Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

flightlover
Posts: 710
Joined: 12 Aug 2008, 08:26

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by flightlover »

Acid-drop wrote: 23 Nov 2017, 15:01 stupid question but ... what would prevent an airline to fill the belly of a 777 without pax or with less pax ?
you could maybe have ... let's say 50% capacity compare to a real -F ?
All longhaul flights will do this. They all take cargo, ranging from some bulk freight to multiple tons of ULD loaded cargo. If you are early at the gate you can see that when looking to the right hand side of the plane. Those containers do not only hold the luggage. Some freight is excluded from this kind of operations as they are classed Cargo Aircraft Only (CAO).

And sometimes they make it a full freighter flight (no pax in cabin). AY has done this for some time with an A340. It just comes down to economics. Some freight will bring enough revenue to support this kind of operations

So, nothing prevents them from doing so. Except when they do not comply with organisational requirements (paperwork, crew training).

And for the capacity: Cargo aircraft have a lighter set-up as they are not carrying the chairs and other amenities provided in passenger planes. So they will always have an extra weight advantage compared to pax configured planes. And for non-pax operations with passenger planes the max loaded weight per position is the determining factor if it ain't cargo seize.

Acid-drop
Posts: 2883
Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 00:00
Location: Liège, BE
Contact:

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by Acid-drop »

Russian freighter operator AirBridgeCargo Airlines (ABC) is retaining a significant number of the flights it transferred from Amsterdam Schiphol Airport (AMS) to Belgium’s Liège Airport (LGG) last month despite regaining the slots it had lost at Schiphol.

In addition to the loss of some ABC flights, the ‘squeeze’ on freighter slots at AMS has seen Singapore Airlines (SQ) Cargo move four weekly freighter flights out of the Netherlands to Brussels Airport, while Emirates SkyCargo has reportedly transferring eight of its 18 weekly AMS all-cargo flights to Brussels, Copenhagen and Frankfurt. And Suparna Airlines (Y8), formerly known as Yangtze River Express, has reportedly shifted four or five weekly flights from Amsterdam to Frankfurt-Hahn.

https://www.lloydsloadinglist.com/freig ... hqjaJ_jLqA
My messages reflect my personal opinion which may be different than yours. I beleive a forum is made to create a debate so I encourage people to express themselves, the way they want, with the ideas they want. I expect the same understanding in return.

Passenger
Posts: 7266
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Brucargo 2017: cargo routes, news

Post by Passenger »

Passenger wrote: 01 Oct 2017, 18:57 Rumours in the Dutch press: within three weeks, the Dutch government will announce its decision to give Maastricht Airport a runway extension (today it's 2.500m real use).
Decision: extended from 2.500m to 2.750m. Thus full use of the runway is allowed.

JVSpotter
Posts: 59
Joined: 05 Feb 2017, 11:27
Contact:

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by JVSpotter »

According to luchtvaartnieuws (NL), Emirates Skycargo has decided to start with 3 weekly flights at Maastricht in February 2018.

Acid-drop
Posts: 2883
Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 00:00
Location: Liège, BE
Contact:

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by Acid-drop »

My messages reflect my personal opinion which may be different than yours. I beleive a forum is made to create a debate so I encourage people to express themselves, the way they want, with the ideas they want. I expect the same understanding in return.

Jetter
Posts: 480
Joined: 06 Nov 2015, 21:07

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by Jetter »

Despite the large reduction in Full-Freighters the cargo volume barely declined. So it must have resulted in a much higher load-factor.

Amsterdam Schiphol Airport (November 2017)

pax +10.1% 5,180,752
movements +4.5% 37,963
cargo - 0.9% 145,153

Acid-drop
Posts: 2883
Joined: 29 Jun 2005, 00:00
Location: Liège, BE
Contact:

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by Acid-drop »

My messages reflect my personal opinion which may be different than yours. I beleive a forum is made to create a debate so I encourage people to express themselves, the way they want, with the ideas they want. I expect the same understanding in return.

globetrotter
Posts: 1227
Joined: 14 Nov 2005, 00:00

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by globetrotter »

JVSpotter wrote: 11 Dec 2017, 19:53 According to luchtvaartnieuws (NL), Emirates Skycargo has decided to start with 3 weekly flights at Maastricht in February 2018.
Said to be dropping AMS.

Passenger
Posts: 7266
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by Passenger »

The opening of Lelystad Airport, planned for April 2019, will be postponed.

The Dutch minister for Infrastructure will advise Parliament on Wednesday.

Passenger
Posts: 7266
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by Passenger »

The opening of Lelystad Airport is now officially postponed from April 2019 to "2020". And because Amsterdam Airport has to limit itself to 500.000 movements, the problem for cargo operators will not be solved soon. For 2017, AMS had over 499.500 movements.

In 2020, Lelystad Airport will be allowed 4.000 movements. In 2021: max. 7.000. As from 2022: max. 10.000. For 2020, the 4.000 yearly means a maximum of 5 flights per day in and 5 out. Airport taxes at Lelystad thus will have to be minimal to convince airlines to move from AMS to Lelystad.

