Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DXB Overtakes LHR In International Passenger Numbers  
User currently offlineRJA321 From Jordan, joined Mar 2009, 68 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 15579 times:

According to the article attached below, Dubai International Airport has overtaken London Heathrow in terms of international passenger numbers for the period January - February 2014.

For the above period, the number of passengers was:
DXB: 12.1 million
LHR: 10.3 million

Is it unlikely that DXB will continue this dominance come the end of the year, contrary to what the article states (runway closure this May-July = reduced flights)?

This is still an exciting and impressive accomplishment. I wonder if DXB has overtaken LHR in terms of international pax numbers in the past for a set time period rather than for the whole of the year.

Article:

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/biz/insi...s_March390.xml&section=uaebusiness


Hurry up, before we all come to our senses!
47 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinefactsonly From Montserrat, joined Aug 2012, 950 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 15411 times:

Quoting RJA321 (Thread starter):
This is still an exciting and impressive accomplishment. I wonder if DXB has overtaken LHR in terms of international pax numbers in the past for a set time period rather than for the whole of the year.

No it hasn't yet, this is the first time that the number of international pax at any airport exceeds LHR for any period of time.

see: www.aci.aero for airport statistics - http://www.aci.aero/Data-Centre/Mont...ic-Data/Aircraft-Movements/Monthly


User currently offlineAIR MALTA From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2515 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (7 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 15297 times:

Quoting factsonly (Reply 1):
No it hasn't yet, this is the first time that the number of international pax at any airport exceeds LHR for any period of time.

And it won't be the last time... everyone is taking over Europe for everything... Bravo to our politicians for making Europe such an undfriendly place to do business.



Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
User currently offlineFCAFLYBOY From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 601 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 15285 times:

I don't see it lasting even past that. Much as I love EK (and BA) I feel the Dubai Tourism bubble is near it's peak, so many clients now saying its passé and done. Yes I believe EK will still remain a huge hub airline, however much traffic into DXB is also leisure driven and for business. Once those numbers drop in the next 5 years we will see a slide I believe.

User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 3016 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (7 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 15181 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 3):
Yes I believe EK will still remain a huge hub airline, however much traffic into DXB is also leisure driven and for business. Once those numbers drop in the next 5 years we will see a slide I believe.

Certainly an adjustment and stabilisation is inevitable at some point.

Still the airline Hub and Spoke strategy has a ways to go yet and the physical constraints on Heathrow aren't changing any time soon are they?

Dubai and Beijing are going to be the biggest people movers over the next twenty years that just how it is.

Through the London market as a whole remains by magnitude the worlds largest international focus !

That said and in addition imho I am sceptical at some of the projected figures especially for the developed world quoted by some analysts


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7624 posts, RR: 17
Reply 5, posted (7 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 14727 times:

Note that in 2013 5,005,942 or 6.9 per cent of a total of 72,331,157 passengers at LHR were domestic passengers. So it is likely that the title of this thread (that does not include the word "International") is misleading as there are few if any domestic passengers at DXB.

Seasonal variations in traveller numbers make any comparison in airport passenger numbers potentially misleading if they are not for a 12 month period.

In this instance the chosen period is the least busy two months at LHR. So, for example, in August 2013 6,962,892 passenger used LHR. This figure is as much as 14.3 per cent more than the 4,850,195 passengers that used the same airport in February 2013.

This seasonal variation at Heathrow is dependent on two factors - summer holiday travellers and winter weather diversions and cancellations - snow in 2013, high winds in 2014.

There will also be a seasonal variation in traffic at DXB. There holiday traffic is likely higher in the winter as European holidaymakers seek a break in the sun. It is also likely lowest in the summer as holidaymakers avoid the very high Dubai temperatures . (For the record the average daily high in Dubai in February is a pleasant 25.4 degrees C or 77.7 degrees F. In August it is a scorching 41.3 degrees C or 106.3 degrees F.)

Whereas one swallow does not make a summer, there is no doubt about the trend. LHR is near to loosing its crown as the airport handling the largest number of international passengers. It is, of course, significantly smaller than ATL in terms of the total numbers of passengers handled.

The source of the LHR passenger figures quoted above is the Civil Aviation Authority web site.


