Pakistan International Airlines

[White Heather]

LBA management remain adamant that the 777-200 can safely operate from LBA - and I don't see any reason why not given that in the 1980's we had the Wardair 747 every week, which landed at LBA without difficulty - although it didn't use runway 14 for landing as I recall and if there are any issues, I would suspect landing on runway 14 is top of the list.

That said, PIA announced they were to use the 777 and I don't believe for one minute they would do that if there were doubts about safety in using it. My theory is that having done so they had a change of heart due to their perilous finances - perhaps even they found out that Air Blue were planning to axe MAN flights, leaving them with a monopoly that they can now exploit by putting all their eggs in the MAN basket. Financially, it makes sense. They will lose virtually no passengers as there is no other airline to use from the North unless you fly via Dubai or another hub. They reduce their running costs through not having to transfer crew to LBA and through doing all flights with a far more effecient aircraft in terms of reliability and fuel useage. And, I have little doubt that MAN will have dangled some seriously big carrots to persuade them to move their operation over there.

I hate to say it but if I was in PIA's position I would probably have done the same thing. It would be nice to think they will continue to bring the flights to the people rather than making the people go over the Pennines, but airlines generally don't work like that - particularly those with financial concerns and a serious lack of available aircraft.

I have no doubt that LBA will again be doing all they can to make them change their minds again - aided no doubt by Bradford Council - but the question is how far can they realistically go to persuade them? I have no doubt either that Tony Hallwood will be on the phone regularly to other operators such as Shaheen or using this as bait for such as Turkish, given the potential links to Pakistan via Istanbul.

 

[SNOWMAN]

hi w/heather
spot on post as usual re pia,i don't think we will keep them this time,i also agree that lba (tony hallwood) never stops trying for new routes & airlines.
regards
sm1

 

[michael]

So the debate seems to be about whether LBA can handle a 777 on a regular basis. There are those on here who seem to doubt that whilst there are others who seem to suggest that it is feasible and LBA management are keen to demonstrate this. I do not know. It has been stated that NCL has a regular 777 from a runway not much longer than LBA's but without some restrictions, ie the Chevin, also Dubai is not as far as ISB. I got the impression that serious money was needed to improve the runway length, etc to attract regular L Haul so it seemed prudent to spend what money is available to improve parking stands, etc and to encourage other airlines to open up the more short haul routes to Europe which I think is very much needed. After all Edinburgh, Birmingham, even Bristol have more business type flights to Europe than LBA for cities of a similar size. If it is possible to have regular 777 flights with PIA, or whoever, then great -I am all for it.

one thing to note also is the Newcastle Emirates B777 service is a -300 variant so is a lump longer and heavier than the -200's of PIA

 

[a300boy]

michael
Look at the landing distance available not the runway length end to end for a better comparison and you will see Newcastle is significantly longer due to the thresholds not being as displaced as the ones at Lbia. The runway at Newcastle also has an east west orientation which is helpful in strong wind situations which make large aircraft operations much safer. Another problem is our height above sea level which has an effect on aircraft performance.

 

[muscleboy33]

Like previously posted if the touchdown point on runway32 was taken back to its original position we would not have a problem at all, with an lda the same as ncl,plus its on the flatter section of runway rather than on the slight downslope.

 

[SNOWMAN]

Like previously posted if the touchdown point on runway32 was taken back to its original position we would not have a problem at all, with an lda the same as ncl,plus its on the flatter section of runway rather than on the slight downslope.

hi mb
did you not read the previous answers to your previous post?
this question has been done to death many times over the previous years.
sm1

 

[Aviador]

Hi Snowman!

It's frustrating when we're covering things that have been discussed before but we have to consider that some of the newer users of the forum might not have read it. You're more than welcome to post a link to the old pages if you can find them.

 

[Seasider]

May I pose a question?
Is it now time that LBA should be pulling the stops out to get a link to an "eastern" hub? (Istanbul)
If they "save" the route again there is always the chance that it could be under threat again in 2/3 years time.

 

[muscleboy33]

I have read posts from the past, its just ive only signed up recently. Maybe its the passion I have for lba, chill out!

 

[User0001]

There is certainly demand for the Pakistan service from our local airport and it comes from the local community. What often changes the situation is when another local competing airport is able to offer the airline a better confidential deal.

 

[adam]

Have PIA passenger numbers declined to make the pull out of LBA necessary and if it was that reason have they shot themselves in the foot by poor punctuality. Or are numbers steady and sustainable but they've just decided that they're gonna focus on a flagship service over at Manchester where there is no issues with the 777 ops.

 

[lbaspotter]

Well the rumour mill going again and doing over Times as I hear that PIA may have had a change of mind about pulling out off LBA alogether according to a certain Bradford based travel agent!
If not he says we may see a once weekly charter flight operation commenced by foreign based operator using wide bodied aircraft with over 300 seats.

