Birmingham Airport - General Thread

[Ray Finkle]

It's almost as if they were reading this as today we have two press releases, one for Thomas Cook adding Cape Verde and one for the Jet2 new routes

To be fair could the airport be wary of making a big deal of the small airline low frequency route announcements?

It could well be, especially with Fly One and Cobalt being relatively new set ups (although Cobalt have been flying to the UK for a season now).

I still would have liked to have seen some publicity for Porto, especially with it being a new route that hasn't been served for a couple of years.

 

[Ray Finkle]

BDA Logistics adds new hub at Birmingham airport

BDA Logistics Innovation, which operates its own freighter flight, has moved into a new, larger base at Birmingham Airport in the UK from its previous base further away from the airport.

The time critical logistics firm’s new facility will act as a base for its national through-the-night delivery service and its European flight network from a new hub at Birmingham Airport.

Previously, the company’s hub was located in Coventry.

Managing director Kevin Turner said: “Moving to Birmingham represents an exciting new chapter for BDA.

“Operations here are 24 hours a day, seven days a week, which matches our requirements and longer-term ambitions perfectly.

“The proximity to our previous hub in Coventry means the whole BDA team has transferred across to Birmingham.

“The excellent access to nearby motorways such as the M5, M6 and M42 offers even better connections and further improves the time critical delivery services we offer.”

BDA offers a pre-8am delivery service to more than 90% of the UK population from mainland Europe via its Frankfurt and Maastricht Hubs.

Clients are based in the agricultural, automotive, materials handling and healthcare sectors.

http://www.aircargonews.net/news/si...birmingham-airport.html#.WCTGtzJde1M.@SkyBrex

 

[andrew.clarkson]

Hi there ray and all, I here and see that Edinburgh Airport now proposing to build a second runway regarding its future expansion, which it's looking at 13 million plus from 2020 onwards. So surely the management at Birmingham should be doing this already, or like Manchester Airport has already done this, which has put Birmingham some twenty to thirty years behind Manchester Airport, but by Edinburgh Airport now going to follow Manchester as well, if Birmingham Airport management don't get there act together as well, then they will also fall behind then Edinburgh Airport. So I now think that Birmingham Airport should forge ahead with its second runway and new terminal and put it's proposal forward to its investors like Ontario teachers pension plan in asking it for funding for this without any further delay, so then once the 3rd runway and terminal are completed with new transport links, it's then growth of 13 million by next year 2017 with then grow on even further... Andyc

 

[andrew.clarkson]

Hi there ray and all, as per my previous post, I mistakenly put 3rd runway, when it should have read 2nd runway, my apologies for my error... Andyc

 

[User001]

Edinburgh aren't building a new runway, they are merely safeguarding the required land should the need for a runway arise. Cheaper to buy the land now than say 10-15 years time when prices may have gone up or housing been built on it.

 

[58terminus]

if Birmingham Airport management don't get there act together as well, then they will also fall behind then Edinburgh Airport.

Whether Bham falls behind catches up or exceeds Edinburgh is irrelevant.They are not in any way competing.

 

[nwoody2001]

Whether Bham falls behind catches up or exceeds Edinburgh is irrelevant.They are not in any way competing.

I think that's a little broad and inaccurate a statement ...in a long-haul context, BHX and EDI are very much competitors, as is BHX with any secondary international airport across Europe!

Yes, BHX serves the midland market with plans for a wider catchment, but when viewed from abroad, BHX not only serves the midlands, but also the UK, as does the likes of MAN, EDI, GLA and others, as well as Europe and the plethora or similar sized airports within.

In attracting long-haul routes therefore, I fear your statement 58terminus is very misguided!

 

[Jon Dempsey]

Edinburgh aren't building a new runway, they are merely safeguarding the required land should the need for a runway arise. Cheaper to buy the land now than say 10-15 years time when prices may have gone up or housing been built on it.

Besides which, I'd imagine extending the existing runway is more of a priority.

 

[Ray Finkle]

A second runway has already been discussed although only as a vision at the moment. In several interviews Mr Kehoe has said that the current site is too constrained for the long term growth that they are hoping for. I guess we'll find out if a move is still on the agenda and the timescales involved when the master plan is released in the spring.

In the short term the runway still has more than enough capacity for growth, the taxiways would need quite a bit of work though.

