Shannon Airport Thread [Mod Warning in First Post]

Brennans Row

New Shannon cargo service Turkish Airline has been granted permission to operate a cargo-only service from Shannon Airport to Chicago though its subsidiary Turkish Cargo. The service will operate on Fridays, and will carry up to 70 tonnes. The aircraft, an Airbus 330F, can carry high-value consumer goods, industrial equipment, pharmaceuticals and thoroughbred horses.

Turkish Airlines are also using Shannon for refuelling of passengers services to North America. (Irish Times)

**************************************************************

Have they started to use Shannon to refuel their passenger aircraft already?

Don’t recall seeing anything of this activity to date.

Jamie2k9

Brennans Row wrote: »

New Shannon cargo service Turkish Airline has been granted permission to operate a cargo-only service from Shannon Airport to Chicago though its subsidiary Turkish Cargo. The service will operate on Fridays, and will carry up to 70 tonnes. The aircraft, an Airbus 330F, can carry high-value consumer goods, industrial equipment, pharmaceuticals and thoroughbred horses.

Turkish Airlines are also using Shannon for refuelling of passengers services to North America. (Irish Times)

**************************************************************

Have they started to use Shannon to refuel their passenger aircraft already?

Don’t recall seeing anything of this activity to date.

They have not for passenger, and why would then when they ave the range, either bad journalism or SNN trying to generate a non PR story.

Brennans Row

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

They have not for passenger, and why would then when they ave the range, either bad journalism or SNN trying to generate a non PR story.

They have not for passenger, . . .

Could you verify that?

. . . and why would then when they ave the range, . . .

Why wouldn’t they if they happen to fly outside their range?

. . . either bad journalism . . .

How about Joan Scales

. . . or SNN trying to generate a non PR story.

Why are you insinuating that as there was no mention of it in their official PR release?

Jamie2k9

Why wouldn’t they if they happen to fly outside their range?

TK network and aircraft have full range, they fly IST-SFO/LAX for example which are their longest routes.

Is <mod snip>?

Well, there is no evidence to suggest passenger ops are stopping so where did she pull it out of!

Why are you insinuating that as there was no mention of it in their official PR release?

I have not read their press release however why would TK stop when they have the range?

imurdaddy

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

They have not for passenger, and why would then when they ave the range, either bad journalism or SNN trying to generate a non PR story.

Mod snip

Clareman

Attack the post not the poster folks.

Brennans Row

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

TK network and aircraft have full range, they fly IST-SFO/LAX for example which are their longest routes.

Firstly, I was hoping you could have verified that Turkish Airways were not refuelling in Shannon with a list of flights or some sort.

Turkish Airways seems to be rapidly expanding world-wide, which makes it very plausible to me that some of their aircraft may need to refuel on route to the US.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Well, there is no evidence to suggest passenger ops are stopping so where did she pull it out of!

But I asked you, if you considered her to be a bad Journalist?

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I have not read their press release however why would TK stop when they have the range?

If you have not bothered to read the official PR release on the previous page then why insinuate such false allegations?

Brennans Row

Limerick District Court heard that the air rage diversion will cost the Norwegian airline €100,000 (newstalk).

Wow, I wonder what fraction of that sum will go to cover Shannon’s 24/7 fire and rescue costs?

Jamie2k9

Brennans Row wrote: »

Limerick District Court heard that the air rage diversion will cost the Norwegian airline €100,000 (newstalk).

Wow, I wonder what fraction of that sum will go to cover Shannon’s 24/7 fire and rescue costs?

Why should it cover 24/7 costs when it operated within normal hours ie before all schedule flights ended, if it was outside of regular hours them maybe. I'm sure there is nothing stepping SNN charging a premium for diversions outside regular hours or even all diversions.

Davys Fits

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Why should it cover 24/7 costs when it operated within normal hours ie before all schedule flights ended, if it was outside of regular hours them maybe. I'm sure there is nothing stepping SNN charging a premium for diversions outside regular hours or even all diversions.

If the cops were called Im sure call out rates were applied. If an airport is open then fire cover will be available regardless. Diversions are expensive any time of day, you pay top dollar for the privelidge. 100k seems a bit steep though. But who knows maybe they took fuel, catering, etc before they continued?

