8herveg From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 1383 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 4007 times:
Does anyone know of any future long - haul expansion from Birmingham Airport, UK? (BHX). A few services were dropped to the US, either due to 911 or simply because of poor loads. Do you think there is a chance any of them will return? Particuarly the AA service to Chicago?
I would like to see the following services in the next few years:
American Airlines - New York (JFK), Chicago (Both with B757) - daily
US Airways - Philadelphia (B757) - 5 x weekly
Air Canada - Toronto (B762) - 5 x weekly
Virgin Atlantic - Orlando - 3/4 x weekly, Barbados - 2/3 x weekly (Both with A343)
Air India - Mumbai (B787, when it arrives!) - 3/4 x weekly
Pakistan International Airlines - Lahore, Karachi (Both with A310) - 3/4 x weekly
Very much doubt it, unless its a stopping off in BHX on the way over the atlantic. The current AI 777 service is bascially a glorified fuel stop with only around 30pax on average originating or destined for BHX.
Quoting 8herveg (Thread starter): Pakistan International Airlines - Lahore, Karachi (Both with A310) - 3/4 x weekly
Yes, would be interesting seeing a A343 fueled up and full of pax trying to make it off from BHX during the summer...
Mahan Air may well be expanding it's current twice weekly route I have been told, it's almost always full with many pax continuing to India and Pakistan. Similarly, Air Slovakia I think are re-inventing themselves under a new owner so may add flights.
I'm surprised you say that the AI 777 has poor loads, several times I've got caught up with the pax coming off and there has been a lot more than 30 on all occasions, more like 100 at least. They have rights to the Birmingham-Toronto leg, so with fares being about £270rtn you have no chance of AC serving the same route as stated previously.
I think I recall that Jet Airways were interested in serving BHX, but I'm not sure if anything more will come of it, especially if they were thinking of using A343's.
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
There was also supposed to be a new start up airline called Flywho operating BHX - SFB with either an A300, Tristar or 767 IIRC but they seem to have disappeared off the face of the map in the last few months. They were investigated by BBC TV's Watchdog programme for selling tickets for a service that didn't exist. http://www.bbc.co.uk/consumer/tv_and..._and_travel/holiday_20061121.shtml
Presumably they did their research and thought there would be sufficient loads for a BHX - Florida route so maybe VS could make this work.
"Our 319's are very reliable. They get fixed very quickly."
Kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 13240 posts, RR: 34
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3796 times:
The 777, being a twin engined aircraft, has very considerably better performance than the A340 (in fact, let's face it, almost anything has), but a twin engined aircraft must have better performance because if it has an engine failure on t/o, it will lost 50% of its power, whereas a quad will only lose a quarter of its power. Hence, twin engined aircraft will be able to use shorter runways than the four engined machines.
For this reason, I don't see 747s or A340s using Birmingham.
However, there is light at the end of the tunnel; with US carriers shifting more capacity onto European routes, I can see Delta flying its newly reconfigured ex-TWA 757s on European routes; if AA doesn't fly BOS-BHX or JFK-BHX, Delta could do so.
More Middle East flights are certainly a possibility; if not Qatar, then Etihad and it wouldn't surprise me if one of the new Indian airlines started flying to Birmingham - Jet has taken delivery of its first few A330s and Kingfisher is likely to do so soon (later this year); AI's 787s don't arrive until September of 2008.
So, don't be downcast, Birmingham! The future holds some very considerable riches to look forward to!
Rdwootty From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 907 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3496 times:
I think it may be better to send all Long Haul flights from BHX to BHXeast (EMA) which has the runway and availability of landing slots!! (only joking but it does show that BHX should have extended the runway years ago as planned and sunk the Coventry road and all would be well. Since then loads of houses have been built in the area so they will all shout against it now.
American Airlines' main reason for serving the UK's second city, Birmingham, was not only to expand their impressive network out of O'Hare, but also because British Airways were able to provide decent feeder services to fill up the flight, which over the years I flew on extensively with DC-10s and Boeing 767s, and I'm pretty sure the MD-11. The flights always did well, but AA's immediate decision to axe the route post-9/11 indicates the assets could have been better utilised elsewhere, and this seems to be the case. JFK was a BA route for a number of years on the B757, but Continental now seem to adequately serve this market from BHX into EWR.
I don't really see what a Philadelphia route would bring to BHX that we can't already get through transferring at EWR. Five times weekly isn't frequent enough for a flight to a hub, though I do very much like their new livery, it's not enough reason for them to launch a flight! I can't imagine this is a big O&D market, and US already serves PHL well at Manchester.
BHXfaotipyyc From Portugal, joined Jun 2005, 1644 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3262 times:
This is a historical issue as well. Even though B'ham is the second largest city in the UK it is geographically too close to MAN and LON. The huge expansion at MAN and the LON airports in the 60s/70's just never happened at BHX.
Breakfast in BHX, lunch in FAO, dinner in TIP, baggage in YYC.