Jet Airways will double its number of pax via Brussels

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 22 Oct 2007, 16:59

It seems that the current flights are doing well. This morning CEO of Jet Airways, Naresh Goyal, had a meeting with Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt about the future of Jet Airways at Brussels Airport.

Goal for 2008 is 1 million pax. According to the CEO it's easy to reach that goal and will double that number to 2 million pax.

Within some days, weeks the necessary paperwork for the expanding will follow.

This is really great for Brussels Airport and the people who work on it.

Source: De Standaard.

ERICAIRLINES · Post by **ERICAIRLINES** » 22 Oct 2007, 18:08

more new destinations via Bru hub?
Vancouver,washington,houston,boston,montreal ??
And why not even JNB,which would be a hit via Bru?

rut-her · Post by **rut-her** » 22 Oct 2007, 18:11

Currently, Jet Airways has 21 flights a week at BRU. By next year, they will more than double this.
It seems 9W is doing well

Greetz,
Rutger

Outsync · Post by **Outsync** » 22 Oct 2007, 18:14

Next week they are starting JFK and MAA!

Conti764 · Post by **Conti764** » 22 Oct 2007, 18:35

On the radio news they pronounced that 9W will expand its activity at BRU from 21 tot 56 weekly flights by the end of 2008. 112 extra widebodys at BRU each week, working there is getting interesting again (only in the morning that is).

But it will cause some troubles at BRU. Where are they going to park that much widebodies at the B-concourse?

And about destinations, maybe Miami and LAX will be added next year?

Outsync · Post by **Outsync** » 22 Oct 2007, 18:37

COA_764 wrote:On the radio news they pronounced that 9W will expand its activity at BRU from 21 tot 56 weekly flights by the end of 2008. 112 extra widebodys at BRU each week, working there is getting interesting again (only in the morning that is).

But it will cause some troubles at BRU. Where are they going to park that much widebodies at the B-concourse?

I think thats the question everyone is posing himself, rumour has it that Jet Airways will finance their own Jet terminal (the old C) but yeah.. rumour rumour rumour!

Conti764 · Post by **Conti764** » 22 Oct 2007, 18:40

Outsync wrote:
I think thats the question everyone is posing himself, rumour has it that Jet Airways will finance their own Jet terminal (the old C) but yeah.. rumour rumour rumour!

There will never be enough space at the C-concourse. It is only fitted to serve low cost carriers with busses and some planes connected true a jetway at the satelite.

And if you mean the old finger south (the ugly small concourse they torn down a few years ago), it would not cope with the destination they are willing to give to the old terminal (low cost). It means that 9W-customers, who pay a lot for their ticket have to pass true a cheap low cost infrastructure before boarding their plane. Although this would be the most logical solution.

brussels airlines · Post by **brussels airlines** » 22 Oct 2007, 18:45

This is great for the entire Belgian aviation:

-Brussels Airport: 2 million extra pax
-Brussels Airlines: Much more transit pax for EU and Africa

I've read somewhere that Brussels Airport has plans to restaurate the old terminal. But there is enough space at Brussels to bild new terminals.

(A-pier can still be expanded, Their is place to build a new C-pier at the old site of the south finger, there is place at the cargo building from DHL as most of the cargo operations will move to the other part of the airport)

peacemaker · Post by **peacemaker** » 22 Oct 2007, 18:49

indeed very good news for brussels airport, would be great if they renovate the old terminal

teach · Post by **teach** » 22 Oct 2007, 19:31

There will never be enough space at the C-concourse. It is only fitted to serve low cost carriers with busses and some planes connected true a jetway at the satelite.

And if you mean the old finger south (the ugly small concourse they torn down a few years ago), it would not cope with the destination they are willing to give to the old terminal (low cost). It means that 9W-customers, who pay a lot for their ticket have to pass true a cheap low cost infrastructure before boarding their plane.

The 'low cost' terminal that is rumored would probably be the currently remaining round pier. The rumored 9W terminal would be a new pier, to be built roughly where the old South finger was located. It shouldn't be much of a problem to 'connect' such a new building to the main terminal iso the old one.

On the radio news they pronounced that 9W will expand its activity at BRU from 21 tot 56 weekly flights by the end of 2008.

If they count those flights the way I think they count them (i.e. one 'rotation' BOM-BRU-EWR-BRU-BOM counts as one flight) then that would mean a staggering 16 (!) daily 9W flights from BRU... Wow..

rut-her · Post by **rut-her** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:00

From a spotter's point of view: is there any change they will use an A340 for the new routes via BRU? Or will it remain the 777 and 330 ?

Greetz,
Rutger

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:02

Could this also mean that they consider to move the LHR flights to Brussels Airport?

Andries · Post by **Andries** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:26

COA_764 wrote:112 extra widebodys at BRU each week, working there is getting interesting again (only in the morning that is).

Too bad (for me) that Lufthansa Technics is doing the maintenance on these planes ... But still, will be very happy to see them passing through BRU !

COA_764 wrote:
Outsync wrote:
I think thats the question everyone is posing himself, rumour has it that Jet Airways will finance their own Jet terminal (the old C) but yeah.. rumour rumour rumour!
There will never be enough space at the C-concourse. It is only fitted to serve low cost carriers with busses and some planes connected true a jetway at the satelite.

I heard another version from several people last week. B-concourse would become Jet Airways Terminal. New C-concourse would be built for all other non-A- and non-B-concourse traffic.

Though I find this a bit strange, I could see a full-widebody B-concourse and non-widebody C-concourse. This offcourse with all Shengen-flights remaining at A-concourse.

