Longhaul from Bristol

[Kernow Bravo]

As far as BRS is concerned they would have to get their current 10 mppa planning cap raised to take advantage. It would be ironic if the LHR third runway failed to progress because of planning decisions and BRS expansion was also blocked because of the planners.

I actually think the stars may align to the benefit of BRS in this case.

The green lobby will very likely scupper the LHR third runway. With the next Climate Conference in Glasgow in 2 years time, the UK would need to be seen to be leading the way, so at the very least the issue will be kicked into the long grass. Remember Boris has in the past been no fan of expanding LHR, and now his constituency is rather too close for comfort!

However, as a result of the referendum and last month's election, it seems inevitable that the centre of gravity for domestic economic investment will escape the confines of the M25 to some extent. The focus of UK trade policy also seems likely to veer westwards for similar reasons.

Therefore growth in air travel outside LHR will still be needed and airports like BRS could (comparatively) quietly add a couple of TATL flights 'under the radar' without the hullabaloo and gnashing of teeth that would greet further LHR expansion. MAN and NCL would also likely benefit, but the 'levelling up' I keep hearing from government ministers will take longer and cost more in the north/midlands than it will in the already relatively productive BRS catchment.

Some tactical investment will be needed to fill the vacuum caused by any gravitational pull away from the south east, and the south west is an obvious candidate to support that.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

I actually think the stars may align to the benefit of BRS in this case.

The green lobby will very likely scupper the LHR third runway. With the next Climate Conference in Glasgow in 2 years time, the UK would need to be seen to be leading the way, so at the very least the issue will be kicked into the long grass. Remember Boris has in the past been no fan of expanding LHR, and now his constituency is rather too close for comfort!

However, as a result of the referendum and last month's election, it seems inevitable that the centre of gravity for domestic economic investment will escape the confines of the M25 to some extent. The focus of UK trade policy also seems likely to veer westwards for similar reasons.

Therefore growth in air travel outside LHR will still be needed and airports like BRS could (comparatively) quietly add a couple of TATL flights 'under the radar' without the hullabaloo and gnashing of teeth that would greet further LHR expansion. MAN and NCL would also likely benefit, but the 'levelling up' I keep hearing from government ministers will take longer and cost more in the north/midlands than it will in the already relatively productive BRS catchment.

Some tactical investment will be needed to fill the vacuum caused by any gravitational pull away from the south east, and the south west is an obvious candidate to support that.

The raising of the passenger cap will firstly be in the hands of North Somerset Council , a local authority that is far more 'Green' orientated since last May's local elections. The majority of the councillors on the planning committee are likely to be against BRS expansion which is a big topic amongst a lot of residents in that local authority area.

The first clue we should get is the nature of the recommendations of the council's planning officers to the elected representatives who will make the decision. The councillors don't have to follow thair professional officers' advice but if the advice is to reject the important thing will be the reasons.

The airport can always appeal a rejection decision to the Planning Inspectorate when a professional planning inspector will be appointed to consider the appeal which will probably involve taking evidence at a public hearing. In some ways that might be a better option all round as the matter will be given an independent, professional airing, although it will add to the already lengthy delay. The inspector will base his/her decision partly on any government policy or guidance on the subject generally, and would also consider the local effect. He or she would then make a final decision although in some cases the inspector would forward a report with recommendations to the secretary of state to decide the outcome.

I'm certainly not an expert on planning but over the years I have read up on it, both for personal reasons and in connection with a number of high-profile local cases such as football stadiums.

If we do have any planning expert members I would be very pleased to hear their comments and be corrected if necessary.

 

[Bes]

Whilst I am not a fan of activities that increase our carbon output as a nation in general, from a selfish perspective I am very glad to see positive steps towards the expansion/ 12M PPA cap being implemented.

As someone who will soon be living in Australia, it would be absolutely amazing to see EK/ QR/ EY come in with a direct service so my young family and I can fly between Melbourne and Bristol with only a single change and not have to schlep from LHR to Paddington and then on the GWR mainline.

