SN's regional network

[Flanker2]

Who's in for an end-of-the-year bloodbath battle between the Luchtzak Conservatives (Tolipanebas, Inquirer & co) and the Luchtzak Liberalist (Me and a few other nice guys).

The question is simple.

Why doesn't SN grab all the opportunities of the regional market?


While KL is coming into SN's yard to harvest long-haul passengers, SN doesn't do the same in Amsterdam.
After LH and BA recently launched RTM, wouldn't it also be justified to contemplate the opportunities of the Rotterdam port, considering the connections with Africa?

While VG failed to maintain successful operations on the BRU-LCY route, SN has a vast and well-placed network at the doors of London City. What's taking them so long?

And while not a priority, aren't there hundreds of second tier airports spread all over neighbouring countries that would justify a one-stop link to Europe and to the entireStar Alliance network from BRU?
Don't these represent huge opportunities for SN?

My aircraft of choice, of course the Q400 Nextgen, but I wouldn't even care if they went for ATR's or even decent partnerships with fast railway.

Wouldn't that also help them fill their A319/A320's more profitably?

[eurojet]

a 2 daily connections to Lux-Findel, thanks ...

[OO-ITR]

Why not connecting Amsterdam and Rotterdam to BRU via HST? But then Fyra has to prove its reliability first.
If I'm not wrong Fyra makes already a stop at Schiphol

[HighInTheSky]

Who's in for an end-of-the-year bloodbath battle between the Luchtzak Conservatives (Tolipanebas, Inquirer & co) and the Luchtzak Liberalist (Me and a few other nice guys).

Oh dear god, not again....

[sn26567]

If I'm not wrong Fyra makes already a stop at Schiphol

Indeed, and Belgium has missed an opportunity to impose a stop at its National Airport. The Dutch have again won the battle. It would be easy to change the game without an additional stop: cancel the Brussels Central stop and stop at Brussels National instead! But the Fyra people will be hard to convince: KLM is a shareholder!

Why not let SN also have a share in Fyra? Or better to let the Amsterdam-Paris Thalys stop in Brussels National? KLM has no say in the Thalys!

[CTBke]

Why not let SN also have a share in Fyra? Or better to let the Amsterdam-Paris Thalys stop in Brussels National? KLM has no say in the Thalys!

Actually they do have an agreement with Thalys on the Antwerp-Schiphol route they put their pax on the train
like SN does on the Brussels Airport-Paris North route

[RoMax]

KLM is in a HUGE advantage with the Schiphol-station, it's one of the biggest in Amsterdam-region with good connections all over the Netherlands (the NS even got the station that far that numerous of people change trains in Schiphol while they have nothing to do with the aviation part of Schiphol). Thalys, Fyra (national to Rotterdam/Breda and international (Rotterdam/Antwerp/Brussels), ICE, ... it all stops at Schiphol.
The MAA-AMS flights with F50's for example, they operated until somewhere in 2008 when KLM made an arrangement with the NS to ensure better train connections to Schiphol from the south of the Netherlands.

When you compare that with BRU...(they were one of the first to have a under-terminal train station, and still they missed the boat later on...)

The daily Thalys connection is already helping. But having Fyra at the airport would be great...tough I don't see it happening. But I don't know if an air connection is the solution. KLM can make it work thanks to their enormours network (offering long haul connections all day long). SN has not so much feed (and the south of the Netherlands is faster with train or car than going to AMS to take the aircraft) and such short connections are expensive to operate.

Maybe better concentrate on more regional routes to France (Bordeaux?), UK (London-City, ... ?) or Germany?

[shockcooling]

Wouldn't it be a nice start that SN actually starts working TOGETHER with the NMBS ? Maybe the BRU trainstation can be developped in the same way as numerous other airport trainstations in the world, including all forms of public transport (fast subway/higher frequencies also originating from other large cities instead only Antwerp). In Germany it's quite normal to start your holiday from your local trainstation...

[JOVAN]

Just small comparison in number of flights to a popular tourist and business destination:
MADRID

KLM: 35 flights a week each direction.
SN : 17 and almost nothing in the week end.

Can somebody explain ?

