Advertisement


Route Development

Jerry

Moderator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jun 1, 2016
8,086
4,180
323
37
Cardiff
Moderator #201
With reference to Turkish Airlines i wonder if it could be the runway that is the problem as reading the BHX thread they seem to like to mix the aircraft types up. A321s, 737 8s, 737 9ers, A332s and A333 i've seen all mentioned. Not saying they would use the bigger aircraft but maybe they are an airline that likes to have the ability to operate larger aircraft if possible?
 

Advertisement


Sherburnflyer92

Well-Known Member
May 7, 2011
938
559
93
26
37,000FT - soon!
Turkish Airline seems like a good choice and nice addition for BRS. TK brings a whole host of different and varied destinations to BRS and i'm sure IST will it's self produce enough O&D.

I wonder if they'll be also go knocking on the door of a certain red themed airline?
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,933
5,278
343
Wurzel Country
IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
Yes
Admin #203
With reference to Turkish Airlines i wonder if it could be the runway that is the problem as reading the BHX thread they seem to like to mix the aircraft types up. A321s, 737 8s, 737 9ers, A332s and A333 i've seen all mentioned. Not saying they would use the bigger aircraft but maybe they are an airline that likes to have the ability to operate larger aircraft if possible?
If the runway is the probem then that's another brake on expanding beyond the core airlines already in place. BRS is certificated for A330s and the type has operated there from time to time. The 200 series ought to be capable of reaching IST.

Whether the new versions of the A321 and 737s are I don't know. If they are not then the airport does have a major problem. Given that TUI is apparently going to base 737 MAX 10s at BRS in due course it might be supposed that the new Boeing 737s are ok.
 

Jerry

Moderator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jun 1, 2016
8,086
4,180
323
37
Cardiff
Moderator #204
If the runway is the probem then that's another brake on expanding beyond the core airlines already in place. BRS is certificated for A330s and the type has operated there from time to time. The 200 series ought to be capable of reaching IST.
Also i do wonder if for an airline like Turkish the lack of cargo facilities could be a problem? I don't know if they carry cargo on their 737s but i know cargo could be loaded by hand on 737s.
Looking at a lot of the legacies many of them do have substantial cargo operations as well.
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,933
5,278
343
Wurzel Country
IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
Yes
Admin #205
Also i do wonder if for an airline like Turkish the lack of cargo facilities could be a problem? I don't know if they carry cargo on their 737s but i know cargo could be loaded by hand on 737s.
Looking at a lot of the legacies many of them do have substantial cargo operations as well.
That's another potential BRS weakness. All options of the new master plan consultation document are predicated on removal of part of the Green Belt that surrounds the airport - already part of the North Side is in a Green Belt Inset which effectively removes the Green Belt restrictions from that part of the site.

If further land is removed from the Green Belt then a cargo facility could be a realistic provision, provided it was thought necessary and viable.
 

Marko1

Platinum Member
Feb 1, 2013
1,103
629
113
The airport press release mentions specifically long haul and particularly as I read it scheduled rather than charter . This suggests to me that they have someone in mind but who I don't know. Secondly Turkish is an absolutely perfect solution for an eastern connection. They claim to fly to more countries than any other airline and just look at the cities across Europe that they serve - many considerably smaller and less affluent than Bristol. They also have the perfect and flexibly mix of aircraft. I just cannot understand why they are not already at Bristol.
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,933
5,278
343
Wurzel Country
IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
Yes
Admin #208
I’m almost a little tired of hearing the same old from the airport in terms of legacy carriers. They do need to diversify in a way that keeps everyone happy. Standsted is a good example of an airport that is looking to do just that to grow. It was basically Ryanair airport however recently they have started to grow with a different mix.
Turkish and or Swiss would be great I’m terms of a state offering and hub connections. I think BMI also need some competition to keep them on their toes. LH with their own metal or eurowings could plug a few gaps there or provide a better offering.. the runway chatter or lack of it is still a disappointment to me.. there lies a real lack of vision looking to the future..
The airport in its present incarnation seems very profitable for its owners and such has been the case for a long time. They apparently see no reason to alter this state of affairs in a significant way. It's been said before that a few more low cost routes or even additional frequency on existing ones would make more money for the airport through ancillary revenue spend than a long haul scheduled route or two.

Other airports (not all by any means) seem to manage both to a limited degree. Robert Sinclair the previous airport CEO said, in an aviation magazine article last year, that their preference for growth is with existing carriers and this has proved itself down the years. He made the telling comment that it might not work for all airports but it does for BRS.

Although there are airlines with aircraft that could operate some long haul scheduled routes from the existing runway, and I'm sure the airport would embrace them if they came along because it would mean very little additional cost to accomodate them, when it comes to becoming a serious long haul player we are back to the airport physical size question. The runway is limiting; the site is small and there is not even a cargo facility.

