Brussels Airlines adventure in Africa

tolipanebas · Post by **tolipanebas** » 14 Sep 2007, 17:36

Small correction to my last post:

LBV (Libreville) is obviously situated in north westerly direction from FIH.

tolipanebas · Post by **tolipanebas** » 14 Sep 2007, 17:44

ambrew wrote:Asuming FIH becomes an b.air hub operating Avro. Will the company develop it's own maintenace facilities in FIH or use the existing Hewa Bora ones?

Were talking 2 BAe 146-200 (so to nitpick: no Avro RJ) and 1 B737-300: the 2 BAe 146s would come from SN, the B733 would not, so it is not like they need huge maintenance facilities in FIH: a modest hangar would do.

Darjeeling · Post by **Darjeeling** » 14 Sep 2007, 21:08

Some people here have obviously never seen Kinshasa N'Djili aiport.
I have never seen a terrible place like that in my entire life. And it's getting even worse (what a local pilot told me a week ago...).

And when I read some posts here, some of you would like us to think that FIH will become for SN what BRU stands now for Jet Airways...

An oil company will NEVER book a Luanda flights that obliges someone to connect in FIH. In FIH when you connect you have 80% of chances to have your luggages stolen.

I fyou want to make money on a route like Luanda and have balls you fly an entire wide-body dedicated to one destination NON-STOP like AF, BA or TP do.

Transiting in the "super-hub" of FIH is just nonsense.

FLY4HOURS.BE · Post by **FLY4HOURS.BE** » 14 Sep 2007, 21:21

An oil company will NEVER book a Luanda flights that obliges someone to connect in FIH. In FIH when you connect you have 80% of chances to have your luggages stolen.

So you would put top-secret documents in your luggage, hun?

Good to know that

Businessmen/women usually travel light and take only needed clothes. (the rest such as laptop and docs go in their cabin luggage).
Normal pax in Africa tend to take food, alot of clothes,...

Anyway having 15+ flights a day to/from the airport are good enough a reason to set up an own handling division with decent personnel and material, preventing loss of luggage.

tolipanebas · Post by **tolipanebas** » 14 Sep 2007, 22:41

Darjeeling wrote: If you want to make money on a route like Luanda and have balls you fly an entire wide-body dedicated to one destination NON-STOP like AF, BA or TP do. Transiting in the "super-hub" of FIH is just nonsense.

SN does have a direct flight at LAD, but sadly only one weekly frequency is allowed.

Bypassing this restriction through FIH might proof to be a very good idea in my view: More choice of frequency: it might be a convincing factor for many business pax on the route...

FLY4HOURS.BE wrote: Anyway having 15+ flights a day to/from the airport are good enough a reason to set up an own handling division with decent personnel and material, preventing loss of luggage.

Brussels Airlines already does a full self-handling at FIH right now!
Check in, boarding, lugage loaders, stairs, push back trucks: all SN staff.

Ironic isn't it? 'brussels airlines handing' does exisit, albeit not at the home base Brussels, but in Kinshasa!

If the mini-hub runs well (something which is possible with European know-how), then there shouldn't be any insurmountable hurdles.
If ET can do it in ADD, then why wouldn't it be possible in FIH?

LJ · Post by LJ » 15 Sep 2007, 10:06

FLY4HOURS.BE wrote:
An oil company will NEVER book a Luanda flights that obliges someone to connect in FIH. In FIH when you connect you have 80% of chances to have your luggages stolen.
Businessmen/women usually travel light and take only needed clothes. (the rest such as laptop and docs go in their cabin luggage).
Normal pax in Africa tend to take food, alot of clothes,...

The reason why many business pax may not take FIH as a hub is because some companies want to minmise travel to unstable countries (and let's face it, many don't view Congo as a stable country). As for the oil companies, most have, like all multinationals, big travel contracts with big airlines (and nowadays with alliances). You'll need a very wide network to be able to catch this business.

If ET can do it in ADD, then why wouldn't it be possible in FIH?

First, ET has a much bigger network from ADD to both Europe and Africa. Second, the point-to-point catchment area (both business and leisure) for ADD is much bigger (hence the reason why ET is so big). This means that the transfer pax at ADD are "a bonus" because there is already a substantial amount of point-to-point traffic. Third, politically Ethiopia is (perceived to be) much more stable than Congo. Fourth, ET has a good reputation and thus many people don't mind flying them (thus it's not a negative for them).

If you want to make comparisons you should compare the maybe future SN mini hub at FIH with the mini hub IB had (or still has?) at SDQ and MIA.

tolipanebas · Post by **tolipanebas** » 15 Sep 2007, 10:31

LJ wrote:
If ET can do it in ADD, then why wouldn't it be possible in FIH?
If you want to make comparisons you should compare the maybe future SN mini-hub at FIH with the mini-hub IB had (or still has?) at SDQ and MIA.

To be told that I shouldn't compare MIA to FIH?

