rdc1000It is always an interesting phenomena. At Manchester, I understand that at one point, a single resident made up something like 60% (don’t quote me completely on this, it is a recollection of a conversation I once had with someone) of complaints, and the figures suggested they were writing multiple complaints per day.
Plymouth is a fine example of people moving close to an Airport and complaining. The Airport has been there since 1927, and houses have built up along the boundary. Ironically these are among the most expensive properties in Plymouth, on Tavistock Road in the Derriford area. One resident moved in and then set up a microphone at the bottom of his garden for noise monitoring. However, one of the reasons the houses are popular and command a high price is that they have a vast expanse of open land behind them, that wouldn’t get built on! Now there is the irony, they want the Airport to stop buildings overlooking their gardens, but don’t want that same airport to make a noise. Well they’ve been stumped now, because the land behind their properties is being removed from the Airport boudnary and will be developed into office blocks and residential properties, but at least it’ll be quite!:dev2:
rdc1000Hopefully there are no scheduled 767 flights in or out of Harare routinely.
Only the long haul ops of Air Zimbabwe to London (!) and Kuala Lumpur/Beijing. Whoops 😮
coming to Zimbabwe, does Air Zimbabwe still have an active fleet?
Yes, they still have 5 aircraft in active service, 2×767-200ERs and 3×737-200s.
rdc1000The aircraft could also been constructed at a commercial rate, and then stored before being converted into the tanker configuration.
Completely agree with your view that it may be as much about space and efficiency. Not sure about the above as such because, as I understand it, the KC-767 will feature 787 cockpits etc, so will be unique, so may as well be built as and when.
rdc1000But even if they win the competition, and the odds are very much in their favour, then that still won’t make much change to the 767 output. The tanker contract is a long term contract. It’s not as if Boeing is suddently expected to roll out a tanker every week. A tanker a month at best, and probably not even that.
Whilst admittedly they will only produce a small number per month (179 deliveries over 13 years = 1.14/month, though I’m not sure its at an even rate, i.e. I suspect they will slow production towards the end of the period), there is a long term need to replace around 450 tankers in the US forces, which is likely to lead to follow on orders for the contract winner. Also don’t forget that 179 aircraft is roughly equal to the 25% of the total 767’s built over the last 28 years, so this is still not insignificant. Furthermore, the re-engineering being done on the aircraft probably means Boeing will hope to sell it elsewhere too.
rdc1000Looks as though it may be off anyway….
http://www.thisisguernsey.com/2010/07/26/aurigny-deal-now-dead/
rdc1000He’s been threatening them with a name change for a while now, and keeps hanging it on different things, this is just the most recent in a short (but notable) list of reasons why EZY may have to give up the brand.
To be honest though, and in my view only, the ‘easy’ brand would not be a brand without the airline, which acts like a flying logo and one of the most ‘hit’ sites in the branding. Therefore, unless Stelios is thinking of launching a new carrier, it would seem like commercial suicide to me for the rest of the branded companies.
rdc1000ASK is the easy one, providing you know the airline’s total capacity vs routes.
The RPK is harder, and obviously can only be calculated retrospectively.
Calculate the ASK by multiplying the number of seats on each route by the total flight distance of the route (return), and then by doing this for all routes you can calculate the system wide ASK.
RPK is calculated by multiplying the number of sold (and carried, no shows don’t count) seats on each route by the route distance. Again, do this for all routes and you get the system wide RPK. However, the information would be virtually impossible to get because of it’s commercially sensitive nature. The rates at which the airlines publish this makes it relatively desensitised commercially, and of course across the whole network gives away no individual route secrets to competitors.
If you don’t work for the airline at hand (I assume BA in the case you’re trying to work out), then OAG is the best source of information for the ASKs and indeed will calculate them on a day/week/month/yearly basis for you if that’s what you need (although bear in mind OAG is only really good for 3-4 months out). However, I’m afraid access to OAG is hugely expensive.
rdc1000The CRJ family cannot use LCY, nor can the ERJ145 (though the E135 can).
Although the concrete length is 1508m, the useable runway from a TORA and LDA position is only 1319m, so the actual runway length you need to consider is that.
The CRJ family has relatively poor runway performance, and there is litttle in the way of weight that can be removed in terms of fuel/load. Therefore Bombardier has never sought approval for the type at LCY as the offload of fuel/pax would be too significant.