Extending the runway would be extremely expensive from a cost perspective (it would require a 150-metre long tunnel for the A38 for starters) and the environmental hurdles would be immense. The airport appears not to have altered its view expressed in the current (2006) master plan that any improvement in performance that might be achieved is relatively small compared with the cost and potential environmental impact. A note was added that it would be necessary keep the issue under review in subsequent updates of the master plan. That they are currently asking for the views of the public on such things as new terminals but not on a longer runway is puzzling.

Expanding the site into the Green Belt might be less difficult but it would still be highly controversial. There is also the matter of persuading the local authority to abolish or raise the current 10 mppa limit. I think that will be less difficult, albeit the usual suspects will make a lot of noise about it.
 

Jerry

Moderator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jun 1, 2016
8,086
4,180
323
37
Cardiff
Moderator #209
The airport press release mentions specifically long haul and particularly as I read it scheduled rather than charter
If it's scheduled the only thing i can think of is US East Coast for New York or another airline like Thomas Cook coming in on Orlando.
 

Marko1

Platinum Member
Feb 1, 2013
1,103
629
113
Can't help feeling a bit envious today of the big event happening over the bridge. With a little foresight that could have been brs today
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,933
5,278
343
Wurzel Country
IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
Yes
Admin #211
Can't help feeling a bit envious today of the big event happening over the bridge. With a little foresight that could have been brs today
I take your general point but I'm not sure that BRS would have been able to pick this particular plum in any event.
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,933
5,278
343
Wurzel Country
IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
Yes
Admin #213
That Qatar was looking to open a route to the South West was mentioned by their UK chief getting on for three years ago. Realistically, it could only be to CWL or BRS (EXT is too far away from the main centres on both sides of the Severn estuary). BRS almost certainly wasn't considered because of operational constraints, even though the 787-8 could reach Doha easily from the current runway. However, that was probably a side issue.

The Qatar CEO made it quite clear that he was looking at a link to serve Wales as a country and had obviously obtained a lot of support from both the Welsh Government and the from the UK Government via the Secretary of State for Wales. The WG was/is in a position to speak on government to government terms with the Qatari Government and through that arrange co-operation on any number of matters to the mutual benefit of both countries.

Furthermore, the WG itself and through its airport company is in a position to offer initial inducements for the air service. We've said before that the WG will view its purchase of CWL a success (both politically and in actuality) even if the airport doesn't reach profitabilty for a while because (a) it will help to oil the wheels of the country's economy and (b) will grow in value as a fixed asset.

The private sector owners of BRS cannot think in this way. A daily Qatar flight would almost certainly provide less ancillary revenue (through such things as car parking and retail outlet use) than a couple of additional easyJet or Ryanair flights a day. Although improving the local economy through the airport's presence would be a positive side effect it's not the primary reason for the airport being there from the owner's perspective.

If today's information about the cargo uplift on the two Qatar flights is true that's another reason why BRS in its present incarnation cannot compete on mainstream long haul.

The draft master plan due for publication this spring becomes more interesting in prospect by the day.
 

Marko1

Platinum Member
Feb 1, 2013
1,103
629
113
I'm a bit confused by the airports growth strategy. All recent press releases talk of targeting long haul flights so surely they must have been trying to win Qatar. Secondly I'm sure I read an article suggesting most of the Qatar airways board wanted to fly to Bristol but was overruled. So what exactly is the strategy?long haul or not ?
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,933
5,278
343
Wurzel Country
IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
Yes
Admin #215
I'm a bit confused by the airports growth strategy. All recent press releases talk of targeting long haul flights so surely they must have been trying to win Qatar. Secondly I'm sure I read an article suggesting most of the Qatar airways board wanted to fly to Bristol but was overruled. So what exactly is the strategy?long haul or not ?
The only thing that I've read is the Qatar CEO's comment that some of his senior staff did not support his decision to begin a CWL service. I've not read anything to suggest they favoured BRS instead.

I'm sure that BRS would have loved Qatar but they were always struggling to get them in my opinion for the reasons set out in my earlier post.
 

Jerry

Moderator
Staff member
I've upgraded to support F4A!
Jun 1, 2016
8,086
4,180
323
37
Cardiff
Moderator #216
All recent press releases talk of targeting long haul flights so surely they must have been trying to win Qatar.
They probably were and i'm sure they'd love to attract more long haul routes and the most likeliest to provide that is TUI and that is probably how they will expand their long haul routes in the future through TUI.
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,933
5,278
343
Wurzel Country
IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
Yes
Admin #217
They probably were and i'm sure they'd love to attract more long haul routes and the most likeliest to provide that is TUI and that is probably how they will expand their long haul routes in the future through TUI.
From the airport's point of view TUI creates footfall. For the region's economy though scheduled routes for business as well as for leisure such as the ME are more important but, as I said previously, that is not the airport's primary concern.

