Aviation Discussion

[AlterEgo]

Connecting passengers absolutely are dominant from Manchester, without a shadow of a doubt. Each and every time I'm on that flight I can overhear the destinations, and then when we disembark there's an enormous string of us heading to connections, and one or two turning left for arrivals. With the train speeds and convenience what they are from central Manchester (and surroundings - Liverpool, Crewe, Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Chester) there is no hope of being cost or time richer for taking the flight. I'll bet you a dollar that Manchester flights remain hale and hearty.

From Newcastle it's different - there are domestic passengers. Scotland is a heady mixture of both, and so the timing of the flight will determine whether it's predominantly domestic or connecting. Those flights which arrive at LHR in time for a big bank of departures will be connection heavy and priced to match. Else it will be domestic.

HS2 isn't set up for connections - which is stupid btw - and so will not be used.

The Eurostar to Amsterdam will take maybe 100 leisure travellers off the flights, and a few business travellers. It absolutely will not release 10 slots. BA have recently become much more aggressive targeting passengers for connections from NL and BE. The reason I used them this time for this trip was in part price, and in part the number of flights they offer as options.

I agree with this entirely. I have been on all of BA’s domestic routes several times and I observe this behaviour too, particularly from MAN as you say. The morning flights are usually chock full of people heading to the USA, and as you say you can overhear the conversations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I expect a majority of BA's domestic passengers at Heathrow are connecting to/from another flight. Those passengers aren't going to switch to HS2, and reducing the frequency of the domestic flights will make the connecting ones harder to sell.

If HS2 codeshare with airlines and with OOC being a better interchange for Heathrow than via London, they actually might.

 

[Bald Rick]

I agree about Manchester - it's mostly transfer passengers, but there will still be some direct who swap to HS2. Same goes for Leeds.

Scotland is different. There is still a lot of direct traffic. With a rail journey time of 3h30 that comes well with the marginal range for people who might use either. Given that air has approx 75% of the air/rail market London-Glasgow / Edinburgh, it's not inconceivable that it could move to 50/50.

Amsterdam - there is very little rail traffic today, yet it is comfortably the best served air destination served from London. With a journey time of c 4 hours, and a service of say 4 traisn a day each way (which is more than Eurostar are currently proposing), I can certainly see it gaining 10-20% of the market. That's around 10 flights, albeit they won't all necessarily fall out of Heathrow.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think E* to Amsterdam will work for those who live in/very near London. Otherwise Luton is likely to be more convenient for those in the southern Home Counties, and of course to get to St P down the MML you have to go past it.

 

[atillathehunn]

If HS2 codeshare with airlines and with OOC being a better interchange for Heathrow than via London, they actually might.

If we look at the continent for a minute. There are various fly by train routes. If I put in a journey from Brussels to somewhere long haul I usually get a train from Midi to Schiphol where I connect to the plane. If it's an Air France route it's to CDG TGV station from Midi. A colleague of mine who's die hard Lufthansa as he lives over the border and commute uses the ICE from Aachen to the station right under Frankfurt. These schemes are popular. The reason? The station is right under the airport. Up the lifts and you're in. Not take a train to OOC, then a shuttle to the airport. Connections add failure room. I think we missed a big opportunity to make connections via train better here with the new HS line.

For now the domestic connections are going nowhere. If anything, with the new guaranteed links to Humberside and Liverpool (was Durham Tees Valley included? I can't remember) as part of the third runway deal there will be limited if any reduction.

The E* service as it stands will be useless. Not enough trains, and there appear to be connections made onto the Thalys (it's announced when we come into Brussels).

 

[fowler9]

Come HS2, I can't see there being a need for so many flights to Manchester, Newcastle, Glasgow Edinburgh; that could release 10 slots. Although by then, the third runway will be open.

If the Eurostar service to Amsterdam takes off, particularly if inbound immigration can be resolved, then I can see 10 slots coming off there also.

It will be interesting to see what happens with BAs low cost long haul initiative, Level, and if that comes to London (presumably Gatwick or Stansted) what impact that has on the busier Trans Atlantic routes, ie NYC.