I am hopeful APD changes in March and a positive outcome to the expansion question make one of these airlines look at BRS again. Much chance of this? Surely BRS and courting EK regarding a direct service?!

 

[Jerry]

As someone who will soon be living in Australia, it would be absolutely amazing to see EK/ QR/ EY come in with a direct service so my young family and I can fly between Melbourne and Bristol with only a single change and not have to schlep from LHR to Paddington and then on the GWR mainline.

Would you not consider Qatar Airways at Cardiff as an option for you? Or KLM/LH from BRS?

 

[Bes]

Would you not consider Qatar Airways at Cardiff as an option for you? Or KLM/LH from BRS?

No - my relatives are too far from CWL (Easier to get to LHR) and KLM/ LH with the extra change is just too painful/ long, not to mention much more expensive than going to LHR!

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Whilst I am not a fan of activities that increase our carbon output as a nation in general, from a selfish perspective I am very glad to see positive steps towards the expansion/ 12M PPA cap being implemented.

As someone who will soon be living in Australia, it would be absolutely amazing to see EK/ QR/ EY come in with a direct service so my young family and I can fly between Melbourne and Bristol with only a single change and not have to schlep from LHR to Paddington and then on the GWR mainline.

I am hopeful APD changes in March and a positive outcome to the expansion question make one of these airlines look at BRS again. Much chance of this? Surely BRS and courting EK regarding a direct service?!

Whilst I am not a fan of activities that increase our carbon output as a nation in general, from a selfish perspective I am very glad to see positive steps towards the expansion/ 12M PPA cap being implemented.

As someone who will soon be living in Australia, it would be absolutely amazing to see EK/ QR/ EY come in with a direct service so my young family and I can fly between Melbourne and Bristol with only a single change and not have to schlep from LHR to Paddington and then on the GWR mainline.

I am hopeful APD changes in March and a positive outcome to the expansion question make one of these airlines look at BRS again. Much chance of this? Surely BRS and courting EK regarding a direct service?!

I think one of the problems in the past has been finding an aircraft that is both operationally and commercially suitable for BRS.

Etihad have some B787-9s and Emirates are supposed to be getting some in the next few years. This aircraft type can operate from BRS as TUI have shown on occasions when standing in for 787-8s. The ME ought to be easily in range even from BRS's runway. Whether there is a commercial imperative is another matter. BRS's relative proximity to LHR means that airlines are content in the knowledge that most West Country travellers automatically default to London (usually LHR) when it comes to direct long haul travel, and a lot use LHR for short haul too even to destinations served from BRS, perhaps at times because the frequency, timings or days of operation at BRS are lacking.

Today on the local radio the BRS CEO said that 8 million annual air journeys are made via the London airports by people originating or terminating in the South West.

As for APD, some media reports suggest that if domestic or short haul APD is reduced there will be an increase on long haul.

My wife and I have been flying to Melbourne most years since 2010 for VFR and we use the London airports, LHR or LGW, with Emirates. Given the length of the overall journey (well over 24 hours when the surface element is included) it's not too much of pain. We've looked at KLM from BRS and also flybmi when they code-shared with Lufthansa but neither was of any use - the elapsed flight times alone were horrendous involving two en-route changes.

 

[Bes]

My wife and I have been flying to Melbourne most years since 2010 for VFR and we use the London airports, LHR or LGW, with Emirates. Given the length of the overall journey (well over 24 hours when the surface element is included) it's not too much of pain. We've looked at KLM from BRS and also flybmi when they code-shared with Lufthansa but neither was of any use - the elapsed flight times alone were horrendous involving two en-route changes.

Yes same issues we face. London just looks like the easier option unfortunately.

