Infrastructure of Brussels Airport

[Air Key West]

All pax have the right to fly from BRU if they and their preferred airlines are prepared to pay the airport fees and taxes applicable to all airlines at BRU rather than flying with airlines subsidized by an airport and, consequently, in most cases also, by regional tax payers money.
I sincerely hope all LCCs will opt for CRL since both love each other so much and I have no problem at all if CRL were ever to become bigger than BRU (which is unlikely but one never knows) : let everybody perform its mission.

[Atlantis]

BRU might be an over-crowded place in 5 years from now, or might not - who can tell ?
At present, the statistics show that BRU is losing quite a lot of traffic by comparison with last year (I don't have the exact numbers at hand, but for instance, in june this year : 9% less pax
http://www.lecho.be/actualite/economie- ... 22-602.art).
CRL, on the contrary, is increasing its traffic month after month, and by a good margin, and is already on the verge of being over-crowded.
http://www.charleroi-airport.com/doc.ph ... e=2&site=1
Moreover, the lower-end passengers, as you say rather snobbishly, have the same right to travel from BRU as anybody else.
May I remind you that BRU was built with public money provided by every belgian tax payer, and that it is still 25 % owned by the Belgian state, ie by every citizen, not only by the top-end happy few ?

Why the hell are you comparing BRU with CRL, a full service airport with a low cost airport?????? You have indeed not the exact figures to compare and you can't rely on some newspapers because they write more stupid things then correct things.

You compare the charter, Extra and Intra figures of BRU with the LC-figures of CRL. Sorry, but you can' compare both.

Sorry airazurxtror, its not personal both what we can read here lately on this forum is realy hilarious. It can be for most of you just a hobby but be professional.

[airazurxtror]

Aviation is on the way to becoming a mass transportation.
You don't run a railway or a metro network just with the 1st class passengers.
The future of aviation is with the LCC, like it or not. And long haul LCC will soon be with us.
Will BRU still miss the coach, once more ?

Nothing personal here, but you see this industry with a nostalgy of the past.
And if I am not a professional (who are always right, as everybody knows), then the BRU management is not either, who strive to attract the LCC at BRU.

[Buzz]

The future of aviation is with the LCC, like it or not. And long haul LCC will soon be with us.

Long Haul LCC is a mith that does not exist. All the traditional LCC methods do not work or become irrelivant on long haul (fast turn-around, no service, etc.). Even Michael O'Leary from FR has said that a LH LCC airline would need a bussiness class and thus all things associated with it to make it profitable.

[Stij]

Even Michael O'Leary from FR has said that a LH LCC airline would need a bussiness class and thus all things associated with it to make it profitable.

Bringing his offer so close to the existing (traditional) offerings that it just won't work.

There's another reason in my opinion: a lot of the low cost flights are filled with tourists on weekend trips (or even day shopping trips), in other words 2 or 3 nights hotel + a cheap flight and that's a holiday you can afford a couple of times a year. If you don't spend that much, you don't care that much if you fly to Barcelona or Madrid, if the fares to Madrdi are excellent, you fly to Madrid.

On long haul, most people tend to fly for a week or two (OK, New York is an exeption). In other words +-10 nights hotel + a cheap flight and that's a holiday you can afford every year / 2 years. Now if you spend that much money, you really want to go to that city /region that YOU want, not where the fares are excellent.

In short it's not just a pricing problem, it's also a demand problem.

Cheers,

Stij

[tolipanebas]

The idea that LCC somehow own the future and service airlines are soon bound to disappear is an idea straight from MOL's big mouth. It is an idea that has caught on with Joe Average who is very price sensitive, flies only once or twice a year (mainly or solely for leasure purposes) and only sees full service airlines as nothing more but a flying restaurant packed with first class pax!

Mind you, the idea not only is overly naive and simplistic, it is an idea which definitely isn't reflected in any way in statistical evidence!

Reality has it most pax making use of full service airlines do so on an almost weekly basis and prefer a full service airline for very different reasons than the better onboard service, as reflected in the fact they no longer fly first or business, but rather economy class! In fact many of the full service airlines are no longer the snobbish and luxurious 5 star airlines of the past, not even in business class; nowadays they offer a product of choice (some have a lowest class merely better than that of any LCC: see b.light), but with one big advantage over any LCC: better frequency and thus greater flexibility.

Just for comparitive reasons:
Have you ever looked at Ryanair's network from CRL? How many of their flights are flown double or trice daily? Heck, many of them aren't even flown every single weekday!
Now compare that to SN's routemap, where basically every European destination is served more than once a day. See the point?

