Finnair launches new Brussels hub

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 04 Jan 2013, 21:42

Juha Järvinen, managing director of Finnair, announced that the new hub is an important step for Finnair to become one of the top 5 cargo carriers between Europe and Northeast Asia.

Steve Polmans, cargo head at Brussels Airport, thinks that this Finnair hub will open doors for both parties.

Source: aircargoweek

Flanker2 · Post by **Flanker2** » 04 Jan 2013, 23:36

At HEL they have access to their own network, belly capacity et al, yet they go for BRU.
So that must mean that they want to combine air with road to offer more point to point service.

So what airplanes are they going to take to do this? They got rid of their MD11's, they would have to wait a couple of years for a A332F. Ok with deliveries of 787's, there should be some B767's coming to the market.

Imagine if the plan is to base a few A32S to operate belly cargo and tap into SN's weakening European network? Imagine how much damage they could do if they were to come with 5 A321's to BRU and start operating on those main SN routes...

SNam · Post by **SNam** » 04 Jan 2013, 23:47

Flanker2 wrote:So what airplanes are they going to take to do this?

Their MD11s are at Nordic Global Airlines (part of the Finnair group) which are/were operating from OST. So maybe they will fly out of BRU?

Regards,
Sam

Flanker2 · Post by **Flanker2** » 04 Jan 2013, 23:53

That makes sense.

RoMax · Post by **RoMax** » 05 Jan 2013, 00:06

Flanker2 wrote: Imagine if the plan is to base a few A32S to operate belly cargo and tap into SN's weakening European network? Imagine how much damage they could do if they were to come with 5 A321's to BRU and start operating on those main SN routes...

Wouldn't make sense for Finnair...delocating from a rather 'strong' hub for Asian transfers as a FSC is not a good idea with the current competition from LCC's (Finnair may probably beat SN, but will still not be profitable after all). They wouldn't have anything else from BRU as some intra-EU routes...why would they take such a risk while at the same time outsourcing their regional routes to FlyBe (FlyBe Nordic is operating all the Embraers previously operated by Finnair itself) to reduce costs because they can't even operate their own hub-operations profitably (they are even looking at options for more outsourcing of European routes).

BRU only makes sense as cargo hub (as they seem to be planning, and that's good news) with their MD-11F's (not operated by Finnair itself, but still operating for Finnair since they were converted).

MKAirlines · Post by **MKAirlines** » 05 Jan 2013, 13:53

kindly note that OH-LGD and OH-NGA operate from OST for Allied Air Cargo.
These OPS will not move to BRU.

OH-LGC and OH-NGB operate for AY..

cnc · Post by **cnc** » 05 Jan 2013, 14:31

MKAirlines wrote:kindly note that OH-LGD and OH-NGA operate from OST for Allied Air Cargo.
These OPS will not move to BRU.

OH-LGC and OH-NGB operate for AY..

trucking to OST to reach the a/c or trucking to BRU doesn't make much difference so why wouldn't they center their ops rather then operating from both airports?

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 05 Jan 2013, 22:47

As both parties confirmed it and Finnair announced that they openend their new European hub at BRU, something will come to BRU.

Maybe with the help of SN. Now also Brussels Airport confirmed that they are looking for new African markets to grow.

We can say that on several levels it is moving.

Charlie_Fox · Post by **Charlie_Fox** » 06 Jan 2013, 10:22

Nordic Global confirm that they will operate MD11Fs for the Finnair Brussels cargo hub.

Acid-drop · Post by **Acid-drop** » 06 Jan 2013, 12:16

It seems the whole market is moving from full cargo to belly cargo more and more.
Knowing that, i would make a lot of sense to use the african network of SN.

Conti764 · Post by **Conti764** » 06 Jan 2013, 12:36

Acid-drop wrote:It seems the whole market is moving from full cargo to belly cargo more and more.
Knowing that, i would make a lot of sense to use the african network of SN.

But as far as I know, SN is already doing pretty good on the cargo side in their African ops, implying an already quite full belly. I don't know where they'd put the extra cargo to grow even more...

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 06 Jan 2013, 13:13

Conti764 wrote:
Acid-drop wrote:It seems the whole market is moving from full cargo to belly cargo more and more.
Knowing that, i would make a lot of sense to use the african network of SN.
But as far as I know, SN is already doing pretty good on the cargo side in their African ops, implying an already quite full belly. I don't know where they'd put the extra cargo to grow even more...

SN is indeed doing a good job with cargo to/from Africa. But also normal, they don't have much competition on the Belgian market. Only since a couple of weeks direct full cargo ops from Brucargo.

But like I mentioned some posts above, also Brussels Airport confirmed that, besides those news full cargo to Africa, they want to grow in new Africa markets.
So maybe this with SN or a full cargo player (SV) or a new pax airline with belly cargo availability.

About Finnair, it is an important step to base some MD11 at Brussels and to build up this new European hub.