The point I was trying to make was that if you can run an airline in Ethiopia, which 10 years ago wasn't really a place to be either, you can do it in FIH too... It will take time and efford to build and grow and you will have to win over reluctant customers for sure, but itsn't this called: potential for growth?

To get back to the exemple I gave with LAD: if SN can be the only European airline (apart from TAP) which can offer multiple frequencies a week (albeit through their hub in FIH), I think they will definitely be considered by many businessmen, provided the operations in FIH proof to be working smoothly.

And that is realy the key issue: I think there will be a lot of sceptisism at the beginning, but if they can proof they can make it work in FIH, there is some great potential in it.

DannyVDB · Post by **DannyVDB** » 15 Sep 2007, 12:30

I agree with tolipanebas ...

Everything depends on how you organise things, how you collaborate with the authorities, etc.

Kinshasa is not the only unstable place at all: let's alone think about Burundi, Rwanda (both close to unstable Eastern Congo), but also Brazzaville, Abidjan, Freetown, Monrovia, Karthoum, and even Angola itself are (or were) not always stable. Even if most place are now +/- OK. But that's exactly why SN can be succesful (like some other European airlines): they have the knowledge and can also operate in difficult circumstances. If things get worsened they suspend (temporarily) flights.

I was suprised when I went for the first time to Bujumbura for the United Nations that Sabena staff was better informed on security/operational issues than myself (however this changed quickly when I was there

).

By the way: business people go to the places where they can make money, and often they send their people even to countries where theres is war. What counts for them is to make money, the rest follows, not the other way around.

regards,
Danny

fcw · Post by **fcw** » 15 Sep 2007, 13:48

I have no doubts at all, this project will work. BruAir has the knowhow and the people (from the Sabena past) to make this adventure a succes!!
The only problem will be, if 51% remains african, the money. Money will be disappearing through all posible holes...

Air Key West · Post by **Air Key West** » 15 Sep 2007, 22:15

A new project often creates a lot of excitment ! I have been to many African countries, but never to Congo. If FIH is such a terrible airport as a number of guests on this forum say (which I have no problem in believing), to me the only and URGENT solution, if they want this enterprise to succeed, is to quickly build a new small but modern terminal building for the sole use of the new airline + b.air, with efficient connection facilities and a good Business class lounge, all similar to European standards of safety and comfort. I know that this cannot be done overnight, but it seems an urgent MUST to me.

LJ · Post by LJ » 16 Sep 2007, 13:30

tolipanebas wrote:
LJ wrote:
If ET can do it in ADD, then why wouldn't it be possible in FIH?
If you want to make comparisons you should compare the maybe future SN mini-hub at FIH with the mini-hub IB had (or still has?) at SDQ and MIA.
To be told that I shouldn't compare MIA to FIH?

The point I was trying to make was that if you can run an airline in Ethiopia, which 10 years ago wasn't really a place to be either, you can do it in FIH too... It will take time and efford to build and grow and you will have to win over reluctant customers for sure, but itsn't this called: potential for growth?

One big difference is that, as fars as I know, the new airline in Congo is not state supported. Althouhgh I don't know how deep SN's pockets are, I do think that they dont have the money to sustain long time losses. This is also the reason why I think comparing ET with the new venture is comparing apples with oranges.

Not many airlines set up mini hubs in foreign countries. And if so, not many are succesful. IB did have a good mini hub but government regulations and the desire of most pax to fly directly from Europe to their final destination. Moreover increased competition on the routes IB handled via its mini hub contributed to the decreased attractiveness of the mini hub at SDQ and MIA.

The same applies to a mini hub at FIH. Most pax will want direct flights from Europe to let's say LAD (no hassle in a unstable country). Currently TP offers a daily flight and given its links with Star can offer much more than any other competitor. The same applies for other destinations in Africa. Most of them have multiple flights ex-Europe by airlines member of a global alliance. Thus a very big disadvantage. If you add all the other benefits the competition will have you'll see the disadvantage SN has.

My view is that the whole idea of a mini hub at FIH is a somewhat intermediate solution (or best solution given SN's position in the airline business) as they don't know (or better what they can given their limited rescources) to do otherwise. The reason I think is that a) I don't think the people at SN are stupid, b) thus they also the (competitive) disadvantages they have and c) it's a high risk venture (wouldn't be cheap operating a hub in Africa and SN's resources relatively limited). Needless to say the best solution would be to create an African hub from BRU. However, for this they'll have to wait untill an investor comes around and leads them into one of the big alliances. My view is that would be the best solution (I'm personally suprised that no airline has knocked on SN's door yet....or do the shareholders want too much?).

However, I agree, time will tell if the mini hub will be sucessfull. Allthough it may sound strange from some who is very sceptical of this venture, I do hope so. Nobody wants a company to fail, especially one with potential.

lumumba · Post by **lumumba** » 18 Sep 2007, 15:42

hi everybody.
I got some info here in FIH so they will start with one Bea and a 737 new not from Virgin.
And they start Congo flight's plus Luanda and Brazaville.
Regards
Patrice
P.S:they also say that there are working very hard on the 5th A330.

