Brussels Airport considering low cost terminal
Moderator: Latest news team
Don't shoot Van Assche. I presume that you all know that Macquarie Airports is leading this airport. Van Assche is on top for Brussels Airport and he is just saying, i.o. Macquarie, what they are going to do.
Second: Its correct that pier A and B are underused, B more then A but they are thinking further then today's situation.
Main goal for this year: long haul and LCC. We know that NW, US, 9W and Air Maestro are coming and Brussels Airlines has a fourth A330. They all will use pier B. Negociations with Thailand, South Africa, Qatar and Japan are under construction, but I have no more info on that.
Handling costs at A and B are way to high for LCC. So why don't put them in an other pier or terminal? How many gates will it have? Eight or nine? And thinking that it will be used heavy. Thats the only way to attract LCC to BRU.
There is at this moment no final decision about the interior of that new terminal. So lets wait a few months.
Second: Its correct that pier A and B are underused, B more then A but they are thinking further then today's situation.
Main goal for this year: long haul and LCC. We know that NW, US, 9W and Air Maestro are coming and Brussels Airlines has a fourth A330. They all will use pier B. Negociations with Thailand, South Africa, Qatar and Japan are under construction, but I have no more info on that.
Handling costs at A and B are way to high for LCC. So why don't put them in an other pier or terminal? How many gates will it have? Eight or nine? And thinking that it will be used heavy. Thats the only way to attract LCC to BRU.
There is at this moment no final decision about the interior of that new terminal. So lets wait a few months.
From wikipedia: "Om de kosten laag te houden heeft deze pier geen winkels, horeca of toiletten. Ook ontbreken overdekte loopbruggen, omdat het aan- en afkoppelen relatief veel tijd kost. .... De pier kan maximaal zeven vliegtuigen tegelijk bedienen."Lukas_Ridgeston wrote: Have you been to the H-Pier? when I was there, it had no toilets and no seats. Maybe it has changed since December...
It had no elevators nor escalators either to get to the gate lounges. (Is there no legislation regarding people with limited mobility?)
I guess low cost terminals/piers have to be built at a low cost ...
http://www.vliegadvies.nl/jetstar/air/eham1.jpg (left upper corner)
from http://www.schiphol.nl/common/portlet/h ... 8673790753
Wait-in-lounge principle
Passengers check in in the same way as other passengers; via the Internet, at the check-in desks or at a Self-service check-in point in Departure Hall 3. Their boarding pass will however only contain the letter "H" and not a gate number. Passengers are referred to a lounge (the area beyond security and/or passport control but before the pier) in which they can wait until the boarding call.
In the lounge passengers can find everything they need for a pleasant stay at Schiphol: shops, bars and restaurants, seating areas, services, information, toilets, entertainment. This is the so-called "Wait-in-lounge" principle. It has the advantage that passengers can wait in a comfortable lounge with all the facilities they could possibly wish for until boarding commences. There are no facilities for them to sit and wait on the actual pier itself. This is why additional seating capacity is being created in the lounge. Special monitors in the lounge inform passengers when boarding is due to commence. Passengers will only start to make their way to the H pier after the boarding call. The boarding call is made via the monitors 30 minutes before the aircraft is due to depart. The gate number in question will be displayed on the monitors. After this boarding call passengers start to make their way to the H pier via lounge 4. On their way to the H pier, passengers pass a Grab&Fly, a last minute shop and a final (extensive) toilet facility. At the passageway to the H pier there is a monitor that shows all the flights leaving from the H pier. Passengers make their way to the H pier through the corridor via a moving walkway. At every gate there is a monitor, which shows the flight details of the flight that is being handled at the gate in question. Once they get to the gate, passengers pass their boarding pass through a "reader" and are asked to queue up in a number of lines. Generally speaking the stay in the pre-boarding area takes around 10 minutes from the moment the gate door is opened by the handling agent. Passengers subsequently make their way across the apron to the aircraft, which is parked close to the waiting area. Disabled persons are escorted to the aircraft via an alternative route.
----
so:
- reopen the old terminal and make a lot of shops in it, place to spend time, .. not only to tho low cost passengers but to all the passengers using Brussels airport.
- let VLM and other small-plane airlines (props) use this terminal, identity check can be done right before entering the apron (for nog schengen-countries).
I like the idea and hope it will become reality.
So, no shops, no seats and no toilets in the pier.