Hope that’s some help? LCY operations and capabilities is an area of particular knowledge of mine.
I should add also that Bombardier have specifically designed their C-series on the basis that it will be LCY operable, even if it is only the C100.
rdc1000I suspect KLM/AF may be more interested in the C-series for their next batch of aircraft. I understand they think it will be a ‘game-changer’.
GA may have hit the nail on the head, in that the Sukhoi may be a financially attractive aircraft for AZ, rather than a major type for the wider KLM/AF Group.
rdc1000If only we had something/someone similar operating Q400’s outta LCY?!:cool:
You get a multitude of the world’s major airlines at LCY, many providing services with jets, why do you need an equivelant of Porter with turboprops?
rdc1000Personally I still prefer BA’s Club product and service to that of Emirates. Albeit, I’ve not been on their A380.
Am I right in thinking that you work in Engineering Rob (I think you once said what you do, but I can’t remember for certain)? Isn’t BA Engineering a seperate legal entity which is 100% owned by BA? If that is the case then it will be an interesting pay negotiation because I’d have thought it would be easier to close the unit down and outsource than for adjusting for Cabin Crew?
rdc1000Thank heavens it wasn’t in the UK. Unite would be saying it wasn’t in the T&Cs of the cabin crew to be helping up front! :dev2:
rdc1000…why doesn’t BA look at its entire operation in order to work out where the axe needs to fall in terms of making those unnecessary costs rather than just blindly turning to and hitting the hard-working people that represent the brand and perform
It has cut costs from everywhere else, and indeed all other sectors of the airline staff have agreed to such cuts. This is the last area holding onto a bygone era.
You could cut more fo the customer service, but then englishrob would just say that was degrading the airline even more. It has to survive somehow.
Is that it?!
Taking a company from record profits to record losses within 12 months!
Don’t forget who put them at this record profit to start with, WW. He was the first CEO in the history of BA to achieve a 10% operating margin.
rdc1000……the company I work for is only relatively new in comparison to something like BA which has been around for years and has let these kind of problems manifest themselves into what is happening today rather than tackling the problems in a better way, whereas our management have been quite good about the whole situation and offered to sit down and negotiate an agreeable settlement, so much so that the new offer was overwhelmingly accepted by a huge majority.
You have accidently hit the nail on the head against your own arguments there C9. That is exactly BA’s problem, they are old and have a legacy of employment structure which is outdated and is stopping them competing against the newer companies that have more modern pay and condition structures. I know you’re not with an airline, but your company has the benefit that its conditions of employment reflect a modern aviation market, not one that existed in 1970 when Government’s used to have to subsidise their airlines. If you’d like BA cabin crew to retain their benefits AND for BA to exist then you have to accept that the Government will need to step in and subsidise the carrier (which is illegal under EU law anyway) and then you, as someone who pays tax, will be propping up outdated working conditions. It’s fine to say you support the BA crew, but they’re on more privelaged working conditions than you are, I just don’t think you’ve noticed that.
Talking about negotiation is fine, but it isn’t just pure salaries that are causing the problem (and indeed nobody will be taking pay cut at BA), but the conditions, such as the excessive crews onboard, your company doesn’t have these issues. Other legacy carriers, such as KLM, Air France and Lufthansa have over the years been able to reduce the number of crew onboard but that increasingly leaves BA in a position from which it cannot compete. There is therefore no negotiation to be had, it is a binary form, i.e. you either HAVE or do NOT HAVE a purser who doesn’t do any ‘heavy lifting’ on board. They cannot negotiate for 0.5 of a purser onboard, so if the airline is to survive then they need to cut unnecessary costs and so they need to impliment the new working conditions.
rdc1000There is a real risk that the JR results in relation to Heathrow may lead to this application being ‘called-in’ for the Government to assess, regardless of the local authority’s decision, so the road ahead may not be clear yet.
As for 70 conditions, that’s not that many really, especially as many will be menial such as those which require works abutting public highways to have highway authority permission etc, which are minor, this is just part of the territory for such large applications.
Its a shame Filton was overlooked, much better location
Except for Filton’s proximity to residential areas of course, making BRS the less offensive option to a larger part of the population.
Sign In
