Dublin Positions Itself as Transatlantic Hub

GCU Flexible Demeanour

It seems to me a feasible strategy - using DUB as a hub for Trans-Atlantic services.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0432237e-e4a0-11e2-875b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2YNEE3MDV

Aer Lingus is expanding its long-haul business to boost growth and position Dublin airport as a transatlantic hub as it awaits a crucial decision on its future ownership by UK competition authorities.

http://irishaviationresearchinstitute.blogspot.ie/2013/07/dublin-airport-welcomes-new-aer-lingus.html

Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) welcomes today’s announcement from Aer Lingus that it will launch new direct routes from Dublin to San Francisco and Toronto from next April. Aer Lingus will operate year-round services to San Francisco five times weekly and Toronto daily further strengthening Dublin Airport's position as an Transatlantic Hub.

The launch of the new Aer Lingus services comes at a time of significant growth in transatlantic traffic at Dublin Airport. Passenger numbers on transatlantic services to and from Dublin are up more than 10% so far this year.

On an historical footnote, the first East-West trans-Atlantic flight took off from Baldonnel. The tradition is there. The traffic is there. You'd nearly wonder why it took so long for the strategy to follow.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Just raising a dead topic that never took off, because it strikes me that there is something to discuss here.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/221369/world-routes-continuous-growth-at-dublin-airport/

Dublin Airport has just recorded 14 months of continuous year-on-year passenger growth, which has helped the airport add more than one million additional passengers over the past year. <...> EU airports recorded 0.2 per cent growth in passenger numbers during the eight months to the end of August. Passenger numbers at Dublin were up by six per cent during the same period. <...> Dublin’s growth is coming from a strong long-haul sector with record-breaking Transatlantic passenger numbers, which are up 15 per cent year to date <...>Transfer passengers are the fastest growing segment of the market at Dublin. “In the first eight months of this year, Dublin Airport handled 378,000 transfer passengers, which is an increase of 43 per cent on the same period in 2012 and 80 per cent higher than the first eight months of 2011,” added Harrison.

It's quite a good performance, and would make you feel it calls for something to be done about lengthening the runway. Like, this is actual business - not vaporware.

urajoke

Why lengthen the runway just because passenger numbers are up. Plenty of capacity in the runway. Aer Lingus can make it to San Francisco with their A332's and be profitable.

I'd increase CBP capacity first to expand the number of flights that can be handled and increase the number of heavy stands which are limited at the moment.

L1011

urajoke wrote: »

Why lengthen the runway just because passenger numbers are up. Plenty of capacity in the runway.

Because 10/28 needs a full rebuild which can't be done without 10/28L

urajoke

MYOB wrote: »

Because 10/28 needs a full rebuild which can't be done without 10/28L

I'm aware of that, my comment was with reference to "why does it need to be lengthened" just because passenger numbers are up.

Jamie2k9

urajoke wrote: »

I'm aware of that, my comment was with reference to "why does it need to be lengthened" just because passenger numbers are up.

Because larger aircraft can't use it and even the A330-300 can't operate within it range from DUB.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

urajoke wrote: »

I'm aware of that, my comment was with reference to "why does it need to be lengthened" just because passenger numbers are up.

I suppose because of this part of the material I posted

<...> Dublin’s growth is coming from a strong long-haul sector with record-breaking Transatlantic passenger numbers, which are up 15 per cent year to date <...>Transfer passengers are the fastest growing segment of the market at Dublin.<..,>

That suggests considerable potential for transfer business, feeding into long-haul services. The runway is a physical constraint on development of long-haul services.

donvito99

MYOB wrote: »

Because 10/28 needs a full rebuild which can't be done without 10/28L

Would that not be 10L/28R?

L1011

urajoke wrote: »

I'm aware of that, my comment was with reference to "why does it need to be lengthened" just because passenger numbers are up.

Because building a second runway the same length would be insane. And because a plane is going to end up punching a nice MLG sized hole in the current one at some point. More pax = more/higher weight flights = more wear and load on the existing runway.

donvito99 wrote: »

Would that not be 10L/28R?

Probably, asking me to tell right from left is never an easy thing.

urajoke

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

I suppose because of this part of the material I postedThat suggests considerable potential for transfer business, feeding into long-haul services. The runway is a physical constraint on development of long-haul services.

