Route Development & Rumours

[LichfieldBlue]

Hassaan , I have to disagree regarding the runway extension.
We would not have seen A380 or Cargo 747's, fully laden, without the extension. It would have meant restricted range, which is not cost effective to the airline concerned.
I do share your concerns that we are not attracting further long range routes, but i live in hope!.

I remember the old AA flight to Chicago struggling in summer months due to runway length and safety margins.

 

[andrew.clarkson]

So after all the interest in finally now having a extended runway, for the purpose of building it was to encourage regular long haul flights. But apart from Emirates to Dubai, that's all it's used for, so is 3,052, is it now justified as money well spent or wasted. Because apart from Dubai route, that's the only long haul route Birmingham airport has

 

[79MX]

So after all the interest in finally now having an extended runway, for the purpose of building it was to encourage regular long haul flights. But apart from Emirates to Dubai, that's all it's used for, so is 3,052, is it now justified as money well spent or wasted. Because apart from Dubai route, that's the only long haul route Birmingham airport has

Cancun, Amritsar and Delhi are all longer than Dubai by a reasonable margin, with Doha and Jeddah being similar albeit slightly shorter

 

[HPsauce]

So after all the interest in finally now having a extended runway, for the purpose of building it was to encourage regular long haul flights. But apart from Emirates to Dubai, that's all it's used for, so is 3,052, is it now justified as money well spent or wasted. Because apart from Dubai route, that's the only long haul route Birmingham airport has

You are way off the mark, Andrew.
While much of our long haul is ad hoc, we have carriers who operate regularly too on long haul.
It has also helped attract many cargo movements in the last few years that would not have used BHX without the extension.

 

[andrew.clarkson]

Hi there HPsauce, very abrupt reply, the point I was making was, ten years ago, Birmingham airport was to get extension of runway, to allow long haul flights for passengers to use to get to North America, or Australia

 

[Nethercote2019]

The runway extension was done with the hope of flights to China & US west coast & we did get the Chinese flights for a short time until they went north

 

[HPsauce]

Hi there HPsauce, very abrupt reply, the point I was making was, ten years ago, Birmingham airport was to get extension of runway, to allow long haul flights for passengers to use to get to North America, or Australia

That was not an abrupt reply!. Merely disagreeing a little with your comment re the runway extension and it's use since. I don't recall any suggestion of flights to Australia. North America, yes, and the far east.

 

[Hassaan]

Hassaan , I have to disagree regarding the runway extension.
We would not have seen A380 or Cargo 747's, fully laden, without the extension. It would have meant restricted range, which is not cost effective to the airline concerned.
I do share your concerns that we are not attracting further long range routes, but i live in hope!.

When I said "the other things on that list" I meant 747s. I wasn't talking about cargo.

I mentioned the A380 as an example of something that the runway extension has brought.

Cancun, Amritsar and Delhi are all longer than Dubai by a reasonable margin, with Doha and Jeddah being similar albeit slightly shorter

We had Amritsar and Delhi prior to the extension too.

Perhaps Cancun wasn't possible beforehand? But don't quote me on that.

 

[thunderchild]

The runway extension was sold on the idea that it would open possibilities to the west coast of the USA, further into Asia and the far east. As already discussed, direct flights to Australia weren’t ever promised as back then even LHR didn’t have a non stop service.

Has it lived up to expectations? Probably not in the sense that we have no direct flights to the likes of Las Vegas or Hong Kong, but let’s face it, who actually thought we would? Admittedly they perhaps came close with Beijing but that’s ancient history now.

Regarding Cancun, it was served long before the runway extension but I think the flights went via MAN and possibly GLA as the 767s that were used couldn’t quite make it direct. Once the 767s were retrofitted with winglets the flights operated direct and have done ever since. I think the extension was open before TUI based 787s at BHX but it may still have had a positive impact on the routes performance.

The former TUI flights to Goa, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore wouldn’t have been possible (a shame none of them are still operate) and the recent waves of cargo flights and even Emirates’ use of the A380 will have undoubtedly performed better because of it. I’m not sure Delhi and Amritsar would be viable at the moment either without the runway extension given the significant detours they have to take these days.

So for those wanting to see flights to Beijing, Los Angeles and Johannesburg all lined at BHX then no, the runway extension hasn’t delivered and I think back in the day it was probably over hyped but there have been many benefits to it and who knows what the future might bring.

 

[Nibbles]

All of these could of operated from the original length runway

Not quite as simple as that. An A380 needs 3000m to get off the ground when fully loaded - so you could send an A380 anywhere it can reach from BHX now.

I cant immediately find a performance calculator, but i suspect an A380 fuelled to Dubai would need something around 2500m, or very close to the length of the runway pre-extension. And to be clear, thats a non-negotiable takeoff run requirement, based upon climbout to an altitude (50ft, i think) with 1 engine out i.e. even though an A380 can get off the ground much earlier than that, it wont be allowed to if the runway length requirement wasnt met at whatever weight it'd be to Dubai.

So yes, all of those (except b747/cargo, see below) could probably get off the ground pre-extension, but for some it might be close.

