Flybe

[Jerry]

Air Berlin codeshares for CWL
Tuesday/Sunday
CWL-MUC AB9133
MUC-CWL A9132

Wednesday/Saturday
CWL-TXL AB9135
TXL-CWL AB9134

 

[Jerry]

I think that CWL and Flybe have a ten-year agreement so there must be some plan to replace the E195s at some point. No doubt there are clauses allowing the agreement to cease under specific circusmstances but the intention is clearly to be at CWL for the long term.

For many of CWL's routes the E175 would be the better fit, giving very good load factors without necessarily increasing the actual loads by very much from what they are now.

From what i've read about Flybe's long term plan is that Flybe sees its future as an 80 seater airline and that by 2020/21 the E190s will be gone and the fleet will consist of E170s and Q400s. As for CWL i kind of think 1 E190 and 2 E170 would be a good fit because many routes are really 80 seater routes but some do need a 100 seater also many potential routes many only be feasible with a 50 seater. The CAA statistics will be interesting to see to see what the load factors are! Thats if we get any this year!

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Temporary CWL-London City route Sept-Oct whilst Severn Tunnel is closed

It seems from comments on another forum website that Flybe has cancelled some of the rotations, in particular the early morning one, causing extreme inconvenience to some passengers who had already booked.

The reason seems unclear as yet but it's not what is wanted if Flybe does have serious thoughts about a permanent CWL-LCY operation.

 

[Jerry]

Temporary CWL-London City route Sept-Oct whilst Severn Tunnel is closed

It seems from comments on another forum website that Flybe has cancelled some of the rotations, in particular the early morning one, causing extreme inconvenience to some passengers who had already booked.

The reason seems unclear as yet but it's not what is wanted if Flybe does have serious thoughts about a permanent CWL-LCY operation.

Yes i've just been reading that apparently the flight times keep changing and the 05.55 morning service has been taken off. First departure is 08.00 it really needs to be between 0600-06.30 for buisness to use it so they can get into London for the start of the buisness day. Wonder if Flybe are either having trouble with crew and aircraft availability or have had the slot taken off them or the landing fee is too high. Think people were hoping if this service did well then it could become a permanent feature but messing about like this will not give people confidence in the route.

 

[Jerry]

Something else that just occured to me about CWL-LCY. Do the aircraft and crew have to be specially certified for landing at LCY? Heard before it's been called a steep approach? Wonder if that could be causing Flybe problems?

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Something else that just occured to me about CWL-LCY. Do the aircraft and crew have to be specially certified for landing at LCY? Heard before it's been called a steep approach? Wonder if that could be causing Flybe problems?

A quick check suggests that only multi-engine, fixed-wing aircraft with special aircraft and aircrew certification to fly 5.5° approaches are permitted at LCY.

One would have hoped that Flybe would have taken all this into account before publishing its timetable.

 

[Jerry]

A quick check suggests that only multi-engine, fixed-wing aircraft with special aircraft and aircrew certification to fly 5.5° approaches are permitted at LCY.

One would have hoped that Flybe would have taken all this into account before publishing its timetable.

Yes only thing i can think of is if aircrew originally down to do this have left or be reassigned. Unfortunately with VLM going bust Flybe may have over committed themselves but the revised schedule is 3 rotations a day which makes me wonder if they are short one crew? I'm not clued up on pilot and crew max hours but i would've thought that 3 rotations a day would be under 8 hours of flying? One crew could do that in their daily hours surely? only problem is without a 6am departure the route becomes less appealing to the buisness people it's meant to target.

 

[Jerry]

Just read a news article on Aviation Wales.com saying that the dropping early morning flight is down to new regulations at LCY which necessitated changing to the original timetable. It doesn't say what those regulations are though?

 

[marsh.ger]

By reading some postings on another forums there are new Standard Instrument (STAR) procedures for London City. This means that aircraft from the west occasionaly have to fly a dog leg. This will increase the flying time by at least 15 minutes by the sounds of it.