Most transatlantic flights are flown with A330's, 757's and 767's. Larger aircraft do use 28 the near double daily 777-300 to Dubai and Abu Dhabi fly the equal distance of Dublin to Chicago. Delta did use MD-11's and 777-200's to Atlanta years ago. Like I said there is plenty of capacity available cheaply to the airport and airlines IF they need it by merely increasing frequency or changing type if needed.

It's passenger numbers that have increased not belly cargo, it's the cargo that adds the weight dramatically and causes the issues with runway length. It's cargo that they leave behind not passengers. We are specifically talking about passenger numbers increasing. The runway handled more aircraft and passengers in 2008 than now and the trigger for 28R is 23.5 million which at current growth rates, that trigger is 3-4 years away from being pulled. At which point we get the longer runway.

The DAA are not going to preempt that by extending a runway that needs reconstruction, wasting money, then having to build the second runway and having to close a recent extended runway for reconstruction.

MYOB you took me up wrong, I was asking in relation to the article and then GCU's comments re:Why does the current runway need to be extended to cope with increased passenger numbers. The plan is for 28R to be the longer runway, any increase in passenger numbers currently can be handled by increased frequency or increasing aircraft size by US airlines from 757's to 767's etc or Aer Lingus increasing frequency.

By the way, I don't deny that 28 is TOO SHORT, I fully accept it is(we know who to blame for that).

GCU Flexible Demeanour

urajoke wrote: »

It's passenger numbers that have increased not belly cargo, it's the cargo that adds the weight dramatically and causes the issues with runway length. It's cargo that they leave behind not passengers. We are specifically talking about passenger numbers increasing.

Grand, but I suppose the issue that would raise is whether then there are opportunities being foregone for more cargo business. Presumably, foregoing that source of revenue has an impact on the costs of passenger services.

urajoke wrote: »

The runway handled more aircraft and passengers in 2008 than now and the trigger for 28R is 23.5 million which at current growth rates, that trigger is 3-4 years away from being pulled. At which point we get the longer runway.

And, to be clear, I'm not necessarily saying there's a pressing need to depart from that approach. I just feel it's a matter worth discussing. I'm certainly open to persuasion that the strategy in Dublin Airport is sane, giving the position we're starting from. It may well be that we're so used to seeing funds thrown at activities and infrastructure without any particular business case, that we forget that there's actually no point in incurring an investment cost before we actually have to.

urajoke wrote: »

By the way, I don't deny that 28 is TOO SHORT, I fully accept it is(we know who to blame for that).

And, in fairness, that's just the opening position. There's any amount of ways of dealing with it, and just building up passenger numbers while working around the constraints may well be the best strategy for the next few years. I just think alternatives are, at least, worth exploring.

Razor44

is there not a case for building a parallel runway now, while its cheaper in terms of contractors etc and have it ready for a potential increase in Pax numbers? Also from what i have read 10/28 needs a major overhaul, so are we not going to arrive at a point in the future where 10/28 will have to come out of service irrespective of Pax numbers?

thinking out loud here.

Bessarion

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

It seems to me a feasible strategy - using DUB as a hub for Trans-Atlantic services. On an historical footnote, the first East-West trans-Atlantic flight took off from Baldonnel. The tradition is there. The traffic is there. You'd nearly wonder why it took so long for the strategy to follow.

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Just raising a dead topic that never took off, because it strikes me that there is something to discuss here........


.....and would make you feel it calls for something to be done about lengthening the runway. Like, this is actual business - not vaporware.

It has been discussed multiple times in various threads.

Some EI flight to the USA already have up to 70% transfers from their S/H network. They are already using DUB as a T/A minihub.

EI are happy with the current runway length. Their A333 can take off at max weight as is. (I'm not sure what the situation is with their older A332's doing DUB-SFO next year) And they may well get the improved version of the A333 in 2-3 years. As for their A350 order......well EI will not require the full range so runway length may not be an issue.

Apart from EI who else can utilise DUB as a T/A hub. EI and FR are the only carriers with a large number of inbound S/H flights which would be needed to feed into a T/A network.

Jamie2k9

EI are happy with the current runway length. Their A333 can take off at max weight as is. (I'm not sure what the situation is with their older A332's doing DUB-SFO next year) And they may well get the improved version of the A333 in 2-3 years. As for their A350 order......well EI will not require the full range so runway length may not be an issue

The A333 can't operate to SFO because the runway in DUB, to short.

donvito99

The A333 can't operate to SFO because the runway in DUB, to short

question: Is it a case the the A333 can operate to SFO, but is restricted by the runway, or that the A333, like it's older EI predecessors, just doesn't have the legs?

owenc

So will they be adding more routes?

