BHX-ORD - annual pax

1995 = 55,416
1996 = 94,574
1997 = 96,749
1998 = 96,686
1999 = 114,187
2000 = 79,165
2001 = 57,600
2002 = 493
Thank you for these. What happened in 2000? I understand 2001 being suspended after 9/11, and 2002 having only a few months of service though 493 still seems extremely low.

Do you have the same for EWR and JFK?
 
Last edited:
BHX-EWR Annual Pax

1997 - 47,287
1998 - 115,006
1999 - 122,468
2000 - 108,999
2001 - 97,318
2002 - 101,164
2003 - 107,812
2004 - 156,093
2005 - 172,587
2006 - 121,377
2007 - 111,837
2008 - 106,326
2009 - 100,254
2010 - 100,355
2011 - 96,821
2012 - 92,794
2013 - 97,747
2014 - 94,346
2015 - 88,573
2016 - 78,469
2017 - 65,510
2018 - 7,059
 
BHX-EWR Annual Pax

1997 - 47,287
1998 - 115,006
1999 - 122,468
2000 - 108,999
2001 - 97,318
2002 - 101,164
2003 - 107,812
2004 - 156,093
2005 - 172,587
2006 - 121,377
2007 - 111,837
2008 - 106,326
2009 - 100,254
2010 - 100,355
2011 - 96,821
2012 - 92,794
2013 - 97,747
2014 - 94,346
2015 - 88,573
2016 - 78,469
2017 - 65,510
2018 - 7,059
Wonderful, thanks! Where did the 2018 stats come from, was there a short-lived service?

Looks like the numbers were in the same kind of ballpark from 1998 to 2014 and then slipped a fair bit. The mid-2000s enjoyed some pretty good numbers though, probably helped by it being twice daily for a while.

It's a shame we've gone from that to basically nothing.
 
Wonderful, thanks! Where did the 2018 stats come from, was there a short-lived service?

Looks like the numbers were in the same kind of ballpark from 1998 to 2014 and then slipped a fair bit. The mid-2000s enjoyed some pretty good numbers though, probably helped by it being twice daily for a while.

It's a shame we've gone from that to basically nothing.
I assume it finished in early 2018 ?
 
Thanks! So for ORD (made a minor correction as you missed out 1999):

1995 - 55,416
1996 - 94,574
1997 - 96,749
1998 - 96,686
1999 - 95,413
2000 - 114,187
2001 - 79,165
2002 - 57,600
2003 - 493
2004 - 52

JFK:

1990 - 3,401
1991 - none
1992 - none
1993 - 48,907
1994 - 60,223
1995 - 68,948
1996 - 69,169
1997 - 58,671
1998 - 42,359
1999 - none
2000 - none
2001 - 759
2002 - 286
2003 - 2,488
2004 - none
2005 - 90

Nothing from then until 2015 and then...

2015 - 50,950
2016 - 69,526
2017 - 1,656

Shame that it couldn't continue as those are better than what BA did in the 90s, but seemingly it didn't turnover a profit for them.

The 2009 seasonal link to Philadelphia did 27,530.
 
While expected, after plotting it out I was surprised just how strongly the EWR pax figures correlated with the £/$. With the £ even lower today than at the time the route was pulled, I don't see much of a chance of a successful return of a similar route unless it recovered to around the 1.55 region, where pax numbers are approximately stable as seen in the 2009-2013 period.

Even the cost reduction of flying newer types (A321XLR vs 757) is eaten up by the loss in spending power of the average Brit and BHX is hit hardest being mostly driven by outbound bookings.


Picture1.png
 
I am interested to see whether 2025 leads to any positive inroads on this front. Are we basically relying on the pound improving? Because I don't think it's a case of the demand not being there.
 
Any Airline tempted to look at a service from BHX (to anywhere, not just the USA) will do their homework to see what return they will get from starting a route. If the return is not viable it will never start. The past has shown that BHX does not have enough market share to make a service worthwhile (US Airlines anyone)! Unless and until BHX can prove that the chance to make money is available then I cannot see any Airline willing to even look at starting up a route let alone keeping it going as a loss leader. It is a shame as I used both AA and CO for trips to the USA from BHX in the past but money talks a d if the revenue is not there any Airline will put their flights into a market where they can make money instead of throwing both money and reputation away. Lets concentrate on services which have a chance of success instead of a pipedream.
 
Then why do US flights succeed at Heathrow, Gatwick, Manchester, Edinburgh and Glasgow. But not at Birmingham airport.
 
Different markets. BHX is primarily a bucket and spade airport with families going away on holiday. Our position geographically doesn't help either. Personally I am of the opinion that what we have should be supported and encouraged to grow as much as possible without trying to entice other Airlines in with deals (either short or long term). Travel is expensive at the best of times so why offer cheap rates for a service which may only last a season? At least we have a relatively thriving cargo market at the moment so let's encourage that as well as PAX operations.
 
I overlook the runway and terminals each day at work and see flights from Jet2, TUI, Easyjet and Ryanair flying off to mainly holiday destinations. How many Airlines have either first class or big business class options from BHX? As far as I am aware not too many. There are a lot more people and families going away on holiday than business people using BHX. That is not a criticism of the Airport its just the way it is. Don't get me wrong more Airlines offering different destinations would be useful for me workwise but I'm happier keeping what we have than upsetting the apple cart as happened with Icelandair with Primera. Let's work to our strengths instead of doing things halfway and potentially upsetting any Airlines.
 
The real question that needs to be asked is of those business class passengers who travel to the States from Heathrow but live in the West Midlands, East Midlands and Somerset/Avon. If the CAA survey also included a question such as f there was a direct flight to the States from BHX to New York, Chicago or Atlanta, would you consider it and if not, why not.

I have excluded Cheshire, Lancashire, Yorkshire, the area formerly known as Cumbria and North Wales as there is a primary need to find out why passengers from those areas do not use the existing flights from Manchester' although it appears profitable to operate from there, its not generating the robust operation from back in the day when Thomas Cook was operating numerous routes profitably (remember the airline was making millions, the group losing millions)

The airports themselves should have a general idea of the type of passenger and in what numbers over a given airport pair but ally this to a CAA survey which points to the same conclusion and it would aid in persuading airlines to make such routes happen
 
Heathrow is the problem for BHX.

Had a quick look at some figures for June 2024 the average number of departures to the USA from LHR approximately 130 per day to 31 different destinations with JFK alone having 20 departures..Heathrow handles 25% of all European passengers to America and according to Google is 111 miles from BHX journey time 1hr 55 min by car. Allied to this long haul prices are generally cheaper and Heathrow offers business/first class in spades along with frequency.

When you look at it its no wonder we face an uphill struggle to get and keep a transatlantic route.
 
Last edited:

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

Jon Dempsey wrote on HPsauce's profile.
Hi, I was born and lived in B36 for a long time - Lindale Avenue, just around the corner from Hodge Hill Comp.
I just noticed your postcode on a post.

Do you still live in the area?
survived a redundancy scenario where I work for the 2nd time
If you’re tired of takeoffs, you’re tired of life.
49 trips undertaken last year. First done this year which was to North Wales where surprisingly the only slippery surfaces were in Conwy with the castle and it's walls closed due to the ice.
Aviador wrote on SNOWMAN's profile.
Thanks for the support @SNOWMAN

Trending Hashtags

Advertisement

Back
Top Bottom
  AdBlock Detected
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks some useful and important features of our website. For the best possible site experience please take a moment to disable your AdBlocker.