User currently offlinejetblue1965 From United States of America, joined Mar 2014, 1797 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 14646 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 4):
Dubai and Beijing are going to be the biggest people movers over the next twenty years that just how it is.

Depends on what Beijing decides with their new airport - move everything over, or split operation the way PVG+SHA is. If the latter, then each airport will fall far behind DXB.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 4):
Through the London market as a whole remains by magnitude the worlds largest international focus !

Exactly. London has 5 core airports, so focusing on LHR alone really shines them in poor light since a large chunk of leisure, regional, and LCC traffic occur at the other ones.


User currently offlinetortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3449 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (7 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 14516 times:

I suggest a thread title change. DXB isn't even a top five airport in terms of passengers. Its not even a top 30 airport in terms of aircraft movements which some might indicate as the statistic of note when talking about 'busiest airports'. No doubt that DXB is on the move but it won't take the title until they move to the new airport as two runways just won't cut it.

tortugamon


User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4597 posts, RR: 77
Reply 8, posted (7 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 13812 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 7):
I suggest a thread title change. DXB isn't even a top five airport in terms of passengers.

Your stats are obsolete : DXB is, per 2013 figures, # 7... and with a yearly rate of growth around 13 %, might very well end 2014 at # 4.
Stats are only indicative for a study on - here - air transport characteristics : what traffic, whe to and from... has never been meant for competition.
The *aircraft movements* stats are biased toward US peculiarities : especially a very active third level traffic : business and private.
On the *International passengers* aspect, US airports suck : in 2013, the first one is JFK, ranked # 17, followed by MIA at # 26.

So everyone takes his/her pick.



Contrail designer
User currently offlineTusdawg23 From United States of America, joined May 2010, 133 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 13417 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 8):
On the *International passengers* aspect, US airports suck : in 2013, the first one is JFK, ranked # 17, followed by MIA at # 26.

Ya have you been to the US lately? It's not like JFK and MIA are our only international gateways. The US is a huge country and there are dozens of airports that have international service to the US so obviously these numbers are going to spread out over many airports.


User currently offline777sigfan From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 17 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 13093 times:

Sort of unfair to say that US airports "suck". As mentioned we have multiple international gateways JFK, MIA, LAX, IAH, IAD, OHR, DFW and even SFO has their fair share of international pax coming through. Now back on topic, congrats to DXB I thought it would be much longer before LHR was dethroned for any period of time. It will be interesting to monitor this as we move forward.

User currently offlinehomer787 From United States of America, joined Feb 2014, 68 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 12472 times:

It is a no brainer that DXB is busier in the winter months. Who wants to go to the UK in the winter? They might as well compare themselves to DTW or MSP. LHR will kick DXB's rear end this spring and summer when the leisure travel season begins again.

User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4597 posts, RR: 77
Reply 12, posted (7 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 12265 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Tusdawg23 (Reply 9):
Ya have you been to the US lately? It's not like JFK and MIA are our only international gateways. The US is a huge country and there are dozens of airports that have international service to the US so obviously these numbers are going to spread out over many airports.
Quoting 777sigfan (Reply 10):
As mentioned we have multiple international gateways JFK, MIA, LAX, IAH, IAD, OHR, DFW and even SFO has their fair share of international pax coming through

OK ; Numbers have a funny way of telling a story :
Taking the 2012 stats for us airports, the top ten are, in decreasing traffic order :
JFK, MIA, LAX, EWR, ORD, ATL, SFO, IAH, IAD and DFW. with an international passenger traffic of 24.7M for JFK to 5.8 for DFW.
Their total barely matches the UK association of their Top Three : LHR, LGW and MAN...

Please check your facts before accusing me.



Contrail designer
User currently offlineYouGeeElWhy From Chile, joined Feb 2014, 74 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 11584 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12):
Please check your facts before accusing me.

Facts are like bums everyone has one.

How far can you fly in the UK to reach all destinations in the UK, about an hour and half. How far can you fly from JFK and not leave the continental US, about 6 and half hours.

These are not apple to apple comparisons.

BTW busy to me means plane movements and no other country has the capability to move planes like the US. Everything else is a joke in that regard.

[Edited 2014-03-26 10:12:08]

User currently offlineWestern727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 751 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (7 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 11439 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12):
Their total barely matches the UK association of their Top Three : LHR, LGW and MAN...

