VLM Airlines news 2016

[Shengenzone]

But that service might not last long if the greens get into the next government. They want to make it forbidden to fly domestic in Belgium. Just like it is forbidden in Wallonia to operate passengerflights between Chaleroi and Liege.

[Passenger]

I would even go as far as considering ANR-BRU feeder flights.
I can already hear the idiots at SN say: "Oh my god, this Flanker2 guy is a total nutjob."
Let me assure you that I'm in total command of my thoughts.

May I suggest a stopover for your ANR-BRU at the Cleydael Gholf Club in Aartselaar? It's closeby for the Indian community working in Antwerpen, has good landing/take off facilities for turboprops, free parking, enough restaurant & bars, free shower facilities, lockers, ... Aartselaar is the Flemish city with the second highiest personal income (after Sint-Martens-Latem).

And maybe we can re-open Keerbergen Airport? The road around the lake is still called Vlieghavenlaan, so people living there knew the airport would re-open sooner or later. We just have to make a landing strip free of water. If you have ever tried to get from Keerbergen via Haacht/Kampenhout to Brussels, you will agree that Keerbergen Airport is indeed the miracle solution.

The reason for this flight to be a total success is because getting to/from BRU is quite a hassle even from Antwerp (ie traffic jams etc...)

Sure. Brussels Airport has a traffic jam problem. Antwerp Airport hasn't. The Ring Antwerpen is totally completely free of traffic. The Kennedy Tunnel is a two minute drive (except during rush hours, which is 06h-10h and 15h-20h there: then it takes a bit more). Local traffic is no problem either (except for the Mortsel problem, caused by the Greens).

[jan_olieslagers]

The more ANR becomes an airport like any other, the more it will become an airport like any other - including traffic jams.

Your comments about Keerbergen and Aartselaar brought me broad smiles. Didn't know about Aartselaar being such a rich men's place! Using amphibians (Cessna Caravan or Twin Otter or such) you could even leave the lake in place! But I always understood Keerbergen is full of rich people, too, they won't like an active airport in their backyard - even if Zaventem is separated from them by traffic jams, its noise is very present.

[cathay belgium]

Hi,

So we gonna have a go and bring belgian full domestic lines back like in the 60's...
ANR-BRU City by chopper ?, LGG-BRU ?, AMS-ANR-BRU ?
Great !
Now, wake up have a coffee and back on topic after this fun ?

As they couldn't keep a GVA line alive, with 9x daily from BRU and a dedicated ANR... business pax. couldn't be reached for this line, what can you expect from them ? IMO ... nothing..
They fly worn out old F50, they are out of money and their core is in germany now..
Some charters for WX...
Guess as WX will pull the plug and fly their own RJ85 2x daily to ANR it's all over...
Can't blame WX in this case anyway... RTM has it already...

Guess the only news from VLM in 2016 will be a bad one...
Hoping for the contrary..

CXB

[Passenger]

As they couldn't keep a GVA line alive, with 9x daily from BRU and a dedicated ANR... business pax. couldn't be reached for this line, what can you expect from them ? IMO ... nothing..
They fly worn out old F50, they are out of money and their core is in germany now.

The F50's are very old indeed, but they remain very reliable. They're good for at least 3-4-5 more years of service. On top of that, they don't look old, specially not their interior (my last flight in one was in November last year).

About Germany: I see a lot of remarks about their load factor, but what really matters is their yield. Only VLM knows if they're doing good. With the turnover they make (and their relatively low debt), the bank(s) will support them. As long as they keep flying Antwerp-London City.

[cathay belgium]

Hi,

They're good for at least 3-4-5 more years of service.

Indeed, but a vision about their future fleet is urgent now as you want replace them by then.
For their kind of operations and with their low paxnumbers and regarding future oil-costs a plane in their working compartment aren't to buy in the next doors supermarket.
Guess only ATR/Dash8 are options..
Don't see them operate jets and their dream of a SSJ is long gone now...

As long as they keep flying Antwerp-London City.

So I said, they are living on a the life-string of Cityjet...
As they bought SSJ, some other RJ can come free to fly services for their own instead the leasing ones.
As VLM was overtaken in RTM by an RJ85 why not ANR.
RJ's are good operating from ANR we noticed last weeks ...

Altough I wish them the best, still don't see any light for the near future from what I read now...
Their F50 are old, they maybe look good ... but +25 years old ...

CXB

[Flanker2]

Come on guys, use your brains.

1. Is a F50 really less ecologic than 50 people heading to BRU via other means?
Those who go by car driven by friends or family or by taxi, you have to account for the fact that the car drives to BRU and back. What's environmental about that? Plus they are pat of the traffic problem.