No way would I use HS2 to get from the North West to Heathrow to get a flight. I am sure I am not the only one.

 

[cactustwirly]

I think E* to Amsterdam will work for those who live in/very near London. Otherwise Luton is likely to be more convenient for those in the southern Home Counties, and of course to get to St P down the MML you have to go past it.

I think it depends on price, if E* can undercut EZY then it could work.
For me Luton is a PITA to get to and STP is cheaper and easier to get to than Gatwick and Heathrow

 

[atillathehunn]

Amsterdam - London is one of the best served air markets in the world. I would estimate there to be about 90 flights per day. Compare that to Paris and Brussels? Brussels has about 3 to London from Sabena and 5 or 6 from BA. Paris has more, but nothing like the Amsterdam volume.

Unlikely that they will ever manage to beat the price of a highly competitive air market.

 

[AlterEgo]

If HS2 codeshare with airlines and with OOC being a better interchange for Heathrow than via London, they actually might.

The real selling point would be the opportunity to check and through-check bags of course, meaning passengers can exit the train at the airport, avoid bag drop and not see their suitcase again until their final destination.

 

[AlterEgo]

I think E* to Amsterdam will work for those who live in/very near London. Otherwise Luton is likely to be more convenient for those in the southern Home Counties, and of course to get to St P down the MML you have to go past it.

Amsterdam is very well served indeed. You can fly from every single London airport, even Southend - to Amsterdam. Add in KLM and others from Southampton and Birmingham and that’s an enormous catchment. I think the core of E*’s business case will be people living or working in central London or people wishing to travel easily to elsewhere in the Netherlands.

 

[AlterEgo]

For now the domestic connections are going nowhere. If anything, with the new guaranteed links to Humberside and Liverpool (was Durham Tees Valley included? I can't remember) as part of the third runway deal there will be limited if any reduction.

Are the links to HUY and LPL guaranteed? I thought they were a “maybe” - Newquay NQY was the other one I saw mentioned.

 

[atillathehunn]

AlterEgo: my mistake. I read more into the report than was there. These are the airports 'expected' to be brought into the network, no firm commitments. They include Liverpool, Newquay, Belfast (though it's already served from LHR, no idea what they mean here. Maybe additional capacity), Prestwick (assuming this is a joke), Durham Tees Valley and Humberside. I'm sure commitments will only come when the thing is actually built.

You're probably fairly right on the Randstad issue. The opportunity to jump off the London train at Rotterdam and straight onto the metro is good since the LHR - Rotterdam flight got dropped a few years ago. However, the few times I was on the LHR flight from Rotterdam it was half empty.

 

[Bald Rick]

Amsterdam - London is one of the best served air markets in the world. I would estimate there to be about 90 flights per day. Compare that to Paris and Brussels? Brussels has about 3 to London from Sabena and 5 or 6 from BA. Paris has more, but nothing like the Amsterdam volume.

Unlikely that they will ever manage to beat the price of a highly competitive air market.

It is indeed the best served route from London. About 60 flights each way per day.

However, it didn't used to be. The best served air route from London used to be.... Paris, with about 50 flights each way a day. Until someone opened a new rail link, with typical times of 3h30. Now there are about 25 a day each way (with many smaller planes too) in a much bigger market.

No reason to think that E* won't make a dent in Amsterdam air traffic. Indeed it would make a very big dent, if:

1) frequency was every 2h or so
2) the service ran non-stop or very limited stop. May not happen, but it would get down to 3h15.
3) inbound immigration was sorted - either through provision at Amsterdam, or St Pancras (the latter more likely post Brexit).

Re 1) the Paris and Brussels frequencies started off low at 1 or 2 trains per day each way, and increased as demand built, market confidence grew, and Eurostars confidence in the operation grew. Of course the plan was always to run more.

Re 2) it's quite possible that E* would make a headline trip non stop (or nearly so) once daily. There are currently 8 flights leaving London that arrive AMS between 1000-1100, or put another way, two full Eurostars. A train leaving St Pancras at around 0630, which is roughly the time you would need to be arriving at an airport for one of these flights, could deliver you into central (Centraal!) Amsterdam by 1100 local time. Given the rather better environment on the train, the ability to be more productive, and being dropped in central Amsterdam rather than at Schipol, I suspect it would be rather attractive for many who currently use the plane.