[RoMax]

Just small comparison in number of flights to a popular tourist and business destination:
MADRID

KLM: 35 flights a week each direction.
SN : 17 and almost nothing in the week end.

Can somebody explain ?

Well I can think of some reasons:
- AMS-MAD is probably a bigger O&D route than BRU-MAD
- MAD is a Skyteam-hub, so is AMS... Air Europe and KLM together offer quite some daily flights between AMS and MAD because they can offer connections all day long on both sides of the route
- SN can only offer some connections in Europe (Southern Europe - Scandinavia is one of the markets they try to develop and you see some increase in transfer activity overthere, but still minimal to what KLM can offer), Africa (which is already a serious backtrack, where you have AF/CDG interfering) and some North-American connections (offered by themself, United, US and AC...also offered out of MAD non-stop).

Besides I also think 35-40 is really about the maximum for KLM on the route. Iberia and easyJet are pulling back from the route and the only think KLM does is upgrading in the bussiest months of S13 to 37 weekly (from 35).

SN on the other hand, they operated 4 daily on the route for years. The latest 1-1,5 year they are pulling back on the route (as with BCN). Is that the right decision? I don't know.

But than again, comparing KLM to SN on air services is quite a strange comparison. I did compare Schiphol and BRU (NS <-> NMBS), just to show how differently they use train services and how KL/AMS/NS turned the Schiphol station in one of their strenghts.
But when you start comparing them straight on a certain route... KLM has a very well developed European feeding network, but did you also see their long haul network? KL has more A330's than SN does, and than you still have all the 777's, 747's and some MD11's (I think they must have about 7 MD11's...that's like SN has A330's). There is not a single European airline that is so dependant on their feeding network because of their enormous intercontinental network. Their own flights, that of Delta and that of other strong partners offer connections all day long. In BRU you have connections in the morning, and a few intra-EU transfers towards the evening and that's it...

For SN. Not all flights connect like it should to the long haul network. But that's just like not all of KL's feeding flights connect well to all their long haul waves (mainly Asia and North-America are quite split up). Not all EU flights depend of the AFI-feed and than it may be better to use the aircraft somewhere else as SN has not really more to offer (yet).
Flights in the afternoon are more like a disaster...more flying empty than something else. Some very late long haul departures (late afternoon, or maybe better: evening) may be a very good idea for them. Many carriers offer late departures to Asia. But to the US it's very limited, so some evening flights to some US destinations may be a good idea (I don't say they suddenly have to fly everything in the evening as that would be bad for connections as well, but for NYC, ORD, IAD... that could support more than one daily in the future). That would help to fill certain afternoon/early evening flights and it would ensure better connections to the late AFI-departures (13-15u).

Currently the EU network is not what it should be. But you can't expect that with such a long haul network. So the focus has to be on expanding long haul and adjusting EU to the needs of that long haul network. But you can't do these two appart from eachother.

[Flanker2]

Just small comparison in number of flights to a popular tourist and business destination:
MADRID

KLM: 35 flights a week each direction.
SN : 17 and almost nothing in the week end.

Can somebody explain ?

This is exactly the issue with SN.
Gustin & co want to use big airplanes like the A319/A320 on major routes and reduce frequencies to make more money.

What really happens is that IB and FR end up taking a big chunk of the pie. IB operates 25 weekly service, FR 14 weekly. Someone who wants a cheap flight chooses FR, someone who wants frequency takes IB.
What's left for SN? Nothing, only those who don't know better.

Even longhaul connecting pax to for instance JFK can't connect with this kind of schedule.

This is why I have been saying for long that they need to add frequencies on intercity services by using the Q400.
If you look at the BRU-MAD schedule, the first departure to MAD is at 07:45 with IB. I'm sure that during weekdays, there is a demand for an earlier departure at say 06:15.
Similarily between 3pm and 7pm, there are neither SN nor IB flights, only Air Europa. I'm sure that if you squeeze in a Q400 flight at 4:45pm, you're going to have some customers for it.

Sure, some won't like the Q400. But be honest, what would you prefer? Having to wait for 4 hours at the airport or getting the next Q400 flight and arriving home 3 hours earlier?
It seems unlikely but that will also help fill their current A319/A320 flights, simply because if they can offer tight-knit frequencies (at only a small additional cost), more customers will choose SN over IB and eventually IB will have to downgrade to CRJ.
At the same time, they can drain pax from FR by simply selling cheap excess seats as pax won't mind sitting on a Q400 if the flight is in the same price arena as FR and they get a nice service instead of noisy marketing.