2. ANR-BRU can be paid for simply by the difference in taxes.
15 Euro's per pax saved on taxes versus a BRU departure x 50 pax = 750 Euro's per return to BRU, or 350 EUR one-way. Enough to operate a 10 minute F50 flight.

2.b. Many pax would be willing to pay 10 EUR one-way extra to be able to fly out of ANR or ny of the other regionl domestic airports.

3. VLM can be used as a vehicle to receive subsidies from the Flemish region.

4. Besides ANR; CRL, OST, LGG, and even Kortrijk make sense IMO.

5. It saves both VLM and all these regional airports (except CRL that is doing well), while alleviating traffic problems from cars and people travelling to/from BRU. It's the traffic solution of the century for Belgium!

[BRU]

750 euro will not be suficient to pay for landing and take off fees at ANR and BRU, nor Belgocontrol charges at BRU... So calculation not that easy. But take into account other benefits mentioned and perhaps people are willing to pay for it or it could be seen as an advantage to avoid passenger to go to AMS. But the taxes will not pay for the flight.

[Inquirer]

Interesting reading, all of the above; some of which definitely is very funny to read even, albeit not always very friendly on those taking the risk to think out of the box.

Just an honest question, flanker2, but why would you want Brussels to buy VLM for your plan?

Vlm doesn't seem to have a customer base of much interest to them, nor do they hold very valuable assets.
On top of that, I fear they might be in immediate need of a costly restructuring after any such takeover as they'd be too big to swallow: after all, they'd come with unwanted overhead under the form of excess back office staff, so whereas I agree it would be a big plus for vlm, I don't immediately see what's in for a company like Brussels Airlines?

[Passenger]

Interesting reading, all of the above; some of which definitely is very funny to read even, albeit not always very friendly on those taking the risk to think out of the box.

I wouldn't call a feeder flight ANR-BRU out of the box, but rather out of the universe.

It's a pity that such wild phantasies spoil the normal discussion about VLM.

[PttU]

Why would it be out of the universe?
ANR-LCY is succesful, although taking the Eurostar is cheaper and greener. I could imagine a (small, but so is a F50) userbase who would pay a bit more to have a relaxed check in at ANR and transfer at BRU. However, in such scenario the waiting time for the transfer in BRU would be a crucial balance between too short and too long :/

[cathay belgium]

Hi,

Be real... ANR-BRU distance 35 km by airplane ?
As much as I like aviation this route should be taxed enormous or must be forbidden!
The greenies must be right here...
Wasn't it europa which would forbid flights under 500 km intra europe, like SXB,AMS,LUX,etc..
And really if I see the truth about climate change all over the world, they must do something no?
These are just ridicolous, boarding ANR,deboarding BRU and transit would take any time profit go away...
Just indeed out of the universe even discussing this !
CXB

[Flanker2]

Interesting reading, all of the above; some of which definitely is very funny to read even, albeit not always very friendly on those taking the risk to think out of the box.

Just an honest question, flanker2, but why would you want Brussels to buy VLM for your plan?

Vlm doesn't seem to have a customer base of much interest to them, nor do they hold very valuable assets.
On top of that, I fear they might be in immediate need of a costly restructuring after any such takeover as they'd be too big to swallow: after all, they'd come with unwanted overhead under the form of excess back office staff, so whereas I agree it would be a big plus for vlm, I don't immediately see what's in for a company like Brussels Airlines?

Thank you for your interest.

To answer your first question, I want SN to buy VLM because SN is limited within its current feeding network.
Sure, SN flies to many places in Europe, but everybody flies to all those places from their respective hubs.
Think about the LH Group, IAG and AF/KLM. They all fly to boring old Rome, Frankfurt, London, Madrid, Paris.
I don't see LX, AZ, BA in places like NTE, LUX, LIL and all of the domestic airports in Belgium.
Northwest Europe is densely populated and numerous regional airports are spread all over Belgium and its neighboring countries, within easy reach from Brussels. In fact, none of the LH Group airlines are lucky to be this close to so many potential feeding spots.
Hence, it's not difficult to fill a turboprop 50 seater with pax from all those places to bring them inside the SN network, to connect to short, medium or longhaul.
And guess who is prepared to pay the highest fares? The guy sitting behind his computer in Paris who has 30 options to choose from or the guy in NTE who has only 2 options?
Yields on flights like JFK will go up, because you take connecting pax who have less choice.