That in itself discredits your assertion that the US airports (as a whole) "suck" at international traffic. We all know that comparing individual US airports to, say, UK airports is an apples-and-oranges comparison, given the large, spread-out nature of the US vs. the UK. Fair comparisons would be with nations of large size with spread-out populaces and multiple international gateways like China, Canada, India, Russia, et al.

Let's focus on the facts in our shared love of aviation.



Jack @ AUS
User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4597 posts, RR: 77
Reply 15, posted (7 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 11087 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Western727 (Reply 14):
. Fair comparisons would be with nations of large size with spread-out populaces and multiple international gateways like China, Canada, India, Russia, et al.

Fair enough : Let's cvompare the economic EU to the economic US : similar populations, similar GDP... similar area...
That means that you have to add to LHR, LGW, MAN the likes of CDG, FRA, AMS, MAD, BCN, ORY... and still on international ,passengers you'd come far second.
I have the greatest admiration for the US aviation but in terms of internatrional traffic, be it airlines or airports, it is obvious that it's not really in their economic psyche.

Quoting Western727 (Reply 14):

Let's focus on the facts in our shared love of aviation.

Let's



Contrail designer
User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 3016 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (7 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 10859 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Western727 (Reply 14):
That in itself discredits your assertion that the US airports (as a whole) "suck" at international traffic. We all know that comparing individual US airports to, say, UK airports is an apples-and-oranges comparison, given the large, spread-out nature of the US vs. the UK

The size of the US in and of its self is only a single matrix.

The US air transportation structures and dynamics have developed to meet a specifically domestic requirement and international travel is a graft on extra.

The UK is a series of islands and remains a major global trading nation. Our air transportation system has developed to connect us with the outside world for leisure and commerce.

Domestically the majority of business travel can be accomplished via ground transport either rail or car with rather few corridors where air actually provides time advantages - Notably London-Scotland.


User currently offlineYouGeeElWhy From Chile, joined Feb 2014, 74 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 10741 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 16):
Fair enough : Let's cvompare the economic EU to the economic US : similar populations, similar GDP... similar area...

Still not apple to apples. To be fair any intra EU flight would not be international.


User currently offlineIslandRob From US Virgin Islands, joined Apr 2011, 144 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 10622 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 15):
Fair enough : Let's cvompare the economic EU to the economic US : similar populations...

Can you please cite any published statistics underlying this assertion? Thanks. -ir



If you wrote me off I'd understand it, Because I've been on some other planet, So come pick me up... I've landed
User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 3016 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (7 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 10507 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting YouGeeElWhy (Reply 17):
Still not apple to apples. To be fair any intra EU flight would not be international.

Yes they are the EU is a group of independent sovereign nations each with their own economies tax systems parliaments and laws. Languages and cultural histories and frontiers.

There are however differing levels of co-operation

Central core share a currency
Some countries including none EU members operate within the Schengen common frontier area
UK and Eire have a smaller Common Travel Area.

Rest assured through cross an international frontier and travel documents either National ID card or Passport remains a legal requirement.

Each country produces nation balance of payments and GDP figures.

Oh and even within the core Euro area international transfers are subject to bank charges (true its a fixed rate).


User currently offlinetravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3529 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 10326 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 15):
I have the greatest admiration for the US aviation but in terms of internatrional traffic, be it airlines or airports, it is obvious that it's not really in their economic psyche.

You are turning this into a weird argument. Do you understand that "international" in the context of much of the EU traffic is the equivalent of flying from LAX to LAS? Or ORD-LGA?

"International" traffic is a different metric when you are comparing Europe with the US. They both have similar land areas, but one contains 50+ countries, and all traffic between them is "international", and one is just one country (with all traffic being "domestic").

It has nothing to do with "psyche".


User currently offlineWestern727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 751 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (7 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 10293 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 15):
I have the greatest admiration for the US aviation but in terms of internatrional traffic, be it airlines or airports, it is obvious that it's not really in their economic psyche.

I agree...and am embarrassed by this, as an American, to be frank. I read somewhere that the US has a fairly-low percentage of passport-holders among its citizens as opposed to citizens of other industrialized nations, though the number of passport holders has grown significantly in the past couple of decades. Yes, the US is large, but aviation and the Internet have shrunken the world. As Mark Twain said, "the world is a book, and those that do not travel read only one page".