I think it's the terminals that require immediate attention, even now they're bursting at peak times. I'd like to see one of the multi storey car parks demolished with T1 then extended towards the railway line. You'd pretty much double the area of the departure lounge and add a significant amount of new check in desks. UKBF and baggage collection could also be reconfigured. The new pier could extend from here rather than off the current pier, which is a pretty narrow down that end.

I wonder how close we are to needing some more new stands, especially if Jet2 add more aircraft for S18.

 

[JF57]

Hi there ray and all, I here and see that Edinburgh Airport now proposing to build a second runway regarding its future expansion, which it's looking at 13 million plus from 2020 onwards. So surely the management at Birmingham should be doing this already, or like Manchester Airport has already done this, which has put Birmingham some twenty to thirty years behind Manchester Airport, but by Edinburgh Airport now going to follow Manchester as well, if Birmingham Airport management don't get there act together as well, then they will also fall behind then Edinburgh Airport. So I now think that Birmingham Airport should forge ahead with its second runway and new terminal and put it's proposal forward to its investors like Ontario teachers pension plan in asking it for funding for this without any further delay, so then once the 3rd runway and terminal are completed with new transport links, it's then growth of 13 million by next year 2017 with then grow on even further... Andyc

On the basis of Gatwick it is terminals and infrastructure that determine passenger numbers not runways. Manchester could easily manage its current passenger numbers with one runway.
No sure how Edinburgh are justifying their second runway.

 

[Ray Finkle]

Planning for Birmingham - HS2 Airport – Opening up jobs, opportunity and closing down noise pollution for residents

Following the government’s announcement giving Heathrow R3 the go ahead, Sir Howard Davies, Chair of the Airports Commission, noted in the Telegraph, 23rd October, that Birmingham could be a better decision for a second round of airport expansion expected in the coming years, ahead of both Gatwick and Stansted – a significant statement for the region.

As we gear up for HS2 development, it’s important that we ensure HS2 Interchange Station is developed to ensure maximum flexibility for the airport’s future growth options, including Runway 2 (R2) alignment.

At present the Airport is considering all its options for expansion. Current projections are for Birmingham airport usage to remain around 10% of overall UK market share, projected to move from 258m passengers per annum (Oct 2016) to around 300m passengers per annum by 2030. But the pace at which they have been growing has brought forward future capacity requirements by 10 years.

If Birmingham airport continues to use Runway 1 (R1) alone total usage will be capped at around 25m passengers a year and likely inhibit airlines from operating out of Birmingham. This, in turn, will lead to the West Midlands region suffering the disruption of HS2 without the possible upside benefits, leading to passengers using HS2 to travel to London rather than taking passengers from London to Birmingham to travel onwards to international destinations using the hub buster planes currently accounting for 70% of order books and able to take passengers longer distances, point to point, on long haul flights and potentially opening up this market to low cost carriers.

Birmingham Airport is projected to grow over the coming decade from moving 10m to 30m passengers per annum on R1, trebling noise emissions for residents in Solihull . At present there are about 100k movements per year with the airport able to fly 5k of these overnight. As the airport moves towards 20m passengers per year this will double night flight noise for residents to 10k movements per year.

By restricting Birmingham Airport to R1 the impact is to double noise pollution for residents as the caps on night flight noise are –

1) On the basis of daily movements – at 5% of total

2) A noise quota on basis of aircraft flying graded 0-4 in terms of noise output, but aircraft today are effectively in category 0, so this cap is effectively unlimited.

By building Runway 2 at Birmingham the Airport will be able to take over 32,000 homes out of night flights completely, effectively preventing all flights from 2300 hours until 0700 the following morning. The proposed location of R2 can be manoeuvred to ensure least noise and overflight for residents. The airport is working to change flight paths to reduce the number of people overflown. Ground based navigation is being changed to in-flight satellite navigation enabling aircraft to fly more accurately on landing to minimise any disruption to residents.

In light of this the mechanics for any future R2 planning application should be considered, as they would in the first instance go before North Warwickshire Borough Council, with a referral on to the Secretary of State, Department for Transport seen as highly likely. In other words any decision on R2 is, in all probability, likely to be subjected to some fairly lengthy planning procedures.

