JustPlanes wrote: ↑08 Dec 2017, 06:54
Brings back memories... we actually filmed those training flights on the A340-200 of Sabena in the late 90s but I think they were in LGG now I don't remember... maybe it was CRL, Here the video
kinda make sense when you read the reasoning but ... how ?
there will be many years before the lengthening of the track
With the same logic you end up in LGG without the issues.
Unless this is just a political joke : I asked you, you refused, so we can remain friends while flying from BRU
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.
I actually wonder what their business plan is? Operating a plane that needs 3.000 meters of runway with a 2.550meter runway will ensure severe penalties and thus unable to operate with cargo, maybe not even with a full cabin?
I know that the Chinese have currently money to burn and they probably can afford it to start an airline with very low ability to generate profits but still...
No wonder that they still don't have an AOC, with such plans it seems to be doomed to fail so why grant an AOC when there's not much chance for success? Maybe Air Belgium should ask for a Slovenian AOC just like VLM did, unfortunately for Air Belgium there aren't any Belgian AOC's available for buying at this moment (and probably not in the (far) future), seems that VLM was lucky that they could snatch Thomas Cook's Belgian AOC.
I actually wonder what their business plan is? Operating a plane that needs 3.000 meters of runway with a 2.550meter runway will ensure severe penalties and thus unable to operate with cargo, maybe not even with a full cabin?
From Hong Kong to CRL this should not be a problem,I guess. For the outbound flight CRL-HKG they could make a technical stop to refuel somewhere en-route when fully loaded ,no?
I actually wonder what their business plan is? Operating a plane that needs 3.000 meters of runway with a 2.550meter runway will ensure severe penalties and thus unable to operate with cargo, maybe not even with a full cabin?
From Hong Kong to CRL this should not be a problem,I guess. For the outbound flight CRL-HKG they could make a technical stop to refuel somewhere en-route when fully loaded ,no?
I'll prefer the direct CX BRU HKG. And do not stop for refueling somewhere because the runway in CRL is too short ! Suréalisme à la belge !
I don't believe what L'Echo writes. Untill CRL has a longer runway, it makes no sense to operate long haul there.
Commercially, it will be hard for a new airline to sell Charleroi-Moscow-Hong Kong when you direct competitor is an established airline who offers a nonstop flight from an airport with more facilities, close to Belgium's major CBD, a railway station at the airport, ....
Add-ons with Ryanair or Wizz? Forget it. Nobody will book that for the return flight, given their fees and penalties for missed flights. And who will fly Italy or the UK to Charleroi, then wait there for three hours, and then board a flight with a fuel stop mid-way to Hong Kong? Must be hell of a journey.
Sure, there is a difference in airport tax, and the handling costs and parking fees at BRU Brussels are also more expensive. But Brussels Airport offers incentives for new airlines with new routes, whilst Charleroi Airport will have it difficult to go cheaper then they are now.
Wonder what the runway restrictions means when they refuel at Moscow. And in case of a weather related deviation there: what if the crew goes in overtime?
Seriously: they only can choose between LGG and BRU. With CRL a possibility as from 2021. If the runway then is 3.000m.
Cargo could be a substantial additional revenue for that kind of destinations no ?
How can they make as much in reduced airport fees...
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.
Acid-drop wrote: ↑21 Dec 2017, 18:31
Cargo could be a substantial additional revenue for that kind of destinations no ?
How can they make as much in reduced airport fees...
An Air Belgium spokeswoman confirmed the negotiations between the airline and Brussels South Charleroi. The negotiations are well underway, but not yet agreed on. More information will be communicated in due time.
That's good news if AB will fly from Charleroi it's important that Charleroi gets other airlines than Ryanair.
Also it will create a healthy competition between Brussels and Charleroi maybe Brussels Airlines can also move some holidays flights to Cherleroi.