Ryanair sees risk to 2020 growth if 737 MAX grounded beyond November

The boss of Europe's Ryanair Holdings has warned the impact of the prolonged grounding of Boeing's 737 MAX on the airline's growth plans may start to spill over to next summer if the airplane is not flying again by November.

Europe's largest budget carrier needs up to eight months to take delivery of some 50 newly built planes left at the factory by the grounding crisis.

www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0711/1061 ... 37-planes/

—-

Shannon Airport celebrates milestone as major transport and economic hub

'Shannon holds a historic and important place in the history of world aviation,” - Mary Considine, acting CEO Shannon Group

Shannon today celebrates 80 years as a passenger airport.

On July 11, 1939, a Belgian airliner, tri-motor Sabena Davoia Marchetti S-73, landed on the newly-opened and then named Rineanna airfield.

Soon after it became known as Shannon Airport and its development sparked an economic transformation of a region.

www.advertiser.ie/galway/article/108866 ... onomic-hub

——

easyJet launches route to Morocco from Belfast International Airport

EasyJet has unveiled a "new and refreshing" route from Belfast International Airport to Marrakesh in Morocco.

Travellers will be able to avail of the service to the Moroccan resort twice a week, on Wednesdays and Saturdays, throughout the winter until the end of March.

https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/busine ... 92024.html

[quote="OA260"]Ryanair sees risk to 2020 growth if 737 MAX grounded beyond November

The boss of Europe's Ryanair Holdings has warned the impact of the prolonged grounding of Boeing's 737 MAX on the airline's growth plans may start to spill over to next summer if the airplane is not flying again by November.

Europe's largest budget carrier needs up to eight months to take delivery of some 50 newly built planes left at the factory by the grounding crisis.

http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/07 ... 37-planes/

I just don't know why FR is not in the market for any used 737-800s. They could certaintly had taken up some of the exJet Airways 737NGs.

I don't think Ryanair have made any secret of being interested in Airbus aircraft for Lauda. It makes sense, as the benefits of scale don't improve by adding more and more 737s. Having them in a separate airline, with a separate brand is probably the right way for Ryanair to do it and keeps things simpler. What Lauda order will be interesting, A320neo or A321neo, the XLR if Ryanair have any interest in long-haul low-cost. I'd say the Lauda brand is pretty suitable for this kind of operation. There is a hit of glamour associated with Lauda that FR could never match.

OA260 wrote:

Shannon today celebrates 80 years as a passenger airport.

On July 11, 1939, a Belgian airliner, tri-motor Sabena Davoia Marchetti S-73, landed on the newly-opened and then named Rineanna airfield.

Soon after it became known as Shannon Airport and its development sparked an economic transformation of a region.

For the record, the correct name is Savoia-Marchetti - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savoia-Marchetti_S.73

LH982 wrote:

JAmie2k9 wrote:

LH982 wrote:

Thanks everyone. I had a vague recollection that they would be upgradeable. It might be a good idea for the DAA to upgrade at least some of the widebody stands, as the 1xx gates are now used in much the same way as the 3xx gates.

Apart from West Jet 787 (300 gates not full at scheduled time) and the odd Air Canada there is no scheduled wide bodies from 100 gates so not sure there is a case for adding an air bridge. 100 gates can handle wide bodies however it was designed as narrow body pier up to Code C aircraft.

Maybe I have phrased it badly. The 100 and 200 gates were set up for low cost and commuter business. While this may still be their prime function, they now find themselves home to legacy/full service carriers on a daily basis. Most of these carriers would have traditionally used the 300 gates, but there is more demand than capacity for these gates.

On Tuesday morning we had Tui(788), Evelop and Transat on the 100s. Across the 100/200 stands were also Lufthansa, Swiss, Turkish and BA; all traditional airbridge users.

Prior to any new piers or terminal, which no doubt are years away, the DAA could improve the situation by bringing at least some of the 100 gates up to the same level as the 300s. It would relieve pressure on the 300s and might be a better home for the likes of LH, who are constantly hopping piers.

I would guess Evelop was just parked there for a while. That operates transatlantic for Norwegian so couldn't do CBP from the 100 gates.

wexfordflyer wrote:

LH982 wrote:

JAmie2k9 wrote:

Apart from West Jet 787 (300 gates not full at scheduled time) and the odd Air Canada there is no scheduled wide bodies from 100 gates so not sure there is a case for adding an air bridge. 100 gates can handle wide bodies however it was designed as narrow body pier up to Code C aircraft.

Maybe I have phrased it badly. The 100 and 200 gates were set up for low cost and commuter business. While this may still be their prime function, they now find themselves home to legacy/full service carriers on a daily basis. Most of these carriers would have traditionally used the 300 gates, but there is more demand than capacity for these gates.

