Longhaul from Bristol

[Foxlimayankee]

The Delta subsidy was offsetting any losses on the route if it didn't turn out to be profitable, I believe.
Here's a suggestion. BRS is plugging that it wants to be a premier regional Airport that offers an alternative to London and the capacity issues in London. Why doesn't the Government allow lower rates of APD at Regional Airports (All UK, not just BRS)
It could even be done by Airport size. E.G BHX would be 75%, BRS 50%, CWL 25% of APD (These are random percentages, not suggestions!). This would utilise spare capacity at smaller Airports and assist them in becoming more competitive and ease the capacity issues at London.
What could that mean for BRS and CWL? Who knows. Doubtful it would mean both Airports would gain a long haul flight to the same destination.
It could mean BRS gets the US East coast and CWL maintains a healthy route for QR going west. CWL could see a return to Canada which is another historically successful route pre-downturn.
TCX could make CWL work alongside TOM in BRS.

The focus here seems to be BRS vs CWL, but why can't it be the "Southwest & Wales" winning back those that use BHX and London and sharing the results, at the same time easing the capacity issues at LGW and LHR, something Robert Sinclair has recently been vocal at how BRS could help that.

For BRS I think it would be restricted it which Airlines it could attract. 757/767/787/A330 to the Middle East & Northeast US. I'm not convinced an A321LR or 737max could comfortably use the runway to the Northeast US, which restricts Norwegian/Primera, although I could be proved wrong. Unless Norwegian feel they could make the 787 work at BRS.

 

[Marko1]

Putting aside apd considerations for a moment I believe that brs should be targeting 2 airlines - JetBlue with its huge hub and spoke at both JFK and Boston with flights all over USA plus Canada and Carribean and etihad which only serves lhr and man and is not far away from the tourist goldmine that is Dubai plus has an excellent connecting network throughout Asia/Pacific region and has precisely the right aircraft to operate from brs. JetBlue I understand have yet to decide on transatlantic but do have a321neos on order. I think both would be perfect.

 

[Marko1]

Putting aside apd considerations for a moment I believe that brs should be targeting 2 airlines - JetBlue with its huge hub and spoke at both JFK and Boston with flights all over USA plus Canada and Carribean and etihad which only serves lhr and man and is not far away from the tourist goldmine that is Dubai plus has an excellent connecting network throughout Asia/Pacific region and has precisely the right aircraft to operate from brs. JetBlue I understand have yet to decide on transatlantic but do have a321neos on order. I think both would be perfect.

 

[Jerry]

The focus here seems to be BRS vs CWL, but why can't it be the "Southwest & Wales" winning back those that use BHX and London and sharing the results, at the same time easing the capacity issues at LGW and LHR, something Robert Sinclair has recently been vocal at how BRS could help that.

For that to happen it would probably need some sort of joint airport ownership or both airports setting up some sort of strategy committee or a strategic partnership, which would probably involve them revealing who they are talking to airline wise and a lot of trust between the 2 parties. Would they be willing to work together?

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Continental was operating from BRS to EWR at the time of Delta contacting CWL. It would have been in competition had CO not pulled BRS. In 2007 York Aviation did a study for the Welsh Government re feasibility for a NYC route. York concluded that a B757 daily route was feasible but would need a £600,000 annual contribution from the WG for the first three years. York never mentioned the BRS route in its study but came up with passenger figures for a fully worked-up CWL route (ie after the first three years of subsidy) that were nearly identical with the numbers that CO was operating out of BRS which eventually saw its demise. There were other reasons for CO pulling BRS, the main one although unacknowledged publicly by the airline was that they had gained access to LHR, something they didn't have when they started BRS-EWR. They moved the BRS flight along the M4 to become their fifth daily from LHR to EWR. They had already moved their LGW-EWR operation to LHR.

Regarding forest's post, the next likely time for any APD announcement is on 22 November when the chancellor presents his autumn budget, which apparently replaces the autumn statement of past years with the spring budget becoming the spring statement from 2018. I would think such an announcement is unlikely given what this government has said in the past about this matter, but with politicians you can never take anything they say as final.

The reasons the devolved powers thing stops when it comes to England is simply because England has no government of its own and there is therefore nowhere to devolve them.

I wonder too (like forest) whether the state ownership of CWL might be a problem if Westminster did decide to devolve. There might be grounds for a legal challenge on competition grounds given that the airport owner would be setting its own APD rates, or abolishing the tax altogether.