How much would a second runway at Birmingham Airport cost? Estimates suggest it could well be in region of £320m for 3,200m2 – standard runway length - although Dublin is building their value runway at present for as little as Euros 150m it is rumoured. In addition, current proposals for Birmingham R2 to be located North of the HS2 Interchange station would require the removal of the former Packington Landfill Site, adding as much as a further £1bn and involving the removal and remediation of 350m3 of waste.

On this basis £2bn investment by Birmingham Airport’s shareholders could deliver a second runway enabling them to move from the current 10m passengers per annum to up to 60m+ passengers per annum. This is in contrast to Heathrow R3 requiring £19bn investment – up to £10bn of public funding to enable access required, which doesn’t look like value for money at this time of continuing cuts and austerity, let alone worrying about the need to purchase up to 4,500 homes via CPO and relocating their occupants.

Birmingham airport is often stated as operating at just 40% capacity and therefore requiring no further runway capacity, but this hides some of the nuances lying behind these headline numbers. At peak times, even now, the airport is operating at 85% capacity, having become so busy that airlines have to book a landing slot. These pressures continue to grow in light of Birmingham Airport’s comparatively small site, just 693 acres airside, accommodating 45 aircraft stands, compared to Gatwick at 1109 acres airside accommodating 143 stands.

Arden Cross, the exciting development due to surround the HS2 Interchange station, is projected to provide up to 20k new jobs, with the majority of these targeting professional and young graduate entrants. In contrast and especially in light of pockets of economic deprivation and unemployment near to Birmingham Airport, development on the airport could provide opportunities for unskilled and low skilled personnel, including in baggage handling, security, catering, cleaning.

Opening up Birmingham Airport to international expansion as a point-to-point hub in light of growing hub buster planes could in turn provide opportunities for NEC site expansion into more internationally focussed sectors – film and television opportunities, perhaps enabling the return to Birmingham of the Motor Show, whilst also showcasing the region’s prowess in renewable, low carbon, autonomous and other technologies. What better place to open young people’s eyes to possible life opportunities than working in an airport connected with international exhibition facilities?

There are real life examples too. Birmingham Airport’s Head of Sustainability, Kirstin Kane, (pictured), now in her early 30’s, is today in a senior management role with responsibilities for corporate-wide H&S and CSR. Having left school aged 16 she started out in one of their most junior roles as a Clerical Trainee. However, whilst working at the airport she’s been able to gain a BTEC in Business and Finance from Hall Green Secondary School, a degree in Business Management, with 2.1 honours, later taking a course in acoustics, having commenced work in their environmental department, all paid for by her employer. It would be great to open up these kind of horizons to many many more young people rather than closing them down now.

http://www.beverleynielsen.co.uk/pl...nd_closing_down_noise_pollution_for_residents

 

[123]

No sure how Edinburgh are justifying their second runway.

There is pressure from the SNP to devolve APD which might give them a boost. Passengers in places like Newcastle who might have gone to Manchester for some flights may in future go to Scotland on price.

 

[Jerry]

There is pressure from the SNP to devolve APD which might give them a boost. Passengers in places like Newcastle who might have gone to Manchester for some flights may in future go to Scotland on price.

APD is already/will be devolved to Scotland. Northern Ireland has Long haul APD devolved, Wales has nothing but that's devolution for you!

 

[David_itl]

Manchester could easily manage its current passenger numbers with one runway.

54 movements per hour on a single runway that is designed to have a max 46 of movements an hour simply isn't feasible. That's what started the ball rolling as demand for slots in the peak periods far exceeded supply. In the late 1980s, capacity was 38 per hour so the airport did it's utmost to accommodate airlines by increase the runway rate though more turn-offs. Now with 2 runways, I believe we are now in the realms of 65 per hour.

It used to be a case of between the morning and afternoon peaks you'd be lucky to get 23 or 24 movements an hour but this winter it's going to be around 32. The traffic mix at MAN doesn't exactly fit the 25 million passengers on a single runway - LGW has virtually priced out the sub-100 seat aircraft and has about 30 (?) above 767-sized aircraft based plus the foreign heavies which does mean passengers per movement ought to be far greater than at MAN. And which airline is the biggest at MAN? BE with their single E95 with over 100 passengers but a host of 70 to 80 seaters based with ops with 50 seaters and 38 seaters thrown in. Interspersing their ops with heavies takes a fair amount of skill by ATC.

