Route Development & Rumours

[Ray Finkle]

The Indian government's new civil aviation policy has finally done away with the 5 year rule (although the 20 aircraft rule still remains) making it easier for airlines to start international routes.

Nothing much is expected to happen in the next 12 months or so but in the medium term the ones to watch are Vistara and Air Asia India.

 

[JENNYJET]

Forgive me for asking but what is your source as I cannot find any current reference on the Indian Government Civil Aviation portal, I am interested in the 20 aircraft rule!

Just being the legal nerd, I desire to understand the mischief behind such a rule.

{ for reference, Mischief in Law is the reasoning for the creation of laws and rules and not someone being just naughty }.

 

[Ray Finkle]

Page 13

http://www.civilaviation.gov.in/sites/default/files/Final_NCAP_2016_15-06-2016.pdf

The requirement for 5/20 is modified and all airlines can commence international operations provided that they deploy 20 aircraft or 20% of total capacity (in term of average number of seats on all departures put together), whichever is higherfor domestic operations. For this purpose, the published schedule of airlines will be the basis for monitoring, assuming that one aircraft would have six departures per day.

 

[JENNYJET]

Page 13

http://www.civilaviation.gov.in/sites/default/files/Final_NCAP_2016_15-06-2016.pdf

The requirement for 5/20 is modified and all airlines can commence international operations provided that they deploy 20 aircraft or 20% of total capacity (in term of average number of seats on all departures put together), whichever is higherfor domestic operations. For this purpose, the published schedule of airlines will be the basis for monitoring, assuming that one aircraft would have six departures per day.

I note section 9 and Bilateral agreements and allowing under 9a unlimited liberalization and 9b allowing for an open skies agreement of routes exceeding 5000km radius of New Delhi.

Indian laws are as troublesome as British laws because we bequeathed them to India upon independence so it remains that I am a tad confused as to the policy and to what they wish to achieve from it.

A simple interpretation might be that they want more international services but they cannot launch unless they expand domestic services in equal or greater measure. In additionm they need to play a roulette game with the fleet to meet current obligations.

Could we therefore see the removal of the Dreamliner to enable a B777 service to include Chicago? It is this that drives my thoughts upon the new policy but with the Indian government, nothing can be taken literally.

 

[nwoody2001]

I believe the purpose of the law is in response to the MEB3 and their impact on India Airlines. Alas all the MEB3 + Turkish are located within 5,000miles!!!

What the wider consequence of this is though is yet to be seen!!!

 

[JENNYJET]

I very much doubt India as a Nation can compete with those Desert Giants but India has something they do not have.

1 billion plus population of which even 2 per cent may have the ability and the funds to travel far and wide.

India needs domestic travel infrastructure over and above international considerations and I can understand this.

The policies seem cumbersome but appear to have merit even though I have only skimmed through the document.

The 20 aircraft provision appears to be puzzling but can be accepted if the fleet is prioritized towards domestic services over and above international obligations.

I am uncertain as to the current fleet but do they retain access to the B747s?

 

[Ray Finkle]

I am uncertain as to the current fleet but do they retain access to the B747s?

They have 4 left I believe.

 

[Ray Finkle]

William Pearson has said that he is 'confident that a new service to Beijing will be launched in 2017'.

 

[Paulsstrange]

Fingers crossed Ray and you know too it may not be the only new flights in that direction exciting times as we head towards 2017.

Fingers crossed we hear some other news over next couple of weeks...

 

[User001]

The airline in question is currently about to push 3 UK route applications through the CAAC, so keep your eyes peeled in next few months.

One is PEK-BHX, the others are CTU-MAN/LHR.

The BHX one may take slightly longer as HNA have the rights to BHX-PEK, so, the airline trying to get the rights has to lodge an 'appeal' to get the rights. Shouldn't be too long though.

 

[richard winterbourn]

This is no way intended to be taking a 'pop' at Man, but the playing field is certainly different to what it was five years ago. Man was able to build up EK and other ME routes and the US before BHX even got started. But since then, BHX has battled to the point when, in some cases, it is debatable whether the next development will be to either Man or BHX.

I say this because while Man has secured a route(s) to China, it is clear that BHX will not be far behind. Setting the fiasco of CCA to one side, the growing economy of the West Midlands, the largest economy outside of the South East, is proving to be the place to concentrate on.

And given that BHX can moved from under 10m pax to over 11m pax in a year is testament to the growing stature of the airport, the city, the region and and its importance to UK.

As Ray has intimated, there is a lot to come - and before too long....

 

[Brum X]

Who is the airline in question User001 ? Do you know ??

 

[hammerb32]

Who is the airline in question User001 ? Do you know ??

Air China have an expanding hub at CTU, i'll have a fiver on them.

 

[rutamkrd]

Logic would suggest Sichuan Airlines or their parent a company already known in Birmingham market China Southern i would say.

 

[User001]

This is no way intended to be taking a 'pop' at Man, but the playing field is certainly different to what it was five years ago. Man was able to build up EK and other ME routes and the US before BHX even got started. But since then, BHX has battled to the point when, in some cases, it is debatable whether the next development will be to either Man or BHX.

