Emirates

[CL44]

I can see Emirates staying with 2 x 777 flights into BHX for the moment. I would hope that in due course they do look at upgrading one of the flights to A380 status, BUT, I cannot see this happening until another of the LHR flights has been upgraded which probably will not happen until deliveries have hit the 20+ mark into the fleet. Even then they will have to justify placing one of these beasts onto the chosen route by ensuring they do not miss out on cargo revenue. Bear in mind that uplift on the A380 does take a hit compared to the 777 which will affect profitability on a route.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

CL 44

I read on another thread that the premium cabin on the BHX link does not perform so well as that on the MAN link.

I don't know if this is so but when I travelled in November the business cabin consisted of the old-fashioned seating design with non-lie flat seats. On the outbound (evening) the cabin seemed pretty full but on the inbound (lunchtime) only about 30 of the 42 seats were occupied. As premium cabin occupancy means so much to route profitability this might be an area that needs looking at though I know that Emirates has been exploring ways of improving the take-up.

You will know that the route was scaled back from 3-class to 2-class last autumn which gives the 777s on the route enormous potential overall passenger load with up to 449 seats.

Broadening the scope briefly, there continues to be much debate about the future role of BHX should LHR find itself overwhelmed with traffic. BHX seems to be the government's preferred airport to take much of the overspill although of course the airport is constricted by its runway length (and narrow and tight corners on some taxiways?) when it comes to a full-blown intercontinental network.

Nevertheless, the airport is very conveniently situated for much of the central and southern portions of England and Wales and ought to feel the considerable benefit of any displacement of LHR traffic.

 

[CL44]

I agree that the premium cabin seems to need a bit of work on it if they are really serious about filling the front of the flights. I am more concerned about the potential for loss of cargo space on these flights (if one of them is upgraded to A380). The 777 is more friendly for cargo than the A380 (which makes sense as you have extra PAX bags to load) which means that the flights of BHX could (and I emphasise could) suffer from reduced uplift which has an impact on the bottom line. Whilst PAX will still pay a fair chunk for the flight, especially if the premium cabin on the 380 is on offer, the bean counters will still need to juggle figures to see if this would assist with the potential shortfall from cargo.
I will be honest with you, I deal with cargo and not passengers and so do not have full information regarding the premium cabins on either type of aircraft but I would be concerned about the potential loss of cargo space.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

You highlight something that too many of us armchair airline CEOs so often forget when we go on about how this or that route 'would work' from this or that airport - the cargo portion of the overall profitability equation.

 

[CL44]

You would be surprised how many of us on these forums sem to forget what is loaded underneath us on these flights. You would be surprised at the sort of thing I have been involved in exporting from the UK. There are very few carriers who do not take cargo on their flights, and a couple of carriers that used to but decided years ago to stop. This is all part of the juggling act that bean counters do. If we carry cargo we have to pay handling agents to receive and handle both import and export cargo. If we do not handle cargo we don't have their invoices coming in, nor do we have to worry about problems with cargo getting lost/damaged/causing any other problem especially dangerous goods. It is surprising how many people think that all cargo goes out on freighter aircraft. A lot of the holiday charter Airlines make good use of the cargo space (why do you think they limit your baggage allowance?).

 

[Hassaan]

Gatwick has a 3 x 777 service, maybe BHX can start with that and upgrade the midday service to an A380 in a couple of years time, just for a test.

 

[pug]

Hassaan, its not the choice of BHX as to what aircraft they use. The airline will use what they see fit, what they can operate from BHX for maximum all up weight, to maximise profits. they wont do anything 'just for a test', but if they ever believed that it would work then they would make the appropriate moves.

There is really no point in comparing BHX with LGW.

 

[User0001]

Hi all

Im a long time memeber of another forum, and decided to finally spread my wings and joing a 2nd forum.

I just want to say, that I may seem the 'doomer and gloomer' in my posts, but hopefully people will find my posts of interest.

I want to start by saying that EK will not be going 3 daily until at least the back end of 2012. The capacity increase generated would just simply be too much considering the current loads at BHX. Not only would the Y cabin suddenly have a lot to fill, but with the A330 and B772 fleet comming offline over the next 2 years, EK would have no choice but to put a B773 on the route, and that means an extra 42 J seats to fill each day!
Also, the A380 wont be happening until 2012 at the earliest. EK want to wait for a 2 class A380 for BHX, as they have no intention of adding F capacity, and will not waste a F cabin on the A380 by closing it off. There are other routes with need for the A380, and the F cabin it ensues, so wont send it to BHX.

Seeming pro MAN here, but I have been reliably informed MAN will have 2 daily A380 before BHX gets one. The F cabin at MAN sells out at regular fares, today being a good example that a low density A380 (A6-EDA is being used, where the F/J cabins are the same size as a HD A388, but economy smaller.)

 

[Aviador]

I would go along with what you are saying world_rep. Basically, why try to mend something that isn't broken. If the aircraft type that is currently using BHX on the DXB route then why risk a drop in yield by changing the aircraft type unnecessarily. Clearly there has to be a point when the airline may have to reexamine this in the future, perhaps even in medium term as opposed to the long term.

 

[Aviador]

"Emirates' UK vice-president Laurie Berryman said the airline could be forced to review its position at UK hubs if the departure tax continues to rise."