Re journey times, as ever it depends on your origin and destination points. For me, it is roughly an hour quicker from front door to central Amsterdam by air via Luton than by rail via St Pancras and Brussels. Because of cost and comfort considerations, the decision for me is roughly 50:50.

A direct train will make my journey time roughly equal. A direct non-stop train would make it 30 minutes quicker. In those circumstances, I would definitely use the train, unless Eurostar was significantly more expensive. Of course everyone has their own cost / time / comfort equation, but direct Eurostars to Amsterdam will shift the factors considerably.

 

[atillathehunn]

I don't agree with the equivalence of Paris and Brussels and Amsterdam.

Brussels and Paris are pretty much 2 hours on the nose now, maybe a little more for Paris.

Amsterdam is projected to be way outside that comfortable envelope. Even by smoothing out the issues with immigration, it's still a bit of a time challenge.

Very pedantic point, but actually Schiphol is better for Zuid where all the major business are then Centraal. Actually Centraal to Zuid is a rubbish journey.

 

[Bald Rick]

I don't agree with the equivalence of Paris and Brussels and Amsterdam.

Brussels and Paris are pretty much 2 hours on the nose now, maybe a little more for Paris.

Amsterdam is projected to be way outside that comfortable envelope. Even by smoothing out the issues with immigration, it's still a bit of a time challenge.

Very pedantic point, but actually Schiphol is better for Zuid where all the major business are then Centraal. Actually Centraal to Zuid is a rubbish journey.

I'm not saying they are equivalent.

Eurostar has around 90% of the air rail market for Brussels, and around 70% of Paris. I'm just saying that with a decent London - Amsterdam service, it could conceivably take 20% or so of the air market (currently 4.5m pax pa) probably more if the journey time came down and immigration was sorted. That 20% will be worth c£100m pa, so well worth chasing.

Purely selfishly, but I haven't been to Amsterdam for 30 years, but I will be going again by train when the Eurostar link opens. I suspect I won't be the only one making a similar decision.

Edit:

Looking at it another way, London to Glasgow / Edinburgh is about 4h30 by rail, and a little over an hour by air, ie rather similar to Amsterdam today. Rail has 20-30% of the market (more for Edinburgh than Glasgow). Given that the Eurostar direct to Amsterdam time will be around 4h, if there was a more frequent service than currently proposed there is no major reason why the share wouldn't be in the region of 20%.

 

[berneyarms]

It is indeed the best served route from London. About 60 flights each way per day.

However, it didn't used to be. The best served air route from London used to be.... Paris, with about 50 flights each way a day. Until someone opened a new rail link, with typical times of 3h30. Now there are about 25 a day each way (with many smaller planes too) in a much bigger market.

No reason to think that E* won't make a dent in Amsterdam air traffic. Indeed it would make a very big dent, if:

1) frequency was every 2h or so
2) the service ran non-stop or very limited stop. May not happen, but it would get down to 3h15.
3) inbound immigration was sorted - either through provision at Amsterdam, or St Pancras (the latter more likely post Brexit).

Re 1) the Paris and Brussels frequencies started off low at 1 or 2 trains per day each way, and increased as demand built, market confidence grew, and Eurostars confidence in the operation grew. Of course the plan was always to run more.

Re 2) it's quite possible that E* would make a headline trip non stop (or nearly so) once daily. There are currently 8 flights leaving London that arrive AMS between 1000-1100, or put another way, two full Eurostars. A train leaving St Pancras at around 0630, which is roughly the time you would need to be arriving at an airport for one of these flights, could deliver you into central (Centraal!) Amsterdam by 1100 local time. Given the rather better environment on the train, the ability to be more productive, and being dropped in central Amsterdam rather than at Schipol, I suspect it would be rather attractive for many who currently use the plane.

Re journey times, as ever it depends on your origin and destination points. For me, it is roughly an hour quicker from front door to central Amsterdam by air via Luton than by rail via St Pancras and Brussels. Because of cost and comfort considerations, the decision for me is roughly 50:50.