I think that LUX must be flown to, along with RTM and AMS.
Fyra and Thalys are viable alternatives from RTM and AMS but isn't it still too slow?
2 hours from Amsterdam to BRU is not really acceptable for a travelling pax. Even if they avoid check-in in Rotterdam or Amsterdam, they still have to check-in at BRU. If so, it's much easier to check-in at RTM or AMS and to not have to worry about luggage anymore, so you can connect smoothly on to your next flight in BRU.

If Fyra and Thalys can do Amsterdam-Brussels in less than 80 minutes, it becomes a good alternative.
However we see time and time again that the Dutch railway people do care about that stop in Schiphol while the Belgians have left BRU to dry.
What was the point of Diabolo if not to connect BRU?

Similarily, unless they can get the Thalys to terminate or go through BRU, SN should absolutely consider operating Lille Lesquin on their own.

By the way, wouldn't it be much better than any subsidy if the Belgian government instructs the NMBS to make all Benelux, Thalys, Fyra and Oostende-Liège trains stop in BRU? That would even save the NMBS some money, by removing several airport express trains.
I mean, wouldn't that be so obvious that it's immeasurably stupid that we even have to talk about it?

[Didymus]

By the way, wouldn't it be much better than any subsidy if the Belgian government instructs the NMBS to make all Benelux, Thalys, Fyra and Oostende-Liège trains stop in BRU?

It wouldn't, unless you find a way to let a train go directly from Brussels-South to Brussels National Airport and vice versa without using the North-South connection and without having to turn back. Especially Fyra and IC trains are already very slow, so you don't want them to make an extra stop without compensating.

[Flanker2]

By the way, wouldn't it be much better than any subsidy if the Belgian government instructs the NMBS to make all Benelux, Thalys, Fyra and Oostende-Liège trains stop in BRU?

It wouldn't, unless you find a way to let a train go directly from Brussels-South to Brussels National Airport and vice versa without using the North-South connection and without having to turn back. Especially Fyra and IC trains are already very slow, so you don't want them to make an extra stop without compensating.

Why would you need to avoid the North-South connection? And why turn back?
Fyra and IC trains are slow but they do stop at Schiphol anyway.
So you can for instance alternate each hour between AMS and BRU to make it a fair deal.
As for the IC trains, if they're not bothered by each stop at each 3 main Brussels stations, an additional short stop at BRU won't make a difference.

In fact, they can scrap rail traffic bottleneck Brussels Central as far as I'm concerned. Sure many people work there, but many people work and travel to/from BRU too. And the bottleneck at Central is the one causing huge delays to every single train going through Brussels, so people can better transit in North or South onto one of many connecting IR's to Central, so that the IC's can go through Central faster and provide much-needed relief to the entire railway network.

Plus you can scrap the Airport Express running between Midi and BRU, as the IC's will fulfill that role more than adequately.

Again, common sense...but this is Belgium.

Otherwise, the only purpose of Diabolo would have been a 1 billion euro investment to replace the shuttle bus service running Antwerp-BRU.

[Didymus]

Why would you need to avoid the North-South connection? And why turn back?

Avoid it because of congestion. Turn back to go around the city.

As for the IC trains, if they're not bothered by each stop at each 3 main Brussels stations, an additional short stop at BRU won't make a difference.

At least 15 minutes extra, which is a lot for people who don't want to go there. And again, the train has to turn back for that.

In fact, they can scrap rail traffic bottleneck Brussels Central as far as I'm concerned. Sure many people work there, but many people work and travel to/from BRU too. And the bottleneck at Central is the one causing huge delays to every single train going through Brussels, so people can better transit in North or South onto one of many connecting IR's to Central, so that the IC's can go through Central.

Bottleneck is the whole North-South connection, not just the Central station. They need to add extra tracks, but that's easier said than done.