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 16):
The US air transportation structures and dynamics have developed to meet a specifically domestic requirement and international travel is a graft on extra.

  ...to a large extent, I think. 

Quoting YouGeeElWhy (Reply 17):
Still not apple to apples. To be fair any intra EU flight would not be international.

That's partly true. To that, on my last trip to Europe (a few years ago) I was able to drive from Germany to Austria and back (on different routes) like it was one US state to another. And flying from BRU to MUC and then MUC to STN were both almost like flying on US domestic flights.



Jack @ AUS
User currently offlineWestern727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 751 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (7 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 10187 times:

Quoting travelin man (Reply 20):
It has nothing to do with "psyche".

On the contrary....much of US aviation saw international flying as generally an afterthought (note the old Humphrey terminal at MSP and the old international terminal in the north part of DTW, both of which left much to be desired)...until the advent of modern, well-designed terminals; SFO, IAH, ATL and DTW come to mind, among others.



Jack @ AUS
User currently offlinetortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3449 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (7 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 10109 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 8):
Your stats are obsolete : DXB is, per 2013 figures, # 7... and with a yearly rate of growth around 13 %, might very well end 2014 at # 4.

You want me to include statistics for a year that isn't even a quarter of the way done yet for an airport that is undergoing a runway shutdown in my statistics of top five airports? 2013 data doesn't sound obsolete to me.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 8):
The *aircraft movements* stats are biased toward US peculiarities : especially a very active third level traffic : business and private.
On the *International passengers* aspect, US airports suck : in 2013, the first one is JFK, ranked # 17, followed by MIA at # 26.

That is why I was suggesting a thread title change. These airports are not the busiest in either traffic nor aircraft movements. The thread title as "DXB Overtakes LHR As Busiest Airport" is completely incorrect. Honestly other than customs and passport control who really cares how many international passengers you have? Its a title for small countries for geographically convenient airports.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 15):
I have the greatest admiration for the US aviation but in terms of internatrional traffic, be it airlines or airports, it is obvious that it's not really in their economic psyche.

Haha, I laughed at this one. It isn't about economic psyche. Why would you fly to the US if you weren't planning on going to the US? I have been to LHR, FRA, and DXB dozens of times but I have been to England, Germany, and Emirates far fewer.

Quoting IslandRob (Reply 18):
Can you please cite any published statistics underlying this assertion? Thanks. -ir

No such data exist. Europe has nearly twice the population of the US.

tortugamon


User currently offlineIslandRob From US Virgin Islands, joined Apr 2011, 144 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 9643 times:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 23):
Quoting IslandRob (Reply 18):
Can you please cite any published statistics underlying this assertion? Thanks. -ir

No such data exist. Europe has nearly twice the population of the US.

Yeah, that's what I was (politely) getting at! Regards. -ir

[Edited 2014-03-26 12:34:57]


If you wrote me off I'd understand it, Because I've been on some other planet, So come pick me up... I've landed
User currently offlinegoosebayguy From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2009, 406 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (7 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 9731 times:

American airports have never really been set up for international travel. The crazy tax free system where you buy and it gets delivered to the gate for you to pick up is just one poor symptom. LHR has shops galore to peruse but many US airport terminals seem to think catering is only for the high st. Its diabolical. Add in the huge queues to transit and its a very poor service. Why does America lag so far behind the 1st world?

User currently offlinePihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 4597 posts, RR: 77
Reply 26, posted (7 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 9289 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 23):

No such data exist. Europe has nearly twice the population of the US.

That statement sums up the level of this discussion for me.
Bye !



Contrail designer
User currently offline777sigfan From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 17 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (7 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 8393 times:

Quoting Pihero (Reply 12):
Please check your facts before accusing me.

Was not accusing you in anyway why so defensive? I was hinting at the apples to oranges topic others touched on, albeit far better than I did.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 15):
similar populations

Not Even close the EU has over 500 mil, the US has about 320 now I am no math expert but that is a significant gap.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 15):
That means that you have to add to LHR, LGW, MAN the likes of CDG, FRA, AMS, MAD, BCN, ORY... and still on international ,passengers you'd come far second.