OO-JFP · Post by **OO-JFP** » 06 Jan 2013, 13:49

Re: Finnair launches new Brussels hub
by Acid-drop » 06 Jan 2013 01:16 pm
It seems the whole market is moving from full cargo to belly cargo more and more.
Knowing that, i would make a lot of sense to use the african network of SN.

by Acid-drop » 30 Nov 2012 03:44 pm
It looks like a big joke to me ... the cargo is dying in BRU for many reasons, some wanted by the gov, some unwanted but nethertheless very real. There are a lot (actually, too many) cheaper and better alternative in a 300km radius.

I have the impression that consistency isn't your strongest point.

Acid-drop · Post by **Acid-drop** » 06 Jan 2013, 15:25

on the contrary : BRU makes a lot of sense for belly cargo and make less and less sense for full cargo. Simple enough no ?

I'm maybe less biased that you think.

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 06 Jan 2013, 15:44

Acid-drop wrote:on the contrary : BRU makes a lot of sense for belly cargo and make less and less sense for full cargo. Simple enough no ?

I'm maybe less biased that you think.

About belly cargo we know this but what makes you think that BRU is not an airport for full cargo?
Do not forget that BRU was the biggest cargo airport in this country before the economic crisis.

BRU was hit because they have the strongest bounds with the far east. Singapore Airlines stored some of their B747, Saudi made some mistakes by opening other European destinations. In meantime they closed them already. cargo via BRU between the Middle East and the US was not easy.
It is uncertain about Cathay.
But in meantime, DHL is again growing, we had a new Canadian operator, we have in meantime also new direct cargo flight to Africa and Finnair openend their European cargo base at BRU.

Can you tell me what LGG received in meantime. Do not forget that LGG is also hit very badly due to two airlines who stay away and with TNT who is transporting less and with an uncertain future ahead.

Brucargo is in full expansion with Brucargo West and with the renovation of the eldest part.

Acid-Drop, every airport has opportunities but now there were and are very difficult periods. Cargo was down generaly worldwide

BRU · Post by **BRU** » 06 Jan 2013, 15:55

AMS has almost no more night slots available, FRA is closed at night, and both remain important and amongst biggest cargo hubs in Europe. Today, correct that integrators can choose their hub. Other full cargo operators are just a small part of the logistical chain and not THE most important one. So airlines will look for business. Due to belly operations and also historically, big forwarders are at Brucargo. So that means cargo operators will come BRU for reason, despite the restrictions that exist. Belief it or not, cargo airlines are changing their behavior! So wen it comes to cargo, look at it from logistical point of view rather that only airline point of view! So for many airlines, full cargo at BRU compared to other airports makes more sense than many would think.

StijnBRU · Post by **StijnBRU** » 06 Jan 2013, 16:05

this is only good news for Brucargo...flights are only decreasing from the major playors and with all the restrictions from brussels new players are not willing to commit new operations...

it only makes sence for an airline located in the north of europe to start a hub more central in europe, they have a better access to europe and other stations can truck with less costs and less transit time...

Only question is what they can do if they only operate 2 MD11...does anybody know what there schedule will be?

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 06 Jan 2013, 16:15

StijnBRU wrote:this is only good news for Brucargo...flights are only decreasing from the major playors and with all the restrictions from brussels new players are not willing to commit new operations...

it only makes sence for an airline located in the north of europe to start a hub more central in europe, they have a better access to europe and other stations can truck with less costs and less transit time...

Only question is what they can do if they only operate 2 MD11...does anybody know what there schedule will be?

Like member BRU wrote, other airports have also restrictions. LHR will even not have their thrid runway, so airlines are not happy with it, but what we can see, they still will fly to LHR even with more frequencies then before.
For BRU was also not easy in the past. Remember all those action groups. BRU decided to be a green, carbon less, noise restrictioned airport. And yes, this as some consequences when it is getting late, then certain types cannot land or start.

Like it or not, but everything is moving and you simply cannot satisfy everybody but till further notice it was not negative for BRU. We will see what time will bring with cargo. But at least they are not waiting for better times, they are preparing for more better years.

StijnBRU · Post by **StijnBRU** » 06 Jan 2013, 16:26

we can only applaud that innovations are starting at Brucargo, but we have to face the truth that BRU is in the loosing mode...

BR back to 1, CX cancelled operations, SQ from 17 to 7, ... we keep on fighting for every flight but we have to do something with our image abroad. When cargo forwarders can choose btn BRU or AMS...they will def choose AMS. If we just take the example of the night curfew, in AMS, even with curfew, some airlines have scheduled departures during the night... In BRU we can not even go if there are horses on the AC...

We must promote BRU as small and flexible, what we do here, they will never do in FRA, CDG, AMS...

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 06 Jan 2013, 16:40

Do not be too modest with BRU as small. Ok if we compare with FRA, AMS and CDG then we speak in other terms but BRU is also a very good one.
At least when those fools of customs don't strike for days!!!!!!! This gives us a bad image.

Do also not forget that SQ was forced to fly less to BRU and this has nothing to do with BRU itself. No, Singapore Airlines Cargo is flying in bad papers and are forced to store some of their B747. It is tricky for them.

Also AMS had some bad luck the last couple of years with some Asian carriers, where LH btw had a stake in it, went into bankruptcy.

Let us hope for the best