CAA data show that in 2001, airlines in the UK employed 78,309 staff – with 19.8% part time. By 2006, they employed 72,797 staff – with 21.6% part time. And in 2011 they employed 62,794 staff – with 29.6% part time (under 30 hours per week). So the number of staff has fallen by 19% over the decade from 2001 to 2011, and in that time, the number of full time staff has fallen by 30%. In the decade from 2001 to 2011, the number of passengers using UK airports rose 21% (it was higher from 2005 -8 than now). This shows how much the airlines have increased productivity per worker, and how jobs are not rising in line with passengers. An increasing proportion are also part time.
Airline personnel (31st December 2001) were 41,845 + 36,464 = 78,309
15,469 were part time, which is 19.8% as part time. (62,840 full time).
Number of passengers uplifted in 2001 was 104 067 472
Number of terminal passengers 180 501 000
Airline personnel (31st December 2006) were 38,406 + 34,391 = 72,797
15,746 were part time, which is 21.6% as part time.
Number of passengers uplifted in 2006 was 127 100 965
Number of terminal passengers 234 416 000
Airline personnel (31st December 2011) were 33,864 + 28,930 = 62,794
18,572 were part time, which is 29.6% as part time. (44,222 were full time).
Number of passengers uplifted in 2011 was 131 567 839
Number of terminal passengers was 219 289 000
Read more »
An El Al Boeing 747-400 flight with a fire in one of its 4 engines had to make an emergency landing at Heathrow yesterday. The fire developed shortly after taking off from London for Tel Aviv, and had 411 people on board. The plane landed without incident, though flames could be seen coming from one engine. If the wind was westerly, (it probably was at the time) the plane would have limped back to Heathrow on a flight path over London. Strange that apparently this story has been reported all over the world, but not in the London media.
Flight 318 lands in London’s Heathrow after flame burst from Boeing 747-400 airliner’s engine; flight lands safely after emergency land forces deploy.
An El-Al flight heading from London to Tel Aviv was forced to perform an emergency landing in Heathrow airport on Thursday, after one of its engines caught fire minutes following takeoff.
The incident occurred about 20 minutes after flight 318 took off from the U.K. airport with 411 people aboard, around 1 A.M. Israeli time, when a loud thump was heard on the right side of the Boeing 747-400 airliner.
A strong smell was then reported in the cabin, with the jetliner losing thrust. The pilots, headed by captain Ilan Margalit then redirected the plane toward Heathrow, where emergency crews were deployed ahead of the unscheduled landing.
The crew began to undertake emergency procedures, during which a trail of fire was seen coming out of the engine, causing much alarm among the passengers.
Eventually, however, the pilots were able to safely land the plane with only three engines.
El Al said in response that it hoped that all of the passengers will be able to arrive in Israel in less than 24 hours.
Speaking to Haaretz, Margalit said that the incident was handled calmly, and that crew wasn’t forced into taking extreme emergency measures. “I didn’t have to dive or do a loop,” he said, adding that he managed the episode “alertly, quietly, and calmly.”
The emergency landing follows an incident in May, during which an El Al airliner bound for London was forced to land in Ben-Gurion International Airport shortly after taking off, after discovering a technical fault in its flaps.
The malfunction was discovered 40 minutes into its flight, at which point the plane was instructed to burn fuel and return to Tel Aviv. It then circled the port for another 40 minutes, before safely landing. The flight’s were passengers transferred to another plane.
Read more »
As the Olympic and Paralympic games get under way later this month, armies of wealthy, powerful or famous people will be flocking to London, only to find they will have to rub shoulders with the great masses.So Battersea heliport is going to be making money out of the desire of the posh to travel in helicopters. Not only will the famous, the heads of state, and the rich be arriving by private jets at small airports near London, such as Farnborough, Oxford, or Biggin Hill, they are then to be rushed from there by helicopter to heliport. The helicopters on offer are luxurious affairs, some with fewer seats than some large cars, others much larger. Making matters more complex for the helicopters, however, is the way much of the airspace will be closed for non-essential travel while the games are on. There will still be a lot of extra helicopter noise, to be suffered by the many, during the Olympics, for the privileged travel of the few.
4 July 2012 (BBC)
Helicopters to aid wealthy visitors to the London 2012 Olympics
By Jorn Madslien, Business reporter, BBC News, London Heliport
Olympic VIPs will be coming into London by helicopter
As the Olympic and Paralympic games get under way later this month, armies of wealthy, powerful or famous people will be flocking to London, only to find they will have to rub shoulders with the great masses.
The organisers have gone to great lengths to arrange transport for the so-called Olympic family, the key sponsors and visiting heads of state to make sure they get to and from the events in style.
“But if you’re not one of the lucky few who can use those BMWs and those red lanes, you’re going to have to use public transport,” says James Dillon-Godfray, business development director with the Barclays London Heliport in Battersea.
As such, the games offer both an irresistible attraction and a major inconvenience for people not used to queuing.
For Mr Dillon-Godfray, on the other hand, the games offer a once in a lifetime business opportunity.
A privileged few have found clever solutions to get to the Olympic Stadium
“We’re going to be very busy,” he says.
“We’ll get a lot of international VIPs and celebrities, but also a lot of foreign dignitaries coming to the country.
“There are something like 150 heads of state coming to the United Kingdom for the Olympic period. A number of them will be coming through here, no doubt.”
Travel in style
Mr Dillon-Godfray’s is a relatively simple business proposition.
James Dillon-Godfray, Battersea Heliport director explains how they will cope with the Olympic traffic
Throughout the games, the helicopters will be shuttling the privileged to the heliport in Battersea.
Flying above the sprawling city offers clear views of the congested streets below.
But this is not where the helicopter passengers will be heading.
Instead, for the last leg of the journey, many will travel down the Thames to the Olympic site, aboard luxurious boats.
“That’s not necessarily the fastest way of getting there, but certainly the most reassuring in so much that it’s a guaranteed travel time, no congestion, no traffic, and a very sophisticated, civilised way of getting to the stadium,” Mr Dillon-Godfray says.
For Mr Dillon-Godfray, the opportunity offered by the games is not without challenges, however.
London only has one licensed heliport, so those travelling to the games will have to fit in among many of its regular users – including police and ambulance helicopters.
“As you would expect, any security or public service operation will have priority over any other activity during the Olympics,” he says, though as the heliport is able to handle some 160 flights a day he does not expect any major problems with regards to capacity.
Mr Dillon-Godfray wants more people to combine helicopters and private jets when they travel
Making matters more complex, however, is the way much of the airspace will be closed for non-essential travel while the games are on, hence many helicopter flight plans might be rejected.
This has caused concern for some in the world of aviation.
“It does worry me,” says Michael Hampton, managing director of luxury helicopter and plane charter firm Capital Air Services.
Mr Hampton reckons there are some 100 private helicopter landing pads within 60 miles of central London, in the grounds of luxury hotels or private mansions, as well as in golf or polo clubs.
Many of these will face severe flight restrictions during the games, so rather than benefiting from the Olympics, Mr Hampton fears his business might actually suffer as a consequence.
“Regular clients who have used us for years might resort to other means of transport, and some of them might think they’re not so bad, so there is the risk that they won’t come back after the games,” he says.
London Heliport expects to be handling a lot of traffic during the Olympics
Mr Hampton’s concerns are not shared by manufacturers such as Eurocopter, AgustaWestland or Sikorsky, which will be showing their wares at the Farnborough air show next week.
Business aviation, including demand for helicopters, took a hit during the global recession, but the market for civilian helicopters has recovered according to Eurocopter’s chief executive Lutz Bertling.
Last year, the leading manufacturer, which says it commands a 43% share of the civilian market, saw its revenues rise 12% to 5.4bn euros, with civilian helicopters making up some two thirds of its total production.
And as the growth in global demand for civilian helicopters is set to rise in the years ahead, while military budgets are shrinking, the civilian market should be larger than the military market by 2025, Eurocopter forecasts.
This is music to the ears of the heliport’s Mr Dillon-Godfray.
“Helicopters are absolutely essential for joining up different parts of the country in the most convenient way possible,” he says.
At least, that is, for some.
This year’s Farnborough airshow will be open for the industry from 9-13 July, then for the general public on 14 and 15 July
Many of those using private jets at small airports like Farnborough and Biggin Hill, as a matter of course, have a helicopter waiting to whisk them off to their next destination. Or sometime a Rolls Royce.
So one very high carbon form of transport, following another very high carbon form of transport.