With NCL (Less wealthy catchment, lower annual pax numbers MAN, EDI, GLA all with ME carriers and in relative proximity albeit not as well connected as Bristol is to London) able to maintain a daily EK, I would imagine BRS would be viable (Especially as the 787-9 is smaller than NCL's 777) Although I understand BRS lacks a proper cargo facility. Does that mean cargo handling is not possible on such flights?

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Yes same issues we face. London just looks like the easier option unfortunately.

With NCL (Less wealthy catchment, lower annual pax numbers MAN, EDI, GLA all with ME carriers and in relative proximity albeit not as well connected as Bristol is to London) able to maintain a daily EK, I would imagine BRS would be viable (Especially as the 787-9 is smaller than NCL's 777) Although I understand BRS lacks a proper cargo facility. Does that mean cargo handling is not possible on such flights?

First of all, please accept my apologies for neglecting to welcome you to Forums4Airports. Welcome and I hope you will be posting regularly.

Freight is undoubtedly an important component of such services as those to the Middle East. At present BRS's air freight contribution is negligible. The airport was rather vague about the freight issue in the documentation it produced about the new master plan which we still await. In fact, we've not even had the draft master plan published yet for further public consultation. It's well overdue - by about a year - but it might have been sidelined whilst the airport worked on more pressing matters trying to gets its passenger cap lifted along with a planning application for infrastructure to support up to 12 mppa.

CAA stats shown that in the whole of 2018 BRS handled 7 tonnes of air freight. Other non-London airports with ME routes were MAN (114,131 tonnes), Edinburgh (20,316 tonnes), Glasgow (15,466 tonnes) and Newcastle (5,524 tonnes). Of course, not all this freight went solely on ME airlines or ME routes.

Unsurprisingly LHR handled the most in 2018 - 1,685,137 tonnes. As far as I can see only London City (7 tonnes), Leeds-Bradford (3 tonnes), Newquay (3 tonnes) and Teesside (1 tonne) handled the same or less tonnage than BRS. Even small airports such as Norwich (220 tonnes) and Humberside (121 tonnes) handled more.

Cardiff handled 1,459 tonnes in 2018. It's thought that freight was one of a number of issues that led to Qatar Airways choosing CWL over BRS for its Severnside airport.

 

[forest1979]

So, we know that the ME remains very much in the radar of Bristol. I have seen in recent days some interesting routes using the 321XLR with Ethiad, the latest to PMI albeit a summer only schedule. I guess my point is that airport expansion and a very modest runway extension might not have to be the thing to wait for. I’m sure BRS could support an XLR flight.. I know someone that flew the XLR to the states with Iberia. They said the flight was fantastic, spacious for a single body airline and quiet.
I’d be interested in your thoughts..
Qatar, is that going back to CWL or should Bristol be trying to secure them.

 

[Jerry]

So, we know that the ME remains very much in the radar of Bristol. I have seen in recent days some interesting routes using the 321XLR with Ethiad, the latest to PMI albeit a summer only schedule. I guess my point is that airport expansion and a very modest runway extension might not have to be the thing to wait for. I’m sure BRS could support an XLR flight.. I know someone that flew the XLR to the states with Iberia. They said the flight was fantastic, spacious for a single body airline and quiet.
I’d be interested in your thoughts..
Qatar, is that going back to CWL or should Bristol be trying to secure them.

The problem Bristol has is it's close to Heathrow so it's going to struggle to attract an airline like Etihad because Etihad can cover Bristol from Heathrow with it's 4 daily flights. With the exception of KLM and Aer Lingus it doesn't seem to be able to attract and keep the hub type airlines like Turkish, Lufthansa or Air France etc. As for Qatar Airways etc they may well feel Bristol is covered from Heathrow as well.

 

[gulftraveller]

Qatar closed the Cardiff file some years ago and Al Baker’s departure ruled out reopening it. The problem is that the QR A321LRs could have performance difficulties at BRS and the B787 would definitely be outside runway length requirements.

It is possible that Etihad could do BRS with an XLR but I agree with the previous comment. Both airlines probably see the region covered by LHR services.