Jamie2k9

donvito99 wrote: »

question: Is it a case the the A333 can operate to SFO, but is restricted by the runway, or that the A333, like it's older EI predecessors, just doesn't have the legs?

Runway, some of the oldest 333 may be restricted in rage but the recent ones are not.

notharrypotter

How far is San Francisco approximately from Dublin?


http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/calculators

Gives Dublin San Francisco as approx. 8204Km

Wikipedia gives the range of an A330-300 as 10500Km.
Now obviously wind and Passengers/Freight must be factored in.

I would suspect that the west coast of America is on the extreme limits of the range for a fully laden A330-300.

The A330-200 has a max range of 12500km which would be a better fit and they have 3 in the fleet.

So will they be adding more routes?

I would assume that if the demand is there it would be considered.
The important word is demand.

I would assume Aer Lingus would prefer to fill what it has on a regular basis and expand services to its core US destinations first.

I believe that they are planning a Canadian service next year too.


The reduction of the travel tax to zero from the new year may encourage further transit passengers from the UK.

Jamie2k9

vHow far is San Francisco approximately from Dublin?


http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/calculators

Gives Dublin San Francisco as approx. 8204Km

Wikipedia gives the range of an A330-300 as 10500Km.
Now obviously wind and Passengers/Freight must be factored in.

I would suspect that the west coast of America is on the extreme limits of the range for a fully laden A330-300.

The A330-200 has a max range of 12500km which would be a better fit and they have 3 in the fleet.

The face is its doable fully loaded but the aircraft is unable to lift off the runway fully loaded because its to short. TBH aircraft going any further East than DXB would also have problems.

Henry Ford III

DAA is the single biggest stumbling block to any notion of this imho. A truly horrendous organisation.

Bessarion

donvito99 wrote: »

question: Is it a case the the A333 can operate to SFO, but is restricted by the runway, or that the A333, like it's older EI predecessors, just doesn't have the legs?

All of the EI A333's are new additions (2007+)so have the range on paper to operate to SFO. EI published a range graphic in their Full Year results about 3-4 years ago, showed old A333, new A333 and expected A359 ranges. However this would be at a punitive cargo/load penalty.
Older A333 just didn't have the range. (Their original A333's were delivered in the mid 90's)

EI will use their A332's on the SFO route. So the point is moot. Airbus are currently working on another improvement to the A333, perhaps the next new A333 EI accept will be able to operate DUB-SFO without penalty. (I wonder how their ordered A359's would do?)

GCU Flexible Demeanour

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/80/airport_data_prov/201311/November_2013_Provisional_International_Routes.pdf

Just looking at statistics for Irish-UK traffic in November 2013, as against last year. In summary, a 40,000 passenger increase (5%), nearly all of which has to do with Dublin (Shannon and Cork seem to have experienced a fall in numbers on most routes).

Again, is this a small indication that the hub concept has some real potential? I can't see any obvious reason for a 10% increase in traffic on DUB routes in November; great to see it, though.

basill

Dublin is pulling in UK passengers due to their high travel taxes. EI have a concerted marketing effort to get these pax to travel from the UK regions into Dublin, clearing US CBP and onwards to the states. Also it was noted in the media a while back that savvy UK punters are booking point to point tickets to Ireland in order to save on taxes and then purchasing a separate ticket from Ireland onwards, thereby avoiding further UK tax on the longer sectors.

newcavanman

I heard that after the Continental/United merger, that United cancelled the Bristol-Newark route and that since then EI have had a huge pick up on Bristol-Dublin on the morning flights, largely due to people using Dub as a transit for the US rather than travel to LHR

Jamie2k9

A lot of the November increase is down to Ryanair who added extra daily flights to MAN, BHX, STN and a few others. EI did increase to but overall its down to Ryanair.

Bo91

Being reported in a few papers that Enda Kenny wants Qatar airways to open a new route to Dublin , could anyone see this happening ?

LoonyLovegood

It's possible, I suppose. They're in Oneworld with American, they could time flights from DOH to connect with AA to the US.

L1011

Am I going mad or did Qatar not try the route before?

Tenger

MYOB wrote: »

Am I going mad or did Qatar not try the route before?

Gulf were the first ME carrier into Dublin, I believe this was before the badly handled EI route to DXB. Then EY came in, finaly EK.