[Air Key West]

Indeed, it's quite incomprehensible why BRU ans SN did not demand that the Fyra trains travel through (and stop, of course) at BRU, if they stop at Schiphol. Of course, the extra stop at BRU will make the trip some 15mn longer bewteen Amsterdam-Centraal and Brussels. If the aim of the Fyra is to offer a short travel time between Amsterdam-Centraal and Brussels, it shoud not stop at Schiphol either.

Well, here is a suggestion for BRU and SN while waiting for the current Fyra agreement to be renegotiated (with a stop at BRU)
The Dutch government bitterly complains that with the introduction of the Amsterdam-Brussels Fyra trains (replacing the old railway connection stopping practically everywhere), The Hague will no longer have a direct railway link with Brussels, forcing Dutch officials traveling to Brussels for EU meetings to change trains (at Rotterdam-Centraal, I think). What about a new railway link Den Haag Centraal-Rotterdam-Roosendaal- Antwerpen-BRU-Brussels (stop at Roosendaal because of connections from other cities in the south of NL).
There will, at the moment, be no Fyra trains available, so just use "regular" trains in the meantime.

And as from 2015, it should be possible to avoid the Brussels North-South bottleneck by making trains run from BRU directly to Brussels-Schuman and Brussels-Luxembourg Station.

While still talking about trains, I don't know why the TGV trains between Lille and Brussels couldn't be extended to BRU (part of the explanation could, of course, be that there are not any slots available anymore on the Brussels-Zuid-Midi / Brussels North bottleneck).

I don't think that operating feeder flights from LIL and RTM could be a viable option, but SN should consider such flights a least in the morning with AMS and 4 daily flights with truboprop to/from LUX (high yield business pax who want frequency).

[A330]

JOVAN wrote:
Just small comparison in number of flights to a popular tourist and business destination:
MADRID

KLM: 35 flights a week each direction.
SN : 17 and almost nothing in the week end.

Can somebody explain ?

Well I can think of some reasons:
- AMS-MAD is probably a bigger O&D route than BRU-MAD

Well, in another topic someone posted the numbers as published by BRU, and it revealed MAD to be the biggest destination to/from BRU! Though this didn't indicate whether passengers originate from MAD (or have it as their final destination), or whether they transfer at one end.
I agree there is a lot of room for improvement of SN's short-haul network. But this doesn't go at once. Instead of increasing, they are cutting routes and frequencies. Hope they know what they are doing.

I don't think that operating feeder flights from LIL and RTM could be a viable option, but SN should consider such flights a least in the morning with AMS and 4 daily flights with truboprop to/from LUX (high yield business pax who want frequency).

RTM seems too close. But I don't know about LIL. How is that connection currently? I do agree that SN should open up more small destinations for feeding, they could certainly do so in UK and France. Problem is, you need small aircraft (say Q400), and primarily in the morning for long-haul connections. What to do with the planes in the afternoon? Extra frequencies to bigger cities in the "low hours"?

[RoMax]

Well, in another topic someone posted the numbers as published by BRU, and it revealed MAD to be the biggest destination to/from BRU! Though this didn't indicate whether passengers originate from MAD (or have it as their final destination), or whether they transfer at one end.

It may be a big route (tough for IB, I assume a VERY big part connects to Latin-America, same will be the case for AirEuropa), that doesn't mean AMS-MAD isn't bigger (which was what I said).

I agree there is a lot of room for improvement of SN's short-haul network. But this doesn't go at once. Instead of increasing, they are cutting routes and frequencies. Hope they know what they are doing.

I agree (like I said numerous times before) they have to develop their short-haul network. But that has to happen in line with the long haul changes. The routes they cut or frequenties they cut are because they are losing money on it and don't have a need in feeding the long haul network. The important routes are kept at the same capacity and/or frequency. Many of them did get a downgrade (from 5 to 4 daily for example) and more A319/A320 instead. Is that they way they should go...I don't know. But high frequency with Q400 isn't perfect either (btw, Flanker, Q400 to MAD...than I'd know at least one airline I wouldn't take...their passengers don't even want the Q400's on TLS or TRN...).
So things need to be done, but what...I wouldn't know. I only know they can't go the way of A319/A320-only with too low frequency, but neither the way of high frequency Q400 all over Europe.

