Why isn't Brussels a big hub ?

unilitha · Post by **unilitha** » 07 Jun 2006, 22:29

Hey guys I was asking myself why isn't Brussels a big hub ? Is it just because we don't have no more big local airlines ? I mean if you compare BRU and Amsterdam, those two cities are not very different and Brussels seems to be a more important international capital so what is the matter ? It is in the middle of the 4 biggest european hub so in one hand I understand that it's hard for BRU to grow but in the other hand we'got the highest density of railway in the world and we can be connected to those for hubs in a little bit more than one hour so... ? CDG is going to rise its prices so could we expect to see airlines moving from Paris to BRU ? Thanks

teddybAIR · Post by **teddybAIR** » 08 Jun 2006, 10:35

I think you mentionned the exact reason in your own post and that is that Brussels is surrounded by a few major hubs (Schiphol, Paris, Frankfurt, London) that can easily access brussels and therefore the catchment areas of these hubs partially overlap with the one from Brussels. Moreover, these other hubs are far more elaborated and allow you to connect to a wider variety of destinations, and thus more passengers are probably taken away from brussels than brussels can take away from it's surrounding competitors.

n5528p · Post by **n5528p** » 08 Jun 2006, 12:45

From my point of view the primary (though not the sole one, of course) reason is that BRU lacks a strong national airline embedded in an alliance.

LON hast BA (and partly BMI), both in an alliance, FRA hast LH, COP has SAS, VIE has OS, ZRH has LX - many of them are comparable in size and market, but there airlines are bigger and in an alliance. The same is true for AMS and of course for Paris.

A hub is created by getting an airline to choose you (for whatever reason) - in the US it happens from time to time that hubs are closed and airlines move away, and the airport shrinks drastically. This is very seldom in Europe, because the larger airlines are former state companies which will not move in the near future. AF will neer leave CDG, BA will never leave LHR,...

Regards, Bernhard

chornedsnorkack · Post by **chornedsnorkack** » 08 Jun 2006, 13:05

n5528p wrote:From my point of view the primary (though not the sole one, of course) reason is that BRU lacks a strong national airline embedded in an alliance.

LON hast BA (and partly BMI), both in an alliance, FRA hast LH, COP has SAS, VIE has OS, ZRH has LX - many of them are comparable in size and market, but there airlines are bigger and in an alliance. The same is true for AMS and of course for Paris.

A hub is created by getting an airline to choose you (for whatever reason) - in the US it happens from time to time that hubs are closed and airlines move away, and the airport shrinks drastically. This is very seldom in Europe, because the larger airlines are former state companies which will not move in the near future. AF will neer leave CDG, BA will never leave LHR,...

Regards, Bernhard

AF has little reason to leave CDG, because it is spacious enough. They seem to have left Orly, though...

BA cannot really leave LHR, because even with the nuisance with slots and restrictions, it is closer to London than GTW or STN, and BA is not exactly planning to build a brand new airport on Thames estuary.

LH has huge trouble expanding FRA and has partly moved to MUC. Could LH move completely to MUC, or somewhere else like Schönefeld, and abandon FRA?

Why is KLM a strong state company with a strong Schiphol hub, but SN is not strong?

Post by **sn26567** » 08 Jun 2006, 13:17

Another reason is the lack of a good rail connection. It is easy to reach AMS or CDG by train, even from Brussels. Try to get by train to Zaventem...

sn-remember · Post by **sn-remember** » 08 Jun 2006, 13:44

Yop train links for short distances and LCCs for longer ones are both unattractive and very insufficient in Bru.
And I agree that a stronger SN within a strong alliance would help a lot.
And yes there should theorically be a place for a more modest 5th "hub" inside the mentioned 4 major hub area.
So in my opinion what lacks mostly is business coherence... and the will to make things change quickly

(

b720 · Post by **b720** » 08 Jun 2006, 14:13

I agree with Andre...try and get to zaventem by train...and try to get to BRU from Antwerp a nightmare....a shame for a country claiming most dense railwaysystem in Europe (and probably in the world)...