QR are regular visitors to the paint hanger in DUB however.

MuffinsDa

QR would be brilliant!!!! Opens a lot more connections in middle/near east and southeast asia, as well as more competition for Australia (they fly to Melbourne and Perth).
It's also a much nicer airline to fly with that Emirates, especially considering crappy planes Emirates use one DUB route (10 abreast 777). They are using dreamliner for a number of European destinations so it's quite likely that we see them in DUB too if this route goes ahead?

A319er

Royal Jordanian were first of the ME carriers into Dub, they operated to
AMM , but yes QR would be a great addition I think they would need a
Unique selling point and 787 might just be it !

MuffinsDa

A319er wrote: »

Royal Jordanian were first of the ME carriers into Dub, they operated to
AMM , but yes QR would be a great addition I think they would need a
Unique selling point and 787 might just be it !

Didn't Royal Jordanian go to Shannon enroute to the States rather than Dublin?

L1011

Tenger wrote: »

Gulf were the first ME carrier into Dublin, I believe this was before the badly handled EI route to DXB. Then EY came in, finaly EK.

QR are regular visitors to the paint hanger in DUB however.

Its Gulf I was thinking of in that case.

poteen

A319er wrote: »

Royal Jordanian were first of the ME carriers into Dub, they operated to
AMM , but yes QR would be a great addition I think they would need a
Unique selling point and 787 might just be it !

Qatar have recently announced and are heavily promoting a new route to Edinburgh with the Dreamliner. If Edinburgh is deemed a feasible route Im sure Dublin could be too. From what i understand the biggest thing holding Qatar back now is actually Doha airport . Even when the new airport is fully available it may still be incapable of handling Qatar Airways growth.

Peregrine

Gulf Airways used to fly to DUB from 2005 up until mid 2007. I remember flying with them in '06. Etihad moved in after Gulf left.

Tangey99

Savvy uk people are definitely looking to fly ex-eur instead of ex-LHR, as the fee saving can be significant.
A recent LAS booking I did demonstrates that. Direct out of LHR was £230 in taxes and fees more expensive than first flying from DUB to LHR and then connecting onto the identical LAS flight.

For two people that's a £460 of saving. It can be worth the flight from LHR to DUB just to do the above.

Strangely, BA seems to have a funny system of YQ ( used to be fuel surcharge). That direct LHR flight charges £179 in YQ. The DUB-LHR-LAS flight has £79 YQ.

And that's not even taking into account the lots of UK folks flying on redemption (Avios) flights.

Fly on aer Lingus biz return out of Dublin using Avios, you'll pay £80 or so return in fees. Use those same Avios to fly out of LHR in biz, and the taxes will be £500 pp. Same on AA flights, in fact the fees work out even cheaper.

urajoke

A good number of UK travel websites and publications are also saying the same to their readers. So for the time being while the UK tax is in it's to Ireland's benefit especially from the regional UK airfields where there is the double benefit of all in one tickets and not having to travel to Heathrow or Gatwick to change.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

urajoke wrote: »

A good number of UK travel websites and publications are also saying the same to their readers. So for the time being while the UK tax is in it's to Ireland's benefit especially from the regional UK airfields where there is the double benefit of all in one tickets and not having to travel to Heathrow or Gatwick to change.

While its good to see in the short run, I've always a sense of unease around the longevity of a tax advantage. Like ourselves, the UK has an excess of regional airport capacity - and the same desire to drum up whatever business they can; I'd take it they know where the business is going.

Now, certainly, the opportunity presented by the short-term advantage will give a spur to DUB's development. There is a sound basis for sustainable development; and the fact the airport is serving a reasonably significant city is always going to give it an advantage over such major transport hubs as Durham Tees Valley Airport.

relaxed

The problem with building a business based on a tax advantage is that it could suddenly be taken away.

On the other hand in the grand scheme of things Heathrow is busting so even if the tax advantage was taken away people might prefer to go through Dublin from regional UK airports if its less congested and enjoy pre clearance of immigration.

steve-o

There is no tax advantage. UK APD is the same for someone going UK-DUB-US as UK-US direct.

The only way to avoid it is to buy separate tickets for each leg, so the the UK Treasury knows nothing about the US leg, with the inevitable hassle of collecting and rechecking bags in Dublin and risk of getting stranded if the first flight is delayed.