Read more »
Boeing’s latest forecast of its plane sales over the next 20 years have risen slightly from its last forecast. It now expects to sell a total of 34,000 planes in two decades, up from 33.500. It expects this will make it $4.5 trillion. Boeing anticipates demand from China, India and the emerging markets to be stronger than from Europe and America. It anticipates annual air passenger growth over 20 years of 5% and annual air freight growth of 5.2%. Boeing expects orders of 23,240 single-aisle planes, as low-cost carriers continue to grow at above average rates - and 7,950 twin-aisle planes, 790 large aircraft and 2,020 regional jets from 2012 to 2031. It expects the world freight fleet to nearly double from 1,740 aircraft currently to 3,200 in 20 years’ time. It expects the number of aircraft in the world to double in 20 years.
Boeing expects strong demand for new planes
Boeing expects strong demand from Asia
Boeing predicts $4.5tn (£2.8tn) of new planes will be bought over the next 20 years, driven by demand in China, India and other emerging markets.
The US planemaker predicts airlines worldwide will buy 34,000 new planes in the next two decades.
About one-third of the planes will be sold in the Asia Pacific region, followed by Europe and North America.
Struggling economic conditions and high fuel costs have weighed on airlines recently as people travel less.
Boeing forecast that airline traffic would grow at an annual rate of 5% over the next two decades, with cargo traffic growing at a slightly faster 5.2%.
Low-cost carriers, which are growing faster than the broader market, will also boost demand, the Chicago-based company said.
Airlines are also ditching older, fuel-guzzling aircraft for leaner ones, particularly in Europe, the US and Russia. Boeing forecasts replacements will account for 41% of new deliveries.
“The world’s aviation market is broader, deeper and more diverse than we’ve ever seen it,” said Randy Tinseth, vice president of marketing at Boeing Commercial Airplanes.
“It has proven to be resilient even during some very challenging years and is driving production rate increases across the board.”
“Robust growth in China, India and other emerging markets is a major factor in the increased deliveries over the next 20 years,” the company said.
Boeing predicted robust demand for its single-aisle next generation 737 and the 737 Max, which is due to fly for the first time in 2016.
Wide bodied planes, those that have two passenger aisles such as Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner, are expected to account for nearly $2.5tn worth of new airplane deliveries with 40% of the demand coming from Asia.
Boeing cut its projection for the number of freight planes to be sold, blaming the current sluggish state of the cargo market.
But it still expects the world freight fleet to nearly double from 1,740 aircraft currently to 3,200 in 20 years’ time.
“That market’s going to come back when the economy comes back,” said Mr Tinseth.
Boeing’s 20-Year Forecast Predicts World Fleet Will Double in Size
3.7.2012 (Aviation Today_
Boeing hikes 20-year market forecast to $4.5 trillion
LONDON | Tue Jul 3, 2012 8:17am EDT
(Reuters) – Planemaker Boeing Co hiked its 20-year market forecast, predicting demand for 34,000 new aircraft worth $4.5 trillion, on growth in emerging regions and as airlines seek efficient new planes to counter high fuel costs.
Many airlines are facing tough conditions as consumers and businesses in austerity-hit regions cut back on travel, while high fuel prices are taking their toll on profit.
“I don’t think there’s any question that the forecast reflects the economic struggles we see today in some of the mature markets,” Randy Tinseth, vice president marketing at Boeing Commercial Airplanes, told a media briefing in London.
The forecast did not take into account a possible collapse of the euro or the exit of any euro member, Tinseth said.
“We’re looking at a world economy, where, especially over the next few years, we slog through the situation here in Europe and then once you get into the 2014 time frame and beyond, you see more normal economic growth.”
Boeing said on Tuesday the market for new planes would become more geographically balanced over the next two decades, with the Asia-Pacific region leading the way in deliveries, as markets like China and India continued to grow.
The company had last year forecast demand for 33,500 new passenger aircraft and freighters worth $4 trillion by 2030.
“Robust growth in China, India and other emerging markets is a major factor in the increased deliveries over the next 20 years,” Boeing said.
The company said airline traffic was forecast to grow at a 5 percent annual rate over the next 20 years, with cargo traffic seen growing at a rate of 5.2 percent.
It saw the world fleet doubling over the next two decades.
“Low-cost carriers, with their ability to stimulate traffic with low fares, are growing faster than the market as a whole,” the company said.
Boeing said there was strong demand to replace older, less fuel-efficient aircraft, with replacements accounting for 41 percent of new deliveries in the forecast, which runs to 2031.
There would be strong demand for replacement aircraft from Europe, the United States andRussia, Tinseth said.
The Chicago-based company said it saw a market for 23,240 single-aisle aircraft over the next two decades – a category that includes its 737 and rival Airbus’s A320 – worth $2.03 trillion.
It predicted demand for 7,950 twin-aisle aircraft – such as its 787 Dreamliner – worth $2.08 trillion and 790 large aircraft – the Airbus A380 or Boeing 747 – worth $280 billion over 20 years.
Two fifths of the demand for widebody long-range aircraft would come from Asian airlines, Boeing said.
It cut its forecast for the freighter market, blaming a cargo market that remains sluggish. It said it expected the world freighter fleet to nearly double from 1,740 aircraft today to 3,200 by 2031. Last year it had forecast the fleet would reach 3,500 by 2030.
That market segment was flat last year and would perform below the long-term trend once again this year, hit by economic problems, high fuel prices and the fact that lower cost alternatives like shipping exist,” Tinseth said.
“That market’s going to come back when the economy comes back,” he added.
(Editing by Dan Lalor and Hans-Juergen Peters)
Boeing predicts robust growth in latest 20-year forecast
By Victoria Moores (ATW)
July 3, 2012
Boeing is forecasting worldwide demand for 34,000 new aircraft over the next 20 years, doubling the world fleet, in its latest market forecast.
Despite the challenging market conditions, Boeing predicts 5% annual traffic growth over the two decades with Asia-Pacific maintaining its position as the lead recipient of aircraft.
“The world’s aviation market is broader, deeper and more diverse than we’ve ever seen it,” Boeing Commercial Airplanes marketing VP Randy Tinseth said. “It has proven to be resilient even during some very challenging years and is driving production rate increases across the board.”
Boeing expects robust growth, with 23,240 single-aisle deliveries, as low-cost carriers continue to grow at above average rates and many embark on fleet renewals. Replacement aircraft will account for 41% of the 34,000 new deliveries.
Boeing forecast a world total of 7,950 twin-aisle deliveries, 790 large aircraft and 2,020 regional jets to be ordered from 2012 to 2031.
Although China, India and other emerging markets will drive growth in deliveries—with Asian airlines accounting for 40% of the widebody total—Boeing believes the new aircraft market will become “more geographically balanced in the next two decades.”
Read more »
IATA says that globally the number of air passenger kilometres rose by 4.5% in May, compared to May 2011. They regard this as not high enough, because it is not much above the level this April. Globally air freight was down – 1.9% in May. IATA says “Traffic growth for European carriers basically stopped at the end of 2011.” Also that “Domestic markets grew at slightly less than half the rate of international markets”. IATA says the airline industry is fragile; that lower oil prices have helped them recently but that fears of deterioration in the European economy are hitting their industry. Business and consumer confidence are falling, causing slowing demand and softer load factors, which does not bode well for industry’s profitability. Airlines are expected to return only a $3 billion profit in 2012 on $631 billion in revenues (=0.48%).
Demand Growth Slows
2.7.2012 (IATA press release)
Geneva – The International Air Transport Association (IATA) announced global traffic results for May showing a general downward trend in line with deteriorating global economic conditions.
While passenger demand was 4.5% ahead of levels in May 2011, growth was virtually flat compared to April. Capacity increased by 4.0% and load factors stood at 77.6%, below the historically high levels recorded in April.
May freight demand was 1.9% below previous year levels. Compared to April, the freight market contracted by 0.4%. Freight markets hit a low during the fourth quarter of 2011. Since then, they have basically moved sideways with just a 1.5% improvement on that level by May. The freight load factor stood at 45.3%, unchanged from the previous month but 1.2 percentage points below May 2011 levels.
“The airline industry is fragile. Relief in oil prices provides some good news. Unfortunately, the softness in oil markets comes on the back of fears of deterioration in the European economy. Business and consumer confidence are falling. And we are seeing the first signs of that in slowing demand and softer load factors. This does not bode well for industry profitability. Airlines are expected to return a $3 billion profit in 2012 on $631 billion in revenues. That’s a razor-thin 0.5% margin,” said Tony Tyler, IATA’s Director General and CEO.
|May 2012 vs. May 2011
| YTD 2012 vs. YTD 2011
International Passenger Markets
International International passenger demand was up 5.6% compared to May 2011. That is well below the 7.1% growth recorded in April. All regions, except the Middle East, saw growth in passenger demand slow in May compared to April. A 4.1% capacity expansion, however, helped improve load factors from 75.9% in May 2011 to 77.0% for the current month.