On Tuesday morning we had Tui(788), Evelop and Transat on the 100s. Across the 100/200 stands were also Lufthansa, Swiss, Turkish and BA; all traditional airbridge users.

Prior to any new piers or terminal, which no doubt are years away, the DAA could improve the situation by bringing at least some of the 100 gates up to the same level as the 300s. It would relieve pressure on the 300s and might be a better home for the likes of LH, who are constantly hopping piers.

I would guess Evelop was just parked there for a while. That operates transatlantic for Norwegian so couldn't do CBP from the 100 gates.

Yes the Evelop gets towed away from the 400 gates after arriving so it doesn’t hog the gate all morning & early afternoon.

LH982 wrote:

JAmie2k9 wrote:

LH982 wrote:

Thanks everyone. I had a vague recollection that they would be upgradeable. It might be a good idea for the DAA to upgrade at least some of the widebody stands, as the 1xx gates are now used in much the same way as the 3xx gates.

Apart from West Jet 787 (300 gates not full at scheduled time) and the odd Air Canada there is no scheduled wide bodies from 100 gates so not sure there is a case for adding an air bridge. 100 gates can handle wide bodies however it was designed as narrow body pier up to Code C aircraft.

Maybe I have phrased it badly. The 100 and 200 gates were set up for low cost and commuter business. While this may still be their prime function, they now find themselves home to legacy/full service carriers on a daily basis. Most of these carriers would have traditionally used the 300 gates, but there is more demand than capacity for these gates.

On Tuesday morning we had Tui(788), Evelop and Transat on the 100s. Across the 100/200 stands were also Lufthansa, Swiss, Turkish and BA; all traditional airbridge users.

Prior to any new piers or terminal, which no doubt are years away, the DAA could improve the situation by bringing at least some of the 100 gates up to the same level as the 300s. It would relieve pressure on the 300s and might be a better home for the likes of LH, who are constantly hopping piers.

It costs the airlines more to use contact stands (Airbridges) than contactless ones, hence why Ryanair fit the optional airstairs to their 737s, the extra fuel penalty of the added weight is less costly than the extra charges of paying for airbridges. Ryanair probably make up a good 90 odd percent of flights using the 100 gates and they do not want airbridges down there. It's not worth the DAA paying for airbridges down there if they're barely going to be used. Waste of money.

If the airlines want airbridges at the 200 gates, they'll pay for them. Obviously they don't want them.

HTCone wrote:

LH982 wrote:

JAmie2k9 wrote:

Apart from West Jet 787 (300 gates not full at scheduled time) and the odd Air Canada there is no scheduled wide bodies from 100 gates so not sure there is a case for adding an air bridge. 100 gates can handle wide bodies however it was designed as narrow body pier up to Code C aircraft.

Maybe I have phrased it badly. The 100 and 200 gates were set up for low cost and commuter business. While this may still be their prime function, they now find themselves home to legacy/full service carriers on a daily basis. Most of these carriers would have traditionally used the 300 gates, but there is more demand than capacity for these gates.

On Tuesday morning we had Tui(788), Evelop and Transat on the 100s. Across the 100/200 stands were also Lufthansa, Swiss, Turkish and BA; all traditional airbridge users.

Prior to any new piers or terminal, which no doubt are years away, the DAA could improve the situation by bringing at least some of the 100 gates up to the same level as the 300s. It would relieve pressure on the 300s and might be a better home for the likes of LH, who are constantly hopping piers.

It costs the airlines more to use contact stands (Airbridges) than contactless ones, hence why Ryanair fit the optional airstairs to their 737s, the extra fuel penalty of the added weight is less costly than the extra charges of paying for airbridges. Ryanair probably make up a good 90 odd percent of flights using the 100 gates and they do not want airbridges down there. It's not worth the DAA paying for airbridges down there if they're barely going to be used. Waste of money.

If the airlines want airbridges at the 200 gates, they'll pay for them. Obviously they don't want them.

I don't quite follow your logic, as BA, LH, LX and TK will all use airbridges when they are available. They are parking in other areas because they can't get stands on Pier 3, not because they don't want airbridges.

LH982 wrote:

HTCone wrote:

LH982 wrote:

Maybe I have phrased it badly. The 100 and 200 gates were set up for low cost and commuter business. While this may still be their prime function, they now find themselves home to legacy/full service carriers on a daily basis. Most of these carriers would have traditionally used the 300 gates, but there is more demand than capacity for these gates.

On Tuesday morning we had Tui(788), Evelop and Transat on the 100s. Across the 100/200 stands were also Lufthansa, Swiss, Turkish and BA; all traditional airbridge users.

Prior to any new piers or terminal, which no doubt are years away, the DAA could improve the situation by bringing at least some of the 100 gates up to the same level as the 300s. It would relieve pressure on the 300s and might be a better home for the likes of LH, who are constantly hopping piers.

