Reopening Brussels Airport after the 22/03/2016 terror attacks

[Inquirer]

According to De Tijd, the plan for handing out the limited number of slots from BRU is ready!

In a first phase, priority would indeed be given to Brussels Airlines' intercontinental flights, as well as their feeding flights, probably because of their strategic importance to airport and country even, as well as the fact that indeed they'll put few stress on the temporary check in facilities:
http://www.tijd.be/ondernemen/luchtvaar ... 1459433819

De Redactie has more information on how they want to proceed thereafter and legally make it possible to refuse demands for slots or even take slots again from some airlines in order to give them to others: http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws/binnenland/1.2616304
Apparently, the general rule would be that every company would be allowed to operate 1 single return flight, per day, per already existing destination of theirs, until full saturation of the airport's capacity.

This is considered a simple rule which is legally watertight as it's the same to everyone and thus also gives a bit to everybody, especially considering the exceptional situation: capacity is reduced due to damage done by acts of terror, so choices have to be made someway or another.

Of course, the more destinations a company serves, the more flights it will get, while a fully functioning connecting network can thus be rebuilt fairly quickly thanks to this rule indeed, but other than that, it indeed seems fair to me?

Although I can already imagine how airlines with a limited number of destinations, but running at high frequencies, will complain about how it: British AW for instance would get just 1 single daily flight, despite running how many Londons a day? While other airlines which have a much smaller volumetric size at BRU, would also be getting the single daily same, but then so be it: the general interest is best served by making every place accessible asap, IMHO: I think it's going to be hard to convince a judge any other rule would be better for everybody (and not just the plaintiff).

edit: corrected the first link.

[mad_fab]

So, as an example FR would get +- 20 flights a day. I wonder if they would be interested in such an option.

For instance they do operate BRU -> SXF 3 times a day.

They could operate let's say the morning flight from BRU and the rest from CRL.

Not sure this is really interesting, sean?

Although I can already imagine how airlines with a limited number of destinations, but running at high frequencies, will complain about how it: British AW for instance would get just 1 flight, despite running how many Londons a day?

Agreed.

[SN539]

And what about the long haul flights from foreign companies ? United, Delta, ANA, Ethiad, ...

[Inquirer]

And what about the long haul flights from foreign companies ? United, Delta, ANA, Ethiad, ...

No idea, sir!

In De Tijd, they mention they'd be welcome in a second phase, and that STAR alliance partners would get priority, but I can only quote what is being said there of course!

Also, no idea how long each phase would last: are we talking just a few days, couple of weeks, several months here???

[Passenger]

Singapore 747-400F 9V-SFO has just landed (LAX-BRU).

Now joined by Asiana Cargo 747-400F HL-7436 (JFK-BRU).

[MKAirlines]

Hello,

Might be a good option to max out BRU with 800pax / hour and deflect other flights to ANR,CRL,OST,LGG and run special trains? Ostend-Brussels Airport, Antwerp-Brussels Airport, Liege-Brussels Airport, Charleroi-Brussels Airport?

So direct trains

just an idea

[mad_fab]

Ah, right, with the arrivals being open, are they going to re-open the train station?

[Inquirer]

So, as an example FR would get +- 20 flights a day. I wonder if they would be interested in such an option.

Seems that like several other leisure oriented airlines, they have decided to leave BRU for the time being, according to De Tijd:

http://www.tijd.be/ondernemen/luchtvaar ... 1459437953

[sean1982]

This plan is a garantueed recipe for empty aircraft. No passenger in their right mind is going to leave from BRU in the morning only to be flown back to LGG or CRL in the evening or the next day. Its ridiculous ans still gives SN n unfair advantage from a lot more then 30%

[mad_fab]

Thinking about it, even if this looks fair, I'm not even sure this is really interesting for any airline running more than 1 rotation/day to a specific destination (it's true for FR, but also for SN in fact).

If I was a airline I'd like to move traffic back to BRU destination by destination, here they'll have weird situation.

[convair]

@mad_fab isn't there a law against these short intra-belgium flights?

I don't know, but LGG being just a "stop" to bring pax on would that be a problem?

Of course not! It happens all the time, e.g. when flghts are diverted to OST due to fog in BRU, wait there for an hour, then take off to bring the pax to BRU.

