New Gates at the end of the A pier?

[Inquirer]

Came back from a business trip yesterday and saw that at the end the A pier -where the sunrise lounge of Brussels airlines is located- an A330 was parked almost perpendicular to the terminal, on what appeared to be a new gate... As I've never seen this before, I am wondering:
Are there indeed new gates foreseen there? If so, how many?
Do these gates have boarding bridges? If so, what will happen with the sunrise lounge?
Is this in preparation of more long haul flying from Bru.Air?
Thank you and sorry should this be discussed before.

[Kapitein]

To be totally correct, these are not gates but stands.
These are indeed new and in the future it might indeed be a fully new position with gates and boardingbridge, but this is in a far future.
Now are they used as remote waiting position for the A330's of SN. Some days we have 7 flights and only 6 positions, so we let one aircraft wait on this new stand until there is a position free to bring it up to the boardingbridge.

[Inquirer]

So no actual boarding will happen at those stands then?
What is the advantage of having them park overthere? Aren't they going to block a taxiway?
I remember planes de-ice overthere in winter, so where are they going to do that in future?

[RoMax]

These planes have to stand somewhere after they left the B pier (to make room overthere) and before they can get at a reall gate at the A pier (T-zone).

[tolipanebas]

The real problem is that the A pier is just too small in the morning and an extenson is urgently needed; not beyond 2015 or something, but NOW.

Indeed, in the morning, it's regularly happening that arriving planes planned to go to the A pier have to wait for up to 10 minutes before they can deboard their (connecting) passengers, just because no gates are free in the Schengen part of the terminal! The alternative is to send those flights to remote positions, which is a real shame for a hub airport like BRU, especially in the winter or when it is raining.
Meanwhile, there are also not enough T gates available for all the SN longhauls either, especially not as from next year, when we'll be having even more A330s operating in the morning...

Rather than waste time and money on a connector building so as to let the airport have even more shops then it already has today, they should first extend the A pier westbound: the connector is a fancyful project BRU should not give priority to, it can always come later, when all the basic infrastructure is able to cope with peak demand.

Unless BRU sees itself as some kind of a mega shopping mall where shopaholics happen to come to by plane, I really fail to see why they give priority to the connector over the A pier extension, especially as they meanwhile have to squeeze gates out of every inch of the existing infrastructure, be it at the B pier (the removal of the tent) or now with these 2 new remote stands right at the top of the A pier.

[Air Key West]

Rather than waste time and money on a connector building so as to let the airport have even more shops then it already has today, they should first extend the A pier westbound

I fully agree. BRU, of course, wants more revenue from renting space to additional shops. That's why they want to build the Connector. I seldom buy anything at the airport. So, I hope that they will not close the tunnel. I'll gladly continue to use it, if it makes it possbile to avoid going through a shopping mall and navigating through masses of shoppers blocking your progression to the gate.

Indeed, the priority is in no way the Connector, but the extension to Terminal A westbound. Time perhaps for the airlines and in particular b.air to put their foot down and demand what THEY need as most important customers of the airport (the airlines are more important customers of the airports than the pax, since if there were no airlines there wouldn't be any pax).

[RoMax]

I fully agree, tough I'm not sure BRU isn't working at the A pier west as much (or even more) as on the connector... I assume the design of this extension will be in line with the rest of the A-pier (but with accomodations for non-schengen pax). So no need to turn this into publicity as much as the connector which is what the pax need to notice.
Maybe BRU is working very hard behind the scenes to get the work on A pier West going?

Don't want to defend BRU without knowing this for sure, but I don't want to be negative either before I know what's really going on. But maybe you guys know more about it?

[Tomskii]

Tunnel normally will be closed and used as staff transport means (supply of shops etc)

[Inquirer]

Anybody got an idea as to when the works on the extended A pier will start, because indeed, BRU seems to be short on gates during the rush hours and is extensively making use of remote stands, something which I personally hate a lot...

[Air Key West]

Whenever I fly to Munich or Frankfurt (for connections), the planes to/from Brussels are always at a remote stand, just like many other planes (LH and other airlines). Everybody hates it except airlines apparently : if there are not enough gates to service all flights, planes go to a remote stand. More than once, when I flew to ZRH, the (LX) plane was also put at a remote stand although several gates with boardingbridges were empty. The availability of gates with boardingbridges seem to be a problem in many airports. That does not mean BRU should not extend Terminal A (quickly).