In this comparison you can't use international pax statistics from the above airports while using the EU as a single entity. You would have to change all pax passing from an EU airport to another EU airport as domestic. As a poster above pointed out it would be a more accurate to compare the likes of China to the States than the EU.


User currently offlinetortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3449 posts, RR: 10
Reply 28, posted (7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7620 times:

I am not sure how this conversation has become about the US anyway. It really is about DXB and LHR and neither are the World's busiest airports.

Quoting IslandRob (Reply 24):
Yeah, that's what I was (politely) getting to! Regards. -ir

I figured. I certainly was less subtle.

Quoting Western727 (Reply 21):
I agree...and am embarrassed by this, as an American, to be frank

No reason to be embarrassed. If you needed a passport to leave/visit the 10 states in the northeast of the US (the same population as England) then more people would have passports. Not to mention a couple big ponds on either side make transportation a little more complicated and therefore economic ties are less significant.

Quoting 777sigfan (Reply 27):
Not Even close the EU has over 500 mil, the US has about 320 now I am no math expert but that is a significant gap.

If you include Europe and not just the EU portion of Europe than the population is nearly 750 million. I have seen the US population listed as ~320 but I have ready 395 million a few times as well. I imagine there are differences in how its calculated.

tortugamon


User currently offlinejumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 849 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7225 times:

Quoting Western727 (Reply 21):
I agree...and am embarrassed by this, as an American, to be frank. I read somewhere that the US has a fairly-low percentage of passport-holders among its citizens as opposed to citizens of other industrialized nations

When you've got the whole range of climates from the steamy everglades; to the Mojave desert and glacial Alaska there are plenty of good reasons not to leave the USA for holidays - unless you are looking for a bit of history - so I can understand why so few US citizens have passports.

If we liken travel between US states to travel between EU countries then I am sure [based on no evidence at all!] that many major airports in the US would show a high level of 'international' travel - though I doubt they would match the levels achieved at DXB or LHR.


User currently offline777sigfan From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 17 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7105 times:

Quoting jumpjets (Reply 29):
though I doubt they would match the levels achieved at DXB or LHR.

   Agreed.


User currently offlinerwy04lga From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 3176 posts, RR: 8
Reply 31, posted (7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7085 times:

Quoting 777sigfan (Reply 27):
Not Even close the EU has over 500 mil, the US has about 320

Ahh, but if you add in Canada...oh wait...never mind.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 28):
I have read 395 million a few times as well

That number probably includes the illegals.



Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4304 posts, RR: 1
Reply 32, posted (7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6955 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 5):
Seasonal variations in traveller numbers make any comparison in airport passenger numbers potentially misleading if they are not for a 12 month period.

I completely agree. You cannot compare January and February in the UK to the same time period as, frankly, the weather is not the greatest in the winter and there are many more visitors to the UK in the summer than that of the UAE.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 8):
On the *International passengers* aspect, US airports suck : in 2013, the first one is JFK, ranked # 17, followed by MIA at # 26.

Us airports don't suck, as you put it, as you must add up all the international passengers to the US to equate to DXB, Somehow you are confusing your numbers with your personal bias. Come up with the numbers that would make an equal comparison.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinec680 From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 588 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (7 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6958 times:

Quoting jumpjets (Reply 29):
though I doubt they would match the levels achieved at DXB or LHR.

I don't know.

Last time I flew over ATL it sure LOOKED like the whole world was changing flights there! (kind of felt like it too!)



My happy place is FL470 - what's yours?
User currently offlineRJA321 From Jordan, joined Mar 2009, 68 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (7 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 6506 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 32):

Quoting VV701 (Reply 5):
Seasonal variations in traveller numbers make any comparison in airport passenger numbers potentially misleading if they are not for a 12 month period.

I completely agree. You cannot compare January and February in the UK to the same time period as, frankly, the weather is not the greatest in the winter and there are many more visitors to the UK in the summer than that of the UAE.

I don't think they are entirely misleading. If it were based on weather/seasonal factors, then the statistics would be just that - the number of international passengers during the winter season vs. the summer season. I think the purpose of the statistics in the article is to indicate that there's been a constant, significant, increase in international passenger numbers at DXB to the extent that so far this year (2014) DXB has overtaken LHR in terms of international pax numbers.