Both Schiphol Airport and Lelystad Airport are managed by the Royal Schiphol Group.

Source - more info:
Press release (Dutch only):
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/ministerie ... ad-airport
Referral page:
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/ministerie ... ad-airport

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 40827
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by sn26567 »

Passenger wrote: 21 Feb 2018, 12:34 The opening of Lelystad Airport is now officially postponed from April 2019 to "2020".
The CEO of the Royal Schiphol Group reacted very disappointedly: https://www.aviation24.be/airports/lelys ... postponed/
André
ex Sabena #26567

Passenger
Posts: 7266
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Brucargo 2017: cargo routes, news

Post by Passenger »

Passenger wrote: 06 Dec 2017, 21:36
Passenger wrote: 01 Oct 2017, 18:57 Rumours in the Dutch press: within three weeks, the Dutch government will announce its decision to give Maastricht Airport a runway extension (today it's 2.500m real use).
Decision: extended from 2.500m to 2.750m. Thus full use of the runway is allowed.
A local action group against Maastricht Airport (they call themselves "against extension of Maastricht Airport") has lost a court case against the above decision. Actually, the Judge dismissed their case because, the Judge rules, the protesters should address the official regulator = the "toezichthouder Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport (ILT)".

https://www.limburger.nl/cnt/dmf2018022 ... ort-geding

Passenger
Posts: 7266
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by Passenger »

sn26567 wrote: 23 Feb 2018, 15:37
Passenger wrote: 21 Feb 2018, 12:34 The opening of Lelystad Airport is now officially postponed from April 2019 to "2020".
The CEO of the Royal Schiphol Group reacted very disappointedly: https://www.aviation24.be/airports/lelys ... postponed/
KLM is more then disappointed: they're furious (they say they are "zeer ontstemd", which is unusual language in top press release in the Netherlands). Because the "Alders Agreement" will not be respected, KLM now demands a re-negociating about the maximum number of movements at AMS Schiphol Airport.

https://nieuws.klm.com/reactie-klm-uits ... d-airport/

Nieuwe afspraken noodzakelijk nu opening Lelystad airport weer is uitgesteld

KLM heeft kennis genomen van het besluit van minister Van Nieuwenhuizen om de opening van Lelystad Airport opnieuw met een jaar uit te stellen tot 2020. KLM is zeer ontstemd over het feit dat het Aldersakkoord niet wordt nagekomen. Er zijn afspraken gemaakt over de functie van regionale velden en dat deze uitsluitend als overflow (vluchten die eerst vanaf Schiphol zouden worden uitgevoerd) ingezet worden.

Groei op Schiphol tot 2020 zou mogelijk zijn als verkeer op Schiphol uitgeplaatst kon worden naar Lelystad Airport. Nu capaciteit op Leystad Airport niet beschikbaar is, moet groei op Schiphol mogelijk gemaakt worden.

Schiphol de komende jaren op slot zetten heeft zeer nadelige gevolgen voor de groei van mainport Schiphol en home-carrier KLM en de daarbij behorende bereikbaarheid, vestigingsklimaat en werkgelegenheid. De Nederlandse luchtvaartsector zorgt voor een bijdrage van 30 miljard aan het Nederlandse BNP en is verantwoordelijk voor 300.000 banen.

JamesD
Posts: 61
Joined: 17 Apr 2015, 10:59

Latam Cargo to BRU

Post by JamesD »

Hey all,

Can someone confirm the news I just read that Latam cargo is coming to BRU as of next week?
There would be 2 flights a week operated by a B767 due to slot issues in AMS...

The flights would be from Santiago via Miami to Brussels.
Return flights on Thursday direct to San Paolo, on sundays via FRA to Santiago.

Anyone more news?

User avatar
luchtzak
Posts: 11734
Joined: 18 Sep 2002, 00:00
Location: Hofstade, Zemst - Belgium
Contact:

Re: Latam Cargo to BRU

Post by luchtzak »

I have asked Jeremy Menno from Air Logistics Group: https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/latam ... s-airport/

TLspotting
Posts: 3075
Joined: 19 Mar 2017, 10:22
Location: Uccle/Ukkel, BE
Contact:

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by TLspotting »

LATAM Cargo flight UC1509 coming from MIA and SCL expected at 10:50L tomorrow !
Hi. I'm Thibault Lapers. @ThibaultLapers & @TLspotting

Passenger
Posts: 7266
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by Passenger »

More bad news for cargo operators at AMS:

a Dutch Judge just ruled against AMS Airport: 2.500 winter slots that were not used (mainly because of extreme weather) have to be given to Corendon TUI and Easyjet, for use during the summer of 2018.

http://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/222385/Sc ... -uitvoeren

The sky is the limit. But at AMS, the limit is 500.000 movements.