I don't believe that crewing is an issue as previous schedule would require two sets of crews. One for the first two rotations and the second for the afternoon/evening.

It is a shame and don't think Flybe have done themselves any favours after initially excellent publicity for being the savious during the tunnel closures.

 

[Jerry]

By reading some postings on another forums there are new Standard Instrument (STAR) procedures for London City. This means that aircraft from the west occasionaly have to fly a dog leg. This will increase the flying time by at least 15 minutes by the sounds of it.

I don't believe that crewing is an issue as previous schedule would require two sets of crews. One for the first two rotations and the second for the afternoon/evening.

It is a shame and don't think Flybe have done themselves any favours after initially excellent publicity for being the savious during the tunnel closures.

I wonder if the arrival from the west could be to avoid LHR traffic? Also i counted Tuesdays arrivals and departures for LCY between 06.35 and 09.15. They have 36 departures each spaced at about 5 mins intervals starting from 06.35 and 32 arrivals each spaced roughly at 5 mins intervals starting from 07.05. After about 09.15 the intrevals go to roughly about 15 mins. This is just me wondering but could it be possible that LCY have taken the gate and slot off them because they don't have any slots available. Because to be fair to Flybe they have temporarily relocated a Q400 (from what i've learned one of a few in the fleet capable of landing at LCY) and their crews and they would know that for it to be a success and a potential future route then a arrival at LCY between 07.00 and 08.00 is key for the route to work so it makes me wonder if it's LCY at fault and not Flybe because they made a big song and dance about this and now are getting negative press from it. It's a pity because it could have been a potential way of expanding the Flybe base at CWL.

 

[Jerry]

Inspired by the 'MAN in 10 years time' in the Manchester forum kind of got me thinking about where Flybe at Cardiff airport will be in 5-10 years time. I'm assuming 2 things first that Flybe will stick around and second Brexit won't ruin everything! (This is all my personal opinion based on nothing more than my enthusiam for my local airport to succeed).
At the moment Flybe have 2 E190 based with between them 236 seats. To keep the same amount of seats based will in the future will require 3 aircraft (3 Q400s=234 and 3 E170's=264).
With the current way that the planes are operated then that could mean one of the other routes going to a daily double my best guess would be CDG as this would enable better use of the Air France codeshare and become a new hub route. I've also had a look at where Flybe fly from other airports in the UK and makes me wonder with the Air France codeshare that maybe routes like Bordeaux, Toulouse, Toulon or Lyon could be added. Considering the new codeshare with Air Berlin then more German routes could be on the cards as well with Hannover and Stuttgart as possible new destinations. To me that would give the airport a spread of western european destinations from Flybe.
For expansion domestically wise i think a 4th aircraft would need to be based which could bring the possibility of either a 3rd EDI rotation, a 3rd DUB rotation or more likely a double daily LCY or MAN with the possibility of extra routes like LBA, INV, NCL and GLA double daily a couple of times a week giving the South Wales area quicker and easier access to the rest of the UK and also bring in more tourism from the UK and western Europe.
I know many people in South Wales would prefer an airline like Easyjet to operate all these routes but I honestly think their aircraft are too big for most of Cardiff's domestic and western European routes. Flybe's aircraft are the right size and really hope they will continue to grow and base more aircraft and increase the routes from CWL. Especially LBA as i won't have to fly via Belfast to go see my sister!

 

[superking]

sounds good all these routes you talking about. remember wales is one of the most deprived area in the uk. with that in mind where will the pax come from. these routes will have to be near full every rotation,its ok filling a plane,but it comes down to yield not pax numbers.i like you like to see the routes flybe flies now to be more supported as some of the routes look dire on pax numbers. so with that in mind I would fear a lot of new routes being started and do well.ppl only has so much to spend on leisure and with that if they choose to fly then it will be a sun route. I want the airport to do well like you and hope it can grow,but they must get the numbers up on what is alredy running.the charters are doing ok,could be better but that's down to charter airlines as to what they offer.lcc airlines are doing ok with what they have on offer as they showing what can be done ie offering right product at the right price and routes that they know will work. vueling has been a good product for cdf with expansion on routes they already operate. fr are proving this with tfs,2 years I think with 1 rotation now up to 2 per week and that's with the 737 aircraft it shows that the aircraft is the right size for the route now its established, but it took 2 years to get there,lets hope we get more from them, but I'm wary with that as they will expand at cdf with sun routes that veuling operate. that's one for the future I think.bmi baby when they based in cdf they operated sun routes and city routes but they finished up with sun routes only.that was due to wrong size of aircraft and recession,whih wales has never recovered which is a shame.lets hope what you say proves me wrong but time will tell. up up and away from cdf.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