Today the CWL chairman has said that he would not be averse to BRS having no APD if CWL had none. That’s impossible under current EU regs and even after Brexit, assuming that EU-type regs are not perpetuated, any varying of APD across England is always likely to be as controversial as devolving the tax to Wales is in the South west.

BRS was certainly thought by many to be the choice when Qatar announced it was looking at a South West route a couple of years ago. The fact that CWL won out means that any future scheduled long haul routes might not fall into the BRS lap even when there is no operational impediment, with or without APD devolution to Wales. The Qatar CEO said publicly that he made the CWL decision and intimated that not all his routes staff were in agreement.

The reasons are now water under the bridge except that if they were known it might help BRS in any future ‘battle’ for a long haul route.

I’m looking to the master plan reappraisal with interest. The airport will consult with local communities, partners and the public before preparing a new draft master plan next spring which will then see further consultation. In 2005 when the current master plan was subject to consultation the airport set up ‘workshops’ around the area where it was possible for the public to speak to airport senior officers. I had a long chat with the then CEO, Andrew Skipp, who was surprisingly forthcoming, especially when he realised I had a genuine interest in the subject. The airport has said it will be doing something similar this time.

It does seem rather strange embarking on this major exercise with no CEO in place. I don’t know who is temporarily in command on the bridge.

Broadly, the current master plan has proved accurate in many respects. The new one is aimed at the next 30 years. I shall be exceptionally fortunate to be around then but I’d love to see how they would pack in 20 million passengers a year which is the figure being talked about. The again in 1987 people, including me, would have smiled benevolently if anyone had said BRS would be handling over 8 mppa in 30 years time.

 

[Coathanger16]

etihad which only serves lhr and man and is not far away from the tourist goldmine that is Dubai plus has an excellent connecting network throughout Asia/Pacific region and has precisely the right aircraft to operate from brs

I doubt there will be much if any expansion from Etihad into other UK airports until 2019 at the earliest when the new terminal opens at Abu Dhabi. Qatar has seen quite substantial growth since they moved to their new airport, so perhaps we will see significant growth from Etihad post 2019.

I don't know Bristol Airport's catchment well, but with Qatar starting CWL next year and the MEB3 "down the road" at Heathrow, is there enough demand to warrant a second Middle East service in the near future (before 2020?). I appreciate Bristol has a wealthy catchment plus the population of Devon/Cornwall for which BRS is easier to get to the CWL/LHR, but with Qatar operating to CWL, Emirates lacking the correct aircraft for Bristol and Etihad generally being more cautious, I don't personally see it happening any time soon.

With regards to the US (most likely New York), there seems to be doubts as to whether the runway at BRS is long enough for a 737MAX or A321NEO to fly to the US East Coast, and whilst a 787 type aircraft would be able to operate the route, I suspect that it would be too large to fit the current demand.

How likely is a runway extension at BRS? Norwegian fly 737MAX's Transatlantic from Edinburgh and the runway there is only 500m longer than Bristol's. Consider that the extended part of the runway could be used as a "starter strip" just for aircraft taking off whilst landing aircraft continue to land at the current threshold. That way flight paths could remain pretty much the same.

 

[forest1979]

With Turkish are they any different from KLM? They don't provide a 1 stop service to Australia and New Zealand which is an important market. Maybe trying to get KLM to change to 737s would be better?
I agree an uplift in KLM would be great and I am surprised this hasn't happened as yet where it certainly has in other regional airports.. Turkish may compliment them and I sight them given the viability of aircraft type. Something for the airport to assess I guess.
The main point here is for Bristol to diversify its route network with scheduled carriers and although technically not one of the ME3, Turkish offer good connectivity through its hub. They also have a substantial route network which ultimately is what Bristol seeks by looking at a scheduled middle east connection.

Thumbs on regional devolution for all... or scrap APD altogether and get a grip of tax havens!! haha....

 

[forest1979]

bit of a botch there on quote and post! apologies... 🙂

 

[TheLocalYokel]

I doubt there will be much if any expansion from Etihad into other UK airports until 2019 at the earliest when the new terminal opens at Abu Dhabi. Qatar has seen quite substantial growth since they moved to their new airport, so perhaps we will see significant growth from Etihad post 2019.

I don't know Bristol Airport's catchment well, but with Qatar starting CWL next year and the MEB3 "down the road" at Heathrow, is there enough demand to warrant a second Middle East service in the near future (before 2020?). I appreciate Bristol has a wealthy catchment plus the population of Devon/Cornwall for which BRS is easier to get to the CWL/LHR, but with Qatar operating to CWL, Emirates lacking the correct aircraft for Bristol and Etihad generally being more cautious, I don't personally see it happening any time soon.