But more shops, seats and toilets in the "lounge". And how exactly does this cost less? I'm sure it does save costs, but I don't see how this can be such a substantial amount.
Having no airbridges would save costs indeed, especially if you let people walk to their plane. But about the toilets and seats, I think they need to rethink it once.
Saving a possible small amount of money, compared with possible unsatisfied passangers: what indeed if your plane breaks down at the last moment, or there are other reasons why you can't enter your plane at the last moment? (Hey, I had that problem in CDG, went into that preboarding area, seats: yes, but no shops or toilets. It was snowing, and they announced a delay. After 3 hours, they closed the airport and finally half hour later it was said that they would cancel the flight and we could leave that preboarding area.)
Opening the old part of the terminal would have a few concequences:
1) cost of installing new shops, seats, etc. there.
2) losing the benefits made from renting the hall for events (had my personelsparty there last year, nothing better than looking at the Hewa Bora Tristar standing there while sipping on a cold beer)
3) You cannot open this hall for all passengers, it is not directly connected to the B or A terminal, so those passangers would need to go out the secured area again to go to their terminal.
So my opinion: there is enough capacity as it is, a new terminal isn't necessary, but why not think about making part of the other terminals low cost? I think about the tent of the B terminal for everything that is non-schengen (Easyjet) and the bussing part of the A-terminal for Schengen. Reserve a few gates there as low cost. No extra infrastructure needs, no extra costs.
But as Atlantis said, the comments on here are weird: not so long ago everybody on Luchtzak was complaning that Brussels Airport wasn't "interested" in low cost, and almost everybody on here was saying they should open a new terminal or revamp the sattelite for low cost. Now they say they are thinking of it, and everybody complains again. Make up your minds, people!
Greets,
Pieter
But more shops, seats and toilets in the "lounge". And how exactly does this cost less? I'm sure it does save costs, but I don't see how this can be such a substantial amount.
Having no airbridges would save costs indeed, especially if you let people walk to their plane. But about the toilets and seats, I think they need to rethink it once.
Saving a possible small amount of money, compared with possible unsatisfied passangers: what indeed if your plane breaks down at the last moment, or there are other reasons why you can't enter your plane at the last moment? (Hey, I had that problem in CDG, went into that preboarding area, seats: yes, but no shops or toilets. It was snowing, and they announced a delay. After 3 hours, they closed the airport and finally half hour later it was said that they would cancel the flight and we could leave that preboarding area.)
Opening the old part of the terminal would have a few concequences:
1) cost of installing new shops, seats, etc. there.
2) losing the benefits made from renting the hall for events (had my personelsparty there last year, nothing better than looking at the Hewa Bora Tristar standing there while sipping on a cold beer)
3) You cannot open this hall for all passengers, it is not directly connected to the B or A terminal, so those passangers would need to go out the secured area again to go to their terminal.
So my opinion: there is enough capacity as it is, a new terminal isn't necessary, but why not think about making part of the other terminals low cost? I think about the tent of the B terminal for everything that is non-schengen (Easyjet) and the bussing part of the A-terminal for Schengen. Reserve a few gates there as low cost. No extra infrastructure needs, no extra costs.
But as Atlantis said, the comments on here are weird: not so long ago everybody on Luchtzak was complaning that Brussels Airport wasn't "interested" in low cost, and almost everybody on here was saying they should open a new terminal or revamp the sattelite for low cost. Now they say they are thinking of it, and everybody complains again. Make up your minds, people!
Greets,
Pieter
Actually, I also don't quite get why they wouldn't want shops in the low cost terminal.
In my opinion, if you're going to gain less on the various charges (paid by airline or pasenger), you would want to augment your profit by other things, e.g. shops, advertisements, etc. I would be surprised to find out that the shops cost them money, instead of making them a nice profit. After all, the shops pay a nice rent, I would presume.
If you want to go low cost, do it well (Ryanair is an example, although I do not like the company, from marketing and sales strategy point of view they are great).:
Try not to position yourself as a building where people merely pass through to go somewhere else. Use that in your advantage! More airlines (at cheap prices or not), mean more passengers. The more people pass through there, the more that that place becomes interesting for advertisers, shops (that will pay more rent), etc. Attract other business in that terminal, and let them pay!
