It's been quiet in here. It seems like a lot of hopes people had haven't really panned out (yet!) - such as: flights to a US hub, flights to one of the hubs in the Middle East incl. Istanbul; a runway extension; B878 as a game changer for long haul from Bristol (although there are some flights now of course, but I don't think it's really been a game changer); Norwegian. And the airport's own assessment, at least as of the old 2006 masterplan, was that demand for long haul from Bristol will always be limited, even more so with Heathrow just up the road - and when the Heathrow Western Rail link is finished it will be even quicker and easier to reach.

Of course there will be many things going on in the background and worked on over a period of years that we won't know about until it's suddenly announced, so I suspect the airport might still have a few cards up its sleeve. And clearly there are plans for a massive increase in the number of passengers handled going forward, even if it's not entirely clear to onlookers like me where those passengers will come from or go to, but someone must know or they wouldn't be pouring hundreds of millions into extending the airport.

In any case, and unrelated to the above, I've recently come across some articles talking about Airbus thinking about an A321 XLR variant to cover a gap in the market between the trusty single-aisle short haul work horses and larger-capacity double-aisle jets. If I recall correctly they may be making a decision on whether to go ahead with this in January, and if so it could go into service as soon as 2023.

To me it looks like this could be much more of a game changer for Bristol than the B787/A350, since it would be a smaller plane and thus easier to fill (or fill profitably, rather), and it might also not be affected so much by the runway limitations.

The way the world is developing I think that a long haul scheduled route to the east would be more valuable than one to the west. Missing out on Qatar was a huge blow for BRS whatever the reasons, and there were probably a number.

Turkish seems to crop up at regular intervals and has done for a few years now. In itself it would not be a long-haul route but would feed into them, although its spread is not as wide from Istanbul than that of the MEB3 from the Gulf, especially Emirates. There are rumours that the new and larger IST will lead to increased connectivity options so that might still be a realistic BRS goal in the future.

The USA appears to be seeing re-adjustment at the moment with bigger airports than BRS experiencing reductions; BHX is a an obvious example. I’m not sure that Norwegian, which seems to have cut back on some of its transatlantic operations, would be well supported without connectivity in the USA. Even then there might be a question mark.

Heathrow remains a major obstacle to any BRS scheduled long-haul ambitions. I recently discovered myself how convenient that airport is from the Bristol area for long haul. I hadn’t used LHR for many years and, having read and heard horror stories, was pleasantly surprised by it as an airport and as a reasonably accessible destination from the Bristol area.

As you point out, the BRS management doubtless has dialogue with all manner of airlines, including long haul, but it’s as a short haul airport that it punches well above its weight, having regard to its physical size and difficult surface connectivity. If this approach is making money for the airlines and for the airport, as it seems to be, there is probably little imperative for the airport to go out on a limb to attract the odd scheduled long haul player if more short haul routes are more profitable for it.
 
I had an email from BRS today - I'm on their mailing list - inviting me to take part in a travel survey that is looking to collate details of how travellers fly to Africa, Asia and the Middle East in terms of frequency, departure UK airports and airlines. The survey also wants to hear where people would like to fly to from the airport in the future.

I suppose this an exercise in bringing up to date their data base of people's travel habits which they will use when pitching to airlines.
 
Hmm. I had an email too . I was thinking whether there really was any point given the fact that Qatar is now at Cardiff and Emirates is highly unlikely to rock up then I thought Turkish. Perfect fit for brs and massive network in Asia and Africa
 
Hmm. I had an email too . I was thinking whether there really was any point given the fact that Qatar is now at Cardiff and Emirates is highly unlikely to rock up then I thought Turkish. Perfect fit for brs and massive network in Asia and Africa
I suppose they have to keep trying. One day something might crop up although it doesn't look very likely at the moment. Apart from Turkish, there doesn't seem anything else that might be more than just possible.

Actually, a route to Istanbul wouldn't be long-haul at all would it? Charter flights already operate to Turkey from BRS, as they do from most UK airports, and they aren't regarded as long-haul. Istanbul would offer connections there to long-haul but so too does KLM to AMS, EI to DUB, LH code-share to FRA and MUC and so on. Are 6-7 hour flights to the ME really long-haul? If they are, so too would have been the BRS flights to the Gambia in the past and arguably the existing flights to Cape Verde.

Despite being acquainted with one or two BRS figures at management level (not bosom pals or anything like that), I never did really establish how the airport viewed not getting Qatar. All I got was that they weren't really surprised - even in private conversations - with operational constraints mentioned as the biggest obstacle, at least as far as Qatar was concerned. Obviously, I would not have expected any commercial confidences or details of any negotiations to have been revealed. However, I did get the impresssion than it was an operational rather than a commercial decision although, having later heard the Qatar CEO's public comments, there were obviously other reasons including government backing both in the Senedd and at Westminster (sec of state) that saw the airline decide on CWL.