It costs the airlines more to use contact stands (Airbridges) than contactless ones, hence why Ryanair fit the optional airstairs to their 737s, the extra fuel penalty of the added weight is less costly than the extra charges of paying for airbridges. Ryanair probably make up a good 90 odd percent of flights using the 100 gates and they do not want airbridges down there. It's not worth the DAA paying for airbridges down there if they're barely going to be used. Waste of money.

If the airlines want airbridges at the 200 gates, they'll pay for them. Obviously they don't want them.

I don't quite follow your logic, as BA, LH, LX and TK will all use airbridges when they are available. They are parking in other areas because they can't get stands on Pier 3, not because they don't want airbridges.

My point is that if enough of the airlines using the 200 gates were willing to pay for airbridges, they’d be built.
Even Emirates don't use airbridges for a good chunk of their 777 routes in DXB, BA don’t in LCY etc. Airlines will get what they pay for.

HTCone wrote:

LH982 wrote:

HTCone wrote:

It costs the airlines more to use contact stands (Airbridges) than contactless ones, hence why Ryanair fit the optional airstairs to their 737s, the extra fuel penalty of the added weight is less costly than the extra charges of paying for airbridges. Ryanair probably make up a good 90 odd percent of flights using the 100 gates and they do not want airbridges down there. It's not worth the DAA paying for airbridges down there if they're barely going to be used. Waste of money.

If the airlines want airbridges at the 200 gates, they'll pay for them. Obviously they don't want them.

I don't quite follow your logic, as BA, LH, LX and TK will all use airbridges when they are available. They are parking in other areas because they can't get stands on Pier 3, not because they don't want airbridges.

My point is that if enough of the airlines using the 200 gates were willing to pay for airbridges, they’d be built.
Even Emirates don't use airbridges for a good chunk of their 777 routes in DXB, BA don’t in LCY etc. Airlines will get what they pay for.

With all due respect LCY doesn't have air bridges, and EK don't at DXB because they literally don't have enough, it's not as if airbridges are running spare out there. Why do you think DWC has so many gates planned for the Emirates terminal?

alancostello wrote:

HTCone wrote:

LH982 wrote:

I don't quite follow your logic, as BA, LH, LX and TK will all use airbridges when they are available. They are parking in other areas because they can't get stands on Pier 3, not because they don't want airbridges.

My point is that if enough of the airlines using the 200 gates were willing to pay for airbridges, they’d be built.
Even Emirates don't use airbridges for a good chunk of their 777 routes in DXB, BA don’t in LCY etc. Airlines will get what they pay for.

With all due respect LCY doesn't have air bridges, and EK don't at DXB because they literally don't have enough, it's not as if airbridges are running spare out there. Why do you think DWC has so many gates planned for the Emirates terminal?

Assuming Emirates ever move there, which they're fighting tooth and nail to avoid. Lufty use contactless stands in their hubs too. As for DXB not having enough airbridges, isn't that exactly the problem we're discussing about Dublin?

The point is if enough airlines using the 200 gates wanted airbridges, they'd pay for them. If they cant wash their face then the DAA won't invest as it wouldn't make financial sense. Maybe some of the airlines using the 200s would prefer a gate at the 300s for a bridge, but the rest of the time the airbridges wouldn't be wanted/paid for, so they wouldn't make economic sense to build, maintain and staff.

Remember ATRs, Avros and DH8Ds etc can't use airbridges anyway.

FINGAL COUNTY COUNCIL EXPECTED TO ADOPT A LOCAL PLAN FOR DUBLIN AIRPORT

Fingal County Council is expected to adopt a local area plan (LAP) for Dublin Airport and its environs to facilitate future growth before the end of the year.

Public consultation on the draft proposal – which recommends redrawing noise zones, additional transport infrastructure and more car parking – will be held over the summer.

https://dublingazette.com/news/news-fin ... lap-33930/

—-

Nearly €180,000 cash seized from man at Dublin Airport

Revenue suspect cash from South African national to be proceeds of criminal activity

www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/n ... 1?mode=amp

—-

Flybe flight forced to return to Belfast airport after possible fault

A Belfast flight was forced to return to the airport after take-off due to a possible technical fault.

Emergency services were called to the scene after the Flybe flight from Belfast to Manchester requested to return to George Best Belfast City Airport shortly after take-off on Thursday evening.

https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/n ... 04700.html

—-

Chief operating officer Peter Bellew to exit Ryanair in 'surprise' move

The “surprise” announcement of the departure of its chief operating officer Peter Bellew has again put Ryanair under the spotlight of investors as the airline may face into more turbulence as fuel costs rise for the industry.

Ryanair shares reversed early losses to gain over 1% in the session but they have nonetheless dropped almost a third of their value in the past year.

www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/busi ... 36387.html

HTCone wrote:

alancostello wrote:

HTCone wrote:

My point is that if enough of the airlines using the 200 gates were willing to pay for airbridges, they’d be built.
Even Emirates don't use airbridges for a good chunk of their 777 routes in DXB, BA don’t in LCY etc. Airlines will get what they pay for.