Ryanair doesn't get their money from the passengers, that much is sure. While I do not want to go into the subsidies thing, I'm convinced that they earn very nicely from all their partners that advertise on their website (a guaranteed audience of so many millions of people a month!). Also they earn well on everything sold in the plane, etc. They are not an airline, they are a very diversed business that uses the airline business to attrackt the people needed to make their other businesses make money! Its all about exposure of the consumer.
Make people want to spend time and money in your terminal, give them a finger (toilets), earn an arm (shops, etc). And they will even be happy to come again.
Basically my idea on a low cost terminal is this: low fares to airlines in the terminal, use the amount of people passing there to earn back all the money missed on the fares for the airlines, by placing shops, bars, restaurants, everything a happy customer could wish for!
Greets,
Pieter
In my opinion, if you're going to gain less on the various charges (paid by airline or pasenger), you would want to augment your profit by other things, e.g. shops, advertisements, etc. I would be surprised to find out that the shops cost them money, instead of making them a nice profit. After all, the shops pay a nice rent, I would presume.
If you want to go low cost, do it well (Ryanair is an example, although I do not like the company, from marketing and sales strategy point of view they are great).:
Try not to position yourself as a building where people merely pass through to go somewhere else. Use that in your advantage! More airlines (at cheap prices or not), mean more passengers. The more people pass through there, the more that that place becomes interesting for advertisers, shops (that will pay more rent), etc. Attract other business in that terminal, and let them pay!
Ryanair doesn't get their money from the passengers, that much is sure. While I do not want to go into the subsidies thing, I'm convinced that they earn very nicely from all their partners that advertise on their website (a guaranteed audience of so many millions of people a month!). Also they earn well on everything sold in the plane, etc. They are not an airline, they are a very diversed business that uses the airline business to attrackt the people needed to make their other businesses make money! Its all about exposure of the consumer.
Make people want to spend time and money in your terminal, give them a finger (toilets), earn an arm (shops, etc). And they will even be happy to come again.
Basically my idea on a low cost terminal is this: low fares to airlines in the terminal, use the amount of people passing there to earn back all the money missed on the fares for the airlines, by placing shops, bars, restaurants, everything a happy customer could wish for!
Greets,
Pieter
I think it would be a great idea to segregate the low cost carriers at a different terminal (especially with word that EasyJet or whoever are rumoured to start flying into BRU). I'm all for the low cost terminal but djeez no toilets, that's pushing it a bit, is that even legal to have a facility like this without putting in toilets? Maybe they can move SN to this terminal too seen as they're starting their low(er) cost service now 
As for building a separate low cost terminal in BRU, is this gonna float the boat? I mean are there really that many scheduled low costs gonna fly in and out of BRU to make it a justifiable cost for BRU? When you look at a low cost terminal at AMS there's a lot more turnover for flights there then BRU so I can see why they built the terminal.
I was wondering about the airport taxes though. What's the price difference between CRL and BRU for landing fees and airport taxes and do you think this will influence people's decisions on which airport to fly out of?
Cheers,
K-
As for building a separate low cost terminal in BRU, is this gonna float the boat? I mean are there really that many scheduled low costs gonna fly in and out of BRU to make it a justifiable cost for BRU? When you look at a low cost terminal at AMS there's a lot more turnover for flights there then BRU so I can see why they built the terminal. I was wondering about the airport taxes though. What's the price difference between CRL and BRU for landing fees and airport taxes and do you think this will influence people's decisions on which airport to fly out of?
Cheers,
K-
Hold your horses guys, there is a LOUNGE were people wait with all facilities. Once the plane lands pasengers are called to a gate, without any facilities, where they wait till the arriving pax have disembarked. Five minutes later they board. So they will spend 10 to 15 minutes standing without toilets. In one hour three planes can board through the same gate. Nice for restaurants and shops as well because the pasengers are concentraded in one area.
This system works perfectly in major airports like AMS, LGW, CDG, SXF...
This system works perfectly in major airports like AMS, LGW, CDG, SXF...
The main objective should be to fill Pier B with more flights and destinations. Now there is only some activity in the morning.
An easy an short transfer from B to A and vise versa is perfectly possible by (re-)organizing the interim remote lounge at B, and building similar lounge at A. Now there is a the 'theoretical' walking time from B to A is 25'. Practically, with queues at immigration and security, you need probably an hour or more.
FRA, AMS, CGG, LON are all over-congested and stressful for the passenger.
BRU is right in the center of the busiest part of Europe.
Easy, short, convenient transfers.