L1011

steve-o wrote: »

There is no tax advantage. UK APD is the same for someone going UK-DUB-US as UK-US direct.

The only way to avoid it is to buy separate tickets for each leg, so the the UK Treasury knows nothing about the US leg, with the inevitable hassle of collecting and rechecking bags in Dublin and risk of getting stranded if the first flight is delayed.

Plenty of people are taking that risk already though.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

MYOB wrote: »

Plenty of people are taking that risk already though.

Which, when you think of it, really just reflects the fact that getting to and from DUB by air from any part of the UK isn't really a big deal.

Tangey99

steve-o wrote: »

There is no tax advantage. UK APD is the same for someone going UK-DUB-US as UK-US direct.

The only way to avoid it is to buy separate tickets for each leg, so the the UK Treasury knows nothing about the US leg, with the inevitable hassle of collecting and rechecking bags in Dublin and risk of getting stranded if the first flight is delayed.

There is a tax (and others charges) advantage in start a journey in Dublin, as opposed to starting it in the uk.

As per my earlier post 2 people to LAS is cheaper by well over £450 one way. Some return flights can be had for close to £800 cheaper.

Use some of that to pay for a LCC LHR DUB. If the flight connection is tight buy a hotel room for the night before. Might still only cost £250 or so.

The savings are more significant for redemption (Avios) fares. Flying from the uk (by first flying to dub) for Avios plus £200, compared to Avios plus £800 makes a lot of sense for many.

Some regular flyers use other tricks and tips. Such as booking the dub-LHR-us-LHR-dub flight and conveniently not taking the last flight, and thus terminating in London (ensure you don't thru book your baggage). Or indeed book that last segment as a very long stop over (many months is doable) and use that segment as the positioning flight to get you to dub for your next international flight beginning in dub.

Tangey99

As it happens BA has a RFS sale for the next two days. Basically you can get LHR-DUB return for 9K avios plus £1.
Combine that with say an DUB-BOS return flight on Aer lingus, and that's a total of 34K avios plus around £70 in taxes.

In Comparison, the direct flight on BA out of LHR costs 40K avios plus £355 pp.

Off-top for this thread, but for anyone looking for a weekend in London, that has some Avios, now is a good time to book (for flights up to 31st May). you must book before Wednesday lunchtime.

notharrypotter

Slightly off topic but what are

Avios

?

Tangey99

notharrypotter wrote: »

Slightly off topic but what are
?

Avios is the new(ish) name that BA has given to their loyalty reward points, formerly called BA airmiles.

My apologies, I'm so tuned into collecting these that I sometimes fail to miss that some things aren't terribly obvious.

Bo91

Any news on Ryanair opening the Russian routes ? 3 weekly would be the guess .

arbour

Ethiopian supposedly looking at starting ADD-DUB-LAX... interesting route. Be good for the ADD-DUB-LAX-DUB sectors should do well but I can't see them picking up much traffic to Ethiopia from Dublin unless there is demand for a one stop to South Africa maybe


http://travelextra.wordpress.com/2014/01/26/travel-extras-sunday-supplement-all-smiles-in-simmonscourt-etihad-goes-double-daily/

LXFlyer

arbour wrote: »

Ethiopian supposedly looking at starting ADD-DUB-LAX... interesting route. Be good for the ADD-DUB-LAX-DUB sectors should do well but I can't see them picking up much traffic to Ethiopia from Dublin unless there is demand for a one stop to South Africa maybe


http://travelextra.wordpress.com/2014/01/26/travel-extras-sunday-supplement-all-smiles-in-simmonscourt-etihad-goes-double-daily/

Ethiopian have a very good reputation, and it would be an alternative 1 stop route to Africa and Asia too.

kub

With the popularity of the Dublin pre clearance with airlines seemingly coming in from all over the place, are those immigration lines going to get very long?

GCU Flexible Demeanour

kub wrote: »

With the popularity of the Dublin pre clearance with airlines seemingly coming in from all over the place, are those immigration lines going to get very long?

According to a news story last October, the facility is being expanded, in view of its increasing popularity.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/us-immigration-boosts-dublin-staff-to-process-american-fliers-29695439.html

The US Department of Homeland Security is increasing staff numbers at its Customs and Border Protection (CBP) facility at Dublin Airport, enabling transatlantic Aer Lingus passengers to clear immigration before arriving in America.<...>The Dublin Airport Authority has recently been given planning permission to expand the CBP facility by about 5,200 sq ft.<...>