At least one of the MEB3 is operating from Severnside and no doubt used by some in the West Country, which is something.

For years BRS were touting the ME as one of the four scheduled long-haul routes they thought viable in terms of demand. Perhaps they were putting too much into the B787 basket but then again I'm told by those who know more about these things than me that a 787-8 or 9 would have no trouble operating BRS-ME without load penalty, if an airline was prepared to do it.
 
Emirates have ordered the A330 neo.. 900 series.. would emirates now be an option?
We've been discussing this in the BRS Random thread. Some interesting opinions there.
 
I've read some views, not on F4A, that BRS would struggle operationally with a ME route because of the weight of cargo that would be required to make such a route viable.

Looking at Qatar with its B787-8 as an example their 787-8s can apparently lift up to 12 tonnes of freight (not that Qatar would be likely given its CWL presence but this is really a post about operational possibilities, not commercial likelihoods, and discounts the BRS management's intention or otherwise to provide a freight capability).

I've found a website that lists fuel burn per hour for various types of aircraft and the B787-8 is shown as 4.8 tonnes per hour. Obviously conditions on particular flights will vary but this appears to be a base or average figure.

TUI operates the same type to Cancun and Florida from BRS and, based on the fuel burn and relative lengths of flights, those destinations are likely to burn around 12 tonnes more fuel than would be the case to the ME. In addition TUI's aircraft have at least 40 more seats than Qatar's - so that's another three tonnes or so including baggage. Furthermore, it might be that on a long transatlantic flight a captain would take more reserve fuel than on a flight to the ME- I don't know, it's a supposition.

So from this it seems that even with 12 tonnes of freight a B787-8 from BRS to the ME would be lighter than the same type to Mexico or Florida.

I have no technical expetise and I might have misunderstood the fuel burn figures and even the weight calculation figures. If I have I apologise for wasting readers' time, and please ignore this comment. However, if I'm somewhere in the right area I would be very grateful for any comments from people who have expertise in this field. Many thanks.
 
No expertise but sounds spot on. I don’t think it’s even in question about if an ME carrier with 787 8/9 or A350 equipment could use Bristol in flights to the ME..
The airport said a while ago they would be A350 ready.. don’t know if they are?

Does anyone know the loads and how popular Qatar has been out of CWL.. ? Without a doubt the biggest loss for Bristol to date against our nearest neighbor...
 
No expertise but sounds spot on. I don’t think it’s even in question about if an ME carrier with 787 8/9 or A350 equipment could use Bristol in flights to the ME..
The airport said a while ago they would be A350 ready.. don’t know if they are?

Does anyone know the loads and how popular Qatar has been out of CWL.. ? Without a doubt the biggest loss for Bristol to date against our nearest neighbor...
Qatar Airways carried 55,568 in 2018 average load factor of 132 passengers and 52.3%.
 
52% doesn’t sound all that good does it? I have no idea if that’s a good load factor..
 
There is also the freight uplift to be considered in the overall picture.
 
52% doesn’t sound all that good does it? I have no idea if that’s a good load factor..

On the face of it, it doesn't sound good. But remember it's the first 8 months of operation.

There's been lots of talk on social media from travellers about quiet business and full business cabins.
2019 will be the telling sign if the route will be a success. The summer figures were relatively good in 2018.
 
Interesting views and one to watch this year..
Certainly things have gone quiet on the rumour mill for BRS and long haul and new routes/airlines in general.. where conns 757 when you need him!!!!...
 
Thanks to Jon Dempsey for this link that he posted in the BHX forum.


The article sets out an argument from a Conservative MP for APD to be cut. I came across this paragraph within the article.

Research conducted for Airlines UK last year showed that APD prevented a significant number of routes from being financially viable. APD is causing the UK to miss out on new routes like Bristol to Dubai; Edinburgh to Delhi; and Birmingham to Tel Aviv.

I haven't heard that APD was the reason for the lack of a service to Dubai. I thought it was more to do with the size of aircraft likely to be used and the fact that it would be too big for BRS to handle (B777 for example), apart from such issues as freight.
 
Thanks to Jon Dempsey for this link that he posted in the BHX forum.


The article sets out an argument from a Conservative MP for APD to be cut. I came across this paragraph within the article.