Granted, statistics vary depending on the factors that are taken into account/omitted, but I still believe DXB has constantly proved itself as major hub, and if it isn't number 1 this year or next, at some point DXB/DWC will take the top spot(s).



Hurry up, before we all come to our senses!
User currently offlineLHRSIMON From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2002, 1343 posts, RR: 22
Reply 35, posted (7 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 6311 times:

OK if your factoring DXB & DWC then London can have LHR/LGW/STN & LTN  

[Edited 2014-03-26 17:15:23]


Canon 1D Mk III,Canon 20D+17-40 L f4.0,70-200 L IS USM f2.8,400 L USM f5.6,135 mm L f2.0, 50 mm f1.8,1.4 x II extender
User currently offlineChaosTheory From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2013, 294 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (7 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 6226 times:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 23):
No such data exist. Europe has nearly twice the population of the US.

'Economic EU', the words used is Germany, France, UK, Italy and Spain. You will find that the pop. numbers from these nations would tally to 300million or so.


User currently offlineRJA321 From Jordan, joined Mar 2009, 68 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (7 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 6208 times:

Quoting LHRSIMON (Reply 35):

I was not referring to DXB/DWC as one and the same. I meant that DXB, and then in the future DWC would be the leaders in the relevant statistics. I apologize for not making that clear.



Hurry up, before we all come to our senses!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25653 posts, RR: 22
Reply 38, posted (7 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 5794 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 19):
Rest assured through cross an international frontier and travel documents either National ID card or Passport remains a legal requirement.

However you're rarely requested to show any ID when travelling entirely within the Schengen area. I can't recall the last time I flew from GVA within the Schengen area (with a connection both ways) that I have had to remove my passport from my pocket, including last weekend GVA-AMS-MUC and back. The only item required at the security checks and gates at GVA/AMS/MUC in both directions was my boarding pass. No photo ID requested anywhere. It's been that way for a couple of years. They used to ask you to present your passport or ID card at the gate when boarding but that seems to have stopped at most Schengen airports.


User currently offlineIslandRob From US Virgin Islands, joined Apr 2011, 144 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (7 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 5667 times:

Quoting ChaosTheory (Reply 36):
Quoting tortugamon (Reply 23):
No such data exist. Europe has nearly twice the population of the US.

'Economic EU', the words used is Germany, France, UK, Italy and Spain. You will find that the pop. numbers from these nations would tally to 300million or so.

Can you please cite a reference for your definition of 'Economic EU'? I've honestly never heard the term used your way. And while your at it, add up the sizes of those 5 countries (in sq. km), and you will discover that the total is nowhere (and I mean nowhere) near the size of the US, as was also claimed above in Reply 15. I think this is just a case of an inaccurate analogy being called into question by other members, nothing more. Regards. -ir



If you wrote me off I'd understand it, Because I've been on some other planet, So come pick me up... I've landed
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13270 posts, RR: 100
Reply 40, posted (7 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 5361 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RJA321 (Thread starter):
Is it unlikely that DXB will continue this dominance come the end of the year, contrary to what the article states (runway closure this May-July = reduced flights)?

Agreed. This is also likely seasonal. But it is a new and unique transition. Thank you for bringing it to a.net attention.

Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 2):
Bravo to our politicians for making Europe such an undfriendly place to do business.

LHR has been begging for expansion since before I ever flew into it. Between slot controls, night time curfew, and no airside expansion, this was bound to happen.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 4):
Still the airline Hub and Spoke strategy has a ways to go yet and the physical constraints on Heathrow aren't changing any time soon are they?

I doubt the constraints will change.   With the runway closures, DXB will fix some taxiway choke points that should help allow a few more operations per hour (not many, but a few).

Quoting FCAFLYBOY (Reply 3):
Once those numbers drop in the next 5 years we will see a slide I believe.

I've heard the 'Dubai drop' since 2009 here on a.net. Why? Dubai is attracting new markets (India/China) that will dwarf the current European tourism. In the US, my impression is there is building excitement to go there. One of my relatives who tends to be a good 'weather vane' on where the silver set will travel next is big on a Dubai trip.

Quoting homer787 (Reply 11):
It is a no brainer that DXB is busier in the winter months. Who wants to go to the UK in the winter?