For BHX, being 85% full in peak periods now is both excellent and disturbing as there is a possibility that potential airlines could start to be turned away. Consequently, there ought to be 2nd runway development team lurking in the background beavering away ready to make a formal application whilst they need to look at what has to be done to see if they can eek out extra capacity from whatever the runway rate is now. LH, KL and SN will be looking on with interest to see what kind of impact a 2nd runway would have in terms of imposed restricted operating hours - would the various chambers of commerce really like BHX to be taken out of 1 wave of departures for those airlines at their home hubs?

I would also take to task this comment:

Birmingham Airport is projected to grow over the coming decade from moving 10m to 30m passengers per annum on R1, trebling noise emissions for residents in Solihull

Sorry but trebling passenger numbers does not mean trebling emissions. Extremely naive of her to think the engine and fuel technology will not continue to evolve over the coming decade. And trebling passenger numbers does not mean trebling aircraft movements. By just getting an Etihad A330 into BHX would mean up to 262 passengers each way or put another way, the equivalent of 3.5 BE DHC8s/E175s. Just got to think of the potential long-haul routes each having that effect plus more based A320s/738s to see how numbers could jump up far quicker than the number of movements.

 

[Jerry]

Just a question but on it's current site where would BHX put a second runway?

 

[123]

Just a question but on it's current site where would BHX put a second runway?

This might help you.

 

[TM3]

This is an interesting post, particularly the bit about the new runway being able to accommodate 24 hr flights.

It seems to me that BHX could be a viable alternative to LHR but the problem is there is not sufficient incentive or interest for airlines to move away from LHR or for new ones to start out of BHX.

Purely as a blue sky idea maybe the way we tax airlines in the UK as a whole should be overhauled?

Not just APD could be devolved but Corporation Tax and payroll taxes such as employers NI could be split out to the LEAs where each airport is based on the share of traffic/employees based there.

This not only could give incentives for airlines to move to or start at different airports but also give councils incentives to invest in infrastructure surrounding them. At Heathrow where expansion has been opposed by local residents the local councils could have the choice to spend local revenue locally, thus appeasing residents or set uncompetitive tax rates to discourage growth.

 

[Coathanger16]

These pressures continue to grow in light of Birmingham Airport’s comparatively small site, just 693 acres airside, accommodating 45 aircraft stands, compared to Gatwick at 1109 acres airside accommodating 143 stands.

Whilst I definitely agree that Birmingham is becoming quite a constrained site, those statistics don't back that claim. The statistics above suggest (a rather crude calculation) that BHX requires ~15 acres per stand whilst LGW requires ~8 acres per stand. Given the size of its current site, that would suggest BHX could accommodate ~90 stands. I appreciate the layout of runways & taxiways will play a part however.

Opening up Birmingham Airport to international expansion as a point-to-point hub in light of growing hub buster planes

I don't think I've ever seen a more ridiculous phrase: "point-to-point hub" ??? - does the author have ANY knowledge of the aviation industry?

If Birmingham airport continues to use Runway 1 (R1) alone total usage will be capped at around 25m passengers a year and likely inhibit airlines from operating out of Birmingham. This, in turn, will lead to the West Midlands region suffering the disruption of HS2 without the possible upside benefits, leading to passengers using HS2 to travel to London rather than taking passengers from London to Birmingham to travel onwards to international destinations using the hub buster planes currently accounting for 70% of order books and able to take passengers longer distances, point to point, on long haul flights and potentially opening up this market to low cost carriers.

Seeming as Gatwick also used the idea of "hub buster planes" flying point to point to promote the idea of their second runway, why does the author think that people in London would use HS2 to travel to BHX for long haul flights when:

1). they have one of the biggest international airports on their "doorstep" which may be expanded and therefore likely provide even more flights to even more destinations.

2). they have 3 other point to point airports that airlines could use "hub buster planes" to fly long haul routes from.

Whilst I certainly support the growth of Birmingham Airport, I am constantly dumbfounded by the links that people make between HS2 and Birmingham Airports future growth. The example of someone using HS2 to travel to BHX from London to catch a long haul flight rests on airlines setting up long haul routes from BHX. As an airline, if you wanted to serve London, you would fly to a London airport (assuming there is capacity).

The idea of flying into BHX if your final destination is London is akin to flying to Philadelphia when your final destination is New York. The only instance that you would do so is if it was significantly cheaper than flying directly to London. I appreciate that there will be some people that will do so, however that number will be a small percentage of the total people using BHX and so future growth shouldn't be centered around them.