- European carriers posted 4.1% growth on international services when compared to the previous May. This is significantly below the 5.7% year-on-year growth recorded for April. The region’s load factor of 78.5% was 1.5 percentage points ahead of the global average. Traffic growth for European carriers basically stopped at the end of 2011. Since the beginning of 2012, the growth trend has been basically flat, in line with the economic pessimism throughout the continent.
- North American airlines experienced a 1.5% increase on international demand in May compared to the previous year. This is below but relatively unchanged from the 1.6% year-on-year growth recorded in April. Load factors for the region’s carriers averaged 82.1% for the month, the highest among the regions. This reflects the tight capacity management conditions which are supporting the recent upward revision of profitability prospects to $1.4 billion (slightly ahead of the $1.3 billion that the region’s carriers made in 2011).
- Asia-Pacific carriers showed a 5.5% expansion in demand over the previous year period. This was ahead of capacity expansion of 3.1%, pushing load factors to 75.4%. In April, the region’s carriers recorded 8.6% growth—heavily skewed from the impact of the Japanese earthquake and tsunami in 2011. Compared to April, demand actually declined 0.8%, while load factors slipped 0.4 percentage points.
- Middle East carriers showed the strongest growth at 15.8%, outstripping capacity expansion of 11.9%. Load factors were the second-weakest among regions at 74.0%. This is, however, a 0.4% point improvement compared to April. The Middle East carriers were the only ones to report aggregate accelerated demand growth compared to April, when the region’s airlines reported 15.2% growth.
- Latin American airlines recorded solid growth of 7.4%. This was ahead of a 5.5% capacity expansion and left load factors at 77.1%, 1.4% points ahead of May 2011 levels.
- African airlines saw demand growth of 9.7% compared to May 2011, below a capacity expansion of 11.8%. Load factors stood at 62.9%.
Domestic Passenger Markets
Domestic markets grew at slightly less than half the rate of international markets, just 2.7%. This was significantly below the 4.1% year-on-year growth recorded in April. Load factors of 78.8% were 0.8% points below the 79.6% reported for May 2011.
- Japan experienced the strongest traffic growth, up 14.8% year-on-year. If we strip out the impact of the Japanese earthquake and tsunami, IATA estimates that Japanese domestic traffic still would have improved year-on-year by about 4%. Load factors of 58.4% were the lowest among major domestic markets.
- China’s domestic demand has slowed to growth rates last seen in early 2011. This reflects a slowdown across the Chinese economy. Traffic rose 4.4% against an 8.3% increase in capacity, pushing load factors down to 78.6%. Compared to April, domestic demand was virtually unchanged.
- US domestic demand slipped 0.1% in May while capacity rose by 0.3%. Load factors dipped slightly to 84.3%, still the highest among all the domestic markets.
- Brazil experienced the strongest growth after Japan, with traffic up 7.2% on a 6.7% rise in capacity. Load factors rose to 65%. However growth softened compared to April, declining 3.1%.
- Indian domestic traffic rose just 0.1% year-over-year, but fell 2.7% compared to April. Load factors stood at 76.8%.
Air Freight (Domestic and International)
Air freight markets stood at 1.9% below previous year levels in May. Compared to April, there was a 0.4% contraction. Taking a broader perspective, air freight has improved by a small 1.5% since hitting bottom in 2011. But this growth has been narrowly focused on the Middle East carriers.
- European airlines experienced the steepest decline in freight traffic, posting a 5.7% decline compared to a year ago on a 1% rise in capacity. North American airlines had a 1.9% drop in demand while capacity was trimmed by 1.6%. Asia-Pacific carriers saw a 4.1% decline in demand in May compared to the previous year, while capacity dipped just 1.7%.
- Latin American airlines’ demand rose 0.2%, while capacity climbed 0.5%.
- Middle Eastern carriers posted a 12.4% increase in demand, which exceeded an 11.7% rise in capacity. Half of this year’s growth in cargo markets has been captured by the Middle East carriers.
- African carriers’ results were not available but will return next month.
The Bottom Line
Evidence of the importance of aviation abounds:
- The Rio+20 meeting brought together over 22,000 delegates to discuss the future of the planet.
- About 15,000 athletes, over 20,000 media and many more spectators will converge on London to watch the Olympics.
- And some 600 million people are expected to fly over the months of July and August as families and friends reunite, businesses find new opportunities and travelers experience new lands.
“Whether bringing people together or moving cargo around the globe, aviation is vital to modern life. The G-20 leaders recognized the critical role of aviation which is the backbone of travel and tourism that is a vehicle for job creation, economic growth and development. Now we need governments to move from recognition to action with tax policies that don’t kill growth, regulation that enables growth and infrastructure to accommodate growth,” said Tyler.
View May 2012 traffic results
- Domestic Markets: Domestic RPKs account for about 37% of the total market. It is most important for North American airlines as it is about 67% of their operations. In Latin America, domestic travel accounts for 47% of operations, primarily owing to the large Brazilian market. For Asia-Pacific carriers, the large markets in India, China and Japan mean that domestic travel accounts for 42% of the region’s operations. It is less important for Europe and most of Africa where domestic travel represents just 11% and 12% of operations respectively. And it is negligible for Middle Eastern carriers for whom domestic travel represents just 6% of operations.
- Explanation of measurement terms:
- RPK: Revenue Passenger Kilometers measures actual passenger traffic
- ASK: Available Seat Kilometers measures available passenger capacity
- PLF: Passenger Load Factor is % of ASKs used.
- FTK: Freight Tonne Kilometers measures actual freight traffic
- AFTK: Available Freight Tonne Kilometers measures available total freight capacity
- FLF: Freight Load Factor is % of AFTKs used
- IATA statistics cover international and domestic scheduled air traffic for IATA member and non-member airlines.
- All figures are provisional and represent total reporting at time of publication plus estimates for missing data. Historic figures may be revised.
- Total passenger traffic market shares by region of carriers in terms of RPK are: Europe 28.9%, Asia-Pacific 28.2%, North America 27.7%, Middle East 7.8%, Latin America 5.2%, Africa 2.2%.
- Total freight traffic market shares by region of carriers in terms of FTK are: Asia-Pacific 39.0%, Europe 21.9%, North America 23.3%, Middle East 11.4%, Latin America 3.0%, Africa 1.3%.
This compares to May 2011 figures of
- International passenger traffic market shares by region in terms of RPK are: Europe 41.5%, Asia-Pacific 25.5%, North America 15.2%, Middle East 10.5%, Latin America 4.5%, Africa 2.9%.
- International freight traffic market shares by region in terms of FTK are: Asia-Pacific 42.1%, Europe 25.6%, North America 16.7%, Middle East 11.4%, Latin America 3.1%, Africa 1.2%.
And compared to May 2010 figures of
- International passenger traffic market shares by region in terms of RPK are: Europe 40.5%, Asia-Pacific 26.1%, North America 15.7%, Middle East 10.5%, Latin America 4.0%, Africa 3.2%
- International freight traffic market shares by region in terms of FTK are: Asia-Pacific 44.6%, Europe 25.1%, North America 16.0%, Middle East 10.1%, Latin America 2.9%, Africa 1.3%
By comparison, last for last May they were saying:
Date: 30 June 2011
Demand Grows in May – Good News on Volumes, But Risks Remain
Geneva – The International Air Transport Association (IATA) announced traffic results for May which showed a 6.8% increase in passenger traffic over May 2010. This is 4% higher than the beginning of the year. Freight traffic showed a drop of 4% against the post-recession peak of the re-stocking cycle in May 2010. However, recent months show a renewed upward trend with freight volumes 2% higher than the start of the year.
|May 2011 vs. May 2010
|YTD 2011 vs. YTD 2010
“We saw positive developments for the air transport volumes in May. International passenger load factors rebounded by 0.8 percentage points to 75.8%. Freight volumes improved by 1.2% over April and passenger volumes were up by 1.8%. These will help to alleviate some of the pressure on profits from continued high fuel prices,” said Giovanni Bisignani, IATA’s Director General and CEO.