I agree this is seasonal. But it is still interesting that DXB is moving 6 million+ passengers per month!    I fully expect LHR to beat DXB in July/August when LHR is at or near a seasonal peak and DXB is at a seasonal low for inbound (low hotel occupancy in Dubai), but a peak for O&D outward tourism as Dubai based expatriates escape the heat.


Quoting tortugamon (Reply 28):
No reason to be embarrassed. If you needed a passport to leave/visit the 10 states in the northeast of the US (the same population as England) then more people would have passports. Not to mention a couple big ponds on either side make transportation a little more complicated and therefore economic ties are less significant.

   A US citizen is able to intermingle with a far larger population sans a passport than an EU citizen.

Quoting goosebayguy (Reply 25):
Why does America lag so far behind the 1st world?

I agree the experience should be better.  
Quoting travelin man (Reply 20):
You are turning this into a weird argument. Do you understand that "international" in the context of much of the EU traffic is the equivalent of flying from LAX to LAS? Or ORD-LGA?

That is the rub. LHR-GVA is international, but for a US citizen, one doesn't cross a boarder for many city pairings as you note a few common examples. I used to fly LAX-DFW once a week and that is more of a 'culture shock' than my EU travels!  
Quoting jumpjets (Reply 29):
When you've got the whole range of climates from the steamy everglades; to the Mojave desert and glacial Alaska there are plenty of good reasons not to leave the USA for holidays - unless you are looking for a bit of history - so I can understand why so few US citizens have passports.

But it also has to do with our short vacations and high divorce rate. I'm divorced and my ex would have me back in court if I leave the country for more than a week... since international flights, other than Canada or Mexico, are so time consuming, why would I take that short time international right now? I'm done with Mexico for now until my kids are older and if they surf... I really want to go back to Canada, but the strongish loonie makes US destinations more attractive. (e.g., I'd love to go back to DC's museums, or NYC/Florida/Boston/Oregon which are the most likely due to free housing...).

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7624 posts, RR: 17
Reply 41, posted (7 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2188 times:

Quoting travelin man (Reply 20):
Do you understand that "international" in the context of much of the EU traffic is the equivalent of flying from LAX to LAS? Or ORD-LGA?

This is certainly not my own personal experience. I have flown from LAX to LAS (but not ORD-LGA). When I did so I did not pass through customs. Neither did I pas through any immigration control. I have flown from numerous EU cities to both LHR and LGW. I have always passed through customs and immigration on all of these journeys and have shown my passport at both ends of each flight except when travelling to and from DUB. This exception is because the UK and the Republic of Ireland are both constituent parts of the CTA (Common Travel Area).

Immigration and Customs controls are, of course only set up at international borders. A passport is unnecessary for domestic travel. So very clearly traffic from all EU countries to the UK excepting from the RoI is, virtually by definition, "international". Further I think our Irish colleagues would be more than offended if it was suggested that traffic between, for example, LHR and DUB was the other side of the coin to "international", namely "domestic" traffic.

The arguments about the size of the USA versus that of the UK hold some water. If we take the UK as a whole the British CAA reports that in 2013 189,997,911 passengers flew between all UK airports and all international destinations (including the RoI). Of these passengers 127,922,665 travelled to or from one of the five London airports. How this figure compares to the USA I have no idea. But since the USA has approximately five times the UK population, if we are making an adjustment for size we should be looking at substantially more than 900,000,000 international travellers to and from the USA for equivalency.  

Finally there are, of course, lies, damn lies and statistics. And all my numbers in Reply 5 and here are taken from the CAA web site section titled "UK Airport Statistics 2013".


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25653 posts, RR: 22
Reply 42, posted (7 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 1966 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 41):
Quoting travelin man (Reply 20):
Do you understand that "international" in the context of much of the EU traffic is the equivalent of flying from LAX to LAS? Or ORD-LGA?

This is certainly not my own personal experience. I have flown from LAX to LAS (but not ORD-LGA). When I did so I did not pass through customs. Neither did I pas through any immigration control. I have flown from numerous EU cities to both LHR and LGW. I have always passed through customs and immigration on all of these journeys and have shown my passport at both ends of each flight except when travelling to and from DUB. This exception is because the UK and the Republic of Ireland are both constituent parts of the CTA (Common Travel Area).