With regards to the US (most likely New York), there seems to be doubts as to whether the runway at BRS is long enough for a 737MAX or A321NEO to fly to the US East Coast, and whilst a 787 type aircraft would be able to operate the route, I suspect that it would be too large to fit the current demand.

How likely is a runway extension at BRS? Norwegian fly 737MAX's Transatlantic from Edinburgh and the runway there is only 500m longer than Bristol's. Consider that the extended part of the runway could be used as a "starter strip" just for aircraft taking off whilst landing aircraft continue to land at the current threshold. That way flight paths could remain pretty much the same.

I suspect you might be right about MEB3 - probably not enough demand at present for BRS and CWL to have services. NYC is another potential problem if the likes of Primera or Norwegian could be interested but the NEO and MAX cannot operate from the runway - if they can't.

BHX is also an excellent alternative for the West Country but LHR is the default airport for nearly all scheduled long haul from the South West, particularly from around Bristol where it is just 'down the road' as you put it. CAA latest stats show that over 5 million South West passengers a year use LHR (mainly) and LGW. I shall be interested to learn how many West Country travellers use Qatar at CWL if such information is ever made public.

The BRS runway is 2011 metres long. The current master plan, published in 2006, contains a number of alternatives for runway extension, all at the eastern end. The topography at the western end makes a runway extension nearly impossible.

The maximum extension that can be accommodated at the eastern end entirely within airport land is 389 metres. Even that would entail the airport taking control of part of an adjacent common for the ILS localiser and potentially approach lighting.

Another option is a starter strip that would add about 389 metres to the runway 27 take-off run but only about 150 metres to the runway 09 take-off run. This would avoid any need to encroach onto the common.

If the airport wanted a full extension beyond 389 metres it would throw up all kinds of operational and environmental issues.

The airport is about to embark on a major revision of its master plan to take the airport through the next 30 years. At a recent airport consultative committee meeting the airport stated that a runway extension would not feature in these deliberations. This might be slightly misleading in that I heard one story that I would not necessarily dismiss out of hand that they are already looking at the idea of a starter strip.

Incidentally, whilst on the subject of NYC this recent business report (see below link) reckons that the Continental BRS-EWR route that ran from May 2005 until November 2010 was originally 'highly profitable', and goes on to say that the global banking crisis-led recession in 2007 was the cause of its eventual downfall. I've never heard any financial figures for the route quoted before. I do know that the first year of operation exceeded the passenger number target that Continental had stated publicly before the route began.

http://www.bristol-business.net/dir...-work-starts-on-blueprint-for-further-growth/

 

[Jerry]

I'm sure CWL will tell everyone how many people are from the South West are using the Qatar flights.
Does anyone know when the new masterplan will come out?

 

[TheLocalYokel]

I'm sure CWL will tell everyone how many people are from the South West are using the Qatar flights.
Does anyone know when the new masterplan will come out?

Consultation will begin in the next few weeks and will involve local communities, airport partners and the public. There will be an online questionnaire as well as events organised around the area for people to have the chance of meeting members of the airport management team.

From this a draft master plan will be drawn up next spring. That will be subject to further consultations before a final master plan emerges. I'm guessing that perhaps by this time next year the final master plan will have been published. They will want to get as clear and accurate a blueprint as possible given that the masterplan will cover the next 30 years.

The existing master plan was prepared in 2005 to cover the period 2006-2030; 2006-2015 in detail and 2016-2030 in outline.

It's actually been reasonably accurate with such things as infrastructure developments and passenger projections.

The master plan projected 6.95 mppa in 2010 (was 5.723); 8.076 in 2015 (was 6.781); 9.271 in 2020 (currently 8.095); 10.812 in 2025; 12.476 in 2030.

The projections fell behind around 2010 because of the recession that few could have predicted in 2005, but they are now nearly back on track and might prove to be under-estimated by 2020.

Its breakdown of types of aircraft and flights was not quite as accurate though, especially with long haul forecasts which were over optimistic. Its passenger per air transport movement (ATM) was also on the low side. It forecast 98 per ATM in 2015 and 103 per ATM in 2020 rising to 115 per ATM in 2030. The 12-month period to August 2017 saw 127 per ATM meaning aircraft are larger and/or more heavily loaded than the projections thought.