With such a different offer, you attrract different kinds of people, people who travel because their business sends them somewhere and don't want to loose a full day of work getting there. For this they (or their company actually) are willing to pay a premium over any low cost airline's ticket, as a full day of salary + hotel + 2 meals etc actaually also costs a lot of money......
That's what I mean with the high end of the market. There's nothing snobbish to it, really, rather a far better yield for the airline AND airport of their choice.

Statistical evidence from the past has shown this time-sensitive market segment to be growing every year, just like the price-sensitive (aka low cost) segment , to the exception of 2009, due to the global economic crisis, so it is bloody obvious it is not going to disappear like MOL likes to pretend.

If you don't care about the fact the're 2 or 3 flights a day to your destination of choice because you're just heading there as a tourist and don't mind the basic flight schedule for as long as the price is unbeatable, you'll likely find your airline of choice at CRL....
And then please accept the inconveniences from it, knowing things like covered parking houses, nearby location of the airport, schedule flexibility and high frequencies do come at a premium price which you apparently aren't willing to pay!

There's no such thing as a constitutional right to the guaranteed lowest cost flight from the most convenient airport, you know?
Or do you feel you should be getting access to the best places at the football stadium too, when you've bought the cheapest ticket, because you're just as much a supporter like the other guy who has payed 3 times as much for his seat with a far better view overthe pitch?

[Conti764]

That's what I don't get either?
As far as the A Pier is concerned, the Diabolo project is nothing but a train tunnel under its future westerly expansion. It doesnt take more than 2 full years to drill a tunnel of a few hundred now, does it? Besides, I thought the tunnel was already pretty much finished at that location???

I don't know the specifics about Diabolo and it's planning, but as long as we have a big construction site next to the A-pier, you can forget any new construction on that ground. As far as I know, it is the most centrally located site for tunneling. You ave a runway at one side and a taxiway at the other. I guess they use this site to reach both sides of the projects easier then they would centralising everything at one side of the tunnel.

[airazurxtror]

You have indeed not the exact figures to compare and you can't rely on some newspapers because they write more stupid things then correct things.

Are the statistics of Belgocontrol good enough for you ?

http://www.belgocontrol.be/belgoweb/pub ... g09-13.pdf

July 2009 / July 2008 :
- 9,93 % at BRU
+ 9,39 % at the 4 regional airports

[airazurxtror]

There's no such thing as a constitutional right to the guaranteed lowest cost flight from the most convenient airport, you know?

The Brusselaars have the right to find cheap flights at the airport of their city.
And I don't see how the LCC consumer Joe Average can disturb His Highness the top-end user of the luxury high cost carriers.
It's just for that purpose that a special LCC terminal is planned : to separate and segragate the two kind of travellers ! Pour ne pas mélanger les serviettes et les torchons, as they say in French ...

[tolipanebas]

I don't see how the LCC consumer Joe Average can disturb His Highness the top-end user of the luxury high cost carriers.

Have you even bothered to read my explanation above?

There is no such thing anymore as 'His Highness the spoiled and snobbish fan of luxury high cost carriers', all there is are ordinary pax traveling not for leisure, but for business purposes and they do so often on a very tight schedule (before or after the office time), thus they look for airlines with convenient and multiple daily links, offering them choice and flexibility on their often weekly trips.
For that they want to pay a premium fare.
If you call them 'highnesses' I am sure many will strongly disagree with you!

[jan_olieslagers]

The Brusselaars have the right to find cheap flights at the airport of their city.

Bwahah excuse me but that's ridiculous. As if I (or anyone) could claim the right to find a high-speed train to Paris stopping at my village station. Market decides it all: if it is offered, at a price sufficient people will pay for it, then it will exist and continue to exist. Period.

[Airbus330lover]

There's no such thing as a constitutional right to the guaranteed lowest cost flight from the most convenient airport, you know?

The Brusselaars have the right to find cheap flights at the airport of their city.
And I don't see how the LCC consumer Joe Average can disturb His Highness the top-end user of the luxury high cost carriers.
It's just for that purpose that a special LCC terminal is planned : to separate and segragate the two kind of travellers ! Pour ne pas mélanger les serviettes et les torchons, as they say in French ...

And by train..... it's take the same time from Mechelen to CRL or BRU !!! (will change with the diabolo!)

[jan_olieslagers]

And by train..... it's take the same time from Mechelen to CRL or BRU !!!

I have no figures handy, but find this hard to believe.

