Ah well then, can’t help.
LOL
LOL
[QUOTE=Humberside]Saw the BBC 1’o clock news piece. OK, but they did highlight the rival coach service. The people they interviewed said they wouldnt change from bus to plane
QUOTE]
This has been a major problem for many small operators, and there have been plenty of small carriers offering such servcies in the UK that have come and gone, I think the advantage this route has is that the surface journey times can be quite long, but (as someone currently working out journey times for passenger forecasting as I speak) passengers make concious decisions based upon cost vs journey time (and perceived journey time and reliability). I’m guessing that the 20min flight, plus 10 min check in and then journey time between the airports and origin/destination of the journey may bring he journey time to around 50 – 60mins, which is an hour less than a car journey, but may cost 3/4 times as much return. The preception may not include the check-in times though. A difficulty could be that many afluent travellers going on business between the two cities will actually start their journeys at home, which may be in the Oxfordshire (or Cambridgeshire) countryside, and they may not perceive the benefits of travelling by plane for this reason.
I have wished Martin luck by PM, but there is no doubt that such regional services do not have a good track record and are a tough nut to crack. But you never know, Alpha1 may be an excpetion. đŸ™‚
[QUOTE=Humberside]Saw the BBC 1’o clock news piece. OK, but they did highlight the rival coach service. The people they interviewed said they wouldnt change from bus to plane
QUOTE]
This has been a major problem for many small operators, and there have been plenty of small carriers offering such servcies in the UK that have come and gone, I think the advantage this route has is that the surface journey times can be quite long, but (as someone currently working out journey times for passenger forecasting as I speak) passengers make concious decisions based upon cost vs journey time (and perceived journey time and reliability). I’m guessing that the 20min flight, plus 10 min check in and then journey time between the airports and origin/destination of the journey may bring he journey time to around 50 – 60mins, which is an hour less than a car journey, but may cost 3/4 times as much return. The preception may not include the check-in times though. A difficulty could be that many afluent travellers going on business between the two cities will actually start their journeys at home, which may be in the Oxfordshire (or Cambridgeshire) countryside, and they may not perceive the benefits of travelling by plane for this reason.
I have wished Martin luck by PM, but there is no doubt that such regional services do not have a good track record and are a tough nut to crack. But you never know, Alpha1 may be an excpetion. đŸ™‚
EK, you’re talking about a long time ago aren’t you? I would guess pre-1996/97 time?
EK, you’re talking about a long time ago aren’t you? I would guess pre-1996/97 time?
Many airlines have ordered the two; KLM being the most recent.
I never said they hadn’t.
Many airlines have ordered the two; KLM being the most recent.
I never said they hadn’t.
Biman Widebody Order
Interesting….splitting the order in that way. I’m guessing they must eb going for A330-200s, otherwise I don’t see the point too much…
Biman said to approve order for ten widebodies
(24Mar05, 11:47 GMT, 113 words)
Bangladeshi flag-carrier Biman Bangladesh Airlines is said to be on the verge of ordering six Boeing 777 and four Airbus A330 aircraft under a long-haul fleet upgrade.
Local reports indicate that the airline’s board has approved the ten-aircraft purchase and that it will be put to the Government for approval, with a view to placing a formal order in June.
The airline’s spokesman is cited as stating that the aircraft would be delivered from 2007 and used to open at least five new international routes.
These new destinations are said to comprise Seoul, Jakarta, Colombo, Tripoli and Baghdad.
Biman Bangladesh has an ageing long-haul fleet of McDonnell Douglas DC-10 and Airbus A310 aircraft.
Source: Air Transport Intelligence news
Biman Widebody Order
Interesting….splitting the order in that way. I’m guessing they must eb going for A330-200s, otherwise I don’t see the point too much…
Biman said to approve order for ten widebodies
(24Mar05, 11:47 GMT, 113 words)
Bangladeshi flag-carrier Biman Bangladesh Airlines is said to be on the verge of ordering six Boeing 777 and four Airbus A330 aircraft under a long-haul fleet upgrade.
Local reports indicate that the airline’s board has approved the ten-aircraft purchase and that it will be put to the Government for approval, with a view to placing a formal order in June.