The reply you responded to said "much of the EU traffic" is like U.S. domestic travel. That's certainly correct. Obviously it isn't true to/from the UK (except for Ireland) since the UK (and Ireland) aren't part of the Schengen agreement.

Fly almost anywhere else in the EU other than to/from the UK/Ireland and you never see customs/immigration and in most cases never even have to remove your passport or any other type of photo ID from your pocket on the entire trip. That makes it even easier than domestic U.S. travel where you're always asked for official photo ID at the security checks and when boarding.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7624 posts, RR: 17
Reply 43, posted (7 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1628 times:

I am not sure of the relevance of the Schengen Area in a discussion of international traffic to and from LHR and DXB. Nevertheless it is of course correct that flights covered by the Schengen Agreement are more like domestic flights in the USA than are flights between the UK and Ireland and the Schengen Area.

The web site of the LHR slot coordinator, Airport Coordination Ltd, states that for Summer 2014 the maximum number of arriving passengers at LHR T1 in any one hour period are "Domestic 1,500, CTA 930, International 1,600". All arrivals from the Schengen area are classified in the "International" category because those passengers are, for example, handled in exactly the same way as those originating at BEY.


User currently offlineTangomaniac From Germany, joined Feb 2012, 13 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (7 months 12 hours ago) and read 1308 times:

If you want to compare the US to the EU or Europe, the Schengen treaty is most relevant.
Have a look at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Schengenzone.svg!
All countries in the Schengen treaty are guaranteeing free movement of their citizens in the whole Schengen Area.
Like in the US for US-citicens.
Since the UK is not part of the Schengen treaty, naturally every flight from LHR to any other European city (outside the UK) is an international flight in every respect, including showing passports.

Best regards!

Tangomaniac


User currently offlinetortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3449 posts, RR: 10
Reply 45, posted (7 months 12 hours ago) and read 1258 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 43):
Quoting Tangomaniac (Reply 44):

Gentlemen,

I think the context of this argument that is relevant here is the number of international passengers. Even if its easy to move within the Shengen (and it is) it doesn't mean that those passengers are not still considered international and it is that statistic that is being compared to DXB. Really the US has no relevance here.

tortugamon


User currently offlinejetlanta From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 3311 posts, RR: 35
Reply 46, posted (7 months 10 hours ago) and read 1131 times:

Unless the argument is that "domestic" passengers are somehow not "people", this entire conversation is just silly.

ATL had 94.4 million passengers travel through it in 2103. End of story.

Airports that exist in countries smaller than certain U.S. states do not get some sort of special consideration. Just as U.S. airports won't be exempted when certain airports in China eventually pass them.

People are people. International vs. Domestic is silly when viewed in the context of geography and national borders.


User currently offlineB777LRF From Luxembourg, joined Nov 2008, 1389 posts, RR: 3
Reply 47, posted (7 months 10 hours ago) and read 1076 times:

Quoting YouGeeElWhy (Reply 17):
To be fair any intra EU flight would not be international.

I think you will find that FedEx and UPS would violently oppose such an idea.



From receips and radials over straight pipes to big fans - been there, done that, got the hearing defects to prove
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...
Passenger Numbers Flying Up In Asia Pacific posted Mon Mar 15 2010 05:50:47 by yazoo
YUL Passenger Numbers Are In! posted Sat Mar 1 2008 11:25:09 by Thenoflyzone
Icao Expects Growth In Passenger Numbers posted Tue Aug 12 2003 20:25:32 by Dispatch
EasyJet Passenger Numbers Up 32% In March 2003 posted Mon Apr 7 2003 20:07:21 by Singapore_Air
Passenger Numbers At MAN Down 6% In January posted Tue Feb 12 2002 00:22:22 by David_itl
BA STL-LHR In 2014? posted Tue Jul 30 2013 11:54:51 by psa1011
DXB Hub Waves: In-depth Flow Chart posted Sat Jun 15 2013 23:19:52 by laolao
MCW (Mason City, Iowa) Passenger Numbers Down 48% posted Sun Jan 20 2013 17:23:55 by iowaman
United To Add 3rd Daily IAH Flight To LHR In 2013 posted Wed Oct 3 2012 19:18:50 by GEsubsea
Etihad - Record Passenger Numbers posted Tue Jan 17 2012 02:44:51 by blueshamu330s