VLM's customer base is of no interest to SN.
At the current rate, VLM's back-office is trash anyway, so perhaps retaining 50% of it is sufficient to maintain operations, and they can easily be transferred to the B.House. Crews and maintenance will be necessary to maintain operations.
The aircaft are very cheap to operate. Low capital cost and low fuel burn, the two biggest cost centers in direct operating costs.

So mainly, the regional operation's aim wouldn't be to make profits with it, but it will bring the benefit of increasing yields and traffic on SN's current network, simply by bringing in high yield customers who don't live at the doorsteps of major airports.

In addition, it would enable VLM to collect subsidies and incentives from regional airports, because they are below the passenger ceiling for subsidies.


Cathay Belgium, a taxi or car carrying a pax running from Antwerp to BRU will burn 8 to 10 liters of fuel (it has to go and go back).
A Fokker 50 carrying 50 pax will burn like 120 liters of fuel.
Imo based on this, the Fokker 50's environmental impact is neutral and if negative considering all tansportation options, mostly too small even to quantify.

[cathay belgium]

Hi,
If SN can create such need for domestics for feeding, they can better create a small dedicate Dash8 fleet..
Instead of buying VLM with some +25years old planes... and extra payrolls...
If there might be such need maybe VLM can compete with BMI for offering a wetlease on these routes as the smallest SN plane in the fleet will soon be an A319, everything smaller will be leased...
As SN is already operating out of CDG,NUE,NTE,Bremen,... maybe soon LCY and LUX as weak spots..
but nice thinking but will never see domestic flights between ANR and BRU, see them taking a taxi to ANR for a flight to BRU or a driving a company car... I see the fun of it but realistic, nope...
It just won't be + / ecofriendly solution to qualify... how green it might be for you ; you won't sell it...
CXB

[Inquirer]

I understand what you are saying flanker: I feel they are showing an increased focus on the kind of places you are pushing hard for since a couple of seasons already, so it's already being developed.
But as Cathay Belgium said: why would they have to directly invest in vlm for that?
Its far simpler to simply wet lease a plane or 2, 3 from say BMI and organically build this regional network route per route exactly as they are doing, than it is to buy a regional airline which most likely has too many planes and staff at present, only to spend more money to get rid of half of them.
It's the most expensive way to do what you want to do for sure, hence it's not such a good option, IMHO.
I agree however that vlm would be an excellent partner airline to Brussels Airlines: they are a good airline and they have Belgian crews, so it would definitely be a plus over flying to say France or Germany on a plane staffed with Brits. Now, the question is: why haven't they ever approached Brussels with an offer to undercut BMI and flyby? Are they so eager to be a brand on their open again, after they were cut lose by Air France? One can hardly call the stand alone scenario a successful one, so far, so they might want to reconsider.

[Flanker2]

I think that it would be cheaper and more flexible to operate directly than to rely on wetleases.
Wetleases come at quite a premium and for short distances, the Q400 or ERJ135 are very expensive to operate compared to the F50. In the case of the Q400 it's the high capital cost, in case of the ERJ the high fuel cost.

In theory, SN could operate the ANR-BRU sector with a RJ100 too, but financially it's difficult to justify.

The F50 makes it all possible because of its extremely low operating costs.
I think that VLM's greatest asset is nothing less but its fleet of F50's.

If VLM had run its Liege experiment with Q400's, they would have been bankrupt by now.

I think that many of the F50's can soldier on for another 10 years with a lot of care and as SN builds its regional network, be replaced by newer similar aircraft like the ATR's.

[Inquirer]

I have no idea which plane is best suited for what you are saying, but what I do know is that it's unlikely to be a good idea to buy an entire airline just because they operate a certain type which may be useful.
Wouldn't it be better just then to get a few of those planes, either directly (self operated) or indirectly (leasing), than to buy the whole operation, which is likely too big and thus overstaffed anyway?
I fail to detect the added benefit for B.air in any such acquisition, so other than some sort of a partnership, I don't see much chances for what you are saying.

[Shengenzone]

They just asked their facebook followers to fill in a survey about which routes they would find attractive.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1jqSEos ... fb_send_fb

[Xavi]

I'm surprised that they don't mention their bases in Waterford and Friedrichshafen, but therefor Berlin and Southampton.
Hopefully they find new sucessfull routes from their home base in Antwerp.

[koninckske]

They seems to have a very specific list of destinations being reviewed from ANR. From other destinations it is just about which country as destination. Hope they can find something that works for them from ANR, but also hope they could get a codeshare on the new route: Lyon with HOP! or Munich with Lufthansa, Zurich with Swiss...