|
Post by Thames Gateway on Jun 11, 2012 8:55:54 GMT
CAA Provisional figures for April 2012 give 41,626 Passengers (running year total of 85,068).
Alicante 5777 Amsterdam 9827 Barcelona 7591 Belfast 9121 Cologne 124 Faro 5947 Ibiza 100 Istanbul 333 Waterford 2839
|
|
|
Post by expressflight on Jun 11, 2012 15:43:59 GMT
The figures for May will show over 60,000 pax for the month.
|
|
|
Post by devonian on Jun 14, 2012 9:55:43 GMT
66,793 to be precise.
Excellent!
|
|
|
Post by devonian on Jun 14, 2012 10:10:58 GMT
Here is the breakdown by destination.
Amsterdam 11783 Faro 8253 Belfast 7974 Alicante 7138 Barcelona 7111 Malaga 7010 Palma 3792 Dublin 3497 Jersey 3269 Waterford 3138 Ibiza 2975 Istanbul 398 Cologne 192
|
|
|
Post by devonian on Jul 16, 2012 16:56:24 GMT
No stats for June on the CAA website. Presumably SEN missed the deadline? Anyone know the pax figures for June?
|
|
|
Post by jon on Jul 17, 2012 9:51:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by expressflight on Jul 17, 2012 16:08:22 GMT
In terms of load factor the figures seem to equate to:
AMS 67% BFS 61% DUB 50% WAT 52% JER 59% ALC 92% AGP 91% BCN 89% FAO 92% IBZ 78% PMI 92%
Any corrections welcomed.
|
|
|
Post by Thames Gateway on Jul 17, 2012 18:25:26 GMT
Yes, that's good - but whats that with the 103 passengers to Sunderland?!!
|
|
|
Post by expressflight on Aug 15, 2012 6:55:08 GMT
July passengers totalled 84,792.
ALC 8,982 93% AGP 8,771 91% AMS 12,424 69% BCN 8,824 91% BFS 13,242 73% DUB 5,168 59% FAO 9,602 88%* JER 4,872 50% IBZ 3,766 93% PMI 4,772 85% WAT 3,392 61% CGN 178
* I believe sold seating is capped on FAO for weight reasons. PMI seems rather a rather lower load factor than one would expect, but there are also 272 pax shown as STN-SEN and another 527 pax in the total which do not seem to be allocated to any airport.
Any corrections welcomed.
|
|
|
Post by jjc212 on Aug 15, 2012 11:28:51 GMT
Hi,
Would it be possible for someone to let me know how to work out Load Factors? I have done some digging online but cant seem to find any reliable ways of doing it.
Any help appreciateed!
|
|
|
Post by jon on Aug 15, 2012 12:28:56 GMT
passengers / (flight freq x seats (156 on A319))
Something like that?
don't know how you find out whether an atr42 or 72 was used on the dub/wat routes though.
|
|
|
Post by Tagron on Aug 16, 2012 17:22:23 GMT
I am curious as to why load restrictions may apply to SEN-FAO flights but not SEN-AGP. In terms of straight line distance FAO is only 24nms further from SEN than AGP. This equates to under 4 minutes flying time, say 150kgs fuel. Could the need for a circuitous airways routeing be the cause ?
Expressflight's BFS load factor looks understated. I think it should be 73% the difference being explained by there being only one rotation on Saturdays. Maybe it was an Olympics effect but for whatever reason an average of 175 extra pax per day looks a very healthy increase compared with June. Perhaps it was the improving trend that prompted easyJet to include SEN in their statement about putting on extra flights from BFS. But for now that all seems to have gone quiet.
|
|
|
Post by lordgumboiljnr on Aug 16, 2012 19:14:47 GMT
I am fairly sure that the same 'tortuous' route is being taken for AGP departures, at least some of the time. Seems a heck of a way to escape U.K. airspace. I have thought for some time that this is a contributory reason that FAO has restrictions. Returning flights seem to take a more direct route.
|
|
|
Post by expressflight on Aug 17, 2012 7:12:08 GMT
Thanks for pointing out that error Tagron and I've corrected the figure in my original post. Let's hope that trend can be continued although I will be surprised if easyJet add an additional BFS rotation at this stage. I do wonder how much negative effect is produced by the lack of a London train arriving SEN in time for the morning BFS departure. One way around that would be to operate BFS-SEN-BFS for the first flight of the day and employ the SEN-based aircraft on an early morning departure to a new destination. It may be, of course, that easyJet want to maintain a slightly later BFS departure time to offer a wider LON morning choice to its Northern Ireland passengers.
As far as FAO is concerned I'm told that the reason for the reduced capaicity is that the average pax weight is higher on that route. This is due to the greater proportion of adult males and their golf clubs, the Algarve being a very popular golfing destination. It isn't runway length that's the limiting factor but Second Segment Climb gradient considerations on 24 due to the rising ground along the climb path. This is being looked at to try resolve this limitation, with a 15° 'slew' being being one possibility, as SOU for a similar problem. All in the hands of the CAA at the moment I should imagine.
|
|
|
Post by Tagron on Sept 1, 2012 8:51:22 GMT
I am surprised that the Second Segment Climb issue has not been addressed. It is hardly a new problem. Not just at SOU but even at LGW 26 some aircraft types have had to implement an Emergency Turn procedure to achieve maximum take off weights. Because it would be type and company specific I would have thought (but could be wrong) that easyJet could publish an appropriate procedure themselves without reference to the CAA if it complied with existing regulations.
It would be interesting to know to what extent such a procedure would alleviate the problem though perhaps a difficult answer to summarise in that it would depend on ambient conditions.
In the case of FAO it would not surprise me if they have had to cope with significant headwinds on occasions this summer due to the unseasonable jetstream position, in addition to the high ZFW. Did they move the FAO departure to the early morning slot in order to take advantage of lower ambient temperatures ?
Apologies for the thread drift, but perhaps better here for the sake of continuity
|
|