With all due respect LCY doesn't have air bridges, and EK don't at DXB because they literally don't have enough, it's not as if airbridges are running spare out there. Why do you think DWC has so many gates planned for the Emirates terminal?

Assuming Emirates ever move there, which they're fighting tooth and nail to avoid. Lufty use contactless stands in their hubs too. As for DXB not having enough airbridges, isn't that exactly the problem we're discussing about Dublin?

The point is if enough airlines using the 200 gates wanted airbridges, they'd pay for them. If they cant wash their face then the DAA won't invest as it wouldn't make financial sense. Maybe some of the airlines using the 200s would prefer a gate at the 300s for a bridge, but the rest of the time the airbridges wouldn't be wanted/paid for, so they wouldn't make economic sense to build, maintain and staff.

Remember ATRs, Avros and DH8Ds etc can't use airbridges anyway.

At FRA LH use remote contactless stands that are a bus ride from the terminal. They do not use contactless stands right beside the terminal, as all stands that can support an airbridge have one.

You're making a lot of assumptions on the DAA's behalf. They have shown many times that forward planning and sense are hit and miss.

OA260 wrote:

Chief operating officer Peter Bellew to exit Ryanair in 'surprise' move

The “surprise” announcement of the departure of its chief operating officer Peter Bellew has again put Ryanair under the spotlight of investors as the airline may face into more turbulence as fuel costs rise for the industry.

Ryanair shares reversed early losses to gain over 1% in the session but they have nonetheless dropped almost a third of their value in the past year.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingne ... 36387.html

Seems like there is a lot of shifting in airline C-Suites lately with Bjørn Kjos stepping down as CEO of Norwegian. Would Norwegian be a potential destination for Peter?

LH982 wrote:

HTCone wrote:

alancostello wrote:

With all due respect LCY doesn't have air bridges, and EK don't at DXB because they literally don't have enough, it's not as if airbridges are running spare out there. Why do you think DWC has so many gates planned for the Emirates terminal?

Assuming Emirates ever move there, which they're fighting tooth and nail to avoid. Lufty use contactless stands in their hubs too. As for DXB not having enough airbridges, isn't that exactly the problem we're discussing about Dublin?

The point is if enough airlines using the 200 gates wanted airbridges, they'd pay for them. If they cant wash their face then the DAA won't invest as it wouldn't make financial sense. Maybe some of the airlines using the 200s would prefer a gate at the 300s for a bridge, but the rest of the time the airbridges wouldn't be wanted/paid for, so they wouldn't make economic sense to build, maintain and staff.

Remember ATRs, Avros and DH8Ds etc can't use airbridges anyway.

At FRA LH use remote contactless stands that are a bus ride from the terminal. They do not use contactless stands right beside the terminal, as all stands that can support an airbridge have one.

You're making a lot of assumptions on the DAA's behalf. They have shown many times that forward planning and sense are hit and miss.

I certainly agree with the hit and miss part. I’d say we’re both making assumptions here, me that it’s a commercial decision, you that it’s DAA incompetence!

LH982 wrote:

HTCone wrote:

LH982 wrote:

Maybe I have phrased it badly. The 100 and 200 gates were set up for low cost and commuter business. While this may still be their prime function, they now find themselves home to legacy/full service carriers on a daily basis. Most of these carriers would have traditionally used the 300 gates, but there is more demand than capacity for these gates.

On Tuesday morning we had Tui(788), Evelop and Transat on the 100s. Across the 100/200 stands were also Lufthansa, Swiss, Turkish and BA; all traditional airbridge users.

Prior to any new piers or terminal, which no doubt are years away, the DAA could improve the situation by bringing at least some of the 100 gates up to the same level as the 300s. It would relieve pressure on the 300s and might be a better home for the likes of LH, who are constantly hopping piers.

It costs the airlines more to use contact stands (Airbridges) than contactless ones, hence why Ryanair fit the optional airstairs to their 737s, the extra fuel penalty of the added weight is less costly than the extra charges of paying for airbridges. Ryanair probably make up a good 90 odd percent of flights using the 100 gates and they do not want airbridges down there. It's not worth the DAA paying for airbridges down there if they're barely going to be used. Waste of money.

If the airlines want airbridges at the 200 gates, they'll pay for them. Obviously they don't want them.

I don't quite follow your logic, as BA, LH, LX and TK will all use airbridges when they are available. They are parking in other areas because they can't get stands on Pier 3, not because they don't want airbridges.

Can’t speak for LH, LC or TK but BAs allocated pier is the 200s with 204 used for the majority of the LHR flights and the LCY flights generally going from the gates around the “chapel”. They haven’t used a jetty for the LHR in about 3 years.