“But there are risks associated with political unrest in the Middle East and the European currency crisis. We still expect the industry to make $4 billion this year. That is a pathetic 0.7% margin and another shock could alter the industry’s fortunes dramatically. It’s another tough year for a very fragile industry,” said Bisignani.
International Passenger Markets by Region
- African airlines’ international traffic increased 1.1% over the previous year. Travel markets to the region had been depressed by the impact of political unrest in Egypt and Tunisia. Flights to these two destinations are still about 20% down. However a significant 2.2 percentage point improvement in the load factor for the month does show initial signs of improvement.
- Asia-Pacific carriers recorded an expansion of 4.7%, considerably below the global average of 8.0%. This is due to continuing weakness in the post-earthquake/tsunami Japanese market. Compared to May 2010, capacity expanded 5.0% and the load factor fell slightly to 73.4%.
- European carriers’ traffic expanded by 10.9%, boosted by increased northern European economic activity and a weaker Euro encouraging trade and inbound travel. Capacity expanded by 10.6%, second only to Latin America, and the load factor strengthened to 77.7%.
- Latin American carriers saw the fastest international growth, up 21.3% compared to May 2010, and the fastest capacity expansion (15.2%). This is a consequence of strong economic growth and increased travel and trade flows to North America and across the Pacific. The load factor is just above the industry average at 76.0%.
- Middle East carriers grew international traffic by 7.8% over May 2010, slightly below a 9.6% capacity expansion that saw load factors slip to 70.8%. While political unrest continues to have a dramatic impact on several of the region’s smaller markets, the overall impact on the region’s carriers is very limited.
- North American carriers have cut capacity for two consecutive months (-0.4% in April and -0.5% in May). Year-on-year, traffic is up 4.5% and capacity increased by 5.5%. This cautious approach to capacity expansion resulted in the highest load factor (81.8%) among the major regions.
Domestic Passenger Markets by Region
- Japanese domestic demand was 29.9% below May 2010 while capacity has been adjusted downwards by 20.8%. Total volumes in May were 4.4% higher than in April, showing the initial signs of recovery from the earthquake and tsunami. But the low 54.7% load factor indicates the continuing mismatch between supply and demand.
- Brazil remains volatile but demand is up 21.6% on May 2010 while capacity was 7.2% higher. The volatility of the market is evident in a 65.7% load factor even with the demand outstripping capacity by such a wide margin.
- In China, demand was 10.4% higher than the previous May. A capacity expansion of just 3.3% resulted in load factors of 81.5%. While this is still robust growth, it is a major ramping down from the 14.6% recorded in 2010— reflecting tighter economic policies.
- India domestic demand was 13.8% above previous-year levels against a capacity expansion 19.9%. The load factor of 78.3% is consistent with the global average of 79.4%.
- The mature United States domestic demand grew by 4.0% compared to the previous May. Against a 1.5% increase in capacity, load factors were pushed to 84.6%–the highest among domestic markets surveyed.
Freight (Domestic + International)
Air freight markets showed a 4.0% decline in May. This is skewed as a result of the May 2010 peak for of the post-recession restocking cycle. Since the beginning of the year, freight volumes have increased by a modest 2.0%. This is lower than the 5.5% IATA forecast for 2011. While the continued expansion of world trade at around 6% annually could lend support to accelerated freight growth in the second half of 2011, the performance so far this year has been lower than expected. Carriers in all regions except Latin America (up 1.5%) and the Middle East (+8.1%) saw air freight declines compared to May 2010. The largest fall was forAsia-Pacific carriers with a 9.2% drop showing the impact of disrupted supply chains in Japan and tighter economic policies in China. Declines by African carriers (down 7.8%) reflected the disruption in Egypt and Tunisia. European and North American carriers had modest falls of 2.2% and 1.4% respectively.
View May 2011 traffic results
Read more »
The Financial Times says that David Cameron has now quietly swung his support behind a 3rd Heathrow runway, but this is deeply opposed by the Lib Dems. Therefore, though the coalition is committed to no 3rd runway in this term of parliament, the Conservaties would now try and get it passed, if they won the next election (? May 2015) by an outright majority, without the Lib Dems. There will be the two aviation consultations this summer (July probably) on aviation policy and hub capacity, but the FT says – after discussion with a senior government figure – that “the official response to this – a final policy paper on hub airport capacity which was earmarked for March 2013 – is now set to be delayed for several years, effectively postponing any firm decision until after the general election. The next three years will therefore feature efforts by the coalition to prove it can improve Britain’s hub airport capacity, while making no big-ticket decisions.”
Comment from HACAN:
HACAN Chair John Stewart said, “It was always unlikely that decisions on new runways would be taken in this Parliament. But, if, after the election, the Conservatives were to reconsider a third runway, it would be the mother of all u-turns which would lead to the mother of all battles.”
The story confirms what we have been hearing for some time that the Tories will look at the 3rd runway again after the next election if they win with a reasonable majority but with their current difficulties, at the moment that looks unlikely. The really new bit in the story is the uncertainty around the forthcoming consultation.
July 1, 2012 5:10 pm (Financial Times)
Government U-turn on Heathrow expansion
By Jim Pickard and Andrew Parker
( a few extracts …)
Now, as prime minister, he has quietly swung his support behind the expansion of the west London airport, convinced by business leaders that it is the most practical way to expand aviation capacity in the south-east.
As a result, the prime minister and chancellor will only be able to execute their Heathrow U-turn after 2015 – and, only then, if the Tories win an outright majority in the general election.
Crucially, the official response to this – a final policy paper on hub airport capacity which was earmarked for March 2013 – is now set to be delayed for several years, effectively postponing any firm decision until after the general election.
The next three years will therefore feature efforts by the coalition to prove it can improve Britain’s hub airport capacity, while making no big-ticket decisions.
Instead the focus will be on small-scale attempts to enhance capacity at existing airports. One option would be to encourage more large aircraft to land at Heathrow. Others, such as more night flights, are opposed by the Lib Dems.
Ms Greening would be moved to a different job if the Tories win a second term without the Lib Dems, to avoid forcing her to preside over an excruciating U-turn.
For now, the transport secretary is determined to publish the initial call for evidence imminently to end speculation about Heathrow’s third runway. She is fighting some cabinet colleagues who have argued that this non-committal publication should be dropped altogether.
Previous attempts to get a third runway built at Heathrow ran into enormous opposition from local residents and environmentalists concerned about noise and carbon dioxide emissions.
Other business leaders may welcome the indication that the Tories are now set on expanding Heathrow – although only if they defy the opinion polls and increase their share of the vote in 2015.
A spokesman for the transport department said its business plan still included a target of March 2013 to adopt its new aviation framework.
See full article at
July 1, 2012 10:30 pm (Financial Times)
Coalition puts Heathrow decision on ice
By Jim Pickard, George Parker and Andrew Parker
The coalition is planning to delay a decision on whether to build new runways in the south-east amid deep splits between the Tories and Liberal Democrats over the expansion of Heathrow.
The Conservative leadership has decided to make a decisive switch away from the party’s outright hostility to a third runway at the west London airport by making no mention of Heathrow in its general election manifesto, according to senior party sources. That would clear the path for a majority Tory government to proceed with the project after 2015.
Under the original plan the (Aviation White] paper should have been published three months ago, with the government formally adopting its preferred options in March 2013. But the Treasury and Downing Street are pushing for the paper to include a long “lead time” of several years, supposedly to allow aviation companies enough time to work up properly costed responses.
In reality the delay means ministers may not have to make a firm commitment to any new hub capacity before the election, avoiding a showdown between the Tories and the Lib Dems, …….
The Lib Dems want to find other ways to increase capacity at Heathrow in the next few years without resorting to either unpopular measure.
A three-year delay on final decisions about UK aviation policy could infuriate some in the industry, who accuse ministers of being slow to resolve the UK’s hub airport capacity crunch. BAA argues it is struggling to support new aviation links to emerging markets because the airport is operating at near full capacity.
See full article at
Read more »
The aviation industry has been working hard to put out the message that there is a crisis in airport capacity in the South East. In fact the Government’s forecasts of air traffic demand indicate that even if no constraints on airport growth were imposed for environmental reasons, passenger demand could be entirely met with existing infrastructure until nearly 2030. Even if no new runways were built anywhere in the UK before 2030, only about 3% of air traffic would be squeezed out. The report finds that passenger demand is being overestimated. Now every time the Government has revised its forecasts, the numbers have been downgraded. In the latest set of figures, which reflect to some extent the impact of recession, demand is down from 500 million passengers per year (mppa) at 2030 in the 2007 forecasts to 343 mppa in the 2011 forecast.