I do not think that Bru should nor could compete with ams cdg lhr or frankfurt..as a hub. I think that Bru and SN should take advantage of business traffic between bru and other major and secondary cities in Europe. SN will do better remaining a small full service airline (alebeit not cheap) concentrating on point to point business trafic in europe. Only area for expansion for both SN and BRU is Africa. I think that Bru has the capacity and potential to become the gateway to Africa by attracting more African airlines, and hopefully SN would increase frequency, and destinations in Africa.

Comet · Post by **Comet** » 08 Jun 2006, 15:27

Brussels is a superb airport, but sadly it is getting more and more like tramps' dossing ground.

And the European obsession that everything French is superior doesn't help, CDG is a bloody awful place, like NCL on a larger scale but because it is French it will always be promoted more.

Post by **speedbird1** » 08 Jun 2006, 15:35

Comet wrote:Brussels is a superb airport, but sadly it is getting more and more like tramps' dossing ground.

And the European obsession that everything French is superior doesn't help, CDG is a bloody awful place, like NCL on a larger scale but because it is French it will always be promoted more.

A tramps dossing ground...? In which context to you intend this point?
Also I think you'll find that Europeans do not have an obsession with everything French.

Emirates

earthman · Post by **earthman** » 08 Jun 2006, 15:57

If BRU were on a main trunk of the train network, including the HST network, that might help a bit. But it is on a side line. But, as pointed out, the main issue is probably the lack of a large alliance member.

Vinnie-Winnie · Post by **Vinnie-Winnie** » 08 Jun 2006, 19:46

Small home market as well!

And if it had done like KLM, ie offering cheap connecting services, it might have done a bit better as well...

But then again KLM has a home market where demand for airline travel is far greater than the belgian one!

Comet wrote:Brussels is a superb airport, but sadly it is getting more and more like tramps' dossing ground..

Hehehe I think you are confusing Brussels airport with the central station in Brussels there! Though both have large empty spaces the hallway between the underground station and the train station has far more tramps!

Buzz · Post by **Buzz** » 09 Jun 2006, 01:48

Vinnie-Winnie wrote:And if it had done like KLM, ie offering cheap connecting services, it might have done a bit better as well...

Yeah, that worked out great for Sabena

Vinnie-Winnie wrote:But then again KLM has a home market where demand for airline travel is far greater than the belgian one!

How is that? There may be 4 million people more, but I assume BRU has a bigger cachment area than AMS... (AMS is in a 'corner', BRU has big cities all around).

BRU was always the underdog, with the weak underdog airline SABENA. It grew historically, and can't be changed overnight...

teddybAIR · Post by **teddybAIR** » 09 Jun 2006, 08:28

earthman wrote:If BRU were on a main trunk of the train network, including the HST network, that might help a bit. But it is on a side line. But, as pointed out, the main issue is probably the lack of a large alliance member.

I made my thesis (2 years ago) about this and the bad news is they will not link the airport directly to the HST network because all alternatives where you set up an HST terminal under or on the airport are to expensive and don't result in significant benefits over other scenario's. However, it will be linked indirectly to this network by making better connections between the airport and Brussels in particular and Belgium in general. At the time I was writing my thesis they were working on the 'Bocht van Nossegem' which makes the airport far more accessible for people coming from the Leuven region. This project is part of the diabolo project that would among others link the airport to Antwerp by a railway connection located in the median strip of the E19. Yet, it is obvious that these are no short term plans as the airport environment is a very densily occupied one. Therefore, even underground alternatives are extremely complicated if you do not want to destabilise the existing structures...a nice example of this was the fact that they considered prolonging the current tunnel under the airport and locate a hst terminal just a few hunderd meters further than the current train terminal, because expanding the currently existing terminal would mean that you dig under the sheraton hotel with all the risks involved.
As for the indirect link with the hst-network: I guess they allready have trains every 15 minutes between brussels and the airport. I'm not a regular user, but 15 minutes seems reasonable, no?

regards,
bAIR

Vinnie-Winnie · Post by **Vinnie-Winnie** » 09 Jun 2006, 09:33

[quote="Buzz"][/quote]

By separating my 2 arguments which were interlinked it's obvious that my comment does not make much sense...