This must be a worrying statement for airport such as Birmingham.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

"Emirates' UK vice-president Laurie Berryman said the airline could be forced to review its position at UK hubs if the departure tax continues to rise."

This must be a worrying statement for airport such as Birmingham.

It's not only the UK that has this sort of tax.

Other major European countries have similar taxes.

If this is a serious 'threat' it will presumably apply to some of these other countries, in which case one wonders how this will affect the planned huge expansion of the Emirates fleet over the next decade.

Even with the massive growth of the economies of China and India, Europe remains one of the world's major players and Emirates could not realistically reduce its exposure.

 

[Aviador]

Calling bluff do you think? I tend to agree with you 'TheLokelLocal', in that the airline has too much at stake to just up sticks and leave the UK. Some marginal routes in the UK could be put at risk, but I would tend to think Newcastle would be most at risk if they did because of the limited catchment there. Birmingham on the otherhand has a huge catchment area so I can't see it happening here.

 

[Hassaan]

At least we can keep our hopes up for a possible A380 this year. I've emailed BHX about starting a third daily service and they've forwarded the ideas to the Route Development team.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Fingers crossed then that the routes team is actively pursuing this one though from what I have read in various aviation forums it might be that the 380 won't be seen regularly at BHX until 2012.

 

[Aviador]

At least we can keep our hopes up for a possible A380 this year. I've emailed BHX about starting a third daily service and they've forwarded the ideas to the Route Development team.

I love your enthusiasm Hassaan13 and I hope your goal to increase flights into BHX succeed. I would say though that for Emirates to increase the size of the aircraft and the capacity that goes with it will require a good business case to make it happen. CL44 has already said that it is difficult to use the A380 for mixed passenger and cargo operations. Many regional departures require a good cargo operation to make the routes viable.

 

[User0001]

Emirates wont be adding a third daily or A380 for 2011, I can assure you on that. Loads are only around the 80% mark, and as I ve explained before, they would need to be hitting 90-95% for months on end before EK will add ANYTHING to BHX.
On top of that, Ive heard C fares are mostly sold at bargain rate, so, do you honestly expect EK to throw an F class A380 at BHX when it cant even sell all its J class fares???? Add to that the J cabin on the A380 is HUGE!, so another reason you wont be seeing the A380 this year at least.

Hassan13, I love your enthusiasm, I really do, but you have no idea what is going on behind the scenes to make a route viable. You need to understand Yield management, load factors, aircraft availablity and hub waving before you can ask an airline to increase a route, as, without this credible evidence, said airline will just shrug you off. Sorry to be harsh but thats the way it goes.

 

[Aviador]

Hassan13, I love your enthusiasm, I really do, but you have no idea what is going on behind the scenes to make a route viable. You need to understand Yield management, load factors, aircraft availablity and hub waving before you can ask an airline to increase a route, as, without this credible evidence, said airline will just shrug you off. Sorry to be harsh but thats the way it goes.

I agree. It would be great if we could just e-mail an airline and say "come and fly to X, Y, or Z", but sometimes we have to take a reality check. Unfortunately the airline business is tough, in fact it is probably tougher now than it ever has been. Many airlines are struggling to stay in business because of the increases in both passenger duty and fuel costs. These factors will inevitably take there toll on some airlines and routes that don't meet expectations.

As for Emirates, if flights from BHX are making a profit, why put that at risk by increasing the size of the aircraft or by adding additional rotations? The same can be said for other airlines that fly into BHX. Perhaps in a few years, more airlines will see the potential that Birmingham has to offer and they might start up operations or increase flights into there. For now, during the hard times it's probably best the airport concentrates on keeping what it already has.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

[textarea]Air stewardess sacked for being drunk on board a flight to Birmingham

An air stewardess on a Birmingham-bound flight has been sacked following claims she was drunk on duty.

Stephanie Partington, 24, was arrested when her Emirates plane touched down from Dubai – after fellow cabin crew members raised the alarm over her behaviour.

Tests later revealed her blood alcohol level was eight times the legal limit for flight attendants.

Partington was charged under the Civil Aviation Act and appeared before Solihull magistrates on Monday. The court heard she had been fired by Emirates.[/textarea]

Full report at this link: http://www.birminghammail.net/news/birm ... z25dB4QjQv

Her fine and costs totalled £210. I find this incredibly lenient - she was twice the legal limit for drivers and eight times the legal limit for flight attendants. It doesn't bear thinking about how she would have reacted in the event of a major emergency.

 

[Aviador]

Sadly I expect this kind of behaviour is quite common especially with crews that night stop. I think it was last year a pilot was arrested for being drunk at Heathrow airport.

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Sadly I expect this kind of behaviour is quite common especially with crews that night stop. I think it was last year a pilot was arrested for being drunk at Heathrow airport.

I can understand that a crew member might occasionally be over the aircrew limit of 20 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of blood though of course they shouldn't.

This woman had 164 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of blood, over twice the drink/drive limit of 80 mg alcohol per 100 ml of blood in this country.

I hope this level of impairment is not a common occurrence. I'm surprised that her supervisor didn't notice it on the flight and speak to the captain. I'm not sure whether the flight would have had to land immediately had the captain decided to suspend her from cabin crew duties mid-flight in the interests of flight safety, if the minimum number of cabin attendants had been breached. Presumably it would be similar to a cabin crew member becoming ill on a flight in terms of numbers.