Brennans Row

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Why should it cover 24/7 costs when it operated within normal hours ie before all schedule flights ended, if it was outside of regular hours them maybe. I'm sure there is nothing stepping SNN charging a premium for diversions outside regular hours or even all diversions.

If you are going to remark on what I post here (Turkish Airlines) then please respond to my questions above.

************************************************************

I believe that the En Route charges for using Irish controlled airspace should include some contribution towards the fire and rescue cover that is provided on the ground for the 300,000 aircraft that pass through it yearly.

Statistically, circa 299,950 aircraft would never need to avail of this free safety net, but it is always there (24/7) if the emergency ever arose.

Ireland has one of the lowest charges (€29,60) in Europe for use of its airspace, so the question is who is subsidising whom?

Charging a premium landing fee for a diversion could comprise safety, especially when we think of the antics that some low cost carriers would do to avoid them.

Jamie2k9

If you are going to remark on what I post here (Turkish Airlines) then please respond to my questions above.

Don't take it personally, it's the point I don't agree with and yet to see a justified answer from most.

I believe that the En Route charges for using Irish controlled airspace should include some contribution towards the fire and rescue cover that is provided on the ground for the 300,000 aircraft that pass through it yearly.

Statistically, circa 299,950 aircraft would never need to avail of this free safety net, but it is always there (24/7) if the emergency ever arose.

Ireland has one of the lowest charges (€29,60) in Europe for use of its airspace, so the question is who is subsidising whom?

Charging a premium landing fee for a diversion could comprise safety, especially when we think of the antics that some low cost carriers would do to avoid them.

We have competitive charges however the IAA is not an airport operator and should not have to bare such costs. There is no obligation for SNN to remain open 24/7. All airports on the island could make a case for emergencies overnight, yes SNN is located well.

It is up to the airport to have a competitive cost base to be able to deal with operating hours and carriers. In my view the airport has a cost base which is way to high since the daa split (not 24/7 related) but staff etc and a based carrier which they are almost offering free fees to. It is not sustainable and the CEO made remarks about staff costs last year but that seems to of gone quiet. The IAA would be subsidizing the airport which not only is illegal under EU rules, it is also unfair competition for airports such as Knock/Cork/Dublin as it could enable SNN to drop fees more.

Brennans Row

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Don't take it personally, it's the point I don't agree with and yet to see a justified answer from most.

Personally, I think you don’t have the balls to retract your untrue assertions, as there was no bad journalism involved nor was Shannon trying to generate a non PR story.

Clareman

What part of attack the poster not the post is so difficult to understand, there has been a yellow and a red card handed out today any further bickering will result in bans.

Jamie2k9

Brennans Row wrote: »

Personally, I think you don’t have the balls to retract your untrue assertions, as there was no bad journalism involved nor was Shannon trying to generate a non PR story.

Ok so TK fuel stop passenger flights daily at SNN :rolleyes:

Somebody clearly didn't do research or there was some form of communication breakdown. So yes a poorly written article.

JCX BXC

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Ok so TK fuel stop passenger flights daily at SNN :rolleyes:

Somebody clearly didn't do research or there was some form of communication breakdown. So yes a poorly written article.

Go ahead and reference the word daily in the article.

Can't find it? Its a pretty key word for you to be making up!

I may understand how the journalist got confused, there were rumours on travel extra that TK would replace their cargo A332 with a half passenger/half cargo A332 on the IST-SNN-ORD route.

Saying that Shannon are making up things for press releases are pretty serious. If anything like that is taking place, it's not at Shannon. Its at the DAA. Their rambling about Shannon in the Cork situation is to save their ass at Dublin and that's clear to most.

highlydebased

I don't think a TK aircraft has ever stopped for fuel at SNN at least in recent years. in this case someone got their lines crossed. When they did the photo op with TK a few weeks ago they probably lifted some fuel alright

JCX BXC

highlydebased wrote: »

I don't think a TK aircraft has ever stopped for fuel at SNN at least in recent years. in this case someone got their lines crossed. When they did the photo op with TK a few weeks ago they probably lifted some fuel alright

So the cargo service operating since march hasn't stopped for fuel?

highlydebased

http://www.limerickpost.ie/2015/04/30/air-rage-incident-cost-airline-thousands-as-disruptive-passenger-fined-in-court/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

Article about Norwegian diversion. They spent 20k on fuel at SNN and a small fortune on new landing slots at FLL

Jamie2k9

Carnacalla wrote: »

Go ahead and reference the word daily in the article.

