The future of Brussels Airlines with Lufthansa

[AirDupont]

Also this, I used to work for NH as a flight attendant and regularly we had JL inflight services staff on board just to see what kind of service we had on board. They took pictures of everything just to copy and train their staff( my brother works for JL). JL and NH are constantly upgrading their inflight product. So, I think it also depends on the country of each airline itself. Asian carriers are known to give superior inflight service...always have and this won't change!!!!

[HighInTheSky]

Did anyone else hear something about a 5th long haul plane for SN? I've heard that the search for a A330 or A340 has restarted recently, and that several new destinations are under investigation (Lome, Cotonou, JFK & BOS) apparently the "Atlantic crossing" briefings are schedueled as well.

These are the rumours... Now anybody with facts?

[Atlantis]

Did anyone else hear something about a 5th long haul plane for SN? I've heard that the search for a A330 or A340 has restarted recently, and that several new destinations are under investigation (Lome, Cotonou, JFK & BOS) apparently the "Atlantic crossing" briefings are schedueled as well.

These are the rumours... Now anybody with facts?

I don't think that JFK would be a good move:

First: a lot of airlines are already flying on that route + the possibility of Openskies.

Second: their partner Jet Airways is flying daily to JFK with a BRU based B777 (winter)

[HighInTheSky]

I don't think that JFK would be a good move:

First: a lot of airlines are already flying on that route + the possibility of Openskies.

Second: their partner Jet Airways is flying daily to JFK with a BRU based B777 (winter)

At this moment i think you are right. But with the new situation of Brussels Airlines i think we may expect AA to stop the JFK-BRU route, and SN absolutely needs that flight at least once a day. 9W is a short term option, but collaboration will have to end as well (Air India in * A)

Anyway, Boston is an idea that was ready to be launched earlier this year, so plans just need to be executed.

What about Washinghton DC? Is that a possible option?

And about the extra plane, they want it absolutely by May...

[kiwiandrew]

At this moment i think you are right. But with the new situation of Brussels Airlines i think we may expect AA to stop the JFK-BRU route, and SN absolutely needs that flight at least once a day. 9W is a short term option, but collaboration will have to end as well (Air India in * A)
...

why ? lots of allied airlines have relationships with airlines outside their alliance - QF for example has codeshared for years on SYD-SEL with OZ , a Star member and JL from OW still codeshares with NZ in Star ... the thing that these exceptions have in common is that there is no member from the same alliance directly competing on the same route - in the unlikely event that AI started their own BRU services then that might force a change of arrangement - but I understand that SN made it very clear to LH how important the 9W relationship is for them , and , let's be honest , do you really foresee AI flying to BRU . On the other hand the codeshare BRU-EWR will be in competition with future star member CO but I am not sure whether I see this as a significant problem

[chou-de-bruxelles]

What about ORD? Which is the biggest hub for United and Star Alliance in the US.
Maybe a flight departing in the afternoon?

[euroflyer]

I appreciate everyone's comments. I know that there are Star Alliance members like Austrian, Singapore, Thai who all offer excellent products, but I don't think that the Alliance as a whole offers the consistency of service which you'd expect from OneWorld. SAS/BMI/Egyptair/Air India aren't to the same standard as Lufthansa (in my mind) who I don't think match the higher standards of Austrian/Singapore/Thai.

To tie this back into the topic of this discussion - I see no evidence that SN would be forced to ditch their blight/flex offering to join *A - they COULD comfortably exist as an airline offering the same levels of service as SAS. If they'd joined BA and OneWorld then I think they'd would have HAD to change...

Sorry, might be a bit off topic , but I simply cannot agree to your point. If all OneWorld members have to change to that common high standard as you name it, why has IB still one of the worst service standards at least on short-haul European flights? I would always prefer a flight with SAS, BMI or Brussels Airlines to any with IB. But that might of course only be my impression .

I could however imagine as well SN could continue with light/flex in *Alliance, as long as they use real Business Class booking classes for b.flex and give it abit more Business Class feeling (empty middle seat?).

[Conti764]

I don't think that JFK would be a good move:

First: a lot of airlines are already flying on that route + the possibility of Openskies.

Second: their partner Jet Airways is flying daily to JFK with a BRU based B777 (winter)

At this moment i think you are right. But with the new situation of Brussels Airlines i think we may expect AA to stop the JFK-BRU route, and SN absolutely needs that flight at least once a day. 9W is a short term option, but collaboration will have to end as well (Air India in * A)

Anyway, Boston is an idea that was ready to be launched earlier this year, so plans just need to be executed.

What about Washinghton DC? Is that a possible option?

And about the extra plane, they want it absolutely by May...

The NY flight from AA can easily be replaced by CO, with 772 + 762/752 or 2 x 764.

SN should focus on markets not served trough its future *A partners.

[sn26567]

The NY flight from AA can easily be replaced by CO, with 772 + 762/752 or 2 x 764.

Except that AA flies to JFK and CO to EWR. Brussels needs to be connected to the most important airport in New York by a partner of SN.

[tolipanebas]

I don't see JFK as having a plus over EWR really.

Sure, JFK airport is BETTER KNOWN than EWR and contrary to the latter, it is situated in New York itself (whereas EWR is in New jersey), but reality is that for both onward connections inside the USA as well as for pax going to down town New York itself, EWR is the better solution.

Why?

-) EWR is nearer to Manhattan than JFK (in time). Only for those going to Queens of Brooklyn is JFK the better solution, but those are not really the suburbs you'll win high yielding pax in...