It's always fun trying to predict the future when it comes to airports but any prediction that turns out to be anywhere near accurate is likely to be luck. The reason is that we cannot foresee what events will have an impact on air travel, positive or negative, even in the next few years.

The major recession that began around 2008 would not have been factored into anyone predicting an airport's size in five years time if making the prediction in 2005. Looking at many master plans published by airports around that time (2005) it can be seen that most if not all were wildly optimistic in their passenger figure projections. CWL, for example, would be handling 4.5 million passengers a year by now according to its master plan.

As for Flybe, it's been said more than once that the E190 is too big for some CWL routes but right for others. On that basis if it's eventually replaced by Q400s, E175s or a combination of Q400 and E175 (unlikely in a 2-aircraft base where there would have to be two sets of crew teams), the situation would be reversed in that the aircraft would still be the right size for some routes but too small for others.

We don't know for sure how much the WAG has paid Flybe to return to CWL (well, I don't unless I missed some official announcement - unlikely as it would be considered commercially confidential) which means we don't know how the routes are operating in terms of being self-sustaining, looking to when any 'subsidy' ends.

As superking points out, Wales (Cardiff and its city region apart) is not one of the most affluent parts of the UK which means the age-old conundrum of how to increase passenger traffic from outside the core catchment is still to be solved. It will have to be if CWL is to break out of the 1 to 2 mppa bracket.

There are obviously two ways of achieving this: substantially increase inbound travel or attract outbound passengers from neighbouring catchments which means in the main the West of England and South Midlands.

 

[Jerry]

The sun routes will always sell well from Cardiff and their future won't really change and Vueling and Ryaniar will probably slowly increase rotations and add new routes but Flybe apart from Faro don't do the sun routes. Their routes are the day to day routes that connect CWL and it's catchment area to Scotland, Ireland and Europe so where will their future be? In high frequency British routes? Or a mix of British and European cities with smaller aircraft because i highly doubt those routes can be done from CWL with A320, A319 size aircraft.

Yes South Wales isn't the the most richest areas in the UK and many areas are poor but it doesn't seem to stop the Welsh from traveling! Many of the routes that Flybe could potentially fly could only be sustainable at 1 or 2 weekly frequencies to provide other choices of holiday destinations other than sun routes and also bring in tourist traffic from countries like Germany as well as buisness traffic. I have heard in Cardiff city centre more Spanish voices and heard many of the Vueling flights have incoming Spanish tourists on them. As well, increasing or putting on new British routes could increase tourism from other parts of the UK.

On another forum a Flybe document was posted which stated where their buisness was going and what their future was and also Cardiff was put in a separate section and the sum of £5 million pounds was mentioned.

Cardiff in reality isn't going to attract much pax from the West country or the West Midlands for it's Flybe routes so those routes will be tailored towards the South Wales area and connecting Cardiff which not trying to sound arrogant (i'll apologize if i have done as it's not my intention) is a capital city of a country (not an independent one obviously) and for any future will need to try and get direct connections to the big cities of Europe and the UK so welsh and foreign pax can access South Wales through CWL rather than BRS, BHX and LHR. It will be interesting to see what Flybe do when the E190's go back.
Another thing that just came to mind is what if Flybe treat CWL different and just replace the 2 E190's with 2 other 100 seaters just for CWL!