[mad_fab]

I just looked up for FR, and these are the destinations with only 1 rotation/day:

LCA, TSF, VRN, OPO, BTS, ALC, IBZ, PMI.

So those could come back to BRU ASAP.

Multiple rotation/day

SXF, DUB, FCO, LIS, BCN, AGP, BNC

So can we guess that the 8 "1 rotation/day" are going back to BRU ASAP while the others stay in CRL?
Not sure that this is doable operationnaly speaking

[sn26567]

@mad_fab isn't there a law against these short intra-belgium flights?

No, only a Walloon decree forbidding flights between CRL and LGG.

[Flanker2]

Well, considering that arrivals are unlimited in numbers in this operation, it makes sense for airline like SN to run the BRU outbound legs at low load factors (ie at very high fares) and the inbounds to BRU at regular fares and high load factors.
This way they can run a max. of flights and the highest revenues in no time.

In theory, airlines can run empty outbound and fly full on the way back to make most of it.
Such flights would surely be exempted from the slot system?

[sean1982]

the thing is that this would require a complete re-drawing of the aircraft using plan and crewing level. Our crew are contractually based in BRU and cannot just be shuffled up and down . Thes destinations an be supported by 2, maybe 3 airplanes but it is not a really efficient use of resources.

For SN this plan is even more disastrous. They rely on a lot of up and downs daily and will lose loads of passengers on this.

[convair]

Hello,

Might be a good option to max out BRU with 800pax / hour and deflect other flights to ANR,CRL,OST,LGG and run special trains? Ostend-Brussels Airport, Antwerp-Brussels Airport, Liege-Brussels Airport, Charleroi-Brussels Airport?

So direct trains

just an idea

Why deflect return flights? The BRU arrivals side is/can be operational immediately! Or you mean for departures only? Please clarify.

[MKAirlines]

Hello,

Might be a good option to max out BRU with 800pax / hour and deflect other flights to ANR,CRL,OST,LGG and run special trains? Ostend-Brussels Airport, Antwerp-Brussels Airport, Liege-Brussels Airport, Charleroi-Brussels Airport?

So direct trains

just an idea

Why deflect return flights? The BRU arrivals side is/can be operational immediately! Or you mean for departures only? Please clarify.

Hi,

No just the fact that only a limited amount of slots are available and not based airlines can run there other rotations to regional airports. Centralising everything again on a crippled airport is not the best idea. Priority should be given to Brussels Airlines as they are the biggest carrier that is bleeding the most money.

Brgs

[sean1982]

Well, that's not how the game is played I'm afraid. Who is losing the most money matters nothing to the european rules

Regulation 95/93 on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports, article 4 wrote:
2. The Member State responsible for a schedules facilitated or coordinated
airport shall ensure:
(a) that at a schedules facilitated airport, the schedules facilitator acts under this Regulation in an independent, neutral, non-discriminatory and transparent manner;
(b) the independence of the coordinator at a coordinated airport by separating the coordinator functionally from any single interested party. The system of financing the coordinators' activities shall be such as to guarantee the coordinator's independent status;
(c) that the coordinator acts according to this Regulation in a neutral, non-discriminatory and transparent way.

[mad_fab]

the thing is that this would require a complete re-drawing of the aircraft using plan and crewing level. Our crew are contractually based in BRU and cannot just be shuffled up and down . Thes destinations an be supported by 2, maybe 3 airplanes but it is not a really efficient use of resources.

Yep, looks complicated, this is why I'm curious to see what airlines like FR are doing to do. "Leave everything in CRL" or just try to move as much flight as possible.

For SN this plan is even more disastrous. They rely on a lot of up and downs daily and will lose loads of passengers on this.

I think FR and SN are in the same ship here: the "Operational nightmare - Brussels".

[mad_fab]

Apparently, the general rule would be that every company would be allowed to operate 1 single return flight, per day, per already existing destination of theirs, until full saturation of the airport's capacity.

I see one obvious loophole here: the feeders.
Let's take LH, they have like 10 BRU->FRA per day.
What prevent them to replace this 10 flights with 1 (very) early BRU -> FRA to bring all the connecting pax for this day in FRA (long connection - ok) and a very late FRA->BRU to bring back the pax coming back.
You upgrade the usual A320/CRJ to a 340/330 and voila! Still you'll get A LOT a pax early morning.

On the bright side, a feeder operated by an A340 would be fun