THY would be a very good fit.

 

[Aviador]

So, we know that the ME remains very much in the radar of Bristol. I have seen in recent days some interesting routes using the 321XLR with Ethiad, the latest to PMI albeit a summer only schedule. I guess my point is that airport expansion and a very modest runway extension might not have to be the thing to wait for. I’m sure BRS could support an XLR flight.. I know someone that flew the XLR to the states with Iberia. They said the flight was fantastic, spacious for a single body airline and quiet.
I’d be interested in your thoughts..
Qatar, is that going back to CWL or should Bristol be trying to secure them.

I agree, interesting times ahead. The idea Heathrow is too close is nonsense. If an airline such as Etihad think Bristol will work for them then there is every chance it will happen sooner or later. It is the obvious next step for BRS airport. The A321XLR is the perfect fit for flights to the Middle East from BRS and it can fly the route unrestricted. It would offer the people of the South West connections around the world via the Middle East without the need for travelling to Heathrow.

Qatar closed the Cardiff file some years ago and Al Baker’s departure ruled out reopening it. The problem is that the QR A321LRs could have performance difficulties at BRS and the B787 would definitely be outside runway length requirements.

It is possible that Etihad could do BRS with an XLR but I agree with the previous comment. Both airlines probably see the region covered by LHR services.

THY would be a very good fit.

Im sure you're right on the 787 but I don't believe the A321XLR would be restricted. The Middle East wouldn't be the aircrafts maximum range so wouldn't be operating with a maximum payload. Cargo wouldn't be an option but that isn't necessarily a deal breaker.

 

[Foxlimayankee]

Maximum payload is affected by runway length. So you cant compare AUH to somewhere based on length of flight. BRS will always be at a disadvantage with a short runway with unpredictable weather.

 

[Jerry]

The idea Heathrow is too close is nonsense

It's not nonsense though, it's a big factor in how airlines view other airports. Etihad operate 4 daily flights to Heathrow from Abu Dhabi. 2 on an A380, 2 on 787s. That's a lot of seat capacity they need to fill and Bristols catchment area is at least a 90 minute drive away. So it is a big factor in how they'll view the route.
I know you see the A321XLR as a game changer for the smaller regional airports when it comes to long haul but it needs to be remembered that airlines may well views it differently and could use it to increase frequency on routes like Heathrow to Abu Dhabi instead or use it to replace widebodies on some routes instead to cut costs.

 

[kfs]

The problem Bristol has is it's close to Heathrow so it's going to struggle to attract an airline like Etihad because Etihad can cover Bristol from Heathrow with it's 4 daily flights. With the exception of KLM and Aer Lingus it doesn't seem to be able to attract and keep the hub type airlines like Turkish, Lufthansa or Air France etc. As for Qatar Airways etc they may well feel Bristol is covered from Heathrow as well.

I agree that residents of the Bristol area might well be seen as close enough to Heathrow by airlines, but Bristol airport also serves a large catchment area south west of the airport. From Devon or Cornwall to Heathrow is a difficult and expensive journey by train, long and very unpleasant on a coach, and don't get us started on the A303! Bristol is easy and quick to reach, and would be a much preferable alternative if the onward connections were better. I have many times used KLM from Bristol for long haul, and have also used Emirates and Turkish from Birmingham as preferable to the hassle of Heathrow. If performance specs will allow the XLR to serve ME hubs from Bristol I believe there would be demand. However, a single daily rotation will limit the choice of onward connections, and I fear the chance of getting multiple flights per day is very slim.

 

[Jerry]

I agree that residents of the Bristol area might well be seen as close enough to Heathrow by airlines, but Bristol airport also serves a large catchment area south west of the airport. From Devon or Cornwall to Heathrow is a difficult and expensive journey by train, long and very unpleasant on a coach, and don't get us started on the A303! Bristol is easy and quick to reach, and would be a much preferable alternative if the onward connections were better. I have many times used KLM from Bristol for long haul, and have also used Emirates and Turkish from Birmingham as preferable to the hassle of Heathrow. If performance specs will allow the XLR to serve ME hubs from Bristol I believe there would be demand. However, a single daily rotation will limit the choice of onward connections, and I fear the chance of getting multiple flights per day is very slim.