New AEF report challenges myth of airport capacity crisis
Jun 25 2012 (AEF)
Since the Government announced its policy of opposition to new runways at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted, the aviation industry has been working hard to put out the message that there is a crisis in airport capacity in the South East. Media coverage of airports issues have tended to start from this assumption, asking, in relation to new runways ‘if not at Heathrow, then where?’
In fact, however, the Government’s forecasts of air traffic demand indicate that even if no constraints on airport growth were imposed for environmental reasons, passenger demand could be entirely met with existing infrastructure until nearly 2030. Even if no new runways were built anywhere in the UK before 2030, only about 3% of air traffic would be squeezed out.
AEF’s new report (linked below), which provides a detailed analysis of the forecasts, identifies a long term trend of passenger demand being overestimated: every time that the Government has revised its forecasts, the numbers have been downgraded. In the latest set of figures, which reflect to some extent the impact of recession, demand is down from 500 million passengers per year (mppa) at 2030 in the 2007 forecasts to 343 mppa in the 2011 forecast.
Even so, we consider that the forecasts up to 2030 may still be too high, as they assume:
- A resumption in economic growth at around 2% pa or above and continuing indefinitely, which AEF considers very uncertain
- No increase in oil prices (despite evidence of increasing demand and increasingly difficult and expensive approaches to extraction), and
- A continuation of aviation’s tax exemptions (including no fuel tax and no VAT)
Recent figures from WWF-UK showed that some of the UK’s leading businesses, including Lloyds TSB, BSkyB, and Marks & Spencer have reduced their business flights by 41% over 2 years, saving £2.4 million and reducing emissions by 3,600 tonnes CO2 as part of WWF’s One in Five Challenge. The scheme aims to help companies and Government departments to cut 20% of flights within 5 years. Members say that lower carbon ways of staying connected, such as advanced videoconferencing, are actually helping them to increase their efficiency, citing less time spent out of the office, faster decision making, productivity gains and increased collaboration, reports WWF.
AEF Passenger Forecasts SUMMARY
AEF Passenger Forecasts analysis
UK Aviation Forecasts from the Department for Transport August 2011
About the Aviation Environment Federation
The Aviation Environment Federation (AEF) is the principal UK non-profit making environmental association concerned with the environmental effects of aviation.
We promote a sustainable future for aviation which fully recognises, and takes account of, all its environmental and amenity effects, ranging from aircraft noise issues associated with small airstrips or helipads to the contribution of airline emissions to climate change.
Read more »
The debate hosted by the Evening Standard took place last night in London had an unbalanced panel, with four speakers broadly in favour of expansion, and only one against. The speakers were Alain de Botton, Willy Walsh, CBI chief policy director Katja Hall, the Mayor’s adviser Daniel Moylan with the lone “anti-expansion” voice of the panel, Tamsin Omond leading member of Climate Rush, among other things. The debate was a missed opportunity for a high level debate, not having sufficient speakers from the opposition, but it was of a higher quality than expected. Willie Walsh confirmed that he is not expecting a third runway at Heathrow, and is not planning for it. He also agreed that the presence of a new runway would not determine whether business is attracted to London. No convincing arguments on the economics of a hub airport, or of a new runway, were put forward.
Despite a panel that was a touch skewed towards the aviation industry the Evening Standard’s debate on aviation was of a lot higher standard than you might expect. The debate, hosted by journalist Jon Sopel, brought together philosopher and writer Alain de Botton, BA CEO Willy Walsh, CBI chief policy director Katja Hall, the Mayor’s adviser Daniel Moylan, with the lone “anti-expansion” voice of the panel, Tamsin Omond leading member of Climate Rush, among other things.
Despite being pretty heavily outnumbered Tamsin Omond was able to make a real impression on the debate raising crucial issues and, in general, using sharper and clearer arguments than her fellow panelists. If she was a little defensive about not being a transport or aviation specialist she made up for it by calling John Stewart from the audience to speak and recognising the work of other campaigners.
What’s it all about?
Alain de Botton kicked off proceedings nicely by planting the discussion firmly in terms of the way businesses, including aviation businesses, by definition prioritise profits over social concerns, or those of the wider economy. He felt that speakers like Willy Walsh would be obliged to argue for aviation expansion regardless of the real case because corporations were legally obliged to maximise their profits. A little bit rum, but quite satisfying none the less.
Willie Walsh on the other hand was concerned that the government appeared to have no aviation policy although he admitted he was no longer campaigning for a third runway at Heathrow as he felt it clearly was not going to happen. Indeed, all the panelists thought a third runway was out.
Which is why people like the Mayor’s adviser were for a “new [unspecified] airport” and Katja Hall of the CBI said that the government was “choking growth” by its refusal to expand capacity so that more trade could be opened up to China and India. Oddly she wrote off the Eurozone altogether, despite the fact that they are or closest trading partners.
However, in the face of the idea that airport expansion was stopping Asian investment Alian de Botton mocked the idea that someone would not open a factory here due to a fictious inability to get a plane here. This seemed slightly weak but lead Walsh to admit that aviation capacity was not the key problem, but the government’s anti-immigration stance and the difficulty in getting visa’s – so it’s border controls that are the problem not airport capacity it seems.
There were some interesting debates that could have done with some expansion, like the merits of hub airports over spreading aviation’s impact among a larger number of smaller airports. Likewise the motivations of politicians was drawn into the frame briefly when Walsh damned the “obsession with votes” and he then warned darkly of “green votes”, which sound horrid. Omond mentioned briefly the fact that the aviation industry pays no tax on fuel and regards itself as a “tax free industry”. Well worth exploring in debate I think.
Siobhan Benita tweeted during the debate that the government should make a noise reduction programme a key and non negotiable criteria of expansion” but it was clear that most proponents of expansion saw other factors (like social or environmental harms) as something that could be ignored if the economic benefits were large enough.
One million people are, apparently, disturbed by aircraft noise in this couuntry and the WHO has made it clear that there should be a limit of 55 decibels above which there are clear health impacts. However, without a clear site for a new airport discussing its impacts on the area seems a little abstract, but important to note.
The best contribution from the floor came from one audience member who made a very clear and simple point. If capacity is the reason we’re not flying to China and India why did Walsh’s airline launch, on that very day, a new Heathrow route to Leeds, just two hours away by train. If Chinese routes are needed then let the train take the strain for internal travel.
It takes us to the point on on how to use aviation capacity. Omond thought we should ban domestic flights but in general laid out a more cautious case that we’re using our capacity badly and that air travel should be seen as part of an integrated network where often other forms of travel are more appropriate. Alain de Botton pointed out that more people manning the desks at immigration control might be a good way of freeing up Heathrow’s capacity, but it was profit over making the airport more people friendly and faster experience.
This was an extremely attractive argument that before we start expanding airport capacity we need to make sure we’re using what we have effectively. If we’re in need of intercontinental flights then let’s scrap the short haul flights and ensure we have other land based (or indeed sea based) transport to take us the shorter distances. Omond argued that, in fact, there was no capacity crisis but a failure to think creatively about our transport and economic needs.
Her argument that we need to reinvigorate our “ancient rail system” and “build real infrastructure” to help fight economic and environmental problems went down well with audience on the whole. When we were told by Moiland that aviation was private enterprise but that a new airport would require from the public purse more than £25 billion over ten years it did seem that there was a have our cake and eat it attitude from the aviation industry.
Of course, Walsh was actually keen on moore high speed rail to take people larger distances to his airports and he stated clearly that HS2 made turning Birmingham into one of London’s airports a real opportunity. So trains in themselves don’t reduce air travel and may, in fact, increase emissions if we aren’t careful when planning.
There were votes of the audience showing that people were against a Heathrow third runway, but a significant minority for, despite the fact that no speaker spoke directly in favour. It was “more evenly split” on a new airport in the Thames Estuary and then asked whether anyone had changed their mind – almost no one put their hand up. Which highlights the fact that if you come out to a midweek meeting on aviation you probably have strong views on it already – but the meeting was still useful and informative, deepening people’s understanding of the issues.
De Botton’s view that we should have a referendum on airport expansion has some merits – but only if that is an informed debate. This debate certainly helped inform the enthusiasts.
For me the take away message was from Tamsin Omond who argued for a better not bigger aviation policy. Let’s use our existing capacity better, stop using flights when we could use other transport and have a proper debate on the role of aviation in our economy and the real consequences of this polluting, pampered industry.