Can't find it? Its a pretty key word for you to be making up!

I may understand how the journalist got confused, there were rumours on travel extra that TK would replace their cargo A332 with a half passenger/half cargo A332 on the IST-SNN-ORD route.

Saying that Shannon are making up things for press releases are pretty serious. If anything like that is taking place, it's not at Shannon. Its at the DAA. Their rambling about Shannon in the Cork situation is to save their ass at Dublin and that's clear to most.

I was being sarcastic, the key works also in the article about passengers stopping are made up to! Easy to get confused but also easy to research.

So the cargo service operating since march hasn't stopped for fuel?

Not very often.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

highlydebased wrote: »

http://www.limerickpost.ie/2015/04/30/air-rage-incident-cost-airline-thousands-as-disruptive-passenger-fined-in-court/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

Article about Norwegian diversion. They spent 20k on fuel at SNN and a small fortune on new landing slots at FLL

Does that make it about $70 per head in fuel costs to cross the Atlantic?

JCX BXC

Can't understand the reasoning behind this claim. Mr Martin does not explain his points, he just makes a blatant claim and then rambles on about Cork airport.

Shannon did make a profit last year, yes? Isn't this only set to increase?

Airbus330

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Not very often.

Incorrect YET AGAIN. It has skipped a few times but majority of the time it has stopped.

Airbus330

It's kind of hilarious that every argument for Cork involves a dig at Shannon.

If Mr. Martin was a Clare man or wasn't from Cork for that matter his argument would be completely different instead praising the airport for making a profit and growing passenger numbers after separating from the dictators in the DAA. They were glad to let it go and wished it every success but now they're quick to say it's impacting on Cork. Please it's called business and Shannon has does everything it can to return the airport to growth in a very competitive market. EI didn't end they're Lisbon and Nice services and reduce Brussels because of Shannon.

Demand clearly dosent exist and they'll end unprofitable routes no matter what (as Jamie 2k19 loves to point out)

Davys Fits

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Does that make it about $70 per head in fuel costs to cross the Atlantic?

It would cost alot more than that. They were just topping up after the diversion and the fuel dumped I believe.

Jamie2k9

Airbus330 wrote: »

Incorrect YET AGAIN. It has skipped a few times but majority of the time it has stopped.

Product the stats so.....

Demand clearly dosent exist and they'll end unprofitable routes no matter what (as Jamie 2k19 loves to point out)

Carrying loads as low as 30% on major routes when the network average is 90%, very low fares close in, they are not crash cows at all!

JCX BXC

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Carrying loads as low as 30% on major routes

First I've heard of that!

Jamie2k9

Carnacalla wrote: »

First I've heard of that!

Some of the Paris/Munich flights in recent weeks have between 30-50% full, the rest are doing good because its Irish going on holidays or non nationals coming/going! Granted schedules are poor but even so it's very low.

JCX BXC

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Some of the Paris/Munich flights in recent weeks have between 30-50% full, the rest are doing good because its Irish going on holidays or non nationals coming/going! Granted schedules are poor but even so it's very low.

I've heard almost as low as 50%, this 30% figure is brand new to me? Any source for it?

The Paris/Munich flights are also not major routes, they are to airports miles outside the cities. If Ryanair flew to CDG or MUN I guarantee those routes would be doing significantly better.

Jamie2k9

Carnacalla wrote: »

I've heard almost as low as 50%, this 30% figure is brand new to me? Any source for it?

The Paris/Munich flights are also not major routes, they are to airports miles outside the cities. If Ryanair flew to CDG or MUN I guarantee those routes would be doing significantly better.

50% would be more common but the Munich had lows of 33%/37% in the last few weeks. I agree not great airports but both have the best inbound markets. Moving to a Mon/Fri or Thur/Su would deliver much better results.

I mean SNN-BVA used to be one of SNN's best Euro routes a few years ago, it was operating daily and double daily a few days a week. There is no reason why it's can't return ti be a decent connection with the right schedule. Prehaps the airport should encourage. There is no need for routes to Alicante/Malaga etc to take up good departure slots as most don't really care which days they run.