While we're on the topic of airbridge use, I notice that EI almost always use an airbridge at SNN for the LHR flights but not for FAO and AGP. Presumably as there's a higher number of business/higher paying passengers for LHR.

LAXffDUB wrote:

Delta's website showing #177 diverted to JFK, before it even departed, and then continuing on to ATL. Anybody know what's up?

DL seems to be having a few tech issues recently. The DL 45 today is also having issues.

tonystan wrote:

LH982 wrote:

HTCone wrote:

It costs the airlines more to use contact stands (Airbridges) than contactless ones, hence why Ryanair fit the optional airstairs to their 737s, the extra fuel penalty of the added weight is less costly than the extra charges of paying for airbridges. Ryanair probably make up a good 90 odd percent of flights using the 100 gates and they do not want airbridges down there. It's not worth the DAA paying for airbridges down there if they're barely going to be used. Waste of money.

If the airlines want airbridges at the 200 gates, they'll pay for them. Obviously they don't want them.

I don't quite follow your logic, as BA, LH, LX and TK will all use airbridges when they are available. They are parking in other areas because they can't get stands on Pier 3, not because they don't want airbridges.

Can’t speak for LH, LC or TK but BAs allocated pier is the 200s with 204 used for the majority of the LHR flights and the LCY flights generally going from the gates around the “chapel”. They haven’t used a jetty for the LHR in about 3 years.

Before this BA LHR flights used the 300 gates, but many of them ended up on the 200s anyway. I don't know how many times I arrived on the last flight from LHR and the captain apologised that we would have to use stairs, as our stand was taken.

Does anyone here actually believe that additional airbridges in Dublin would lay idle?

OA260 wrote:

LAXffDUB wrote:

Delta's website showing #177 diverted to JFK, before it even departed, and then continuing on to ATL. Anybody know what's up?

DL seems to be having a few tech issues recently. The DL 45 today is also having issues.

Not sure what the dispatch reliability on the 764ER is like but the fleet is coming up on 20 years old. They are retrofitting them with new seats and IFE this year, I've had some nice flights to JFK with them in the past year but the IFE is unreliable on the 764s and regularly crashes so the sooner it's replaced the better.

Aerial view of constructions




www.twitter.com/dublinairport

Very nice, they're a lot further on than I expected. I wonder if they have a particular timing planned for crossing 16.

LH982 wrote:

tonystan wrote:

LH982 wrote:

I don't quite follow your logic, as BA, LH, LX and TK will all use airbridges when they are available. They are parking in other areas because they can't get stands on Pier 3, not because they don't want airbridges.

Can’t speak for LH, LC or TK but BAs allocated pier is the 200s with 204 used for the majority of the LHR flights and the LCY flights generally going from the gates around the “chapel”. They haven’t used a jetty for the LHR in about 3 years.

Before this BA LHR flights used the 300 gates, but many of them ended up on the 200s anyway. I don't know how many times I arrived on the last flight from LHR and the captain apologised that we would have to use stairs, as our stand was taken.

Does anyone here actually believe that additional airbridges in Dublin would lay idle?

If it was an ATR, Avro, Q400, SB340 then it would have to lay idle. And like I said, There's extra charges for using a jetbridge, and many airlines don't want to pay. The LHR, FRA and CDG flights might, but BCY, STK and BEE can't use them, and TUI, Sunwing, Sky Travel, Blue Air, Logan, Moldova etc etc don't want jet bridges so they won't pay for them, meaning if they were installed they wouldn't be used more often than not and therefore would be a waste of money. There is a demand for extra jet bridges at certain times of the day, but not enough to justify building them. There is a far greater demand for stands of any kind for large chunks of the day, hence more and more contactless ones coming online.

HTCone wrote:

If it was an ATR, Avro, Q400, SB340 then it would have to lay idle. And like I said, There's extra charges for using a jetbridge, and many airlines don't want to pay. The LHR, FRA and CDG flights might, but BCY, STK and BEE can't use them, and TUI, Sunwing, Sky Travel, Blue Air, Logan, Moldova etc etc don't want jet bridges so they won't pay for them, meaning if they were installed they wouldn't be used more often than not and therefore would be a waste of money. There is a demand for extra jet bridges at certain times of the day, but not enough to justify building them. There is a far greater demand for stands of any kind for large chunks of the day, hence more and more contactless ones coming online.

Who says these airlines "don't want jet bridges". Air Moldova use the 300 gates so clearly want jet bridges. The Blue Air 01:30 to Bacau also use the 300 gates as does the occasional TUI charter flight. I'm sure Croatia Airlines, TAP, BA, Iberia, Icelandair, Luxair, SAS, Air Transat and WestJet would use jet bridges if they were available considering they use them elsewhere.