HACAN welcomes Willie Walsh’s recognition that a 3rd runway at Heathrow is off the agenda
June 28, 2012 HACAN has welcomed the recognition by British Airways chief Willie Walsh that a 3rd runway is off the agenda at Heathrow. Walsh also ruled out mixed-mode which he said would make the situation at the airport worse. Speaking in a debate organized by the Evening Standard in Central London last night Walsh admitted that, while he had supported a 3rd runway, he now recognized that it would not be built. He said that decisions about his business were now being made on that assumption. He cited, for example, that BA had acquired BMI in order to get more landing slots at Heathrow. HACAN applauds Willie Walsh’s honesty. When a straw poll was taken at the end of the debate a large majority of the audience voted against a 3rd runway. Click here to view full story…
Boris Island ‘a distraction’ says Walsh
By Ian Taylor
Jun 28, 2012 (Travel Weekly)
British Airways will still fly from Heathrow in 2050 after parent International Airlines Group (IAG) bought BMI to ensure it could expand at the airport, Willie Walsh told an audience in London last night.
Speaking at an Evening Standard debate on London airports, Walsh dismissed a new hub airport in the Thames estuary as “a distraction”, said he supports high-speed rail and would not campaign for a third runway at Heathrow.
The IAG chief executive said: “I was disappointed with the Conservative decision to oppose the third runway, but I accept the decision. However, there is no plan B.
“A third runway should have been built, but it won’t so I can’t waste time. We bought BMI to give us the opportunity to fly to some of the routes [we had not been able to].”
Walsh told the audience of several hundred: “I don’t believe Boris Island will be built. You can have an airport where you like; if you don’t have airlines there, it won’t happen. In 2050, BA will be flying from Heathrow.”
Told that flying between Manchester and London wastes capacity at Heathrow, Walsh said: “If high-speed rail connected Manchester and London, I wouldn’t fly to Manchester. People fly from Manchester to Heathrow because they are connecting to flights.”
He said: “I hear more argument in favour of a third runway since I said I was not going to campaign for it. So I’m going to carry on saying that and we might see it built.”
Writer Alain de Botton argued against expanding Heathrow and described a new Thames estuary airport as “pie in the sky”.
He told the audience: “Our inefficiency in building airports is a symptom of efficiency in other areas, such as democracy. That is more important than business.
“We should celebrate the 15 years it took to build [Heathrow’s] Terminal 5. It is a tribute to our freedom.” De Boton added: “We have five airports in London. Let’s use them.”
Environmentalist Tamsin Omond said the problem was “miss-use of airport capacity”, saying: “45% of capacity is wasted on journeys of less than 300 miles, on flights from Heathrow to Edinburgh and Manchester.
London is the best-connected city in the world. The government is right to stay firm on its decision [on Heathrow].”
Daniel Moylan, aviation advisor to London mayor Boris Johnson who advocates a new Thames estuary hub, argued: “The question is not whether we have a fourth or fifth runway somewhere in the southeast. The question is whether it is going to be in Britain.
“The hub capacity used by a large number of people outside the southeast has already moved to Schiphol.”
However, Moylan conceded that half the funding for a new airport, provisionally costing £50 billion, would have to come from “the public purse”.
BA chief: We need a new hub airport to take place of Heathrow
Britain’s top airline boss Willie Walsh wants a new four-runway hub airport to replace Heathrow within 25 years.
Speaking at the Evening Standard’s aviation debate, he sounded a death knell for Heathrow as the country’s premier international airport.
“I think we need to build a third runway at Heathrow, then we need to plan and build a new hub airport,” he told a capacity crowd of 900 Londoners. “I’m open to where it should be built. It should be in the best place possible.”
Mr Walsh, whose vast International Airlines Group includes British Airways, Iberian and now BMI, explained after the debate that Heathrow will eventually run out of capacity — even if it is allowed a third runway, which all three main political parties oppose.
With the current two runways, IAG’s airlines could be served by Heathrow for “the next 15 years”, he said. But even with a third runway, it would be running out of capacity by 2037.
“A third runway probably gets you 20 to 25 years, but not much more,” he told the Standard. “I can’t see where you’d put a fourth Heathrow runway.”
The former pilot, who rose to become one of the most powerful figures in aviation, called on the Government to choose a new hub within three years.
“You need a decision, with cross-party support, in this Parliament,” he said. “Can you postpone it beyond an election? No, I don’t think you can.”
He said a new hub should be “future-proofed” by having the potential to grow to at least four runways and many terminals, plus top-grade rail and road links. It must also keep costs down.
BAA boss Colin Matthews has warned that Heathrow’s status will be reduced to a “local airport” by 2027 unless it can expand.
Mr Walsh did not support Boris Johnson’s proposal for a Thames Estuary airport because of possible airspace conflicts, running costs and doubts about its appeal to airlines.
And unlike the Mayor, he insisted a third runway is needed as an interim measure to stop Britain falling down the aviation league table while a new hub is being planned and built. “We’re No 1 today,” he said. “If we slip to No 20, how do we get back to being No 1?”
His dramatic call was one of the highlights of an electrifying debate held at the Emmanuel Centre, Westminster. It brought together the air industry, business, environmentalists, residents and passenger groups.
The panel, chaired by the BBC’s Jon Sopel, included climate change activist Tamsin Omond, CBI chief policy director Katja Hall, the Mayor’s aviation adviser Daniel Moylan and writer Alain de Botton.
During lively exchanges, both Mr Moylan and Mr Walsh slammed proposals for permanently allowing “mixed mode” Heathrow flights, which would allow both runways to be used all day for both take-offs and landings. And all the expert panellists attacked the Government for its inaction over the air capacity crisis.
Mr Walsh said: “Let’s challenge David Cameron to do what he said he would and come up with the long-term solution. That may be difficult. I’ve seen no evidence of him wanting to do that.”
John Stewart, chairman of pressure group Hacan which represents residents under Heathrow flights, said today: “We applaud Mr Walsh’s honesty. We wait for the rest of the aviation industry to wake up to reality and start to engage in a constructive debate about the future of aviation in the UK.”
On a show of hands after the debate, an overwhelming majority agreed London is facing an aviation crisis but a majority was against a third runway. By a smaller margin, the hall opposed a Thames Estuary airport.
Transport Secretary Justine Greening said today: “Willie Walsh is right to say it is now time to grasp the nettle and look long term. I am determined to lead the debate that will secure our country’s long-term status as a leading aviation nation.” In Monday’s Standard she warned against “quick fix” solutions to capacity problems.
Heathrow owner BAA renewed its appeal for a third runway after Mr Walsh’s comments, saying: “For the foreseeable future, this is the only airport in the UK with the scale and capability of a global hub and we need an aviation strategy recognising this.”
The title of the article above has now been changed, a few hours later on 28th June, to read:
We need new Heathrow runway as stopgap, says Willie Walsh
from the earlier
BA chief: We need a new hub airport to take place of Heathrow
with the text remaining unaltered.
And then, by 29th July, it has shifted back tot he first title, at
with no trace of the “Heathrow runway was stopgap” article.
Another report on the debate says:
New airport is better idea than high-speed rail, says Boris aide
Airport debate: The panel last night
Boris Johnson’s aviation adviser claims there is a better business case for building a Thames Estuary airport than for the High Speed 2 rail line.
Speaking at the Standard’s aviation debate, Daniel Moylan said an island airport in the South-East would be part-funded by the private sector.
He said £25 billion of public money would be needed for the project, but argued that if the Government was willing to spend £32 billion on HS2 it should be willing to finance a new airport.
HS2, which will initially link London to Birmingham, has faced fierce opposition from some MPs and residents on the proposed route.
At yesterday’s debate at the Emmanuel Centre in Westminster, Mr Moylan said: “This is not pie in the sky. The figures are £25 billion for an airport and possibly £25 billion again for [rail and road links]. If you could sort half of that in the private sector then you’re left with a £25 billion cost over a construction period of perhaps 10 years. For the economic benefits it will generate … I suspect a very strong business case can be made.
“I’m not drawing invidious comparisons but as strong a business case, if not better, than spending £32 billion on high-speed rail.”
Mr Moylan said that a new four-runway mega-hub was vital to attract big business and investment to the capital, and with Heathrow full to bursting point, rival airports in Europe were now offering more links to developing economies than London.
“We cannot continue to attract investment, we cannot continue to be the headquarters location of choice for major companies … unless we offer them direct connections to a wide range of cities across the globe,” he added.
“It is just possible the Dutch and the French and Germans and Arabians have all got this wrong and the British approach of burying your head in the sand, not doing anything for 60 years, is the right one. Personally I don’t find it a very compelling case.”