1) There are much more trains on Mechelen->Brussel-Noord and Brussel-Noord->Luchthaven (I think 4 per hour on each stretch) There can never be as many to Charleroi
2) A train from Mechelen to Charleroi takes at least double as long as to Brussel-Noord
3) Much less time lost in changing platforms at Brussel-Noord than finding the bus in Charleroi + lower frequency on the bus too, meaning more time lost in waiting for it.
4) Bus from Charleroi station to the airport can never be as quick as the Brussels Airport Express.

And indeed, the Diabolo would make it even faster; though we don't yet know what services will be offered on that link. But Antwerpen-Mechelen-Luchthaven would be a natural first.

Then again, a train is not really handy for an air traveller who usually carries lots of luggage; so I don't know if this discussion is very relevant.

[Atlantis]

You have indeed not the exact figures to compare and you can't rely on some newspapers because they write more stupid things then correct things.

Are the statistics of Belgocontrol good enough for you ?

http://www.belgocontrol.be/belgoweb/pub ... g09-13.pdf

July 2009 / July 2008 :
- 9,93 % at BRU
+ 9,39 % at the 4 regional airports

Hmmm, haha, this is exactly what I tought. You see only the global figures, no single detail. I think you forgot that there are a lot of training flights on airports like OST and CRL. This is what we don't have at BRU. No wonder that the figures at those airports are increased.

Please, if we have a discussion about the figures of pax, movements, BRU or CRL, please come with exact figures we can compare.

[airazurxtror]

Please, if we have a discussion about the figures of pax, movements, BRU or CRL, please come with exact figures we can compare.

OK, we won't compare.
BRU : minus 9,93 % , full stop.

[Atlantis]

Please, if we have a discussion about the figures of pax, movements, BRU or CRL, please come with exact figures we can compare.

OK, we won't compare.
BRU : minus 9,93 % , full stop.

What has this to do with this topic? BTW this is totally irrelevant.

[airazurxtror]

Please, if we have a discussion about the figures of pax, movements, BRU or CRL, please come with exact figures we can compare.

OK, we won't compare.
BRU : minus 9,93 % , full stop.

What has this to do with this topic? BTW this is totally irrelevant.

It is most relevant.
The traditional custom of BRU being in free fall, it is high time to attract a new custom.
Whence the need to set up the LCC infrastructure as soon as possible.
Which some "professionals" dispute, wrongly in my view.
Which Macquarie is going to make happen, sensibly, in my opinion.

[Airbus330lover]

And by train..... it's take the same time from Mechelen to CRL or BRU !!!

I have no figures handy, but find this hard to believe.

1) There are much more trains on Mechelen->Brussel-Noord and Brussel-Noord->Luchthaven (I think 4 per hour on each stretch) There can never be as many to Charleroi
2) A train from Mechelen to Charleroi takes at least double as long as to Brussel-Noord
3) Much less time lost in changing platforms at Brussel-Noord than finding the bus in Charleroi + lower frequency on the bus too, meaning more time lost in waiting for it.
4) Bus from Charleroi station to the airport can never be as quick as the Brussels Airport Express.

And indeed, the Diabolo would make it even faster; though we don't yet know what services will be offered on that link. But Antwerpen-Mechelen-Luchthaven would be a natural first.

Then again, a train is not really handy for an air traveller who usually carries lots of luggage; so I don't know if this discussion is very relevant.

Change in Brussels north is not always synchronised.....
Train to CRL is a direct to Charleroi, but ... I forgot the 12 min journey by bus...

In fact the difference is minimal. Therefore the affirmation..." easier for people around Antwerp and Mechelen wants an LCC terminal in BRU for convenience...." is not so correct. Apologize

[Atlantis]

On the site Jaspers you can find a new picture of the Gateway-project. Jaspers is an architect bureau and this in cooperation with A.2R.C.

It looks very modern, good looking and it presents Brussels Airport as a warm, welcome airport.

PS: no dates when they are going to start with.

[Conti764]

I have seen the works at the LCC. It is quite a long walk to the gates. Right now, it looks like there will be a store and bar/restaurant in the old terminal and after that nothing untill you're at the gate (except maybe some vending machines?). There are toilets somewhere in the middle of the old C-pier and where the C-pier makes a small turn towards the satelite, people go down to ground level to a number of remote gates.

Planes park in front of this pier and to roughly half the satelite. There is still heaps of work to be done, but when everything is finished, I think it will be quit a nice terminal with bright colors all around, contrary to the more classic B-pier and the modern A-pier.

Service is basic in the infrastructure.