DannyVDB · Post by **DannyVDB** » 18 Sep 2007, 16:56

Hi Patrice,

Did you also hear something about the timing (start, ...)?

Regards,
Danny

Kabila · Post by **Kabila** » 18 Sep 2007, 18:29

DannyVDB wrote:

If things get worsened they suspend (temporarily) flights.

You must be kidding right ? Do you think this goes without consequences ? It costs lots of money and your customers affected will never return or fly through FIH anymore because of the bad experience.

Believe me - Brazzaville, Luanda, Bujumbura, Kigali,... would have been better choices. The situation in Congo (DRC) is not stable enough yet to set up a project like this. But hey - good luck anyway.

And why try to set up your own mini hub at a great risk? Why not try to approach ET and cooperate with them ? They have soon 6 weekly flights ex-BRU. ET has brand new airplanes, a wide route network in Africa, experienced staff, good maintenance and security and an excellent customer service and ADD has a brand new modern facility with air bridges. Why not - just like KL and KQ - allign yourself with an established carrier and operate twice daily BRU-ADD (1 by SN and 1 by ET). It will be an enormous cost saving for SN and a project with low risk. ET could be an excellent feeder in ADD, SN an excellent feeder at BRU. Once you discover some important traffic flows, you can then deploy non stop service to certain destinations ex-BRU.

Further, ET is looking at developping a hub in West Africa (Lome). Once it's operational, why not feed flights into that city from BRU by SN (or ET). Look on a map where Lome is situated and think of the number of feeder flights that ET is going to have there from cities within reasonable distance: Cotonou, Kano, Lagos, Port Harcourt, Abuja, Douala, Niamey, Ouagadougou, accra, Malabao, Doaula, Bangui, N'djamena, Pointe Noire, Brazzaville, Libreville, Bamako,...

If ET/SN work together, ET will take the financial and operational risk, but will have doors going wide open because they are African. Believe me, if SN is going to try the same in FIH, it will be regarded as a neo-colonial way of getting money out of Africa, benefitting the Belgians, not the Congolese (at least that will be the assumption from the Congolese side)

The question of course is: does ET even want a partner as SN ?

steeven205 · Post by **steeven205** » 18 Sep 2007, 18:55

You are right, when you already visited FIH airport and Kinshasa recently, you can't imagine to set up a hub there. People from B.Air are aware of that, so they decided to send only 1 or 2 Bae, they will not invest a lot of money there, operations will be managed by EO management, "a lot of words for nothing"

At B.Air People are aware that the future is not too good for the company, short and medium haul flights from Brussels are showing a deficit, the only solution "to try" to save the company, will come from "African Market" because of the past of SABENA, so they are doing their best. Unfortunately, they are still working and thinking like a national carrier.

If at B.Air they think that they could generate more revenues and developp by creating a hub at FIH, well wait and see!! But i think that they are more intelligent and they will soon announce the real project they have for Africa .

FLY4HOURS.BE · Post by **FLY4HOURS.BE** » 18 Sep 2007, 19:13

This is true but you could also see it from another point of view:

What good is it to send 10 airplanes to a start-up company that still needs to settle its roots and attract the client?

They start with 3 aircraft and I think that's more than they need.

Also, the A330 is not an A380. What good is it to have feeders that have more capacity than the flights they are feeding?

Why not try to approach ET and cooperate with them

SN's got enough codeshare's already

[/quote]

Jacob330 · Post by **Jacob330** » 18 Sep 2007, 20:12

FLY4HOURS.BE wrote:
Why not try to approach ET and cooperate with them
SN's got enough codeshare's already

I think working together with ET is not such a bad idea, allthough I don't see this happening.

lumumba · Post by **lumumba** » 19 Sep 2007, 13:40

Hi Danny VDB.
Yes the start is for 16 of December.
Regards
Patrice

LJ · Post by LJ » 19 Sep 2007, 16:24

Kabila wrote: Why not try to approach ET and cooperate with them ?

Doesn't ET has some sort of cooperation agreement with LH? If so I don't think ET would consider working together with SN as this may upset LH (potentially a much more interesting partner

LX-LGX · Post by **LX-LGX** » 20 Sep 2007, 09:44

And here is another Pan African airline:
http://www.businessday.co.za:80/article ... BD4A568616

They will be Togo-based. Quote from Business Day (South Africa): "... to fill the gap left by the demise of west African airlines Nigeria Airways, Ghana Airways and Air Afrique..."

I'm sure investors will be queuing up. Re-quote: "The new airline, expected to be profitable in its second year of operation, ..."

Aviation24.be

Brussels Airlines adventure in Africa

Re: What about aircraft maintenace in FIH ?