Research conducted for Airlines UK last year showed that APD prevented a significant number of routes from being financially viable. APD is causing the UK to miss out on new routes like Bristol to Dubai; Edinburgh to Delhi; and Birmingham to Tel Aviv.

I haven't heard that APD was the reason for the lack of a service to Dubai. I thought it was more to do with the size of aircraft likely to be used and the fact that it would be too big for BRS to handle (B777 for example), apart from such issues as freight.
Yet lack of APD devolution hasn't stopped Qatar launching DOH-CWL.
Nor has APD stopped TUI from launching long haul from Bristol.
 
Yet lack of APD devolution hasn't stopped Qatar launching DOH-CWL.
Nor has APD stopped TUI from launching long haul from Bristol.
Airlines UK is the trade body for UK airlines so it might be expected that their research would enable them to make comments like that. I'm always searching for the salt cellar when I read such things from airlines, airports or their representatives.

It would seem that Qatar believes that CWL has the stronger market and could operate viably within the APD environment (ergo, it must have believed that BRS could not, or at least not as well), yet Ryanair blames APD for its inability to offer more routes at CWL then starts some new ones anyway.
 
I think when it comes to the likes of Ryanair, because per passenger they make such little profit (I've seen c. £1 per pax quoted before), its understandable why reducing or even axing APD would help to make more flights from Cardiff (and other airports) viable.

Interestingly looking at some fares from BRS & CWL next April, APD represents a higher percentage of a long haul fare, between 9% (BRS-CUN) up to 18% (CWL-DOH), whereas for short haul fares to the likes of ALC/PMI/AGP, APD equates to around 6-8% of the fare.

I personally found this quote from the article quite staggering:

"This has left the UK with the highest aviation taxes in Europe and the developed world, more than double Germany, the next highest in Europe."

Considering APD started as a way to offset the environmental impact of flying, the fact that the tax is now double the amount of the next highest in Europe clearly shows how much it has become just a money grab for the Exchequer. Of course the industry will claim that the tax gain from the resulting increase in flights that reducing/scrapping APD would bring, has this ever been independently proven I wonder? If it can be it would be a win-win for both the airlines and the Exchequer surely?
 
Considering APD started as a way to offset the environmental impact of flying, the fact that the tax is now double the amount of the next highest in Europe clearly shows how much it has become just a money grab for the Exchequer. Of course the industry will claim that the tax gain from the resulting increase in flights that reducing/scrapping APD would bring, has this ever been independently proven I wonder? If it can be it would be a win-win for both the airlines and the Exchequer surely?

Yet you can also choose to 'carbon offset' your flights with many airlines! Whether such additional contributions actually end up with tree planters is almost as likely as UK APD income finding its way to the same worthy cause, in my opinion.

I would imagine the Exchequer is only interested in LHR, LGW and maybe MAN from an APD policy perspectve. Reduction or scrappage at those airports would only exacerbate the existing capacity constraints so there's no incentive to change the status quo.

APD reductions/scrappage for regional airports might have some merit in helping to relieve the logjam at LHR in particular, but that in turn may reduce the overall APD tax take, not to mention the reduced fuel duty resulting from fewer pax driving long distances to LHR!
 
With climate change currently in the spotlight it would be difficult for the government to do something like reducing or axing APD because it would immediately be jumped on by activists and supporters as encouraging people to fly more, not less.

In reality it would probably make little difference to the environment but the image would be wrong. The government could look down from the moral high ground and say that maintaining APD was one of the many weapons they are using to tackle climate change which also has the agreeable (to them) side effect of raising £3 billion or so a year and the collection is done for them.

Osborne's Treasury did eventually come clean about the real reason for APD when it launched a consultation on the subject in 2011, saying, "Air passenger duty is primarily a revenue raising duty which makes an important contribution to the public finances, whilst also giving rise to secondary environmental benefits".
 

Upload Media

Upgrade Your Account

Subscribe to help support your favourite forum and in return we'll remove all our advertisements. Your contribution will help to pay for things like site maintenance, domain name renewals and annual server charges.



Forums4aiports
Subscribe

NEW - Profile Posts

9 trips in 9 days done 70 miles walked and over 23-00 photos taken with a large number taken at 20mph or above. Heavy rain on 1 day only
5 trips done and 45 miles walked,. Also the RAF has had 4 F35B Lightning follow me yesterday and today....
My plans got altered slightly as one of the minibus companies had to cancel 3 trips and refunded me but will be getting nice discount when I rebook them.
wondering why on my "holidays" I choose to get up 2 hours earlier than when going to work. 6 trips in 6 days soon coming up with 3 more days to sort out

Trending Hashtags

Advertisement

Back
Top Bottom
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock