Route Development & Rumours

[TM3]

In case you missed it, these are the reasons SQ is not doing BHX-USA any time soon..

• Daily SIN-EWR and SIN-JFK already exist

I addressed this earlier on, I'm not typing it again, you'll have to check it back and pick up on the specific points I made.

• SIN-FRA-JFK works for a couple of reasons, one being that they can offer their excellent First Class product to New York (the A350ULRs do not have First), this is supported by the fact that FRA is a massive *A hub in itself as

I've already debunked your claims about the relevancy of FRA being an A* hub earlier on, again, you'll have to read through the earlier posts.

The latter is somewhat true. I would say SQ's product and service is superior in every class to that offered by Lufthansa or any other US airline on the route. There are also no United services from JFK so there is limited competition from other A* carriers.

Given that you recognise that the quality of the product on the route is a factor surely you must recognise that I might prefer to fly SQ than BA or Virgin to the US outright, even more so I could do so from my local airport. Conversely you must recognise that I probably would prefer to drive to Heathrow and fly BA or Virgin rather than flying Biman.

• well as the business connections between the three cities helping to fill the cabins up front (& up top..)
• SIN-MAN-IAH only exists as SIN-IAH is too small of a market to justify the long flight - MAN-IAH offers a not-insignificant top-up. This is not the case for SIN-NYC

HOU and NYC are both theoretically serviceable direct with the A350 ULR however HOU probably doesn't have the premium demand to operate an aircraft without any economy seats on that route.

• BHX-NYC as stated before is simply not a big enough market to offer a top-up worth the hassle of the stop

Do you have any evidence to support this?

 

[laviation]

@TM3

What's so wrong with Biman? I used them a couple of years ago to Bangkok, they were perfectly fine.

To play devil's advocate, if you want to fly SQ to the US so much, why don't you fly from MAN? Just because one airport has a service, doesn't mean the other is entitled to it. The argument you make that BHX and MAN are similar when it comes to US is inaccurate. As Timberwolf has stated, the equidistance of LHR, MAN and EDI is largely why all three can support US flights - this is also a factor for the airlines. Not saying necessarily that BHX couldn't support any US connections, but there is a reason why it doesn't at present - may that be poor management in the previous decade or just plain consolidation from carriers.

The economics simply do not add up for SIN-IAH direct - the PDEW does not add up as such. MAN-IAH usually accounts for 40-50% of the total load on SIN-MAN-IAH.

I have posted before that raw BHX-NYC is sub-20 PDEW. That is most certainly not enough to justify SQ switching from FRA which clearly works for them.

 

[TM3]

@TM3

What's so wrong with Biman? I used them a couple of years ago to Bangkok, they were perfectly fine.

You can fly Biman if you want to and I'm sure it would have appeal to those looking for the cheapest possible way to get to the served destination.

Are you seriously saying you think Biman's product is as good as Singapore Airlines?

Can I earn frequent flyer status and miles on any airline other than Biman? Can I redeem my Amex points with them? Can Biman offer onward connections comparable to Singapore Airlines at Changi or with JetBlue in the US? What is Dhaka like as a stopover location vs Singapore?

Would you REALLY rather fly Biman than Singapore Airlines? Would you rather fly Biman than Virgin? Would you rather fly Biman than BA?

To play devil's advocate, if you want to fly SQ to the US so much, why don't you fly from MAN? Just because one airport has a service, doesn't mean the other is entitled to it. The argument you make that BHX and MAN are similar when it comes to US is inaccurate. As Timberwolf has stated, the equidistance of LHR, MAN and EDI is largely why all three can support US flights - this is also a factor for the airlines. Not saying necessarily that BHX couldn't support any US connections, but there is a reason why it doesn't at present - may that be poor management in the previous decade or just plain consolidation from carriers.

I have flown HOU-MAN on SQ and I enjoyed Singapore Airlines' excellent service in business class. I don't actually need to fly to Houston very often but as a matter of fact given that there is little difference in journey time for me I would choose that connection over the same connection at LHR with BA or United, maybe I'd even go the extra mile to fly with Singapore Airlines.

This is exactly my point. I've flown on a lot of airlines, including the one rated Skytrax's worst and Ryanair, for the record Ryanair is a more miserable experience. It's not as you want to frame it, me being snobby about Biman, as an AV geek I'd actually like to fly Biman and tick it off my list of airlines, the thing is as an informed individual I find it very easy to say when I board a Singapore Airlines flight I know I'm going to get one of the best, if not the best service experiences I will get on any airline.

The economics simply do not add up for SIN-IAH direct - the PDEW does not add up as such. MAN-IAH usually accounts for 40-50% of the total load on SIN-MAN-IAH.

The numbers of local Manchester flyers on the Singapore-Houston route is suprisingly low but maybe incomes are not there to support premium services. We often see Mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham on TV talking about the relative poverty in the area and asking for extra financial support.

I think the brand of Singapore Airlines is so strong that most flyers see them as one of the best airlines in the world. If Singapore Airlines showed faith in Birmingham such that they offered the only US services we had I'm sure that the people of Birmingham would value a service from a premium carrier.

I have posted before that raw BHX-NYC is sub-20 PDEW. That is most certainly not enough to justify SQ switching from FRA which clearly works for them.

I can get why people don't fly to New York from Birmingham, the number one reason I would say is there is no direct service to there, This is obvioulsy going to seriously restrict the ticket sales on that route to a very limited audience.

No one is saying SQ should swap ther daily A380 to BHX. In fact that route is a great example of how SQ make money out for 5th freedoms selling flights to New York to Germans. This definatley doesn't preclude them doing the same thing in another city.

 

[gulftraveller]

The numbers of local Manchester flyers on the Singapore-Houston route is suprisingly low but maybe incomes are not there to support premium services. We often see Mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham on TV talking about the relative poverty in the area and asking for extra financial support.

I think the brand of Singapore Airlines is so strong that most flyers see them as one of the best airlines in the world. If Singapore Airlines showed faith in Birmingham such that they offered the only US services we had I'm sure that the people of Birmingham would value a service from a premium carrier.

I think you are looking at this from the wrong angle. Comparisons between airports such as BHX and MAN are pointless. I am told that parts of MAN’s catchment are very affluent (cf. EK’s successful First Class from MAN). The numbers flying MAN-IAH depend on how many seats are allocated: it goes without saying that a SIN-IAH seat is worth far more than a MAN-IAH seat. SQ are clearly happy with the route.

But even this is simply not the issue. The reason SQ will not operate BHX - USA is that they do not need to. They have non stops to most US destinations they want and if numbers on SIN-IAH became viable, the MAN stop would doubtless be dropped. Added to that is the fact that SQ will want to channel passengers onto LHR and MAN services to SIN which, after all, is their main interest, not UK/USA. The real question is how strong would BHX-SIN demand be?

 

[laviation]

You can fly Biman if you want to and I'm sure it would have appeal to those looking for the cheapest possible way to get to the served destination.

Are you seriously saying you think Biman's product is as good as Singapore Airlines?

Can I earn frequent flyer status and miles on any airline other than Biman? Can I redeem my Amex points with them? Can Biman offer onward connections comparable to Singapore Airlines at Changi or with JetBlue in the US? What is Dhaka like as a stopover location vs Singapore?

Would you REALLY rather fly Biman than Singapore Airlines? Would you rather fly Biman than Virgin? Would you rather fly Biman than BA?.

Of course, Singapore are a vastly superior airline to Biman. Nobody has said that but you are in no position to make a judgment if you’ve never used them. It reeks of prejudice, I feel.

We often see Mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham on TV talking about the relative poverty in the area and asking for extra financial support.

This is an absurd remark that writes its own response really.

The numbers of local Manchester flyers on the Singapore-Houston route is suprisingly low but maybe incomes are not there to support premium services.

Where are your figures to back this up? I have posted before that MAN does actually account for roughly half of the total load on SIN-MAN-IAH, but you have chosen to ignore this .

I think the brand of Singapore Airlines is so strong that most flyers see them as one of the best airlines in the world. If Singapore Airlines showed faith in Birmingham such that they offered the only US services we had I'm sure that the people of Birmingham would value a service from a premium carrier.

So if Manchester, which has a higher GDP per capita than Birmingham, doesn’t have sufficient ‘incomes’ to support premium services surely Birmingham can’t either?

 

[Timberwolf]

You can fly Biman if you want to and I'm sure it would have appeal to those looking for the cheapest possible way to get to the served destination.

Are you seriously saying you think Biman's product is as good as Singapore Airlines?

Can I earn frequent flyer status and miles on any airline other than Biman? Can I redeem my Amex points with them? Can Biman offer onward connections comparable to Singapore Airlines at Changi or with JetBlue in the US? What is Dhaka like as a stopover location vs Singapore?

Would you REALLY rather fly Biman than Singapore Airlines? Would you rather fly Biman than Virgin? Would you rather fly Biman than BA?

I have flown HOU-MAN on SQ and I enjoyed Singapore Airlines' excellent service in business class. I don't actually need to fly to Houston very often but as a matter of fact given that there is little difference in journey time for me I would choose that connection over the same connection at LHR with BA or United, maybe I'd even go the extra mile to fly with Singapore Airlines.

This is exactly my point. I've flown on a lot of airlines, including the one rated Skytrax's worst and Ryanair, for the record Ryanair is a more miserable experience. It's not as you want to frame it, me being snobby about Biman, as an AV geek I'd actually like to fly Biman and tick it off my list of airlines, the thing is as an informed individual I find it very easy to say when I board a Singapore Airlines flight I know I'm going to get one of the best, if not the best service experiences I will get on any airline.




The numbers of local Manchester flyers on the Singapore-Houston route is suprisingly low but maybe incomes are not there to support premium services. We often see Mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham on TV talking about the relative poverty in the area and asking for extra financial support.

I think the brand of Singapore Airlines is so strong that most flyers see them as one of the best airlines in the world. If Singapore Airlines showed faith in Birmingham such that they offered the only US services we had I'm sure that the people of Birmingham would value a service from a premium carrier.


I can get why people don't fly to New York from Birmingham, the number one reason I would say is there is no direct service to there, This is obvioulsy going to seriously restrict the ticket sales on that route to a very limited audience.

No one is saying SQ should swap ther daily A380 to BHX. In fact that route is a great example of how SQ make money out for 5th freedoms selling flights to New York to Germans. This definatley doesn't preclude them doing the same thing in another city.

I can get why people don't fly to New York from Birmingham, the number one reason I would say is there is no direct service to there, This is obvioulsy going to seriously restrict the ticket sales on that route to a very limited audience.

I think also BHX would need a service with good onward connections once in New York.

For me, Primera was always going to fail ,getting into JFK very late at night, with virtually no onward connections available.

We would need a reliable airline operating at good times from BHX with good onward connections available within a decent time frame of arrival at New York..

 

[Brum X]

Can I just clarify the extent to which the discussion is closed? Are we no longer allowed to talk about the possibility of a Singapore Airlines connection at BHX?

At the end of the day, just start the conversation again, looool

So C'mon then guys/gals, lets keep it civil and friendly. No Bickering please.

So did someone mention Singapore Airlines serving BHX ?

 

[Aviador]

The thread has been cleaned up.

Strictly no personal remarks as they are not necessary to put your point across.

If you want to be part of this debate. Some self restraint is all we ask for.

Posts that contain personal remarks will continue to be removed.

Please adhere to this request to avoid future posts being auto-placed in the moderation queue.

Now back to the topic, keep the debate friendly please.

 

[Birmingham Aviation]

Something different.

I really think Cathay Pacific are gonna announce flights this summer.I don’t know why but I think it will happen.

That’s my prediction

 

[Aviador]

To add another slant to the debate, is it just possible the success of the Middle East airlines in the UK regions is actually hampering growth of other airlines such as Cathay Pacific and Singapore Airlines?

The liklihood of Turkish Airlines commencing ops from more regional airports is a strong possibility also so the chance of Cathay and Singapore showing up outside of London may diminish further?

 

[gulftraveller]

Something different.

I really think Cathay Pacific are gonna announce flights this summer.I don’t know why but I think it will happen.

That’s my prediction

My prediction is no new CX destinations in Europe for at least two years. They have severe staffing issues. Once that is resolved, they will focus on building up frequencies on existing routes.

 

[rollo]

To add another slant to the debate, is it just possible the success of the Middle East airlines in the UK regions is actually hampering growth of other airlines such as Cathay Pacific and Singapore

Exactly my thoughts BHX since covid has seen the return of Emirates,Qatar, Air India, and Turkish plus the recent addition of Saudi BHX has up to seven flights a day between them five of which are widebodies.
Turkish have also announced that they are going from fourteen weekly up to eighteen next summer. Most UK airports can only dream of that portfolio.

Given the huge amount of connections offered going East the addition of Cathy or Singapore is remote to say the least and in my view and would threaten the success of what we have. Leave well alone for a while although a second A380 or Qatar increasing frequency would be nice.

Also with EasyJet opening a three aircraft base in addition to the existing operation, Ryanair adding another one or is it two aircraft taking them them up to eight along with Wizz and Vueling we are at long last getting a real low cost set up that hopefully will continue to expand plus Jet2 going up to seventeen based at peak summer along with increasing A321s on the horizon. TUI are the disappointment of the main operators barely treading water.

A couple of other things a USA service by United/Jet Blue to JFK is a wish and did anyone notice on the post by nwoody that the list of twelve airlines that they were all flag carriers its a pity the one with a union flag is missing but BHX is not unique in that.

 

[IanFarquharson]

My prediction is no new CX destinations in Europe for at least two years. They have severe staffing issues. Once that is resolved, they will focus on building up frequencies on existing rout

The fact that BHX mentioned Cathay (and Finnair) in articles on Bloomberg & Reuters to me says they must be in advanced talks with both airlines.
I don't see reason why Cathay couldn't add BHX at 3/4 pw.
It has worked well for Saudi who chose to add BHX alongside London & Manchester.
BHX will look a little stupid if they announce plans to such platform and there is no truth in it.

 

[Kevin Farnell]

Isn't it unusual for airports/airlines to talk about new routes/operators before an official announcement?

 

[Timberwolf]

The fact that BHX mentioned Cathay (and Finnair) in articles on Bloomberg & Reuters to me says they must be in advanced talks with both airlines.
I don't see reason why Cathay couldn't add BHX at 3/4 pw.
It has worked well for Saudi who chose to add BHX alongside London & Manchester.
BHX will look a little stupid if they announce plans to such platform and there is no truth in it.

I don't think airport stupidity comes into it. What an airport may think are advanced talks may not result in any new services.

Let's not forget BHX released a press update to the media well before Covid , saying they were in "advanced talks" with Air Baltic in relation to flights to Riga ,and hopefully a service would start very soon.

We are still waiting for that one !

I'm sure we all want to see Cathay and Finnair start from BHX ASAP however .So fingers crossed.

 

[gulftraveller]

Airports are always talking about being in talks with particular airlines. The business case for a UK-HKG route has to be much stronger than for the Middle East carriers, not least because of the huge South Asian communities the MEs can service.

In any case, CX is still unable to return to previous frequency levels because of staffing problems which will continue for a while. MAD and ZRH remain only 3 weekly whilst BCN only resumes this June. In this climate, 3 or 4 weekly from BHX does not make sense for now.

 

[TM3]

On the subject of gulf carriers I think certainly they must carry many passengers to the big 3 SEA cities of Bangkok, Singapore and HK. As others have mentioned many passengers must also use other European carriers like Turkish, AF/KLM. Don't underestimate how many seats LH group have as they not only transit through Frankfurt & Munich but also through Zurich and Vienna with Swiss and Austrian.

There are some universal truths you have to accept about direct flights vs 1 stops:

1. Passengers nearly always prefer (by that I mean choose) direct flights over 1 stops and there is a sinificant portion of the market who will pay a premium for direct over 1 stop.

2. Like for like on the same metal direct flights are always cheaper to provide than 1 stop connections. Simplistically because as a passenger you are paying for 2 flights rather than 1, 2 sets of takeoff/landing fees/ crewing / more fuel as take of and landings use more and overall distances are typically longer.

As such any carrier able to operate the same route direct at sufficient capacity should be at a significant commercial advantage.

In recent years SQ & CX have both taken delivery of A350s. Until the introduction of the 787, the 777 (which has many more seats) was generally regarded as necessary for longer distance SE Asia / Europe routes. It's now universally recognised that 787/A350s are more efficient than 777s in tems of fuel. It's been asserted and is now generally accepted that it is cheaper to operate 2 787s on a route than 1 A380, (I wouldn't expect the economics to be much different with an A350-900.

Given that gulf carriers specifically have to go a route that is quite a lot longer to get to SE Asia and Emirates in particular are exposed to a dependency on the less efficient A380, advantage has now moved in favour of carriers based on SE Asia to serve demand in that area.

Airlines obvously direct their resources wherever they think they can get the best return (which does not necessarliy mean the don't offer some routes because they wouldn't anticipate making a profit there).

I prefer not to make a prediction but I'm happy ignore short term factors like staffing when talking about the long term viability of a route.

If either SQ or CX came to BHX I would expect them not just to pick up the lion's share of any direct traffic to those destiantions but also a share of traffic to onward destinations that also go through gulf carriers to places like the Australia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, Bali, Vietnam, etc.

I would expect both destinations to report an increase in flights from BHX to their hubs over and above the predicted demand now, just as a virtue of serving those routes.

 

[mullion]

The 777 is becoming a bit aged now, A350X is virtually same seating as 777 but I m not sure BHX can take an A350X on a regular basis same as the 777X will be a problem if it ever gets through the testing stage. The A350 is much quieter than the 777 and as I have not flown an A350 I can`t comment but believe so much more comfortable.
The ME3 would still pick a large percentage as a lot of people don`t like a long non stop or want a break on route as both EK and QTR and THY have shown.

 

[TM3]

The 777 is becoming a bit aged now, A350X is virtually same seating as 777 but I m not sure BHX can take an A350X on a regular basis same as the 777X will be a problem if it ever gets through the testing stage. The A350 is much quieter than the 777 and as I have not flown an A350 I can`t comment but believe so much more comfortable.
The ME3 would still pick a large percentage as a lot of people don`t like a long non stop or want a break on route as both EK and QTR and THY have shown.

I'd like to pick you up on a large percentage of people wanting a stop on route, partcularly on a gulf route where there are also likely to be at least another 2 or 3 hours on the aircraft vs flying the most direct route. I'm not saying that people don't buy these itineraries but I am saying they need to be cheaper than a direct flight on the whole.

Is this something you prefer? Do any other forum members prefer this, like for like for the same itinerary? Please post on what you prefer.

When I'd talking about SQ and CX A350s I'm talking about the -900s which have about 260 seats vs the 777-300ERs which have about 400.

I'm also refering to the 2 class Emirates 777s which have about 420 seats and the 2 class A380s with more than 600.

That is a lot of seats when SQ & CX would both have the advantage of flying a shorter distance on a plane with lower operating costs per seat. I'm saying these airlines have to sell a lot fewer seats now than they did 5 years ago for a good load factor, but for Emirates nothing has improved as they are tied to the older frames for a long time.

Would you seriously rather take 18 hours to get to Hong Kong on Emirates than 12 and a half on Cathay?

Also what if you were flying for business, would a corporate employer be happy if you to the long way to get to Hong Kong on a work flight?

 

[mullion]

Quite a few of the A350x we get at MAN depending on season are almost 400 seats and some of the A380 are 515 seats.
I used to work in Business travel and yes many prefered a hotel stop DXB or the like in Middle East. The main requirements were costs and were they ready to go a meeting on arrival of which the answer was of course not unless flying first class. and the other problem was corporatate deals on which airline they could fly with. for many reasons.
Personally I hate any flight over 10 hours and would prefer a break and cannot think of anything worse than 12hours plus in economy.