A b748 would be about 50 tonnes below its max takeoff weight to operate off the old runway, whereas on the new runway it can be almost at max weight. Its more problematic for the b744. You cant get a fully loaded b744 off the ground on the existing runway - on the old runway it would've been very light. That may be ok depending on your cargo of choice. But, my suspicion is the runway hadnt been extended you'd likely not have very many of these dedicated cargo flights as now.

(sorry, i see others have responded along the same lines as the above)

 

[andrew.clarkson]

Hi there Nibbles, I agree with you regarding cargo flights are vital to revenue incoming for Birmingham airport, but also increased passenger numbers is what an airports main function is or am I wrong.

 

[rollo]

I know the recent discussions regarding the runway extension have focused on the lack of new long haul routes which is disappointing but the extension has bought other benefits. The runway now has five highiy usable entry/exit points (there are others) three at the 33 end and two at15 plus the loop giving increased efficiency with airports ops and importently the full runway length also gives airlines the option of reduced thrust take offs reducing engine and brake ware on take off and landing something Jet2 in particular are keen on.

Finally from a safety point of view if a aircraft is unfortunate to face an emergency on landing or take the more tarmac in front of you the better.

 

[nwoody2001]

Hi there Nibbles, I agree with you regarding cargo flights are vital to revenue incoming for Birmingham airport, but also increased passenger numbers is what an airports main function is or am I wrong.

You are correct, and since the Runway extension opened, the airport has experienced record passenger growth with this year being the busiest year for passengers...

As much as people may not like to hear it... a daily flight to Hong Kong is never going to generate anywhere near as many passengers or as much revenue as an additional Ryanair or Easyjet aircraft based at BHX. Yes the former is a lot more sexy, but they will have a negligible impact on passengers and revenue growth at the airport.

 

[Nibbles]

Hi there Nibbles, I agree with you regarding cargo flights are vital to revenue incoming for Birmingham airport, but also increased passenger numbers is what an airports main function is or am I wrong.

Well, a bit of both I would say. The important thing for the airport is to make money and, more generally, to support regional growth. You can do that by attracting more passengers, or you can do that by attracting more cargo. It's helpful in this regard that the airport is part publicly owned.

Pax come with the need for facilities, which are expensive to build and operate, and need airlines to fly then. Those airlines need charges to fly from the airport to be sensible. But those charges are directly based upon the costs of running the airport.

So look at it the other way - you can bring in revenue by encouraging cargo ops. They have the advantage of not being confined to preferred passenger schedules, so you can slot them in nicely between the departure and arrival waves when the airport is otherwise quiet. And their facility requirements are lower.

I assume that the intent of cargo at BHX - aside from supporting industry in the region (one of the biggest of which is barely a mile from the airport) - is to increase revenue with the potential that, in the longer run, they can bring down charges to the airlines, which then encourages more to operate, etc.

Look at EMA, they have a huge cargo operation which they focus on. I suspect they do the opposite - encourage a small number of pax to use the airport, with the intent that the fees the airlines are charged used to make the cargo operation more and more efficient (and e.g. to encourage DHL to open another logistics warehouse, etc.).

Consider now LHR - its whole model is based around large aircraft with a large amount of people on but, more specifically, a good amount of freight in the cargo hold of each of them. That cargo is hugely valuable to the airport. If cargo was switched off at LHR tomorrow, i suspect the airport would struggle to maintain viability.

 

[andrew.clarkson]

I think that Birmingham airport should be looking and focusing on a balance of pax and cargo freight, say a 50/50.

 

[nwoody2001]

I think that Birmingham airport should be looking and focusing on a balance of pax and cargo freight, say a 50/50.

Thank will never happen... unless you are suggesting BHX reducing the number of Pax flights it offers...

BHX does not have the infrastructure or space needed for large scale cargo operations. The hanger space, storage space, customs space, apron space, bonded-storage and apron space. Its also too close to residential areas needed for night-time flying which may hub-spoke cargo operations work around...

EMA on the other hand is perfectly suited for that!

 

[HPsauce]

I think that Birmingham airport should be looking and focusing on a balance of pax and cargo freight, say a 50/50.

While the cargo side is important revenue, it is passengers that provide the airports major income.

 

[Nibbles]

While the cargo side is important revenue, it is passengers that provide the airports major income.

Yes, it may well be. But, as i suggested above, an element of cargo brings in revenue which allows the airport to offer more competitive rates to airlines (in theory, anyway), which eventually results in more pax.

The whole point im trying to make is that all of the offers at any airport have to be seen in the round, with any revenue increase being, ultimately, a virtuous circle.

 

[KJAY 786]

Coventry Airport should not have closed down it would benefit midlands with more passenger and cargo flights. I had Schizophrenia and Ghost Attacks - much better now missed the forum with love to all and Birmingham International Airport true needs more to offer us all a new terminal and car park that is nicer than that multi- story car park too small overall a new cargo terminal please love to everyone nice forum. x x x

 

[Birmingham Aviation]

Any rumours for new airlines or returning airlines or even new routes.Very quiet