I say this because while Man has secured a route(s) to China, it is clear that BHX will not be far behind. Setting the fiasco of CCA to one side, the growing economy of the West Midlands, the largest economy outside of the South East, is proving to be the place to concentrate on.

And given that BHX can moved from under 10m pax to over 11m pax in a year is testament to the growing stature of the airport, the city, the region and and its importance to UK.

As Ray has intimated, there is a lot to come - and before too long....

The main issue with that is, yes, BHX is doing great this year (and into next year), but MAN is equally if not more so, especially on long haul.

The nature in which China is growing means that multiple routes were always likely to come in quite quick succession. It's not like it was 5-10 years ago when airlines were growing in a different way. The appetite for Chinese to travel as well as more trade links means this market is growing FAST!

The issue MAN now has compared to BHX, and a reason BHX may seem to be 'doing better' is that MAN has now almost become the victim of its own success.

The 'obvious' long haul routes to MAN are now in place. This means new long haul routes are going to be the more elusive ones.

While BHX catches up with the likes of JFK and DOH of late, MAN now has to go after the CTU type routes, hence the recent additions of BOS/SFO/MCT/LAX and a bit further back MIA/JED/HKT.

It's worth remembering, MAN still has MRU/PVG/HKT/DWC/TAB and extra GOI to come online this year, next year has already seen 4 long haul routes confirmed with growth on 5 more, and already 2 more based long haul aircraft, and it's only June 2016! There are still plenty more rumours doing the rounds (Chengdu, Xi'an, more Toronto, Norwegian to name a few), so, yes, BHX may seem to be stealing the march on MAN, but as harsh as this sounds, BHX still has a LOT of work to do before it can even be considered as nearly caught up or have a similar rate of long haul growth.

OT I know, but, wanted to respond to this.

 

[richard winterbourn]

User 001, of course i appreciate what you say and agree with it in principle. But the thrust of what i was saying is that as a market develops now, foreign airlines might now have BHX in their mindset. That certainly was not the case five - 10 years ago, BHX would have registered zero on the Richter Scale! A case in point is Air India, i am sure that if Air India had wanted entry into the UK other than at Heathrow 10 years ago, it would have chosen Man. As the future unfolds, the playing field is going to be a little more even - i hope....

 

[User001]

I think the crux of some growth is that LHR and LGW are effectively closed for any substantial long haul growth, so, it's the time to shine for BHX/MAN/EDI and the likes.

I have no doubt that Oman Air and the recent Virgin expansion at MAN would not have taken place had LHR had the slots.

It's the same with China, I have no doubt Air China would have added more to LHR-PEK over a MAN-PVG route, and while they can apply for CTU-LHR, the likelihood is that PEK-LHR will have to be reduced, hence, PEK-BHX comes into play. Tianjin Airlines have already said they want to move from LGW to LHR should they get any slots.

Norwegian are primarily looking at long haul from the regions because good slots at LGW are few and far between.

It's an exciting time for the UK regions, we are going to see some great growth in the short term.

 

[thunderchild]

I wonder if we are talking Air China? I'm assuming that the current bilaterals would prevent them operating MAN-PEK as Hainan already fly it so BHX could be a good way of securing more UK capacity assuming they can get the rights from Hainan. They would also be in a position to launch LHR/MAN- CTU too.

If Air China can make Minsk work anything can happen. It's also no secret Dublin wants a direct flight to China - hypothetically could a DUB/BHX/PEK flight work as an interim solution?

 

[rutamkrd]

A case in point is Air India, i am sure that if Air India had wanted entry into the UK other than at Heathrow 10 years ago, it would have chosen Man

Air India is NOT a good example they have been operating one and off out Birmingham since the 1980s and with good'ld 707s .

They were a shoe in when they announced the latest return.

BTW they did once serve Manchester briefly in the 90s serval times a week with 310 via Rome .

The regional dynamics in relation to the sub continent play heavily here Manchester has more direct flights to Pakistan than Heathrow but just a winter seasonal charter to Goa.

And has been consistently pointed out especially in fruit favoured and now ruined a.net Birmingham still needs to walk before it runs - i.e. There remains substantial holes in the Europe network to fill and these will bring in far more traffic then a few long haul charters to China.

 

[rutamkrd]

A case in point is Air India, i am sure that if Air India had wanted entry into the UK other than at Heathrow 10 years ago, it would have chosen Man

Air India is NOT a good example they have been operating one and off out Birmingham since the 1980s and with good'ld 707s .

They were a shoe in when they announced the latest return.

BTW they did once serve Manchester briefly in the 90s several times a week with 310 via Rome .

The regional dynamics in relation to the sub continent play heavily here Manchester has more direct flights to Pakistan than Heathrow but just a winter seasonal charter to Goa.

And has been consistently pointed out especially in fruit favoured and now ruined a.net Birmingham still needs to walk before it runs - i.e. There remains substantial holes in the Europe network to fill and these will bring in far more traffic than a few long haul charters to China.