But Willie Walsh, head of BA’s owner IAG, said he did not believe a “Boris Island” estuary airport would ever be built. He said: “It is an interesting issue but I think it’s largely a distraction. I struggle to see the business case.” Wycombe Tory MP Steve Baker, who has opposed HS2, said: “The financial case for HS2 is poor. The case for a high-quality hub in the South-East is a very good one.”
Panel’s views ban domestic flights, hold vote or build new hub
The environmental campaigner said she would ban domestic flights “in a second” as she argued that Britain does “not have a capacity crisis”.
Ms Omond, an author and founder of the Climate Rush protest group, said better railway connections are the answer and called for the Government to have a better “vision”.
She said: “I believe in Britain and I believe in keeping Britain great. Any responsible government would chuck this debate back into the airport bar where it belongs. We do not have a capacity crisis. The crisis we have is a misuse of our existing airport capacity.
“Heathrow, at 99 per cent capacity, flies 118 times a week to Edinburgh and 81 times to Manchester. Better rail connections between UK airports alone would release a runway’s worth of capacity for the South-East.”
Alain de Botton
A referendum must be held before the next big aviation strategy is allowed a go-ahead, the writer and philosopher said.
“The best mechanism ultimately is a referendum on what we should do with our aviation policy,” he said. “This is a particular issue and the only real way we are going to balance up the needs of business, the needs of the one million people who can’t sleep because of noise, and so on, is by some sort of democratic process.”
The chief executive of IAG, owner of British Airways, backed Transport Secretary Justine Greening’s calls for an end to what she called the “pub-style debate” so far on UK aviation.
He accused the Conservatives of coming out against a third runway at Heathrow in a bid to woo green voters and was sceptical about the benefits of a “Heathwick” solution — linking Gatwick and Heathrow with a high speed rail link.
The CBI’s chief policy director said ministers needed to take Britain’s growing aviation needs out of th “too hot to handle box”.
She said the private sector would step in to finance bigger airports, adding: “This is not a market failure. It’s a failure of nerve. The market is ready to deliver but it’s the Government’s failure to confront some tough decisions that is holding us back.”
THE mayoral adviser to Boris Johnson said that a failure to build a new hub airport in the South-East would condemn London to becoming a bit-part player in the global economy.
He said: “The Dutch, the French, the Germans — they get it. They are competing for our business. They are laughing all the way to the bank.
“We cannot expand Heathrow, it is in the wrong place. We need a new, proper airport.”
Read more »
In 2011, international tourism receipts exceeded US$ 1 trillion for the first time, up from US$ 928 billion in 2010. In real terms, receipts grew by 3.8%, following a 4.6% increase in international tourist arrivals. The UN World Tourism Organisation UNWTO thinks this is a very good thing. “The past two years have shown healthy demand for international tourism out of many markets, even though economic recovery has been uneven. This is particularly important news for countries facing fiscal pressure and weak domestic consumption, where international tourism, a key export and a labour intensive activity, is increasingly strategic to balancing external deficits and stimulating employment.” International tourist arrivals grew by over 4% in 2011 to 980 million, according to the latest UNWTO World Tourism Barometer, and are expected to grow to one billion this year.
International tourism receipts surpass US$ 1 trillion in 2011
In 2011, international tourism receipts exceeded US$ 1 trillion for the first time, up from US$ 928 billion in 2010. In real terms, receipts grew by 3.8%, following a 4.6% increase in international tourist arrivals. An additional US$ 196 billion in receipts from international passenger transport brought total exports generated by international tourism in 2011 to US$ 1.2 trillion.
According to the latest UNWTO World Tourism Barometer, international tourism receipts continued to recover from the losses of crisis year 2009 and hit new records in most destinations, reaching an estimated US$ 1,030 billion (euro 740 billion) worldwide, up from US$ 928 billion (euro 700 billion) in 2010. In real terms (adjusted for exchange rate fluctuations and inflation), international tourism receipts grew by 3.8%, while international tourist arrivals increased by 4.6% in 2011 to 982 million. This confirms the close correlation between both indicators, with growth of receipts tending to lag slightly behind growth of arrivals in times of economic constraints.
“These are encouraging results,” said UNWTO Secretary-General, Taleb Rifai. “The past two years have shown healthy demand for international tourism out of many markets, even though economic recovery has been uneven. This is particularly important news for countries facing fiscal pressure and weak domestic consumption, where international tourism, a key export and a labour intensive activity, is increasingly strategic to balancing external deficits and stimulating employment.”
“We trust that governments worldwide will progressively recognize this and engage in measures that support tourism including fairer tax policies and the facilitation of visas and travellers’ movements, as these have proven to stimulate economic growth and job creation,” he added.
By regions, the Americas (+5.7%) recorded the largest increase in receipts in 2011, followed by Europe (+5.2%),Asia and the Pacific (+4.3%) and Africa (+2.2%). The Middle East was the only region posting negative growth (-14%).
Europe holds the largest share of international tourism receipts in absolute numbers (45% share), reaching US$ 463 billion (euro 333 bn) in 2011, followed by Asia and the Pacific (28% share or US$ 289 billion/euro 208 bn), and the Americas (19% share or US$ 199 billion/euro 143 bn). The Middle East (4% share) earned US$ 46 billion (euro 33 bn) and Africa (3% share) US$ 33 billion (euro 23 bn) (see table below).
Asides from international tourism receipts (the travel item of the Balance of Payment), tourism also generates export earnings through international passenger transport. The latter amounted to an estimated US$ 196 billion in 2011, bringing total receipts generated by international tourism to US$ 1.2 trillion, or US$ 3.4 billion a day on average.
As a result, international tourism (travel and passenger transport) currently accounts for 30% of the world’s exports of services and 6% of overall exports of goods and services. As a worldwide export category, tourism ranks fourth after fuels, chemicals and food, while ranking first in many developing countries.
Strong growth in international tourism expenditure from the BRIC countries
Many source markets generated strong demand in 2011. However, it was the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China) that continued to stand out. China’s expenditure on international tourism increased by US$ 18 billion to US$ 73 billion, the Russian Federation increased by US$ 6 billion to US$ 32 billion, Brazil by US$ 5 billion to US$ 21 billion and India by US$ 3 billion to US$ 14 billion. Together, their increases accounted for an additional US$ 32 billion, a value equivalent to the eighth largest source market by expenditure. Of the advanced economy source markets, Germany, Australia, Norway, Belgium and Canada reported the biggest absolute growth (see table 1).
Increases in receipts in emerging and advanced economy destinations alike
Both advanced and emerging economy destinations benefited from the 2011 growth in arrivals and receipts. Destinations where international tourism receipts grew by US$ 5 billion or more in absolute terms include the United States (increasing by US$ 13 bn to US$ 116 bn), Spain (by US$ 7 bn to US$ 60 bn), France (by US$ 7 bn to US$ 54 bn), Thailand (by US$ 6 bn to US$ 26 bn) and Hong Kong (China) (by US$ 5 bn to US$ 27 bn). Furthermore, significant increases on lower base value destinations were reported by Singapore, the Russian Federation, Sweden, India, the Republic of Korea and Turkey (see table 2).
International Tourism by Subregion
Table 1: World’s Top Source Markets by International Tourism Expenditure
Table 2: World´s Top Destinations by International Tourism Receipts
UNWTO World Tourism Barometer
UNWTO World Tourism Barometer
Tourism Trends and Marketing Strategies
International tourism to reach one billion in 2012
International tourist arrivals grew by over 4% in 2011 to 980 million, according to the latest UNWTO World Tourism Barometer. With growth expected to continue in 2012, at a somewhat slower rate, international tourist arrivals are on track to reach the milestone one billion mark later this year.
International tourist arrivals grew by 4.4% in 2011 to a total 980 million, up from 939 million in 2010, in a year characterised by a stalled global economic recovery, major political changes in the Middle East and North Africa and natural disasters in Japan. By region, Europe (+6%) was the best performer, while by subregion South-America (+10%) topped the ranking. Contrary to previous years, growth was higher in advanced economies (+5.0%) than in emerging ones (+3.8%), due largely to the strong results in Europe, and the setbacks in the Middle East and North Africa.
“International tourism hit new records in 2011 despite the challenging conditions,” said UNWTO Secretary-General, Taleb Rifai. “For a sector directly responsible for 5% of the world’s GDP, 6% of total exports and employing one out of every 12 people in advanced and emerging economies alike these results are encouraging, coming as they do at a time in which we urgently need levers to stimulate growth and job creation,” he added.