NiallS wrote:

HTCone wrote:

If it was an ATR, Avro, Q400, SB340 then it would have to lay idle. And like I said, There's extra charges for using a jetbridge, and many airlines don't want to pay. The LHR, FRA and CDG flights might, but BCY, STK and BEE can't use them, and TUI, Sunwing, Sky Travel, Blue Air, Logan, Moldova etc etc don't want jet bridges so they won't pay for them, meaning if they were installed they wouldn't be used more often than not and therefore would be a waste of money. There is a demand for extra jet bridges at certain times of the day, but not enough to justify building them. There is a far greater demand for stands of any kind for large chunks of the day, hence more and more contactless ones coming online.

Who says these airlines "don't want jet bridges". Air Moldova use the 300 gates so clearly want jet bridges. The Blue Air 01:30 to Bacau also use the 300 gates as does the occasional TUI charter flight. I'm sure Croatia Airlines, TAP, BA, Iberia, Icelandair, Luxair, SAS, Air Transat and WestJet would use jet bridges if they were available considering they use them elsewhere.

You are correct - they do want airbridges, they have said as much, and they’re willing to pay. Which is why the daa are planning to install them at both the 100 and 200 gates, as contained in their submission to the regulator as part of the next CIP. You can read the submission on the aviation regulators’ website.

OA260 wrote:

Aerial view of constructions




http://www.twitter.com/dublinairport

This is class! A long awaited sight!

OA260 wrote:

Aerial view of constructions




http://www.twitter.com/dublinairport

Hi all,

Apologies for the dumb question, but when will the new runway be ready to use?

Regards
Chris.

Dublinspotter wrote:

OA260 wrote:

Aerial view of constructions




http://www.twitter.com/dublinairport

Hi all,

Apologies for the dumb question, but when will the new runway be ready to use?

Regards
Chris.

Early 2021 is the current target date, Chris. Though the rate of progress appears to be significant, so who knows, it could be ahead of target.

shamrock604 wrote:

NiallS wrote:

HTCone wrote:

If it was an ATR, Avro, Q400, SB340 then it would have to lay idle. And like I said, There's extra charges for using a jetbridge, and many airlines don't want to pay. The LHR, FRA and CDG flights might, but BCY, STK and BEE can't use them, and TUI, Sunwing, Sky Travel, Blue Air, Logan, Moldova etc etc don't want jet bridges so they won't pay for them, meaning if they were installed they wouldn't be used more often than not and therefore would be a waste of money. There is a demand for extra jet bridges at certain times of the day, but not enough to justify building them. There is a far greater demand for stands of any kind for large chunks of the day, hence more and more contactless ones coming online.

Who says these airlines "don't want jet bridges". Air Moldova use the 300 gates so clearly want jet bridges. The Blue Air 01:30 to Bacau also use the 300 gates as does the occasional TUI charter flight. I'm sure Croatia Airlines, TAP, BA, Iberia, Icelandair, Luxair, SAS, Air Transat and WestJet would use jet bridges if they were available considering they use them elsewhere.

You are correct - they do want airbridges, they have said as much, and they’re willing to pay. Which is why the daa are planning to install them at both the 100 and 200 gates, as contained in their submission to the regulator as part of the next CIP. You can read the submission on the aviation regulators’ website.

I stand corrected! Although I'm absolutely shocked they're going in on the 100s if they do. Maybe FR haven't fitted the airstairs to their MAXs? Don't think I've ever boarded FR via a bridge!

HTCone wrote:

shamrock604 wrote:

NiallS wrote:

Who says these airlines "don't want jet bridges". Air Moldova use the 300 gates so clearly want jet bridges. The Blue Air 01:30 to Bacau also use the 300 gates as does the occasional TUI charter flight. I'm sure Croatia Airlines, TAP, BA, Iberia, Icelandair, Luxair, SAS, Air Transat and WestJet would use jet bridges if they were available considering they use them elsewhere.

You are correct - they do want airbridges, they have said as much, and they’re willing to pay. Which is why the daa are planning to install them at both the 100 and 200 gates, as contained in their submission to the regulator as part of the next CIP. You can read the submission on the aviation regulators’ website.

I stand corrected! Although I'm absolutely shocked they're going in on the 100s if they do. Maybe FR haven't fitted the airstairs to their MAXs? Don't think I've ever boarded FR via a bridge!

Nope, you’re entirely correct about FR - they don’t wish to use them, they’re intended for the other carriers and especially for any wide bodies. The design of the gates means that even if airbridges are installed, they don’t have to be used if a carrier prefers not to. A bit like how you sometimes see boarding by stairs on the 300 gates.

For FR was it not also the case that they could not achieve a 25 minute turnaround using the air-bridges?