Yep there's demand but the airlines know that they can cater for it from Heathrow or via partnerships with airlines like KLM.
There has to be a reason why Bristol has failed to attract European airlines and ME airlines so far and I do think part of that is Heathrow. The airlines there no people will travel to them and unless people stop using them it's going to be difficult for Bristol to get them to offer direct flights.

 

[Aviador]

Yep there's demand but the airlines know that they can cater for it from Heathrow or via partnerships with airlines like KLM.
There has to be a reason why Bristol has failed to attract European airlines and ME airlines so far and I do think part of that is Heathrow. The airlines there no people will travel to them and unless people stop using them it's going to be difficult for Bristol to get them to offer direct flights.

I don't disagree but where there is a set up with a weak point to exploit then there is an opportunity for an airline to take advantage of that. Just because it suits the current operating model of the middle eastern airlines now doesn't mean it will stay like that forever more. Initially Heathrow was the first port of call for these airlines, then they branched out to Manchester and Glasgow. As the airlines mature and the market grows, regional departure airports came with airports like Newcastle and Birmingham taking advantage of that. The next logical step is regional departures to airports that currently have no offering. Liverpool, Bristol, Cardiff, Leeds, East Midlands and Luton are all logically next in line. The market will dictate where next, not necessarily the airlines as the first to do it will have a monopoly as the others scramble to do the same.

 

[Jerry]

don't disagree but where there is a set up with a weak point to exploit then there is an opportunity for an airline to take advantage of that

Assuming that they want to take advantage of it though. There's only a few airlines when it comes to regional long haul and they may not be willing to change things up.

The next logical step is regional departures to airports that currently have no offering. Liverpool, Bristol, Cardiff, Leeds, East Midlands

The problem is though airlines may well see those areas as covered.
If you look at the M62 corridor it has 4 airports along a 107 mile corridor.
The East Midlands can be considered covered by Birmingham. London has 3 airports with long haul.
If you look at Bristol its what 120 miles from Heathrow? Cardiff 150 miles?
If airports like Bristol are going to attract long haul flights then I don't think it'll be flights off the major airlines but more niche ones. For Bristol who's that likely to be?

 

[gulftraveller]

All agreed. Except that airlines operating long haul flights cannot scatter themselves at every regional airport. It is not good economics. Speaking from the ME end, I would be very surprised to see QTR or ETD expand much in UK. The idea that every regional airport can support long haul flights to NYC or DXB is a bit of a fantasy. That said, BRS should be next on the list for THY.

 

[forest1979]

All agreed. Except that airlines operating long haul flights cannot scatter themselves at every regional airport. It is not good economics. Speaking from the ME end, I would be very surprised to see QTR or ETD expand much in UK. The idea that every regional airport can support long haul flights to NYC or DXB is a bit of a fantasy. That said, BRS should be next on the list for THY.

Some interesting points and discussion. Thanks everyone.
It would be great to get an insider view of what’s happening internally within the airport on this one.
Regarding the point of too close to Heathrow, Bristol is but the wider southwest and wales isn’t.. it’s a big old catchment area so there is no doubt in my mind about demand if the flight was there. Heathrow is around 4 hours for most I’m Devon and Cornwall. The same could be said for example in attracting someone like jet blue for New York. I really feel it would be used. I don’t think runway length is an issue for the XLR on these routes but might be wrong.
With regards to Turkish, I think if that was going to happen it would have already. I agree with the point that for whatever reason, Bristol struggle to keep any national flag carrier which is a shame. I’ve always thought they need a mix, it’s too reliant on low cost and easyJet in particular.