Why not use this Unique Selling Point.
Why is BRU doing so poorly with transfeer passengers??
As for a 'new' LCC terminal: it does not need to be build, it is there already with the Old Satellite building. Existing building, place for shopping facilities,...even toilets and seat are there.
As Acid-drop writes: they are late (look what a choice there is already at less than 120km from BRU). Too late I am afraid.
An easy an short transfer from B to A and vise versa is perfectly possible by (re-)organizing the interim remote lounge at B, and building similar lounge at A. Now there is a the 'theoretical' walking time from B to A is 25'. Practically, with queues at immigration and security, you need probably an hour or more.
FRA, AMS, CGG, LON are all over-congested and stressful for the passenger.
BRU is right in the center of the busiest part of Europe.
Easy, short, convenient transfers.
Why not use this Unique Selling Point.
Why is BRU doing so poorly with transfeer passengers??
As for a 'new' LCC terminal: it does not need to be build, it is there already with the Old Satellite building. Existing building, place for shopping facilities,...even toilets and seat are there.
As Acid-drop writes: they are late (look what a choice there is already at less than 120km from BRU). Too late I am afraid.
At the Brussels Fair of Tourism (Salon des Vacances), Brussels Airport shows the public a display of the airport in 2020. Nothing is mentioned about the low cost terminal, however they want to build a 2nd bigger terminal next to the existing terminal (on the DHL spot) with an extentsion south oriented D-pier. The A pier will also be extended south. And the diplay also shows the still existing satellite (C-pier). Behind and aroud the sheraton they want to develop a huge business center.
Go and have a look at the travel fair in palace 4, they share their stand with Brussels Airlines and just on the opposite site you can try out singapore airlines Y, C and F class seats. I went yesterday and I enjoyed it very much.
Go and have a look at the travel fair in palace 4, they share their stand with Brussels Airlines and just on the opposite site you can try out singapore airlines Y, C and F class seats. I went yesterday and I enjoyed it very much.
Last edited by TWA on 11 Feb 2007, 12:33, edited 1 time in total.
I just came back from the holiday expo (vakantiesalon) and I took a few low quality pictures with my mobile. Didn't have my good camera with me unfortunately...If someone can take a picture of BRU in 2020 I would love to see it here on luchtzak
Next problem: My laptop crashed a month ago, and as I transfered the images from my mobile by infrared to my laptop, and this old computer that I'm temporary using now doesn't have infrared, I can't tranfer the pictures... untill I go and buy a special USB cable to connect with my mobile...
I'll try to get them on here asap, but even then, remember that they are low quality!
Greets,
Pieter
-
Bruspotter
- Posts: 2068
- Joined: 04 Sep 2004, 00:00
- Location: (Antwerp/Belgium)
- Contact:
Hello
It's great seeing BRU wants to invest in the low-cost market , this would certainly improve the competition in this market @ BRU (for as far it is already there) and there's a good chance more low-cost airlines will come to BRU.
Although this , I do have serious considerations with the things they're planning at the ('new'???) terminal. If they will not place seats and toilets into it , than what WILL they place in it? I mean , come on , a LITTLE bit of comfort should be possible , even if you go with a low-cost airline. Don't forget , at CRL (ok , maybe a bit outrages example) , DUB (I flew from both) low-cost terminals , you ALSO have that service. And indeed , just like in some cafés you have to pay to use the toilets. That's a good solution but I would certainly not abbandon toilets out of an airport building wich receives thousands of people a day. It's asking for bad commercial.
If they want to keep it cheep it's maybe a good idea to keep the C-satellite in service , maybe do some refurnishing and renovation works. And they can always remove the boarding bridges if they don't need it. It's a perfectly isolated place and yet easy to reach terminal for low-cost passengers.
PS: wich airlines could be considered as low-cost at BRU this moment?
-B-light (ex Virgin Express) ?
-Sky Europe
-Vueling airlines
-Easyjet (soon)
Best regards: Yannick
It's great seeing BRU wants to invest in the low-cost market , this would certainly improve the competition in this market @ BRU (for as far it is already there) and there's a good chance more low-cost airlines will come to BRU.
