Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MXP - The Future?  
User currently offlinelisbonbearuk From Portugal, joined Jan 2010, 427 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2746 times:

It seems MXP is totally under-utilised and needs filling up fast with new carriers and above all passengers.

The new extension at T1 is now open but is like a ghost town....

What don't they close T2 and combine all flights into T1 for example?

Where does MXP's future lay? In long haul? Or, in further low ost growth?

17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineflyingalex From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2732 times:

Quoting lisbonbearuk (Thread starter):
Where does MXP's future lay? In long haul? Or, in further low ost growth?

In the closure of LIN. That's the only thing that will dramatically and sustainably improve MXP's fortunes.



Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24310 posts, RR: 47
Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2625 times:

Longhaul carriers have no choice but use MXP, however for shorter flying if one can get slots why use MXP when you have LIN - a city center airport, not a facility 50km away out in the countryside as MXP is.

So unless if Linate closes for some odd reason, Malpensa will always struggle for the local market.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24061 posts, RR: 23
Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2421 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 2):
Longhaul carriers have no choice but use MXP, however for shorter flying if one can get slots why use MXP when you have LIN - a city center airport, not a facility 50km away out in the countryside as MXP is.

So unless if Linate closes for some odd reason, Malpensa will always struggle for the local market.

It's similar to the situation in Montreal when remote Mirabel airport (YMX) opened in 1975 and all international flights (except U.S. transborder) were forced to move from YUL to YMX. That killed Montreal as as a connecting hub and resulted in several carriers suspending service.

Unfortunately, the way they resolved the Mirabel problem (closing the airport to passenger flights and moving everything back to much more convenient YUL in the late 1990s) doesn't exist for MXP/LIN since LIN is far too small and can't be expanded.

Like MXP/LIN, the only way Mirabel would have worked was if everything, including domestic flights, had moved and YUL had been closed to scheduled service, along with building the planned but never built rail connection to YMX to avoid the tedious 60 km (about 37 mi.) highway trip, especially in Montreal's often severe winter weather.


User currently onlineRafabozzolla From Brazil, joined Apr 2000, 1184 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2396 times:

They did it in MUC by closing the old airport altogether. It should have been done in Milan, but this is Italy and political interests overthrew policy and economics.

User currently onlinefreakyrat From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 757 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2357 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I didn't mind flying out of MXP but I did get lost trying to return the Rental car. You have to go into the short term parking lot and take an immediate right turn into the Avis lot instead of going straight. It would be better with better markings.

User currently offlineIndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 2779 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2204 times:

MXP is a facility that has been hindered more by politics than anything else. It is in a strong location to be a hub, but political pressures around LIN and FCO have made it very hard for it to maintain traction.

AZ moving to a single hub at FCO has definitely not helped it at all, and the reliance on LIN as the main domestic base for MIlan flights has really left it even more isolated.

Unless LIN closes at some point, MXP will likely never live up to its potential.


User currently offlinemiaintl From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 979 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1864 times:

I think LIN can remain open but only for low-cost carriers whilst MXP keeps AZ and all the legacy carriers which focus on high-yield traffic. What do you guys think about that suggestion.

User currently offlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1128 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1847 times:

You will kill Alitalia even faster then.

By forcing them to consolidate at MXP, you just handed over the Milan market and made LCCs very happy.

Very few will venture to MXP and fly AZ when there is good service from LIN. AZ has even said some of its most profitable flying is the LIN-FCO shuttle and other domestic LIN services along with flights to European capitals from LIN.

But other airlines I am sure will be more than happy to take over all the LIN slots from AZ and provide needed service for the local market.


User currently offlineflyingalex From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1827 times:

Quoting miaintl (Reply 7):
I think LIN can remain open but only for low-cost carriers whilst MXP keeps AZ and all the legacy carriers which focus on high-yield traffic. What do you guys think about that suggestion.

Not going to happen. It's precisely the high-yield traffic that wants lower transit times to the airport. Time is money.

Look at the airlines other than Alitalia that are currently at LIN:

BA, AF, LH, SN, IB, KL, TP, SK

Plus a handful of flights by Meridiana, EasyJet and Blue Panorama

For the most part, the airport is the domain of legacy carriers, because LIN is where the money is. And always will be, for as long as it remains open.

If you want to improve MXP's fortunes, you must close LIN. Nothing else will work. At least nothing that would hold up in court.

