operations? Curious.

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

Why do you not want wizz at LBA? Do they have a poorer customer service rating or are you afraid they will affect ryanair operations? Curious.

They are a basket case recently. Their reliability and cancellation rate is beyond stupid - look at their LGW ops. Horrendous customer service, even worse then Ryanair, and I just don't want them. I dislike the airline, their business plan, I think they've grown WAY to big over the past few years and have no clue or direction where to go (if you could compare this to Norwegian as the other basket case example). They've come away from their core market and are now leaching on the UK market. They've become too big for their boots, I get airlines need to expand but concentrate on what you're good at and not interfering in or disrupting the markets (Contradicts what I'm saying since Ryanair are masters of that). They need bringing down a peg or two and need to retreat to fortress Eastern Europe and concentrate and what they are, and was, good at.

To me, I'd rather have more Ryanair, who are a successful based airline at LBA. They add something no one else can. They can add routes, whilst adding frequencies to routes that sell well. Have a proven track record at LBA. Are reliable majority of the time.

 

[White Heather]

They are a basket case recently. Their reliability and cancellation rate is beyond stupid - look at their LGW ops. Horrendous customer service, even worse then Ryanair, and I just don't want them. I dislike the airline, their business plan, I think they've grown WAY to big over the past few years and have no clue or direction where to go (if you could compare this to Norwegian as the other basket case example). They've come away from their core market and are now leaching on the UK market. They've become too big for their boots, I get airlines need to expand but concentrate on what you're good at and not interfering in or disrupting the markets (Contradicts what I'm saying since Ryanair are masters of that). They need bringing down a peg or two and need to retreat to fortress Eastern Europe and concentrate and what they are, and was, good at.

To me, I'd rather have more Ryanair, who are a successful based airline at LBA. They add something no one else can. They can add routes, whilst adding frequencies to routes that sell well. Have a proven track record at LBA. Are reliable majority of the time.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your point of view, your personal view on whether or not Wizz are welcome at LBA will not come into the equation.

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your point of view, your personal view on whether or not Wizz are welcome at LBA will not come into the equation.

Correct. However I’ll always stand by the fact I don’t want to see them at LBA. If they do come; I want Ryanair to go full defence and they touch holiday routes expect the same from Jet2. Both Jet2 and Ryanair are in a happy medium, competing and complimenting.

I know if they come I won’t use their services.

 

[LBA4EVER]

They are a basket case recently. Their reliability and cancellation rate is beyond stupid - look at their LGW ops. Horrendous customer service, even worse then Ryanair, and I just don't want them. I dislike the airline, their business plan, I think they've grown WAY to big over the past few years and have no clue or direction where to go (if you could compare this to Norwegian as the other basket case example). They've come away from their core market and are now leaching on the UK market. They've become too big for their boots, I get airlines need to expand but concentrate on what you're good at and not interfering in or disrupting the markets (Contradicts what I'm saying since Ryanair are masters of that). They need bringing down a peg or two and need to retreat to fortress Eastern Europe and concentrate and what they are, and was, good at.

To me, I'd rather have more Ryanair, who are a successful based airline at LBA. They add something no one else can. They can add routes, whilst adding frequencies to routes that sell well. Have a proven track record at LBA. Are reliable majority of the time.

Have you and the managing director of wizz had words with each other! Only kidding haha thanks for your view on wizz though, this is a forum so its good to hear members points of view, i was unaware of their apparent poor service but yes i agree they have expanded out of their core eastern europe destinations and flooded the market more with the uk based side of the airline. Never flown with wizz so unaware of the service onboard.