Westjet to Calgary was a disaster at check in on Thursday last. Complete mess - flight delayed almost an hour as a result. Sorry but i do wonder sometimes if there is any brain at all in the service providers at the airport! Paddy quackery at its best

HTCone wrote:

shamrock604 wrote:

NiallS wrote:

Who says these airlines "don't want jet bridges". Air Moldova use the 300 gates so clearly want jet bridges. The Blue Air 01:30 to Bacau also use the 300 gates as does the occasional TUI charter flight. I'm sure Croatia Airlines, TAP, BA, Iberia, Icelandair, Luxair, SAS, Air Transat and WestJet would use jet bridges if they were available considering they use them elsewhere.

You are correct - they do want airbridges, they have said as much, and they’re willing to pay. Which is why the daa are planning to install them at both the 100 and 200 gates, as contained in their submission to the regulator as part of the next CIP. You can read the submission on the aviation regulators’ website.

I stand corrected! Although I'm absolutely shocked they're going in on the 100s if they do. Maybe FR haven't fitted the airstairs to their MAXs? Don't think I've ever boarded FR via a bridge!

Ryanair definitely do use bridges elsewhere. Arrived & departed PMI over Easter using a bridge.

I think that in Spain, use of airbridges is obligatory, so FR wouldn't have a choice.

eirflot wrote:

For FR was it not also the case that they could not achieve a 25 minute turnaround using the air-bridges?

Westjet to Calgary was a disaster at check in on Thursday last. Complete mess - flight delayed almost an hour as a result. Sorry but i do wonder sometimes if there is any brain at all in the service providers at the airport! Paddy quackery at its best

Don't think that was the handling agent's fault. Wasn't that the day that there were two YHZ flights? Probably more to do with Westjet's systems than with Sky Handling.

Not sure that is was just Westjet! They were using 7 stations - 2 nominated check in, 3 nominated Bag Drop and 2 nominated Priority! Seems okay except the 2 nomnated for checkin in were not manned and 1 Priority was not manned. So 1 Bag Drop was used only for check in and 1 Bag Drop was used only for Priority with 1 Bag Drop for a full 787! In fairness the lady on the 1 Bag Drop was more efficient than all the rest of her colleagues! Silly chaos!

Indeed Ryanaur use them in Spain and a few other places. The 25m turnaround has changed to 35m for most Spanish routes and at major airports.

It looks like Ryanair has opted to rebrand its 737 MAX fleet, the latest model has appeared with '737-8200' titles under the cockpit.

https://twitter.com/AeroimagesChris/sta ... 9096002560

I'm guessing it's mainly for the benefit of ground crews, if the 'MAX' branding was too problematic for passengers they would have just removed it instead of coming up with a clumsy replacement.

A flight has made an emergency landing at Shannon Airport this afternoon after crew reported they detected fumes in the cockpit and passenger cabin.

It is understood a number of people were assessed by paramedics after the flight landed.

The Irish Examiner reports that a British Airways flight was flying fro Gatwick to Cancun in Mexico when the crew made a U-turn over the Atlantic and diverted to Shannon Airport.

There were 237 passengers and 13 crew members on board flight number BA-2201 at the time it made the emergency landing.

The crew reported a number of people appeared to be affected by the fumes on the Boeing 777-200 jet. The flight landed at 3.18pm and was escorted to the terminal by emergency crews.

www.buzz.ie/news/plane-emergency-landing-shannon-332433

eicvd wrote:

Ryanair definitely do use bridges elsewhere. Arrived & departed PMI over Easter using a bridge.

Certainly at AGP too, where they self-handle as well. Apparently, AENA insists on the use of jet bridges, where available. I don't think its a Spanish law or regulation, as such. If anyone has been to Llieda-Agulaire airport you won't find an airbridge, or much else, truth be told!

Regarding Airbridges, as far as i can remember that pier was built primarily for Ryanair who didn't want to use airbridges, but because Ryanair particularly back then, were in constant "we will drop routes if we dont get another deal" mode, the pier was built to be able to adapt it to be reconfigured to Airbridges if Ryanair ever left it.

There are whispers going around that American may not renew all of their new-for-2019 transatlantic routes next year. Any sense as to how DFW-DUB is performing? It seems to have fairly full loads up front, but the back of the bus is often going out a bit light.

ckpaeg wrote:

There are whispers going around that American may not renew all of their new-for-2019 transatlantic routes next year. Any sense as to how DFW-DUB is performing? It seems to have fairly full loads up front, but the back of the bus is often going out a bit light.

According to ExpertFlyer over the next two weeks Y is almost completely full and J is almost the same, maybe 2-3 seats free on some days.

Car parks at Dublin Airport at capacity as holiday season peaks

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/fin ... -1.3956429

Another multistory car park is in for planning.

There are also planned changes to the existing taxiway:
http://documents.fingalcoco.ie/Northgat ... 630890.pdf

Delta will be putting the A330-300 on the Dublin-JFK service from Jan 2020; the 763 will operate for a short period before that, replacing the 764.