[Edited 2013-03-06 08:43:37]


Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24310 posts, RR: 47
Reply 10, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1797 times:

LOL

Forcing AZ to MXP will make those once high yield LIN routes, low yield now for AZ.

Today already there is ample evidence of this. Look at side by side fares from LIN and MXP and its LIN that commands the premium.

There is a reason why folks like EasyJet have gone to court to force their way into LIN.
Its where the $$$$ is...


Think of it a bit like the US. How airlines fight to get slots at city airports like DCA or LGA.
In Miami it would be like forcing everyone to drive to PBI (MXP) when you have MIA Intl (LIN) right in the city almost.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineflyingalex From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1757 times:

I am not sure whether this would be permitted under EU law, but one thing that might work is a regulation along the lines of the DCA perimeter rule in Washington DC.

Here is a list of LIN's busiest routes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linate_Airport#Traffic_and_Statistics

Domestic:
1 Lazio Rome, Italy 1.522.184 1.522.817
2 Sicily Catania, Italy 809.155 806.328
3 Campania Naples, Italy 672.468 674.851
4 Sicily Palermo, Italy 466.726 479.110
5 Sardinia Cagliari, Italy 447.663 441.535
6 Apulia Bari, Italy 412.796 405.533
7 Sardinia Olbia, Italy 255.168 237.373
8 Calabria Lamezia Terme, Italy 253.521 261.144
9 Apulia Brindisi, Italy 237.250 239.681
10 Calabria Reggio Calabria, Italy 172.139 132.061

International:
1 United Kingdom London, United Kingdom 733.352 646.589
2 France Paris-CDG, France 497.887 415.512
3 Germany Frankfurt am Main, Germany 370.940 310.274
4 Netherlands Amsterdam, Netherlands 341.934 203.652
5 Spain Madrid, Spain 330.596 313.590
6 France Paris-ORY, France 241.597 195.052
7 Belgium Brussels, Belgium 160.060 139.078
8 United Kingdom London, United Kingdom 138.149 95.634
9 Spain Barcelona, Spain 130.093 117.185
10 Republic of Ireland Dublin, Ireland 93.699 93.224

Now let's look at that on a map (the circles are various possible perimeters):
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=lin-fco...0LIN%0D%0A627mi%40LIN&MS=wls&DU=mi

If you set the perimeter at the length of the longest domestic route (LIN-CTA, 627mi), you don't solve very much because most of of the big international routes (including those to Europe's biggest connecting hubs) are within that perimeter.

If you set the perimeter at 430mi (equal to LIN-CAG), you cut out most of the European routes, but you also lose the Sicilian, Apulian and Calabrian routes, which together represent over 2 million passengers per year. You also leave yourself open to lawsuits from the likes of BA or KLM, who would be annoyed that lucrative ex-LIN passengers can still fly to (and more importantly, connect via) FRA or CDG but can no longer do so via LHR or AMS.

Which brings us to the last, and most restrictive, perimeter solution, and in my opinion, the only one which has a chance of surviving a court battle:

Declare LIN-FCO to be of national interest, and limit flights to LIN to routes which are the same distance (292mi) or shorter. The problem with this is that it kills all of the other Top 10 domestic routes out of LIN. If you increase the perimeter to 314 miles, you can bring in LIN-OLB, but you cannot go any further than that because at 318 miles LIN-FRA becomes possible.

At that point, having cut nearly all routes and 80% of your passengers, you might as well shut LIN entirely because it's unlikely that you'll be able to run it profitably.

Which brings us back to what I said earlier. To turn around MXP, LIN has to go.

[Edited 2013-03-06 09:27:25]


Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
User currently offlineLOWS From Austria, joined Oct 2011, 1064 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1725 times:

Quoting flyingalex (Reply 11):
I am not sure whether this would be permitted under EU law, but one thing that might work is a regulation along the lines of the DCA perimeter rule in Washington DC.

Would EU Law prohibit limiting LIN to only national flights?


User currently offlinesteman From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 1319 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1640 times:

Quoting LOWS (Reply 12):
Would EU Law prohibit limiting LIN to only national flights?

Yes,
I think it would. In the same way, it would not allow to restrict LIN to certain airlines only, like LCC.
The only solution for the future of MXP is the complete closure of LIN to all commercial traffic.
General Aviation can stay but all the rest must go to MXP.
AZ would also need to get back in shape and offer a much improved service, moving back to MXP most
of its long haul ops in order to establish a strong hub in a region with high yields.
FCO can still work as an O&D as well as Domestic/European hub with a few long hauls once the Company
can spare some planes (their long haul fleet is ridiculously small).
But I believe there are too many actors lobbying against it: local politicians as well as competing airlines who wish to draw high paying Italian pax to their hubs, something that the likes of LH, LX, BA, AF, etc have been doing with great success for a long time!