Atlantis wrote:Could this also mean that they consider to move the LHR flights to Brussels Airport?

Wasn't this allready confirmed by Jet Airways itself that they will make BRU their European hub, with even LHR dissapearing in 2009 or 2010 ?

Greetz,

Andries

Conti764 · Post by **Conti764** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:33

Atlantis wrote:Could this also mean that they consider to move the LHR flights to Brussels Airport?

I heard this rumour two months ago, but it's not 100% reliable.
But it is a possibility, even more so if 9W wil get it's own concourse at BRU (and some financial advantages) and since London is only a leap away from BRU by both plane and train.
Then, a sole European hub in BRU could be very interesting for 9W and their most logical European partner, SN.

EBAW_flyer · Post by **EBAW_flyer** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:40

While all these "terminal-rumours" are very interesting, think about all the money and time it would take to renovate (C-pier) or build a new terminal, or even "just" a new pier. Just look at pier A at BRU, new terminals at CRL en LGG. It's not that easy to build new facilities. I guess they have to use the remote positions (pos. 3xx and 4xx) and busses for the smallbodies and the B-gates for widebodies.

Conti764 · Post by **Conti764** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:44

Andries wrote:I heard another version from several people last week. B-concourse would become Jet Airways Terminal. New C-concourse would be built for all other non-A- and non-B-concourse traffic.

Though I find this a bit strange, I could see a full-widebody B-concourse and non-widebody C-concourse.

It would be more logical to use the B-concourse for extra-shengen smallbodies and a new concourse/terminal at the current site of DHL, close the existing terminal.

The B-concourse is aging and to small to comfortably accomodate a big number of widebodies. It is better for BRU to have some 'double bridge'-jetways to connect two doors of a widebody, so (de)boarding speeds up. It would be a smart step in possible future carriers coming (back) to BRU with a high capacity plane like the 744 or 346 and 9W with its fleet of T7's.

I think the B-concourse is becoming too small because of two reasons. First of all when two widebody flights are checking in across each other pax of both flights get mixed in the middle of the concourse and sometimes there aren't even enough seats for pax to sit down.

Second, and most important, the security is pretty much working on full capacity during some times of day. They constructed an extra transfer security check point at the arrivals level and there too, people have to qeue in a long and uncomfortable line.

Adding to that, adding a transfer hotel where people can hire basic rooms for democratic prices would be an extra advantage. The Sheraton can stay for longer and more expensive stays.

And BRU should be looking for more asian flights (aside to those of 9W) because they leave in the afternoon or evening and there is plenty of capacity in the afternoon.

teach · Post by **teach** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:46

Could this also mean that they consider to move the LHR flights to Brussels Airport?

Very much doubt it. India - London is a very large O&D market, large enough to be served direct. The BRU hub will be for India-US traffic mainly, as well as traffic to smaller European markets. Completely different market than O&D. Besides, what would be the point of moving those flights to BRU? All the markets they fly to from LHR are already, or will soon, be served from BRU, so there'd be no added value moving the LHR flights here.

Wasn't this allready confirmed by Jet Airways itself that they will make BRU their European hub, with even LHR dissapearing in 2009 or 2010 ?

They said it'd be their European hub, yes, but they never said it'd be their only destination in Europe. NW has its European hub in AMS, but that doesn't stop them from serving several other destinations in Europe.

EBAW_flyer wrote:for the smallbodies and the B-gates for widebodies.

You mean narrowbodies, not smallbodies

Conti764 · Post by **Conti764** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:47

EBAW_flyer wrote:While all these "terminal-rumours" are very interesting, think about all the money and time it would take to renovate (C-pier) or build a new terminal, or even "just" a new pier. Just look at pier A at BRU, new terminals at CRL en LGG. It's not that easy to build new facilities. I guess they have to use the remote positions (pos. 3xx and 4xx) and busses for the smallbodies and the B-gates for widebodies.

There was enough time to build the A-concourse. If the money is there and the need is high, building new facilities can go fast. And with 9W, the money is there and the need will be there even more.

And the smallbodies at remote stands? What will you do with possible 757-flights coming in from RAM, LY or an American carrier? (Rumours are that CO is considering an extra daily flight EWR-BRU-EWR next summer season, flown by a 757)?

EBAW_flyer · Post by **EBAW_flyer** » 22 Oct 2007, 21:28

And the smallbodies at remote stands? What will you do with possible 757-flights coming in from RAM, LY or an American carrier? (Rumours are that CO is considering an extra daily flight EWR-BRU-EWR next summer season, flown by a 757)?

Well, boarding a 757 by bus or a 737 is quite the same. They do have to make some modifications at gates B9x, but they can also board at a jetway gate that isn't used. There are even postive things about a bus boarding; you can allready board the pax while they are still cleaning/fueling the plane, so once the plane is ready, they can immediatly sit down and you can be ready in about 15mins.

PS: did you know transatlantic 757's usually seat less pax than a charter/low cost 737/320? f.e. NWA 757 is configured 16/144 --> 160 but JAF 738 seats 189

.

DannyVDB · Post by **DannyVDB** » 22 Oct 2007, 21:32

What could change the situation is that countries shift to shengen, e.g. UK, IE, ... in the long term even all European countries, including new member states of the EU.

This would mean increased used of A-terminal and decreased use of the B-terminal. I am not sure that there is a need (in the short term) to have an additional terminal, especially when there would be a LCC terminal ...

Only when all the plans are achieved (connection to Japan, additional connections to China, Africa, Singapur, Dubai, Bangkok, ...) there might be an additional need.

regards,
Danny