-) JFK is by far THE intercontinental gateway to the USA, meaning many of its slots are taken by foreign airlines from far away, this contrary to EWR which sees a lot more domestic trafic. Needless to say all those intercontinental flights at JFK have made the airport well known, but aren't much of an asset to SN (or in fact any European airline): what really matters is how many transcontinental destinations they can offer to their pax through their US gateway. You'll find that EWR offers much more domestic connections that JFK and as such makes a far better destination than JFK.

Have a look at SN's current timetable and how they cover the USA: you'll see they cover far more domestic destinations through ORD then they do through JFK... and the reason is exactly as explained above: JFK doesn't offer such great onward domestic connectivity as many intuitively seem to think.

[BrightCedars]

Have a look at SN's current timetable and how they cover the USA: you'll see they cover far more domestic destinations through ORD then they do through JFK... and the reason is exactly as explained above: JFK doesn't offer such great onward domestic connectivity as many intuitively seem to think.

This also supports the theory that JFK is more of an O&D market where yields are extracted from O&D pax more than transit pax, making SN opt to route the through traffic via ORD. In which case JFK does need to be on the list of destinations, I'm sure SN and UA can work something out, and keep EWR alongside with CO as well. They can even keep ORD with UA if they need, UA isn't a dwarf at ORD either.

[sn26567]

I canot agree more with tolipanebas that EWR is a better gateway than JFK, but look at what happened to SAS. Several years ago, SAS (in cooperation with Continental) had tried to make EWR its main entry port into the US. They have retreated and are now back in JFK. Why?

[134flyer]

but look at what happened to SAS. Several years ago, SAS (in cooperation with Continental) had tried to make EWR its main entry port into the US. They have retreated and are now back in JFK. Why?

Since when? SAS still fly to EWR and, as far as I know, have no plans to move to JFK!

[Conti764]

The NY flight from AA can easily be replaced by CO, with 772 + 762/752 or 2 x 764.

Except that AA flies to JFK and CO to EWR. Brussels needs to be connected to the most important airport in New York by a partner of SN.

Why is JFK the most important airport in the NY region? It is only in name. EWR is actually the better located airport when it comes to Manhattan.

Why is JFK a so much better solution for SN then EWR? For SN it only serves two purposes, as airport to NYC and as gateway to the US. For the latter, CO domestic network is not worse then AA and their South-American network is far better. At this moment, CO in flight service outgrows AA on the BRU - NYC market.

Maybe JFK has more international carriers then EWR, but that doesn't matter to SN, they only need the NYC connection for the two purposes mentioned above. For Asian destinations SN can rely on LH for the routes it doesn't serve itself.

[Conti764]

This also supports the theory that JFK is more of an O&D market where yields are extracted from O&D pax more than transit pax, making SN opt to route the through traffic via ORD. In which case JFK does need to be on the list of destinations, I'm sure SN and UA can work something out, and keep EWR alongside with CO as well. They can even keep ORD with UA if they need, UA isn't a dwarf at ORD either.

You really think UA is going to add a flight in the very saturated BRU - NYC market in favor of tiny SN, when another carrier of the alliance (in future) is already serving that market?

Actually, JFK may be more an O&D market then EWR, but that doesn't matter to SN, since they only need to get their pax to a NYC airport for two reasons: NYC itself and onward connections to the US. If JFK is more an O&D market that's only the case because so much international carriers fly to the airport (due to history?) for a company only aiming at a connection to NYC for the city itself and connections, that doesn't matter since revenue won't be bigger on JFK then on EWR, which is the better Manhattan airport.

Why wasting your own energy on a very tough market, when sufficient planes are hard to find these days, in stead of aiming at highly performing markets (AFR)?

[KLC]

Is it true that an LH 747 is coming to Brussels Airlines, to operate the FIH-flights? Or is this just gossip?

[HighInTheSky]

Is it true that an LH 747 is coming to Brussels Airlines, to operate the FIH-flights? Or is this just gossip?

I think it is still a rumour... I have heard it only a few times, so not enough to make me believe it will happen soon.

EDIT: Ok, I have to correct myself sooner then i guessed... I've just recieved info that in December some crews from Brussels Airlines will recieve training on B747 in FRA... GREAT!

[euroflyer]

EDIT: Ok, I have to correct myself sooner then i guessed... I've just recieved info that in December some crews from Brussels Airlines will recieve training on B747 in FRA... GREAT!

If this would prove to be true , it is a first very encouraging sign of what good, positive developments could LH bring to B.Air!

I only today read in the LH inflight magazine two things: (1) Swiss is taking its 15th A340 int service those days, finishing for the time being the expansion of its long-haul fleet (after the takeover by LH) and (2) LH announcing to its pax they have bought 45% of SN Airholding and thereby of B.Air and explaining they want to develop that airline as an independent player taking full advantage of its position in the Belgian market

[HighInTheSky]

As soon as i recieve some more info i'll share it with you if possible!

[BrightCedars]

Does LH have some combi's in its B747-400 fleet? I'm seeing a full blown B747-400 might be too much capacity, although the gap may not be that large with an A330-300, but still. It could be a way for SN to increase capacity without increasing frequency (understanding they are limited in this aspect), and allow them to deploy the A330-300 somewhere else.

I'm a bit sceptic about the type but I can't really say that I wouldn't be thrilled to see a B747-400 in SN colors!