Europe surpasses the half billion mark in 2011
Despite persistent economic uncertainty, tourist arrivals to Europe reached 503 million in 2011, accounting for 28 million of the 41 million additional international arrivals recorded worldwide. Central and Eastern Europe and Southern Mediterranean destinations (+8% each) experienced the best results. Although part of the growth in Southern Mediterranean Europe resulted from a shift in traffic away from the Middle East and North Africa, destinations in the Mediterranean also profited from improved outbound flows from markets such as Scandinavia, Germany and the Russian Federation.
Asia and the Pacific (+6%) was up 11 million arrivals in 2011, reaching a total 216 million international tourists. South Asia and South-East Asia (both +9%) benefited from strong intraregional demand, while growth was comparatively weaker in North-East Asia (+4%) and Oceania (+0.3%), partly due to the temporary decline in the Japanese outbound market.
The Americas (+4%) saw an increase of 6 million arrivals, reaching 156 million in total. South America, up by 10% for the second consecutive year, continued to lead growth. Central America and the Caribbean (both +4%) maintained the growth rates of 2010. North America, with a 3% increase, hit the 100 million tourists mark in 2011.
Africa maintained international arrivals at 50 million, as the gain of two million by Sub-Saharan destinations (+7%) was offset by the losses in North Africa (-12%). The Middle East (-8%) lost an estimated 5 million international tourist arrivals, totalling 55 million. Nevertheless, some destinations such as Saudi Arabia, Oman and the United Arab Emirates sustained steady growth.
Receipts confirm positive trend in arrivals
Available data on international tourism receipts and expenditure for 2011 closely follows the positive trend in arrivals.
Among the top ten tourist destinations, receipts were up significantly in the USA (+12%), Spain (+9%), Hong Kong (China) (+25%) and the UK (+7%). The top spenders were led by emerging source markets – China (+38%), Russia (+21%), Brazil (+32%) and India (+32%) – followed by traditional markets, with the growth in expenditure of travelers from Germany (+4%) and the USA (+5%) above the levels of previous years.
International tourism on course to hit one billon in 2012
UNWTO forecasts international tourism to continue growing in 2012 although at a slower rate. Arrivals are expected to increase by 3% to 4%, reaching the historic one billion mark by the end of the year. Emerging economies will regain the lead with stronger growth in Asia and the Pacific and Africa (4% to 6%), followed by the Americas and Europe (2% to 4%). The Middle East (0% to +5%) is forecast to start to recover part of its losses from 2011.
These prospects are confirmed by the UNWTO Confidence Index. The 400 UNWTO Panel of Experts from around the globe, expects the tourism sector to perform positively in 2012, though somewhat weaker than last year.
Governments urged to facilitate travel
As destinations worldwide look to stimulate travel demand under pressing economic conditions, UNWTO is urging governments to consider advancing travel facilitation, an area in which in spite of the great strides made so far there is still much room for progress. UNWTO advises countries to make the most of information and communication technologies in improving visa application and processing formalities, as well as the timings of visa issuance, and to analyze the possible impact of travel facilitation in increasing their tourism economies.
“Travel facilitation is closely interlinked with tourism development and can be key in boosting demand. This area is of particular relevance in a moment in which governments are looking to stimulate economic growth but cannot make major use of fiscal incentives or public investment,” said Mr. Rifai.
Presentation: World Tourism Performance 2011 and Outlook 2012
UNWTO World Tourism Barometer
Read more »
Jenkins has seen straight through the aviation industry spin and PR, and is not remotely taken in by it. In a brilliantly written piece, this are some quotes: “BAA and BA have been wrapping themselves in the flag of “growth” and “UK plc” for years, as if Heathrow had anything to do with some wider public interest. It does not. British aviation is chiefly about shifting millions of leisure travellers, mostly British tourists going overseas” And “. A mere 13% of British airport passengers are in any sense “business”, and that embraces company junkets, conferences and trips on expenses. The industry may present Heathrow as the throbbing hub, the nerve centre, of the nation’s economy but only 30% of its passengers are in any sense “business”, which is why it is designed like a supermarket. Gatwick and Stansted are barely 15% business travellers. This whole enterprise is dedicated to inducing Britons to holiday abroad.”
The third runway debate is back, and it’s all about greed
Third runway debate: Heathrow
It won’t lie down. Like some ancient vampire, the “third runway at Heathrow” is the living dead. Born of greed and sucking lobbying cash into its veins, its coffin is hammered shut time and again. Yet come the fall of dusk over west London, with much creaking and howling, it slinks back on stage.
Governments have promised no expansion at Heathrow for half a century. In the Sixties, they admitted it was an airport in the wrong place and told local residents there would be no expansion “for all time”. The same pledge was repeated after Terminal 4 was built in 1978, again after Terminal 5, and when the Labour transport minister, Ruth Kelly, reneged and promised “just a mini-runway” in 2006. Ministers lied, all of them. They swore on their mothers’ graves, and then lied.
Before the 2010 election David Cameron and Nick Clegg could not have been clearer. There would be no third runway at Heathrow. In this day and age in a civilised country, you could not seriously propose to fly ever bigger and noisier jets over heavily populated areas. It was a promise. Read my lips.
The money refused to admit defeat. The money, in the form of BAA and British Airways as it then was, knew that a Heathrow promise was not worth a bucket of spit. They would not give up until the last aviation civil servant was lying dead of lunch overdose in the Whitehall gutter. Lord Adonis, Colin Matthews of BAA and Willie Walsh of BA/IAG cared not a jot for the pledges that elected politicians give. They have cash-thirsty companies to run.
Since Heathrow is my nearest airport I suppose I must declare an interest in a third runway. Since the runway would send planes distantly over my home I have a conflicting interest. But there are surely more important interests. One is in the coherent planning of
London’s infrastructure, striking a balance between commerce and the environment. Another is that government should take decisions quickly, honestly and fairly and, once taken, keep them.
One issue can be dismissed at once. BAA and BA have been wrapping themselves in the flag of “growth” and “UK plc” for years, as if Heathrow had anything to do with some wider public interest. It does not. British aviation is chiefly about shifting millions of leisure travellers, mostly British tourists going overseas. Aviators hate to think of themselves as part of the tourism business, preferring to see themselves in flashy uniforms and associating with financiers and politicians on upgrades. A mere 13 per cent of British airport passengers are in any sense “business”, and that embraces company junkets, conferences and trips on expenses.
The industry may present Heathrow as the throbbing hub, the nerve centre, of the nation’s economy but only 30 per cent of its passengers are in any sense “business”, which is why it is designed like a supermarket. Gatwick and Stansted are barely 15 per cent business travellers. This whole enterprise is dedicated to inducing Britons to holiday abroad. The UK’s deficit on foreign tourism is £15 billion a year. This is hardly in the national interest. Indeed, if BAA really cared about Chinese and Arab tycoons using Heathrow “as a hub” it would not devote precious slots to Malaga and Orlando.
Why then did George Osborne last autumn promise to “explore all options on maintaining the UK’s aviation hub status”? Why did he repeat in his Budget, “we cannot cut ourselves off from the fastest-growing cities in the world”? Why did this follow David Cameron’s pledge that he was “not blind to the need to increase airport capacity” since Britain should not be “just a feeder route to bigger airports in Frankfurt, Amsterdam or Dubai”. The answer is that these phrases come straight from the handouts of political lobbyists for the airline companies.
There is much, so we often read, that could be done to increase Heathrow’s throughput for business travellers. Tourist destinations could shift elsewhere: it is absurd to have holiday-makers having to travel south and east to London to fly elsewhere in Europe. There is already a third runway near Heathrow, the Government’s private and VIP airport at Northolt. If Cameron is really short of “vital capacity” Northolt stands waiting. Runways could go over to “dual-use”, for landing and take-off, now being considered a quarter century after being first proposed.
If more capacity really is one day needed in the London area, there is no way it can ever be over the rooftops of west London. Gatwick and Stansted are in precious countryside which, as at Heathrow, ministers once pledged to leave alone.
It can hardly be more precious than the ears of millions. But no hindrance other than financial lies in the way of the much-vaunted Thames estuary site. In the long-distance future it must make sense to exile these vast developments as far from human habitation as possible.
What is wrong is for policy to veer this way and that in response to the pressure of special interests waving the flag and claiming to be what they are not. For the time being Downing Street is being led by the nose by lobbyists. That is why campaigners against the runway must sustain their countervailing
pressure. This runway will not vanish until buried at a crossroads on the A4, with garlic in its mouth and a stake through its heart. And possibly not even then.
Read more »