[Conti764]

I fully agree, tough I'm not sure BRU isn't working at the A pier west as much (or even more) as on the connector... I assume the design of this extension will be in line with the rest of the A-pier (but with accomodations for non-schengen pax). So no need to turn this into publicity as much as the connector which is what the pax need to notice.
Maybe BRU is working very hard behind the scenes to get the work on A pier West going?

Don't want to defend BRU without knowing this for sure, but I don't want to be negative either before I know what's really going on. But maybe you guys know more about it?

I could understand them not starting on the APW-building as long as the basic construction of Diabolo was finished, but the damn thing is now even up and running, so the first signs should have been already there. I know getting all paper work is nothing to do overnight, but they should have started the paperwork already years ago to start as soon as possible.

On the other hand, I do see the need to build the connector. The point is to centralize all security at one point after which border control could be done prior to enter the non-shengen area. The current infrastructure in the basement of the A-pier is highly insufficient to do so and way to small to cope with an extended A-pier in the future, which I believe is to be used as non-shengen area, when these days waiting lines are already horrific in that dull basement.

Another issue was many people complaining about going down several floors, walking through a dull tunnel, wait in an overly crowded security area and going up those same floors again. That the Connector can be used by BAC to gather even more retail income is a nice extra.

But I repeat, building the Connector should not stand in the way of building the A-pier West extension.

[Stij]

The current infrastructure in the basement of the A-pier is highly insufficient to do so and way to small to cope with an extended A-pier in the future, which I believe is to be used as non-shengen area, when these days waiting lines are already horrific in that dull basement.

I think you made a very smart remark, and maybe the most important reason for constructing the connector and also building it first... If they would first build the extention... nobody would make their flights...

Cheers,

Stij

[Kapitein]

So no actual boarding will happen at those stands then?

No, only waiting stands for at this moment

What is the advantage of having them park overthere?

Making place for other flights, same principal as with UA, HU and TG at the B-pier.

Aren't they going to block a taxiway?
I remember planes de-ice overthere in winter, so where are they going to do that in future?

No, taxyway K-M is clear for traffic and de-icing

Indeed, in the morning, it's regularly happening that arriving planes planned to go to the A pier have to wait for up to 10 minutes before they can deboard their (connecting) passengers, just because no gates are free in the Schengen part of the terminal! The alternative is to send those flights to remote positions, which is a real shame for a hub airport like BRU, especially in the winter or when it is raining.

If every flight would leave and arrive at the time of their schedule, this wouldn't be a problem. Every one could go in and out without waiting time. But this will only happen in a perfect world and for me this won't be good either because I would have no job . So we prefere to let the arrival wait for some time then to send them in remote. And indeed, sometimes it can take a while.

Meanwhile, there are also not enough T gates available for all the SN longhauls either, especially not as from next year, when we'll be having even more A330s operating in the morning...

With this I need to disagree. There are enough stands/gates for the SN longhaul, for now. The days that SN has 7 departures, there is always a flight that leaves at 1435LT to DKR. This aircraft goes to the new waitingstand until the first flight leaves the stand at the T-terminal, mostly is this the JFK at 1020LT. So in theory they have 4h15 minutes to bring the aircraft to the departure position wich is more then enough to prepare it for the flight. No need to block a position with BB for more then 7 hours if we need them all. So I must say, there are enough stands for all the longhaul SN departures.
Next year I maybe need to agree with you, but I have no view on that at this moment

[Inquirer]

Thank you for the detailed answers, brubiac!

[Atco EBBR]

What is the advantage of having them park overthere?

Making place for other flights, same principal as with UA, HU and TG at the B-pier.

Allright, but isn't there enough room for that elsewhere, eg stands 310-318?

Aren't they going to block a taxiway?
I remember planes de-ice overthere in winter, so where are they going to do that in future?

No, taxyway K-M is clear for traffic and de-icing

Taxiway K is no more, it had to go due to the arrival of the new stands. It was seldom used, but still handy if you had to put somebody 'out of the way' - technical problem, stand blocked...

As for de-icing, I can only suppose it will be done on taxiway M solely, so there will be less place for a/c waiting. De-icing is allways a pain in the a**, but if a/c have to start waiting on the normal taxiways (R4 and S), then it will be even worse...

[Kapitein]

Brubiac wrote:

Inquirer wrote:What is the advantage of having them park overthere?


Making place for other flights, same principal as with UA, HU and TG at the B-pier.


Allright, but isn't there enough room for that elsewhere, eg stands 310-318?

Well, there is indeed enough room at apron 3 but sometimes it's completely full aswell.
Also in the winter, when de-icing is done at pos 320-325 it can be handy to put a aircraft at another place.
As I said before, these are now remote waiting stands but in the future, if SN grows further with the AFI-flights these will become full stands with even a BB.