Have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands#Economy for example and you will see that the Netherlands have a big chance: Export related economy with many companies which are "locally" owned and whose headquarters are located there....

That helps Schiphol a lot!

Post by **sn26567** » 09 Jun 2006, 09:37

teddybAIR wrote:As for the indirect link with the hst-network: I guess they allready have trains every 15 minutes between brussels and the airport. I'm not a regular user, but 15 minutes seems reasonable, no?

That is reasonable for people living in Brussels. But coming from other parts of the country, it is not. In most cases people must change trains, which they hate when carrying a heavy suitcase. Try going from Antwerp, Liège, Namur or Charleroi to the airport! The diabolo will certainly alleviate the problem a little bit, but a direct link with the HST network would have been an ideal solution.

teddybAIR · Post by **teddybAIR** » 09 Jun 2006, 09:45

I agree that it would be nice for those couple of people on that train, but if you ask me, it's just a waste of money to extend the hst-network to the airport, it just costs to much for what you can get out of it. Unless you can clearly indicate and quantify (in hard cash) the benefits of such a project, it will not be executed.
Don't forget that every scenario has it's side effects: extending the hst-network to Zaventem means that those HST's have to cross the North-South axe in Brussels which is allready heavily congested in peak hours! Really, virtually no extra train fits in the shedule! The idea of having a hst-terminal on the airport is off course a good idea, but it is subject to numerous constraints that you don't think of in a first instance. If we wanted a hst-terminal in Zaventem, than that decision should have been taken years ago when the choice for a first terminal was taken (location: brussel-midi)

greetz
bAIR

b720 · Post by **b720** » 09 Jun 2006, 10:57

maybe, but that's exactly why the airport will remain a regional one. If every possible solution is IMPOSSIBLE we have to be quiet, and accept our little provincial airport where longhaul means Teneriffe and Antalya...

teddybAIR · Post by **teddybAIR** » 09 Jun 2006, 11:10

jan_olieslagers wrote:
Neither do I think the diabolo will help very much. The diabolo is the link that allows direct trains from Leuven to the airport terminal, not? A very good thing, certainly, but much more progress will be made with the direct connection to the Brussels-Antwerp railway.

The link to Leuven is only one part of the Diabolo project. The total project also comprises the link to Antwerp.

And I agree that good hst-links are not the magical solution for BRU, but not having them would be far worse if you ask me! Besides, indirect links can be good links as well, given the fact that businnessmen don't necesarilly cary lot's of luggage...

regards

b720 · Post by **b720** » 09 Jun 2006, 11:23

I use BRU on a weekly basis..i live and work in antwerp. There is no way to use public transportation if my flight departs at 07:00 am or earlier. I will simply miss my flight, I need to use my car and park at the airport. I also avoid taking last flights into BRU as with a simple delay of 30 min (very frequent by the way) I will miss last SN Brussels bus to Ant. let alone trains via brussels north station, when a trip after 22:00 can take over 90 minutes from zaventem to Antwerp -taken me longer at times. On the other hand, when I fly during the day I need to leave my office a good 3-4 hours before departure time which is ridiculous given that the airport is 40 km away!!!! a flight to geneva for instance, takes me about 6 hours door to door (from antwerp using BRU of course), the whole trip takes 7 hours by car door to door..now at this age and time that is not normal.

Aviation24.be

Why isn't Brussels a big hub ?

Why isn't Brussels a big hub ?

Re: Arlon