Jetter
Posts: 480
Joined: 06 Nov 2015, 21:07

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by Jetter »

Passenger wrote: 05 Apr 2018, 15:40 More bad news for cargo operators at AMS:

a Dutch Judge just ruled against AMS Airport: 2.500 winter slots that were not used (mainly because of extreme weather) have to be given to Corendon TUI and Easyjet, for use during the summer of 2018.

http://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/222385/Sc ... -uitvoeren

The sky is the limit. But at AMS, the limit is 500.000 movements.
That's not bad news for cargo operators at all as these slots are available for cargo operators as well. The judge ruled the slots have to made available, not to who they should be given.

Meanwhile in februari cargo grew more at AMS than BRU, so AMS seems to be doing fine.

Passenger
Posts: 7266
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by Passenger »

Jetter wrote: 08 Apr 2018, 19:48
Passenger wrote: 05 Apr 2018, 15:40 More bad news for cargo operators at AMS:
a Dutch Judge just ruled against AMS Airport: 2.500 winter slots that were not used (mainly because of extreme weather) have to be given to Corendon TUI and Easyjet, for use during the summer of 2018.
http://www.nhnieuws.nl/nieuws/222385/Sc ... -uitvoeren
The sky is the limit. But at AMS, the limit is 500.000 movements.
That's not bad news for cargo operators at all as these slots are available for cargo operators as well. The judge ruled the slots have to made available, not to who they should be given.

Meanwhile in februari cargo grew more at AMS than BRU, so AMS seems to be doing fine.
At this moment, there is no problem indeed. But there will be a problem during tourism season 2018.

During the tourism season 2017, AMS had a capacity problem. Delays and holdings were more standard than exception. Many cargo operators had their slots cancelled because they had failed to realize their previous slots numbers (the 80% or 90% rule).

With another 2.500 slots awarded by court decision, the slot coordinator can't do anything else but to cancel, once again, cargo flights from operators who didn't realize 80% or 90% of their previous slots.

Passenger
Posts: 7266
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Amsterdam flights capped; some cargo operators compelled to move elsewhere

Post by Passenger »

The sky is not the limit. That's a brief summary of a press statement by the Onderzoeksraad voor de Veiligheid / the Dutch Safety Investigation Board about their ongoing investigation into the continuous growth from Amsterdam Schiphol Airport:

https://onderzoeksraad.nl/nl/onderzoek ... E631#fasen

...Een principiële discussie over de toekomst van luchthaven Schiphol is vanwege de veiligheid onvermijdelijk. Dat schrijft de Onderzoeksraad voor Veiligheid vandaag naar aanleiding van de reacties die de Raad heeft ontvangen op zijn aanbevelingen uit het rapport Veiligheid Vliegverkeer Schiphol, dat in april 2017 werd gepubliceerd. Daarin concludeert de Raad dat de grenzen in zicht komen van de hoeveelheid vliegverkeer die op Schiphol veilig afgehandeld kan worden.

Op Schiphol is een patroon zichtbaar dat de betrokken partijen eerst nieuwe veiligheidsrisico’s accepteren en vervolgens maatregelen nemen om de negatieve gevolgen voor de veiligheid te beperken. Die aanpak moet doorbroken worden. Veiligheid speelt naar het oordeel van de Onderzoeksraad in het huidige debat over de groei van Schiphol een ondergeschikte rol, waardoor het belang van veiligheid onvoldoende wordt afgewogen tegen de andere belangen die met de luchthaven zijn gemoeid.

Het ministerie van Infrastructuur en Waterstaat en het Veiligheids platform Schiphol (VpS) grijpen het rapport juist aan om te benadrukken dat de Onderzoeksraad geen signalen heeft dat de veiligheid van het vliegverkeer op en rond Schiphol op het moment van onderzoek onvoldoende was. Daarmee gaan zij voorbij aan de conclusie dat de grenzen in zicht komen van wat op Schiphol veilig afgehandeld kan worden als gevolg van de snelle groei en de grote complexiteit van de infrastructuur en het vliegverkeer. Deze eenzijdige nadruk van de sector en het ministerie op een ‘veilig’ Schiphol doet geen recht aan de door de Onderzoeksraad in het rapport beschreven zorgen over veiligheid.

Na decennia van groei, steeds weer nieuwe maatregelen nemen voor nieuwe risico’s en maximaal benutten van marges, is het debat over de grootste luchthaven van Nederland vooral een getalsmatige discussie geworden. Zo is het huidige plafond van 500.000 vluchten inmiddels een veel aangehaald referentiepunt. In dit plafond zijn de zogeheten ‘technische vluchten’ en de ‘general aviation’ echter niet opgenomen. Dit betreft duizenden vluchten op jaarbasis, die eveneens op de luchthaven worden afgehandeld en meewegen in de veiligheid van de omgeving.

Dat de risico’s reëel en actueel zijn, blijkt uit de recente voorvallen die de Onderzoeksraad in onderzoek heeft genomen en waarbij de in het onderzoeksrapport uit 2017 geconstateerde bevindingen wederom een rol spelen.

Post Reply