Although this , I do have serious considerations with the things they're planning at the ('new'???) terminal. If they will not place seats and toilets into it , than what WILL they place in it? I mean , come on , a LITTLE bit of comfort should be possible , even if you go with a low-cost airline. Don't forget , at CRL (ok , maybe a bit outrages example) , DUB (I flew from both) low-cost terminals , you ALSO have that service. And indeed , just like in some cafés you have to pay to use the toilets. That's a good solution but I would certainly not abbandon toilets out of an airport building wich receives thousands of people a day. It's asking for bad commercial.
If they want to keep it cheep it's maybe a good idea to keep the C-satellite in service , maybe do some refurnishing and renovation works. And they can always remove the boarding bridges if they don't need it. It's a perfectly isolated place and yet easy to reach terminal for low-cost passengers.
PS: wich airlines could be considered as low-cost at BRU this moment?
-B-light (ex Virgin Express) ?
-Sky Europe
-Vueling airlines
-Easyjet (soon)
Best regards: Yannick
-
airazurxtror
- Posts: 3769
- Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 00:00
I am sorry, but you don't have to pay to use the toilets at CRL or DUB. Nor at other LCC airports that I know, such as CIA or BGY or PSA or TRN or TSF or GRO or VLC or BER-SXF or even in the Netherland EIN or MST ...Bruspotter wrote:
Although this , I do have serious considerations with the things they're planning at the ('new'???) terminal. If they will not place seats and toilets into it , than what WILL they place in it? I mean , come on , a LITTLE bit of comfort should be possible , even if you go with a low-cost airline. Don't forget , at CRL (ok , maybe a bit outrages example) , DUB (I flew from both) low-cost terminals , you ALSO have that service. And indeed , just like in some cafés you have to pay to use the toilets.
Are there airports where you have to pay that service ?
I don't know of any.
-
Bruspotter
- Posts: 2068
- Joined: 04 Sep 2004, 00:00
- Location: (Antwerp/Belgium)
- Contact:
Hello
Then I must have mistaken myself in CRL or DUB , than I guess I don't know where it was anymore , but anyway , I flew with it to with Ryanair , maybe it was at PSA but I've my doubts about it. Anyway , I do know I was quite astomished by that on that moment , that's why I still know something about it , but I really tought it was at DUB :s
Anyway , they COULD do that , it's anyway better than NOT placing any toilets.
Best regards: Yannick
Then I must have mistaken myself in CRL or DUB , than I guess I don't know where it was anymore , but anyway , I flew with it to with Ryanair , maybe it was at PSA but I've my doubts about it. Anyway , I do know I was quite astomished by that on that moment , that's why I still know something about it , but I really tought it was at DUB :s
Anyway , they COULD do that , it's anyway better than NOT placing any toilets.
Best regards: Yannick
Ok,
Luckily I had my laptop from my work with me this weekend, and it has infrared too! So here are the pictures:
http://coppermine.luchtzak.be/index.php?cat=10318
As I said, taken with my mobile, so don't expect too much of it!
Greets,
Pieter
Luckily I had my laptop from my work with me this weekend, and it has infrared too! So here are the pictures:
http://coppermine.luchtzak.be/index.php?cat=10318
As I said, taken with my mobile, so don't expect too much of it!
Greets,
Pieter
-
Lukas_Ridgeston
- Posts: 26
- Joined: 16 Mar 2006, 00:00
Please note that ALL Brussels Airlines flights offer B-light tickets ! No use in referring to B-light as "ex VEX". You can book B-light to all destinations, even the ones VEX never flew to (MAN, LYS, VCE, PRG, etc).Bruspotter wrote: PS: wich airlines could be considered as low-cost at BRU this moment?
-B-light (ex Virgin Express) ?
-Sky Europe
-Vueling airlines
-Easyjet (soon)
Their flights would never use a new LCC pier, as ALL flights will have B-light AND B-flex pax on them.
-
Bruspotter
- Posts: 2068
- Joined: 04 Sep 2004, 00:00
- Location: (Antwerp/Belgium)
- Contact:
Hello
I thought it would actually be two appart airlines. B-light and Brussels Airlines , but it seems it's just a travel formula.
Thanks for the clarification.
Best regards: Yannick
Oh , I didn't knew that , or at least haven't thought about that.Please note that ALL Brussels Airlines flights offer B-light tickets ! No use in referring to B-light as "ex VEX". You can book B-light to all destinations, even the ones VEX never flew to (MAN, LYS, VCE, PRG, etc).
I thought it would actually be two appart airlines. B-light and Brussels Airlines , but it seems it's just a travel formula.
Thanks for the clarification.
Best regards: Yannick