[JOVAN]

JOVAN wrote:
Just small comparison in number of flights to a popular tourist and business destination:
MADRID

KLM: 35 flights a week each direction.
SN : 17 and almost nothing in the week end.

Can somebody explain ?

Well I can think of some reasons:
- AMS-MAD is probably a bigger O&D route than BRU-MAD

Well, in another topic someone posted the numbers as published by BRU, and it revealed MAD to be the biggest destination to/from BRU! Though this didn't indicate whether passengers originate from MAD (or have it as their final destination), or whether they transfer at one end.
I agree there is a lot of room for improvement of SN's short-haul network. But this doesn't go at once. Instead of increasing, they are cutting routes and frequencies. Hope they know what they are doing.

MADRID biggest EU destination from BRU !!!

Reducing frequencies (and capacity) is the best way to send people to competition.
There is certainly a market for connecting MADRID with Northern Europe (and vv.)

SN does not have a Transatlantic network; but at least they could aim at being a EU - HUB. East-West and South-North.

I have (business-)friends in Bordeaux, who used to travel almost systemayically via Brussels in the Sabena days: any destination in EU: via BRU.
(no hassle in CDG; smooth connections and good service)

Convenience and efficiency, and service .

[Atlantis]

If we talk about Madrid and carriers who are flying to this destination ex-BRU then we need some facts.

We can only compare with 2011. In 2011 Madrid was on the 6th place when it comes to movements to this destination with 5.284 flights. A decrease with -1,2% with 2010.

When we have a look about the number of pax then we see that Madrid is on the first place when it comes to European flights with 580.280 pax or an increase with 2,4% when we compare it with 2010.

Both IB and SN reduced capacity. Ex-BRU we speak only about two carriers: IB and SN, lately also Air Europe.

When we also have a look at Charleroi then it is only Ryanair who connect MAD with Belgium with 2 flights a day.

But in my opinion SN made a very big mistake to cancel an important and booming market in Europe: Poland. To cancel waw and krk is unbelievable. Economy is growing in this region the last 5 years with 15%!!!!!!! and a lot of our expats are working there.

But I predicted some years ago that SN should start to reshuffle it's European flights and bring this into a branch like Brussels Airlines Regional and serve specific European destinations with only two types of aircraft. F.e. Embraer for smaller European destinations but who have still some potentional and bigger ones like A319 for feeder flights for their Long haul product. Of course in combination with a good frequency and connection time. With their European product they should sell it aggresivily to the customer to take them away of other carriers and, like JOVAN said, put them on the map as the only important carrier for Europe. But then it will be difficult with one of their chareholders: LH. They will hold them of this plan.

The key for the future will be long haul and should receive full 100% attention. Those are the money makers

[RoMax]

MADRID biggest EU destination from BRU !!!

Did I say it's small? MAD being number one EU-destination for BRU, doesn't mean it's bigger than the MAD-AMS O&D market, which was my statement (where I used 'probably' indicating that I'm not sure either).

Reducing frequencies (and capacity) is the best way to send people to competition.
There is certainly a market for connecting MADRID with Northern Europe (and vv.)

SN does not have a Transatlantic network; but at least they could aim at being a EU - HUB. East-West and South-North.

I have (business-)friends in Bordeaux, who used to travel almost systemayically via Brussels in the Sabena days: any destination in EU: via BRU.
(no hassle in CDG; smooth connections and good service)

Convenience and efficiency, and service .

I agree reducing frequency isn't the way to develop a route, did I say that?
It's not that I don't agree with you, not at all. But you asked me to compare KL with SN on that certain route, and that's just a comparison that's not working.

But IB has always been stronger on the route because they have a more attractive transfer market to offer. Thanks to that stronger stransfer offer, they have the capability to sustain a higher frequency, that higher frequency is also more popular for O&D-traffic. The one results in the other making MAD a hell of a market for SN at certain times.
As AMS/KL is popular in this topic. IB experienced the same with their MAD-AMS route. KL/Air Europa are the ones who are able to offer the best connections on both sides, making them able to offer higher frequency (making them also more popular for O&D). And than they also faced easyJet that get away with the low-yield O&D-market.

Could SN do something about it, yes they could try (but no Q400's please...) it. But like in several other cases, they proved to be the weakest.