Bristol Airport - expansion plans, car parking, public transport links - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[Timmer]

Something new for Tony Ambrose (MTLS^▸ (More Train Less Strain)) to get his campaigning teeth into:
http://www.thisisbath.co.uk/travelandtransport/Row-campaigners-worry-night-flight-noise/article-1139739-detail/article.html

Campaigners fighting expansion plans by Bristol International Airport have suggested that complaints about night-time noise from the Bath area will increase if the development is approved.

But the Stop Bristol Airport Expansion pressure group has been accused of scaremongering by bosses at the airport, which wants to increase the number of commercial flights by more than 40 per cent.

[Tim]

"Mr Lyddon may work in a field which does not require him to travel, but thousands of people in the south west do rely on air links to do business.

That is why almost all of the flights from Bristol are to hot sunny places with beaches.

[JayMac]

"Mr Lyddon may work in a field which does not require him to travel, but thousands of people in the south west do rely on air links to do business.

That is why almost all of the flights from Bristol are to hot sunny places with beaches.

I've counted 38 destinations that are British, Irish or European cities for scheduled services and 39 charter destinations including ski resorts. So hardly 'almost all' hot sunny places with beaches. Bristol Airport was once known for mostly charter 'package holiday' flights, but this is no longer the case.

[devon_metro]

"Mr Lyddon may work in a field which does not require him to travel, but thousands of people in the south west do rely on air links to do business.

That is why almost all of the flights from Bristol are to hot sunny places with beaches.

I know somebody who frequently flies to Scotland on business. Its cheaper and far, far better than a 10 hour slog on a Voyager.

[JayMac]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

One of the West Country's major transatlantic links is to cease as Continental Airlines discontinues flights between Bristol and Newark.

The route, which was opened in 2005, is not making enough money, the firm said.

A spokesman told the BBC that although the flights had good occupancy rates in the peak season, they struggle to fill planes all year round.

The last flight will be on 7 November. Ticket-holders after that date will be offered alternatives or a refund.

Continental's daily services - which have carried 400,000 people since they began, also failed to attract enough first and business class passengers, the airline said.

Campaigners say the move proves that the facility should scrap its expansion plans.

Stop Bristol Airport Expansion group spokesperson Hilary Burn said: "There is no justification for allowing the huge negative impacts on local communities that will result from Bristol airport's massive expansion plans."

An airport spokesman said they were disappointed with the decision and thought that the service had been hit by the recession.

[inspector_blakey]

B*ggeration. It's a useful flight that (although before I took it I had no idea that a 757-200 would make it all the way across the Atlantic without falling in). Odd that it's not making money though, when I've used it it's always seemed reasonably full, at least in cattle. However I guess if the pointy end isn't filling up with the expensive business class fares then that could impact on the profitability.

Oh well, back to Heathrow and BA^» (British Airways - about) it is then...

[JayMac]

It is exactly as you suspect, blakey. The local TV news reported as such - not enough punters up the pointy end.

It was interesting, last night, to see BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) Points West revisiting the story that accompanied the launch of the Continental service. They sent a reporter to the Big Apple back in 2005, no doubt with cameraman and producer in tow. Strikes me as a little extravagent for local TV news, especially one funded by a license fee.

[smithy]

B*ggeration. It's a useful flight that (although before I took it I had no idea that a 757-200 would make it all the way across the Atlantic without falling in). Odd that it's not making money though, when I've used it it's always seemed reasonably full, at least in cattle. However I guess if the pointy end isn't filling up with the expensive business class fares then that could impact on the profitability.

Oh well, back to Heathrow and BA^» (British Airways - about) it is then...

i too was amazed it was operated with a 757 obviously the fuel saving from having blended winglets retrofitted has made it just about possible to cross the pond.
personally i use VS out of heathrow always seemed to be the best quality and value to me plus i prefer JFK to Newark.none the less it is a blow for the area to lose a transatlantic service it seems numerous airports are now losing these long haul services.Gatwick has lost a lot of late with operators preferring heathrow.

[Brucey]

It was interesting, last night, to see BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) Points West revisiting the story that accompanied the launch of the Continental service. They sent a reporter to the Big Apple back in 2005, no doubt with cameraman and producer in tow. Strikes me as a little extravagent for local TV news, especially one funded by a license fee.

Probably paid for by the airline as free advertising for their service.

I think (if memory serves me correctly), that Bristol to New York is about 4000 miles.  The 757 has a range of approximately 4500 miles, which is quite surprising for an aircraft of its size.

[grahame]

It's a shame to loose the service; it is one we had tried (family in USA - have made the trip quite often), but it didn't really work out - the marginal convenience of Bristol rather than London in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) was heavily outweighed by delays, and severe inconvenience and poor customer service at Newark, and when we head out next, it's already booked Heathrow to Dulles.

[moonrakerz]

i too was amazed it was operated with a 757 obviously the fuel saving from having blended winglets retrofitted has made it just about possible to cross the pond.

It wasn't the winglets that enabled the 757 to go transatlantic, it was the new generation of aero engines. Their much improved fuel efficiency was one factor. The main reason was their reliability. This enabled the rules concerning diversion distances, when a twin engined aircraft was down to one engine, to be drastically altered.
It's all down to ETOPS !

See:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETOPS

[inspector_blakey]

In fact thanks to ETOPS the majority of transatlantic flights are now twin-engined aircraft (767, 777 and A330). Flying to/from the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) I think it's only BA^» (British Airways - about) and Virgin who use four-engined aircraft: Virgin use them on all their routes but BA have use 777s and 767s on some of the less busy route like the Philadelphia and Denver flights. Most of the big North American carriers (e.g. American Airlines, Continental, US Airways, Air Canada) no longer have any four-engined aircraft in their fleets to my knowledge.

[Mookiemoo]

It may be completely irrational - but seeing four engines gives me comfort

to lose one is an accident
to lose two is careless
to lose three is a disaster

but a jumbo can still land on one

[Chris from Nailsea]

Completely irrational: Air France Flight 4590 lost only one engine. 

[inspector_blakey]

...whilst Air Canada 143 managed to land safely after losing both its engines. A salient lesson in not mixing up metric and imperial though - it ran out of fuel at cruising altitude. As always happens in these situations, a whole series of things had to go awry before anything went seriously wrong (which included faulty fuel sensors in this case) but one of those mistakes was to mix up kilogrammes and pounds of fuel. Oops.