A direct train will make my journey time roughly equal. A direct non-stop train would make it 30 minutes quicker. In those circumstances, I would definitely use the train, unless Eurostar was significantly more expensive. Of course everyone has their own cost / time / comfort equation, but direct Eurostars to Amsterdam will shift the factors considerably.

I think you will find that in fact Dublin just pips Amsterdam in terms of the number of flights from London (counting flights from Luton, Stansted, Southend, Gatwick, Heathrow and London City).

AMS max is at 60 while Dublin is 61.

 

[gsnedders]

The real selling point would be the opportunity to check and through-check bags of course, meaning passengers can exit the train at the airport, avoid bag drop and not see their suitcase again until their final destination.

And have a guaranteed connection.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think you will find that in fact Dublin just pips Amsterdam in terms of the number of flights from London (counting flights from Luton, Stansted, Southend, Gatwick, Heathrow and London City).

AMS max is at 60 while Dublin is 61.

I wasn't counting Southend

 

[berneyarms]

I wasn't counting Southend

Well then Dublin still wins out with 58 flights -v- 57!!

 

[atillathehunn]

@BaldRick: I take your point RE the Scottish market. Though their expansion plans for more trains daily, pricing, and their time penalty in Brussels needs to be aggressively targeted. However, one final concern is the hour time difference. Heading over the journey time cost is 5 and a bit hours - almost an entire business day. 06:00 from St Pancras - 5.5 hours later I'm only just getting into Centraal at 11.30am, so downtown by 12.15 (Zuid). The 06.20 flight from LCY/LHR gets me in at 08.20, I'm in Zuid by 09.00.

I read the figure of 90 somewhere: probably out of date by now. I don't know you get your figures. My number is 69. I went to Skyscanner, put in Amsterdam - London (any) and then filtered to direct flights. On a random Friday in December I get 69 unique results. Though you are still correct that Dublin has more: same process, same date I get 94. Though, in my defence I never said Amsterdam was the best served market from London. I said one of the best served markets. Honourable mention for Sao Paulo and Rio with 96 flights between them daily. I believe the winner is Sydney and Melbourne, with 104 results.

 

[berneyarms]

@BaldRick: I take your point RE the Scottish market. Though their expansion plans for more trains daily, pricing, and their time penalty in Brussels needs to be aggressively targeted. However, one final concern is the hour time difference. Heading over the journey time cost is 5 and a bit hours - almost an entire business day. 06:00 from St Pancras - 5.5 hours later I'm only just getting into Centraal at 11.30am, so downtown by 12.15 (Zuid). The 06.20 flight from LCY/LHR gets me in at 08.20, I'm in Zuid by 09.00.

I read the figure of 90 somewhere: probably out of date by now. I don't know you get your figures. My number is 69. I went to Skyscanner, put in Amsterdam - London (any) and then filtered to direct flights. On a random Friday in December I get 69 unique results. Though you are still correct that Dublin has more: same process, same date I get 94. Though, in my defence I never said Amsterdam was the best served market from London. I said one of the best served markets. Honourable mention for Sao Paulo and Rio with 96 flights between them daily. I believe the winner is Sydney and Melbourne, with 104 results.

First of all it was BaldRick who claimed Amsterdam was the busiest route out of London, it is in fact Dublin. That's the post that I was correcting.

Secondly, unfortunately Skyscanner does not distinguish between codeshare flights, so in both cases your figures are inflated. Cityjet and Iberia don't fly AMS-LON, and are codeshares, and BA and Aer Lingus codeshare on every single one of their flights between London and Dublin, so all of the codeshares have to be eliminated.

This will (I suspect) also impact on the numbers of flights on the other sectors that you have quoted.

I also suspect that is how someone thought that there were 90 flights between London and Amsterdam - I very much doubt that figure.