[tolipanebas]

Isn't there enough room for that elsewhere, eg stands 310-318?

There is, but having all of SN long haul planes as much as possible together has certain benefits: it makes life much easier for serveral departments.

As for de-icing, I can only suppose it will be done on taxiway M solely, so there will be less place for a/c waiting. De-icing is allways a pain in the a**, but if a/c have to start waiting on the normal taxiways (R4 and S), then it will be even worse...

Ideally, rather than have a/c start up and wait on taxiways leading to the de-icing area, improved coordination should make it possible to keep a/c longer at their gate.

IMHO, BRU is really lacking a dedicated de-icing platform near the holding point of it's main RWY25R.
For all the works that are constantly done at B1/B3 or at W41, it's a real pitty they have never decided to make one overthere as that would be brilliantly efficient...
In the absence of it, I suppose we will indeed just have to stick to using just M in future?
I wonder if BAC/Flightcare have already noticed the upcoming bottleneck overthere, or whether they will discover this problem only on the very first day they'll have to de-ice?
Oh wait, we're talking BRU here, so what a stupid question of mine!

[Tomskii]

Isn't there enough room for that elsewhere, eg stands 310-318?

There is, but having all of SN long haul planes as much as possible together has certain benefits: it makes life much easier for serveral departments.

As for de-icing, I can only suppose it will be done on taxiway M solely, so there will be less place for a/c waiting. De-icing is allways a pain in the a**, but if a/c have to start waiting on the normal taxiways (R4 and S), then it will be even worse...

Ideally, rather than have a/c start up and wait on taxiways leading to the de-icing area, improved coordination should make it possible to keep a/c longer at their gate.

IMHO, BRU is really lacking a dedicated de-icing platform near the holding point of it's main RWY25R.
For all the works that are constantly done at B1/B3 or at W41, it's a real pitty they have never decided to make one overthere as that would be brilliantly efficient...
In the absence of it, I suppose we will indeed just have to stick to using just M in future?
I wonder if BAC/Flightcare have already noticed the upcoming bottleneck overthere, or whether they will discover this problem only on the very first day they'll have to de-ice?
Oh wait, we're talking BRU here, so what a stupid question of mine!

Firstly, making a dedicated de-icing platform around the W41 area would be stupid.

Reason 1: Not all flights have to pass there, only the heavy's pass via W41. The rest is B1
Reason 2: All flights would have to cross runway 02 for de-icing, hence if they have to get back to H/P RWY 07R that would be a bottleneck for atc, and includes even longer taxi times.

A solution which I see as a better solution is one many airports use. The de-icing trucks come up to the stands and de-ice the planes before pushback.

[Atco EBBR]

Firstly, making a dedicated de-icing platform around the W41 area would be stupid.

Reason 1: Not all flights have to pass there, only the heavy's pass via W41. The rest is B1

But sending every flight that needs de-icing (be it heavy or medium) to W41 is no problem at all. Btw W41 is not dedicated to heavy traffic, nor is B1 only used by mediums. It just comes down to TORA needed

Reason 2: All flights would have to cross runway 02 for de-icing, hence if they have to get back to H/P RWY 07R that would be a bottleneck for atc, and includes even longer taxi times.

This is true, it would be a huge pain with 02/07R in use...

A solution which I see as a better solution is one many airports use. The de-icing trucks come up to the stands and de-ice the planes before pushback.

In fact, this is already done in Brussels. Aviapartner only de-ices at the stand, while Flightcare has remote and on-stand de-icing. A disadvantage of on stand de-icing is that you lose 10-15 min of the holdover time during taxi, which is a problem in heavy winter conditions...

Imo, the best thing to do would be to have a look in Arlanda or Gardermoen to see how they do it there... But I must say, the situation in Brussels has improved greatly since Bru airport (for the taxiways and runways) invested in new snow removing vehicles. Up until two (?) winters ago, they had the old 'Bertins', which used hot air to clear the runways, but were very slow (1 - 2 hours/rwy) and couldn't stop while in progress...

[Stij]

Reason 2: All flights would have to cross runway 02 for de-icing, hence if they have to get back to H/P RWY 07R that would be a bottleneck for atc, and includes even longer taxi times.

This is true, it would be a huge pain with 02/07R in use...

And what would be the problem with creating 2 dedicated platforms? One at W41 for runways 25R and 20 and one at the start of runway 07R for runways 07R and 02?

Cheers,

Stij