 

[michael]

Over 300 seats would exclude most B767 300's and A330 200's wouldn't it? Even the A330 300 in Virgin's 3 class set up only has 266 seats...

 

[Aviador]

Cattle class might be 300 plus? :whiteflag:

Seriously though, I think it is inevitable this route will end.

The airport company has chosen to follow a low-cost operating model which is disappointing and an irritating truth for those of us who want to support the airport to develop so it can offer Yorkshire people long haul flights to the likes of ISB, DXB, YYZ, SFB and JFK. The infrastructure in place doesn't suit full service airlines let alone long haul full service airlines which prefer air bridges, large wide-bodied parking stands and large arrival carousels.

As White Heather has already said, the airport can reach 5 million passengers per year with bucket and spade routes to the Mediterranean. Until Bridgepoint achieves it's goal 5mppa they're unlikely to look at widening their horizons by improving their terminal and infrastructure to facilitate long haul offerings to support airlines such as PIA.

 

[White Heather]

PIA always use the air bridge don't they? And the aircraft capacity is less than a Jet2 757, so I fail to see how the airport facilites have anything to do with this. It is entirely down to PIA and their finances, lack of aircraft and lack of desire to operate to anywhere other than MAN, BHX and LHR.

 

[whoshotjimmi]

I have to say White Heather, I often find your points, though well thought out and excellently communicated, are overly defensive of the airport company. However, on this occasion, I agree with you entirely. It wouldn't matter if LBA laid on a magnificent supper for them every time they landed, the way PIA is run is nothing short of chaotic.

I still think, however, that there are legs in my conspiracy theory....

 

[Aviador]

Firstly White Heather I'd like to publicly thank you for your continued involvement in the forum and the committee during such a difficult period for you personally. Your opinions on the various subjects and reporting about the committee meetings are very much appreciated and respected by all users on here even if it's not what we all want to hear. I view my opinion as a frustration more than anything else so don't take my post to heart but rightly or wrongly this is my opinion so far as long haul is concerned at LBA. So I hope you don't find my posts too negative.

PIA always use the air bridge don't they? And the aircraft capacity is less than a Jet2 757, so I fail to see how the airport facilites have anything to do with this. It is entirely down to PIA and their finances, lack of aircraft and lack of desire to operate to anywhere other than MAN, BHX and LHR.

Yes so far as the PIA operation goes at the moment until they withdraw the A310 is small enough to use the stand 8 air bridge without the need for remote parking. When the A310 goes PIA will have little choice but to move the service else where that can accommodate the larger aircraft. Even if the 777-200ER can make it in it will be restricted to parking on a remote stand, in fact it would need to park on the most remote stand available to LBA with NO use of an air-bridge. That was my main point so far as attracting other long haul services either to replace the ISB service or otherwise.

LBA does NOT have the capacity to deal with long haul. To reiterate, the low cost model LBA is following does not take long-haul services into account. Now I know LBA isn't exactly going to ever rival Manchester so far as long haul flights are concerned but destinations like Dubai and Abu Dhabi are becoming more and more important to regional airports because of their year-round connect-ability. If LBA is to compete with other regional airports in the UK, LBA must make itself more attractive to airlines serving these long haul routes it needs to attract and connect with.

YES, It is the managements decision or choice not make the airport attractive to these airlines and you are right to say "who are you to question the managements decision, they know best?" It's a perfectly valid question. My answer to that question is simple. If you look around to see what other airports are doing. Take Newcastle for example and look at what they're doing. Look at the excellent relationship they've built with Emirates. Even during the worst recession since the war Emirates have been building up their NCL base and expanding from there. Over the hill, Manchester is progressing with £1billion worth of investment in the new Airport City. Bristol airport is progressing with building a new walkway link with air bridges, quote "for long haul flights".

Meanwhile LBA is meandering on at it's own slow pace and without at doubt it is being left behind. It's all good and well saying "we'll do things at our own pace and in our own time", but it's not doing the airport any favours. We look on as other airports forge ahead with their proposals and developments.

 

[User0001]

Well the rumour mill going again and doing over Times as I hear that PIA may have had a change of mind about pulling out of LBA alogether according to a certain Bradford based travel agent!

Its interesting that daily flights to Manchester have been rumoured, and looking at the PIA site, they have increased to 5 weekly, and the only 2 days MAN-ISB does not operate is Wed and Sat, the 2 days LBA-ISB runs (or ran).

The A310 retirement issue still remains, so will be interesting to see what PIA will operate if they do stay, but, I do wonder if there is still some discussion going on based on the fact Wed and Sat are not available from over the hill.

 

[Bigman]

It has just been on the BBC local news this morning about flights being suspended next month. Stated as saying the route is losing money due to inefficient aircraft (gas guzzling A310 wrecks of course).

 

[White Heather]

To me, 'suspended' indicates a temporary cessation and that they might be back, otherwise 'withdrawal' or 'termination' would be more appropriate. However, BMi said 'suspended' when they dropped Edinburgh and look what happened then!