To prove the case for Dublin - here are all of the scheduled flights (excluding codeshares) for Friday 1st December:

AMS-SEN - Easyjet 3
AMS-LCY - KLM 5; BA 5; Flybe 1
AMS-LHR KLM 11 and BA 8
AMS-LGW BA 4 and Easyjet 8
AMS-LTN Easyjet 7 and Vueling 2
AMS-STN Easyjet 4

Total 58

DUB-SEN Flybe 3
DUB-LCY Cityjet 7 and BA 5
DUB-LHR Aer Lingus 11 and BA 8
DUB-LGW Aer Lingus 6 and Ryanair 8
DUB-LTN Ryanair 3
DUB-STN Ryanair 8

Total 59

 

[atillathehunn]

That person was me. I clearly read some duff information. I never bothered to count until this morning when I thought I would do some stupid filtering with Skyscanner over breakfast, clearly my method is flawed, I didn't consider codeshares which would inflate the figure artificially. There's no method to remove them.

I am not quibbling your figures. Duly chastised.

 

[Crawley Ben]

Stobart Air are planning on launching flights from Carlisle in 2018 according to an article I read this morning. The link is below for anyone who might be interested.

https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/...up-aims-to-start-carlisle-pax-flights-in-2018

Cheers

Ben

 

[atillathehunn]

I plan to stop drinking and eat healthier in 2018, and both have about as much chance of happening as these flights.

 

[berneyarms]

www.flightmapper.net is a better source I find as it segregates codeshares, although for some strange reason the Flybe flights from Dublin to Southend don’t appear on it.

Click on Flight Search at the top of the page, and then enter the details and you should get all the flights on a particular day.

 

[Bald Rick]

First of all it was BaldRick who claimed Amsterdam was the busiest route out of London, it is in fact Dublin. That's the post that I was correcting.

Secondly, unfortunately Skyscanner does not distinguish between codeshare flights, so in both cases your figures are inflated. Cityjet and Iberia don't fly AMS-LON, and are codeshares, and BA and Aer Lingus codeshare on every single one of their flights between London and Dublin, so all of the codeshares have to be eliminated.

This will (I suspect) also impact on the numbers of flights on the other sectors that you have quoted.

I also suspect that is how someone thought that there were 90 flights between London and Amsterdam - I very much doubt that figure.

To prove the case for Dublin - here are all of the scheduled flights (excluding codeshares) for Friday 1st December:

AMS-SEN - Easyjet 3
AMS-LCY - KLM 5; BA 5; Flybe 1
AMS-LHR KLM 11 and BA 8
AMS-LGW BA 4 and Easyjet 8
AMS-LTN Easyjet 7 and Vueling 2
AMS-STN Easyjet 4

Total 58

DUB-SEN Flybe 3
DUB-LCY Cityjet 7 and BA 5
DUB-LHR Aer Lingus 11 and BA 8
DUB-LGW Aer Lingus 6 and Ryanair 8
DUB-LTN Ryanair 3
DUB-STN Ryanair 8

Total 59

Ah. I used Tuesday 12th December, and got 57 for Amsterdam, and 57 for Dublin. Both excluding SEN.

I gave the title to Amsterdam, because 18 of those to Dublin are Ryanair, and well, you know...

To be fair Dublin has 4.7m pax pa, whereas Amsterdam only 4.5m, so I do stand corrected.

According to Wikipedia (usual disclaimers apply) the busiest city pair air routes are:

Seoul - Jeju (passenger numbers and seating capacity)
Rio - Sao Paulo (aircraft movements)

 

[atillathehunn]

Dublin is only going to get busier as it looks like many of the banks will be jumping ship to Dublin.

Seoul and Jeju - an incredible amount of capacity and people moving back and forth.
Rio and Sao Paulo - probably something to do with the terrible road connection.

Interesting that the busiest air routes in the world are all domestic. You have to get to number 9 on the list before an international route (Hong Kong - Taipei) begins to creep into the list.

 

[fowler9]

Didn't Barcelona to Madrid used to be the busiest?

 

[atillathehunn]

Not even close. Barcelone - Madrid is 2.3m. Seoul - Jeju is 9.9 million

 

[fowler9]

Not even close. Barcelone - Madrid is 2.3m. Seoul - Jeju is 9.9 million

Back in the day Barca to Madrid had the most flights I believe though. It all died when the new AVE route was completed.