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Your points don't come across as arrogant at all but the capital city cachet hasn't brought an automatic premium to the airport in terms of passenger numbers as some people believed it would. In fact, this is one of my hobby horses.

You are probably aware that there is a popular forum/message board dedicated to Welsh aviation matters with CWL understandably the principal subject. You may not be aware that there was an earlier Welsh aviation forum/message board with a name quite similar to the current one but which ceased to exist a few years ago.

The proprietor of that board was a well-known figure in Welsh aviation and business who was also CWL's press officer at one point (but before he started the website). He used to emphasis the capital city status of the airport and could not understand why a 'poorly identified city' like Bristol had an airport that was outpointing a capital city's airport to such a degree.

I put it to him that for too long (and I was saying this six or seven years ago) those running CWL had sat back expecting the capital city title to attract airlines and passengers without working for it. Life's not like that and in the meantime the 'rival' airport had rolled up its sleeves, worked hard and had built itself a decent portfolio of routes and airlines which in turn drew in more and more passengers.

Now Bristol isn't really the 'poorly identified city' that he described and it's true that it has a larger and generally wealthier catchment than CWL, but the point I was emphasising was that serving a capital city is not an automatic panacea; success has to be worked for.

In my earlier post I mentioned CWL's recent history (ie this century) as a 1 to 2 million passengers a year airport. It would be relatively easy to get back up to 2 mppa. A two-aircraft base from someone like Ryanair or Jet2 on top of the current network would reach that target.

The really hard work would be getting up to 3 mppa and then 4 mppa. That's when some substantial help would almost certainly be needed from without the core catchment.

BRS gets about half its passenger numbers from Greater Bristol (currently around 3.5 million passenger journeys); over a million from South Wales; and another million from Devon and Cornwall. The rest come from Gloucestershire, Somerset, Wiltshire and the Thames Valley in the main. So to make real progress CWL would have to extend its horizons.

 

[Jerry]

In a way both cities are capital cities. Bristol is in reality the capital city of the South West region and it's airport reflects that and it does have an effect on CWL and south wales especially considering that the people who run BRS have done a really good job turning it into the success it has become today. Unfortunately CWL wasn't run as well!

I believe it is no coincidence that new Flybe route is Berlin and I wouldn't be surprised if the next routes that the airport will be after will be Rome and Madrid though Flybe won't be the ones flying those routes.
CWL has a lot of work to do in the future to put together a network that connects CWL to Europe's capitals and big cities directly and also providing a wide variety of holiday routes.

The only way I can see CWL attracting pax from outside of it's catchment is by providing a product that BRS doesn't have and the only things i can think of is Jet2 and scheduled long haul flights. Jet2 is the more likely out of both as i think long haul is not very likely and even a Jet2 base could be a long way off or not happen at all.

 

[superking]

jerry said The only way I can see CWL attracting pax from outside of it's catchment is by providing a product that BRS doesn't have and the only things i can think of is Jet2 and scheduled long haul flights. Jet2 is the more likely out of both as i think long haul is not very likely and even a Jet2 base could be a long way off or not happen at all

brs did Newark for 5 years. they had good loads in the rear end,one problem was could not get enough to fill the front end,also slots came about at lhr,which continental grabbed so brs aircraft moved to lhr. if the service did not work how it was ment it sure wont work from cwl.the logistics of wales is not good.there is no way a long haul schedule will work from cwl. its proven with tom on their long haul that they do it from brs. cwl had all tom long haul a few years back.cwl stick to sun routes and try and get flybe to do a few ciiy routes. hope when these leases on the e190 are up they don't run.flybe with their bhd route are doing rather well,aircraft based in bhd tells a story. flybe must feel once bte is done then the aircraft can make more money working out of bhd than cwl. I just hope when the leases on the e190 are up that flybe don't run,they did bfore and will do it again. they did this at brs.another thing is it wonders how much the route fund is left,as that will have a bearing also as to what airlines do or not do.something has to happen at cwl to get more pax through doors,but I think the main problem is the airport is in the wrong place, and also compition from other airports not that far away.brs with what they offer,lhr with all the long haul on offer and bhx with a large flybe base which I think flybe wont cut their nose off to open offerings from cwl that would affect bhx. I hope I'm proven wrong about it,but I do fear for flybe at cwl when these e190 leases are up. they sure wont sign up for any more aircraft of that size.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

I believe there is a 10-year agreement between Flybe and CWL. I presume that there are 'get-out' clauses for both sides under certain circumstances but the fact that the agreement is a lengthy one does suggest that Flybe is satisfied that it will have a viable product at CWL, even if this means taking into account the route development money in the early years.