User currently offlinemercure1 From French Polynesia, joined Jul 2008, 1128 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1593 times:

Talking about closing Linate is a little crazy as there really is no one that wishes this.

Both politicians, business and local population seem happy with Linate. Its not like there is a tide of public opinion against the airport, instead its quite positive. The airport people don't like is Malpensa.


User currently offlineflyingalex From Germany, joined Jul 2010, 1013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1557 times:

Quoting mercure1 (Reply 14):
Talking about closing Linate is a little crazy as there really is no one that wishes this.

Both politicians, business and local population seem happy with Linate. Its not like there is a tide of public opinion against the airport, instead its quite positive. The airport people don't like is Malpensa.

Within the context of this thread, it's not crazy at all. The OP asked what lies in Malpensa's future.

The answer is: it will continue being the unpopular bastard stepchild it is now, and the only thing that could change that is the closure of Linate.

That doesn't mean that I want LIN closed - far from it. But I know that while LIN is open, MXP will always struggle.

[Edited 2013-03-06 11:30:00]


Public service announcement: "It's" = "it is". To indicate posession, write "its." Looks wrong, but it's correct grammar
User currently offlineWAC From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 275 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1413 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LOWS (Reply 12):
Would EU Law prohibit limiting LIN to only national flights?

No it would not, providing that all EU carriers have access to operate domestic flights out of LIN.

Any airport can be upgraded or downgraded to domestic to international and vice versa, along as it complies with domestic and international requirements.

EU competition law stipulates the access of airport for all EU carriers as long as they have equal flight rights and access.
As long as AZ/SEA allowed EZY, BA, etc to operate domestic flights from LIN there would be no trouble what so ever to limit LIN domestic. The fact is that Milan politicians along with certain business interests do no want LIN to become a domestic airport.

AZ has a bigger commercial concern to open all those slots to EU carriers to operate on domestic routes from LIN (where it has a near monopoly) than share the international EU traffic from LIN, which is slot constrained.

It was originally planned to make LIN domestic once Malpensa 2000 opened, but lobbying by business and airlines (mainly BA, LH and AF) stopped that.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12404 posts, RR: 100
Reply 17, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1350 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I've never been a fan of split hubs and MXP is just one more example of how it 'kills potential.'

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 3):
It's similar to the situation in Montreal when remote Mirabel airport (YMX) opened in 1975 and all international flights (except U.S. transborder) were forced to move from YUL to YMX. That killed Montreal as as a connecting hub and resulted in several carriers suspending service.

   Mirabel is the poster child on split hubs, but that is unfair. If the transportation had been built and YUL closed as promised... It would have been a different result.

Or BKK
Tokyo with HND/NRT

Split hubs always reduce connections for long haul. Even if it is some trivial number of seats, that is lost revenue that cannot be made back.

Quoting flyingalex (Reply 15):
But I know that while LIN is open, MXP will always struggle.

And since there will be no decision. Eventually, one or the other will be closed unless the local economy grows quickly enough to support multiple airports.

Lightsaber



I've posted how many times?!?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
The Future Of ORD Terminal 2 posted Tue Feb 26 2013 11:41:54 by AmricanShamrok
Chance Of WN Looking At The BLI In The Future? posted Sat Feb 9 2013 18:09:35 by raddek
The Future Of AZ? posted Thu Feb 7 2013 15:01:50 by miaintl
The Future Of Cityjet? posted Thu Jan 17 2013 02:38:05 by seansasLCY
The Future Of International Non-stops From Rio? posted Mon Jan 7 2013 06:03:34 by VC10er
The Future NB Market posted Thu Dec 27 2012 09:07:49 by sweair
The Future Of Lufthansa´s A340 Fleet? posted Wed Dec 26 2012 05:23:58 by columba
TK's Hamdi Topcu Bullish On The Future posted Sun Oct 21 2012 05:57:48 by TK787
Visions Of The Future By Airbus posted Thu Sep 6 2012 06:09:09 by Gonzalo
The Future For US Airways' 737-400s. posted Mon Aug 20 2012 15:28:31 by CX747