 

[Foxlimayankee]

I'm sure CWL will tell everyone how many people are from the South West are using the Qatar flights.
Does anyone know when the new masterplan will come out?

I doubt it would be specific data. As that would provide BRS and other Airlines with data that could be used to coax an Airline to BRS.
Maybe some media spin of "A number of passengers from XXX and XXX are using the route that is aimed at the Wales and Southwest market".

 

[Marko1]

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/chairman-cardiff-airport-backs-air-13865146

Somewhat conciliatory.

 

[Aviador]

Have a referendum and get devolved assemblies for the regions!

I'm not a fan of devolved powers, assembly's or regional governments. Basically they're politicians obsessed with power. It's unsurprising they happen though when money isn't distributed fairly by national governments.

Hypothetical but extremely unlikely to ever happen, but look at this from a different perspective, how would the Welsh or Scottish feel if Westminster lowered or removed APD in the English Regions? Surely this wouldn't be received well by the Welsh or the Scottish?

Similarly though we have Scottish university's offering free places for Scottish students but English and Welsh students have to pay. Basically it's not fair and they only serve to create divides that weren't there before.

 

[Jerry]

I'm not a fan of devolved powers, assembly's or regional governments. Basically they're politicians obsessed with power. It's unsurprising they happen though when money isn't distributed fairly by national governments.

Hypothetical but extremely unlikely to ever happen, but look at this from a different perspective, how would the Welsh or Scottish feel if Westminster lowered or removed APD in the English Regions? Surely this wouldn't be received well by the Welsh or the Scottish?

Similarly though we have Scottish university's offering free places for Scottish students but English and Welsh students have to pay. Basically it's not fair and they only serve to create divides that weren't there before.

Yes Wales and Scotland probably wouldn't like it but the UK is made up of 4 different countries each with it's different needs and since Wales has had it's own government a lot of things have changed for the good which probably wouldn't have happened with Westminster rule. Also if you look at England it is to roughly 4 countries/regions each with it's own different needs that may well get satisfied better under local control.

 

[Seasider]

There's only one country in England ... and that is Yorkshire! 😗

 

[forest1979]

Dubai Airshow: Boeing wins $15bn order from Emirates http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41960871

Interesting.. Emirates with a plane that could use Bristol? Few years off yet but they are the biggest of the ME3 with growing ambitions.. maybe just maybe?
I couldn’t see what variant of dreamliner has been ordered and If this makes a difference for an airport like BRS with a short runway..

 

[TheLocalYokel]

Dubai Airshow: Boeing wins $15bn order from Emirates http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41960871

Interesting.. Emirates with a plane that could use Bristol? Few years off yet but they are the biggest of the ME3 with growing ambitions.. maybe just maybe?
I couldn’t see what variant of dreamliner has been ordered and If this makes a difference for an airport like BRS with a short runway..

It's the 10 series. It's doubtful that the current BRS runway would be able to cope.

 

[Coathanger16]

Dubai Airshow: Boeing wins $15bn order from Emirates http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41960871

Interesting.. Emirates with a plane that could use Bristol? Few years off yet but they are the biggest of the ME3 with growing ambitions.. maybe just maybe?
I couldn’t see what variant of dreamliner has been ordered and If this makes a difference for an airport like BRS with a short runway..

At this stage they've ordered the -10, though they have the ability to change some or all of those orders to -9. It's been commented on other forums that the -10 would offer a similar amount of seats to some of the current 777, so having some -9's would make expansion into smaller markets easier for EK.

As for take off distances, I'm not sure. The -8 has a published "hi thrust" take off distance of 2600m yet TUI operate them from Bristol to Cancun (about 57% of its max range). Bristol to Dubai would use just 40% of the -9's max range, whilst using 48% of the -10's max range.

Best guess - it could just about work with the -9, but the -10 may be too big.

 

[Foxlimayankee]

They have ordered 787-10's. According to Wiki, the wingspan is the same across all 787 variants, the question is if it's length would be a problem on Stand 26 or any of the new parking stands if they are for 787 parking. Also the runway shouldn't be a problem, BRS-DXB 5660km / BRS-CUN 7800km / BRS-SFB 6820.
The suggested seating capacity for each variant is:
787-800 - 242
787-900 - 290
787-100 - 330
So TOM operate at near 787-900 capacity on it's -800's.
The question is if the lack of cargo facility would be an issue for EK, and if cargo was available, what would that do to runway performance?