If BRS had a freight facility and a longer runway and was able to handle aircraft up to, say, B777 size its primary catchment and proximity to secondary catchments would almost certainly have seen it with some scheduled long haul by now. As it is, the airport will remain a very good short-haul business provider with an abundance of leisure routes including some long haul. The BRS managment said recently that increases in frequencies on some of its existing routes is one of its priorities.
 

aviatorconcorde

Well-Known Member
Feb 1, 2018
485
364
63
South East Wales
They probably were and i'm sure they'd love to attract more long haul routes and the most likeliest to provide that is TUI and that is probably how they will expand their long haul routes in the future through TUI.
My personal opinion is that BRS will likley pick up a Transatlantic USA East Coast connection before Cardiff does. I think it could potentially come in the form of Primea or Nowergian who would have the right sized jet for the job.

That said, BHX have seen a decline in Transatlantic links in recent years with Primea cancelling it's plans to operate. Who knows what will happen?
 

TheLocalYokel

Administrator
Staff member
Jan 14, 2009
11,933
5,278
343
Wurzel Country
IMPORTANT!! To reduce spam, we request that you make a post soon after completing your registration. We request you keep your account active by posting regularly. Inactive accounts risk being deleted.
Yes
Admin #219
https://www.aviationwales.com/qatar-airways-is-in-cardiff-for-the-long-haul/

Below is a report on part of the press conference given today by Qatar Airways' CEO.

Qatar Airways coming to Wales shows his belief that airlines should create markets and he sees the catchment area of Cardiff Airport as being bigger than that of Bristol, one of several reasons he didn’t choose the smaller airport across the channel. Others being the size and operating restrictions that apply there and with Bristol’s focus on low-cost passenger flights, a limited desire for freight operations.

It confirms what some of us have been saying for a while, although as I said earlier I saw little chance of Qatar coming to BRS even if its physical size had not been a problem because of the government to government communication that is potentially something that both countries can develop. BRS only has local authorities fighting its cause, and they aren't united or all in favour of airport development. Bristol City Council formally objected to the airport's planning applications for its major expansion when they came before North Somerset Council in 2010/11. Had Lulsgate been located within the city boundary it's highly likely that any expansion would have been blocked.

I don't follow the airline CEO's claim that CWL has a bigger catchment area than BRS. That is plainly a ludicrous suggestion unless the article is poorly drafted and the CEO was speaking solely about his own airline's service. There is an argument with that in that the BRS catchment, when it comes to ME long haul, has other options: LHR, BHX and now CWL. That works both ways of course because those options mean that CWL is only one of three choices and the airport and airline will need to fight hard to claim passengers from the West Country who might otherwise use LHR (mainly) or BHX.

Nevertheless, BRS's resticted size and lack of freight facilities is now coming home to roost when it comes to securing scheduled long haul. Things are unlikely to change greatly in the future as the airport is making its owners a lot of money and all I can see in the form of future growth is more of the same.
 

aviatorconcorde

Well-Known Member
Feb 1, 2018
485
364
63
South East Wales
https://www.aviationwales.com/qatar-airways-is-in-cardiff-for-the-long-haul/

Below is a report on part of the press conference given today by Qatar Airways' CEO.

Qatar Airways coming to Wales shows his belief that airlines should create markets and he sees the catchment area of Cardiff Airport as being bigger than that of Bristol, one of several reasons he didn’t choose the smaller airport across the channel. Others being the size and operating restrictions that apply there and with Bristol’s focus on low-cost passenger flights, a limited desire for freight operations.

It confirms what some of us have been saying for a while, although as I said earlier I saw little chance of Qatar coming to BRS even if its physical size had not been a problem because of the government to government communication that is potentially something that both countries can develop. BRS only has local authorities fighting its cause, and they aren't united or all in favour of airport development. Bristol City Council formally objected to the airport's planning applications for its major expansion when they came before North Somerset Council in 2010/11. Had Lulsgate been located within the city boundary it's highly likely that any expansion would have been blocked.

I don't follow the airline CEO's claim that CWL has a bigger catchment area than BRS. That is plainly a ludicrous suggestion unless the article is poorly drafted and the CEO was speaking solely about his own airline's service. There is an argument with that in that the BRS catchment, when it comes to ME long haul, has other options: LHR, BHX and now CWL. That works both ways of course because those options mean that CWL is only one of three choices and the airport and airline will need to fight hard to claim passengers from the West Country who might otherwise use LHR (mainly) or BHX.

Nevertheless, BRS's resticted size and lack of freight facilities is now coming home to roost when it comes to securing scheduled long haul. Things are unlikely to change greatly in the future as the airport is making its owners a lot of money and all I can see in the form of future growth is more of the same.
I also think the UK Government may of had a hand in this, or at least wanted to take some credit for it. Alan Cairns has never turned up or had a huge amount to do with Cardiff Airport in recent years and all of a sudden appears. It also looks good with the UK almost brexiting they are building trade links and the likes.

With the Qatari owned gas terminal in Milford Haven and plans to open a hotel, I can’t help think Qatar want to hang around for quite a while.
 

Advertisement


Top Bottom