Ryanair to close some bases due to Boeing delays

Ryanair has warned over plans to cut and close bases at airports from November until next summer as it said delays to Boeing's B737 MAX aircraft would hit growth rates.

The group said it was in talks with airports over which loss-making bases will be affected and is set to consult with staff and unions over the planned "short-term" cuts and closures.

www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0716/1062 ... forecasts/

—-

Aer Lingus flight returns to Shannon with technical issue

A US-bound Aer Lingus fight was forced to return to Shannon Airport this afternoon after the crew reported a technical issue over the Atlantic.

Aer Lingus flight EI-111 departed Shannon at 12.51pm and was bound for New York’s JFK International Airport. There were 178 passengers and a crew of 6 on board.

Soon after taking off, the crew reported a “technical issue” which precluded them from continuing with their oceanic crossing. The crew requested permission to delay the commencement of their crossing so they could troubleshoot the issue.

The Boeing 757-200 jet routed northwards for a time while the flight crew attempted to resolve the problem.

http://clareherald.com/2019/07/aer-ling ... sue-11111/

—-

Boeing grounding 'costs Shannon region €58m'

The world-wide grounding of the Boeing 737 Max aircraft will cost the region served by Shannon Airport €58m this year.

That is according to the acting CEO of the Shannon Group, Mary Considine, who told a special meeting of Clare County Council yesterday that the loss of 120,000 passengers from three services affected by the Boeing Max grounding will end six years of passenger growth at Shannon Airport.

Ms Considine said that passenger numbers at Shannon have increased by 34pc since separation from the DAA, but added that the loss to the region as a result of the Boeing Max grounding will be "huge", putting the estimated cost at €58m to the area for 2019.

www.independent.ie/business/irish/boein ... 15038.html

Whats the update on the EI A321 EI-LRA. Is it going to be delayed further? There doesn't seem to be any record of it having had its first flight test yet. It seems to be still in a hangar in XFW.

I posted some links on another forum that keep track of movements at Hamburg XFW, the best for photos and first flight reports is probably the spotter page but the second and third links are the most up to date. Currently there are three A321LR for Aer Lingus at various stages of assembly.

https://xfw-spotter.blogspot.com/

https://aibfamily.flights/airline/Aer-Lingus

https://digitalairliners.com/?s=Aer+Lingus

Judging from those there hasn’t been any flights yet and most test take between 2-3 weeks before delivery with the shortest being 8 days but those are few and far between.

It’s already been pushed from the 19th to the 23rd and now someone else has said it has completed a taxi test today and is due in another 10 days or so. We’re just over two weeks away from planned entry into service.

Former Aer Lingus chief Stephen Kavanagh joins board of Chinese aircraft lessor
Kavanagh stepped down as Aer Lingus chief executive last year

Former Aer Lingus chief executive Stephen Kavanagh is joining the board of Irish-based Chinese-owned aircraft lessor, CDB Aviation.

Dublin-based CDB, part of China Development Bank Financial Leasing Co, owns 226 aircraft, manages a further five and has committed to buy another 196. The company struck $3.2 billion worth of deals last year.

CDB said on Wednesday it had appointed Mr Kavanagh as a non-executive director to its board.

www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-a ... -1.3959389

---

Dublin Airport Reveals Low Emission Vehicles Plan

Dublin Airport has announced that it intends to convert its fleet of vehicles into a fleet of low emission vehicles (LEVs) over the next five years.

The plan is part of the airport's overall sustainability strategy, which includes targets based around carbon, energy, waste, water and the fleet of vehicles used on the airport campus.

Some areas of the airport's operation require specialist four-wheel drive vehicles. A recently developed plug-in Hybrid replacement for four-wheel drives that were traditionally powered by two-litre diesel engines has allowed the airport to convert vehicles across its operation.

www.hospitalityireland.com/general-indu ... cles-77890

ckpaeg wrote:

There are whispers going around that American may not renew all of their new-for-2019 transatlantic routes next year. Any sense as to how DFW-DUB is performing? It seems to have fairly full loads up front, but the back of the bus is often going out a bit light.

I heard a few people saying it was very expensive shortly after it was announced and way cheaper via LHR which could potentially lost a few bookings however I can't say how true this is. I do think it will be back in 2020.

JAmie2k9 wrote:

ckpaeg wrote:

There are whispers going around that American may not renew all of their new-for-2019 transatlantic routes next year. Any sense as to how DFW-DUB is performing? It seems to have fairly full loads up front, but the back of the bus is often going out a bit light.

I heard a few people saying it was very expensive shortly after it was announced and way cheaper via LHR which could potentially lost a few bookings however I can't say how true this is. I do think it will be back in 2020.

It’s certainly bookable for next year as are the other AA flights to CLT & ORD. It’s only a sample but when I was booking to LAS for this summer in J and via DFW was cheapest