The airline’s spokesman is cited as stating that the aircraft would be delivered from 2007 and used to open at least five new international routes.
These new destinations are said to comprise Seoul, Jakarta, Colombo, Tripoli and Baghdad.
Biman Bangladesh has an ageing long-haul fleet of McDonnell Douglas DC-10 and Airbus A310 aircraft.
Source: Air Transport Intelligence news
I think I have several points to make here, resulting from numerous comments, hence no quotes….
Firstly, it is extremely important that freighters are reliable, ESPECIALLY when looking at the integrators (DHL, UPS, FedEx, TNT etc). By the very nature of their business they must have reliable operations in order that they may promise tight delivery times. These companies are the largest parcel and freight handlers going. I think the fact is that freight tends to be less bothered whether it is in a nice shiny new aeroplane or a 15 year old model doing much the same thing. When airlines boast about the average age of their fleets it is designed to impress passengers. So the freight carriers can capitalise on second hand aircrfat rates. Don’t be fooled though, many freight companies do buy NEW aircraft, ie. Cargolux 747s, UPS 757/767Fs, A300s, Fedex A300s and some earlier A310s. Furthermore add to that the fact that Air France, SIA and many other airlines tend to add new freighters to their fleets.
In answer to Robbelc, freight carriers tend to be very profitable, and there are plenty of examples of good freight airlines. Just because a freight carrier is an arm of a passenger carrier, does not mean it is not a profitable standalone business, in fact most of these airlines are almost completely standalone and profitable, I name companies such as Lufthansa Cargo, Air France Cargo and SIA Cargo among many (Japan airlines’ subsiduary, ANC….All Nippon Cargo, which actually is not fully owned by ANA, KAL Cargo, Eva Airways Cargo, China Airlines’ Cargo arm…the list REALLY goes on). It was rumoured for many years that a 747 could fly across the Atlantic and make a profit based on belly hold cargo alone, without any passengers! Reliable freight servcies are worth their weight in gold, and as tenthije may testify they pay very good rates..certainly above the rate a passenger pays considereing the amount of space they use.
Freight is one of the fastest growing areas of Air Transport, the switches to JIT (Just In Time) processing and changes to the types of industry out there (ie small volume, high value such as IT equipment) are driving such growth.
I think I have several points to make here, resulting from numerous comments, hence no quotes….
Firstly, it is extremely important that freighters are reliable, ESPECIALLY when looking at the integrators (DHL, UPS, FedEx, TNT etc). By the very nature of their business they must have reliable operations in order that they may promise tight delivery times. These companies are the largest parcel and freight handlers going. I think the fact is that freight tends to be less bothered whether it is in a nice shiny new aeroplane or a 15 year old model doing much the same thing. When airlines boast about the average age of their fleets it is designed to impress passengers. So the freight carriers can capitalise on second hand aircrfat rates. Don’t be fooled though, many freight companies do buy NEW aircraft, ie. Cargolux 747s, UPS 757/767Fs, A300s, Fedex A300s and some earlier A310s. Furthermore add to that the fact that Air France, SIA and many other airlines tend to add new freighters to their fleets.
In answer to Robbelc, freight carriers tend to be very profitable, and there are plenty of examples of good freight airlines. Just because a freight carrier is an arm of a passenger carrier, does not mean it is not a profitable standalone business, in fact most of these airlines are almost completely standalone and profitable, I name companies such as Lufthansa Cargo, Air France Cargo and SIA Cargo among many (Japan airlines’ subsiduary, ANC….All Nippon Cargo, which actually is not fully owned by ANA, KAL Cargo, Eva Airways Cargo, China Airlines’ Cargo arm…the list REALLY goes on). It was rumoured for many years that a 747 could fly across the Atlantic and make a profit based on belly hold cargo alone, without any passengers! Reliable freight servcies are worth their weight in gold, and as tenthije may testify they pay very good rates..certainly above the rate a passenger pays considereing the amount of space they use.
Freight is one of the fastest growing areas of Air Transport, the switches to JIT (Just In Time) processing and changes to the types of industry out there (ie small volume, high value such as IT equipment) are driving such growth.
Six now.
Six now.