How long that money will last in regard to Flybe only the parties involved will know but CWL will obviously be hoping that its seed corn money will lead to most of the routes (there will always be fallers at every airport) becoming self-sustaining.

It's in the public domain that the WAG loaned its airport company £13 million over three years for route development. I can't remember off the top of my head whether the three years end this year or next - I think it's next.

That probably doesn't mean the airport company has to spend all the money in those three years. I imagine the loan was phased for WAG budgetary purposes.

It might well be that a hefty chunk will be put to attracting someone like Jet2 or Ryanair. I imagine the latter especially would be very interested in guaranteed 'subsidy money' and it would be fascinating to learn what discussions have taken place between this airline and the CWL management. I'm sure there has been some serious talking.

Staying with Flybe, the next year or two will be a very good guide to their long-term thoughts about CWL.

 

[Jerry]

jerry said The only way I can see CWL attracting pax from outside of it's catchment is by providing a product that BRS doesn't have and the only things i can think of is Jet2 and scheduled long haul flights. Jet2 is the more likely out of both as i think long haul is not very likely and even a Jet2 base could be a long way off or not happen at all

I did not say long haul would be a success just that is one of 2 ways possibly that CWL could attract pax from over the bridge. In my view direct long haul would probably not work from CWL unless it's one off sun charters or an airline was subsided or used small aircraft like the A319LR and i believe not many airlines have them and the ones that do are setup for buisness flights i believe.

As someone who flys to the US a couple of times a year from CWL, i believe that the long haul strategy should be using Flybe to connect to hubs like CDG and MAN to access their long haul routes using codeshares as I often find it is a lot cheaper to fly from CWL than LHR.

Flybe and the airport have to develop routes to suit CWL and it's catchment area and provide routes for the South Wales area and yes in the long run that will mean different aircraft to operate these routes probably smaller ones operating routes with more frequency or they could just disappear when the E190s go back. Personally i would be surprised if they did because Flybe as company are in a different place now and if Flybe thought they could make money using the E190's at BHD then why haven't they based them there? or at MAN or BHX? Or EDI?

In the long run if Flybe stick with CWL i can see it being a 3 to 4 plane based Q400 operation or possibly 1 to 2 E170's with 2 Q400s.

Yes the airport could be closer to the M4 but with better public transport links then that could alleviate that as BRS being where it is hasn't really effected it's success!
But in the end it is only my opinion and predictions based on what i believe could happen! I could be completely right or completely wrong!

Though i hope the former happens as I believe CWL can become a decent regional airport connecting south wales to the UK and Europe and that Flybe can play a future in that and I think they will and like TheLocalYokel says the next 2 years will be the guide to Flybe at CWL and the future.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Re scheduled long haul, especially transatlantic to the US East Coast, much may demand in the coming years whether LHR gets a third runway or at least whether an additional runway is built in South East England.

If there is no third runway and air travel continues to increase airlines will have to look elsewhere and, although MAN and BHX are the obvious choices to see most of such an expansion, smaller regional airports may also benefit to a lesser degree.

Regarding long haul charter services, for many years CWL was pre-eminent on Severnside for routes to Florida and the Caribbean. It was only after First Choice became part of TUI along with Thomson that the CWL flights largely ceased (except for Caribbean cruise flights mainly in winter which still exceed those of BRS in number). Paradoxically, BRS came later (than CWL) to a regular and substantial transatlantic charter programme thanks to First Choice but retained these flights whilst CWL lost its own flights.