The main point of the interchange HS2 station is for people commuting to London. There will be some that will use it for the airport, but not many.

It seems to me that BHX could be a viable alternative to LHR but the problem is there is not sufficient incentive or interest for airlines to move away from LHR or for new ones to start out of BHX.

The problem with BHX being a viable alternative to LHR is that once you take out transfer passengers, the majority of people on flights in and out of LHR are travelling to/from somewhere in London or the South East of England. Transfer passengers make up about 30% of total passengers on any given flights. For Birmingham to work as a hub, the other 70% would have to be travelling to/from either Birmingham or somewhere in the Midlands. Whilst there are of course people in the Midlands that want to fly to long haul destinations that are as of yet un-served from Birmingham, there aren't enough to start a regular service. Adding in transfer passengers would unlikely results in a viable service either, certainly not when there are a greater frequency of flights from Heathrow. People from the Midlands and the North resent travelling down to Heathrow for long haul flights (they aren't forced to do this - both BHX and MAN have flights to New York and the Middle East - that allows for one stop flights to pretty much anywhere); good luck getting people in London and the SE to travel to Birmingham for long haul flights when they haven't previously had the need to.

You suggest that more incentives needs to be provided to encourage airlines away from LHR - compare the cost of any slot at LHR with any slot at BHX. Slots at Heathrow typically "go for" millions - do airlines even pay for slots at Birmingham?

Whilst APD should be reduced, it should NOT be devolved to the regions. This would artificially distort growth to where we want it to go, not to where there is a need for it. Bear in mind that a £10 reduction in APD for the Midlands say might encourage growth here, but it would be unlikely to attract passengers from elsewhere. Add in the cost of travelling from "elsewhere" to BHX and that wipes out the reduction in APD. To attract passengers from London, you would likely have to abolish APD in the regions and probably increase it for London airports. Good luck getting that through without being challenged on grounds of fair competition.

 

[123]

Although four years old many of the points about hub airports and APD are touch on in this Transport Select Committee.
From 17.00 Paul Kehoe with Manchester and Bristol airport.
First section is CAA and NATS for those that are interested.

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/688b3aca-a9e2-40bd-859b-d4ed0ceb131d

 

[TM3]

Whilst there are of course people in the Midlands that want to fly to long haul destinations that are as of yet un-served from Birmingham, there aren't enough to start a regular service. Adding in transfer passengers would unlikely results in a viable service either, certainly not when there are a greater frequency of flights from Heathrow. People from the Midlands and the North resent travelling down to Heathrow for long haul flights (they aren't forced to do this - both BHX and MAN have flights to New York and the Middle East - that allows for one stop flights to pretty much anywhere); good luck getting people in London and the SE to travel to Birmingham for long haul flights when they haven't previously had the need to.

You suggest that more incentives needs to be provided to encourage airlines away from LHR - compare the cost of any slot at LHR with any slot at BHX. Slots at Heathrow typically "go for" millions - do airlines even pay for slots at Birmingham?

Whilst APD should be reduced, it should NOT be devolved to the regions. This would artificially distort growth to where we want it to go, not to where there is a need for it. Bear in mind that a £10 reduction in APD for the Midlands say might encourage growth here, but it would be unlikely to attract passengers from elsewhere. Add in the cost of travelling from "elsewhere" to BHX and that wipes out the reduction in APD. To attract passengers from London, you would likely have to abolish APD in the regions and probably increase it for London airports. Good luck getting that through without being challenged on grounds of fair competition.

I don't really see the position quite as you put it. There are a lot of people in the West Mids conurbation, including myself, who regularly drive past BHX on the way to LHR because no suitable direct flight is available or transit not so much through NYC but through AMS, CDG and FRA.

If a suitable like for like alternative was available I would always rather travel from BHX.

BHX is never going to take a big share of London traffic but it is well positioned geographically and with transport links for LHR users along the M40 corridor, on the train down towards Oxford and in other locations such as Derby, Nottingham and Leicester.

What is lacking is competition from an airline perspective to move passengers away from LHR. The slot price at LHR is a further factor acting against BHX as it entrenches existing players at Heathrow.

I don't think APD reductions alone are enough to help regional airports compete I think airlines need further incentives to operate out of smaller airports, whether that is Corp Tax breaks, reduced employers' NI or grants.