TK773ER wrote:

I think for TK best option is to fly here into MEL no curfew

Would still need an intermediate stop either via BKK or SIN (both Star Alliance hubs). The direct distance is 7906 nmi.

Some bad PR again for ACT Cargo with a runway overrun in MST (operated for SV)

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1378593

Turkish Airlines October performance:

ASK 15.129m +1.8%
RPK 12.275m +10.4%
L/F 81.0% +6.3 Pp
Pax 6.200.051 +12.7%
Cargo 105.767t +21.6%

Ytd:
ASK 145.627m +0.3%
RPK 115.091m +6.4%
L/F 79.0% +4.5 Pp
Pax 57.819.144 +7.5%
Cargo 917.397t +26.3%

Great results so far!
I am curious of Nov/Dec data, as in the comparable period last year, TK has cut almost 10% of its capacities. Growth rates (Pax, RPK) will be at least double digit again.

TK787 wrote:

Reporting from on board TK1, TC-LJD "Selimiye", 2 yrs old 77W. All good, will be crossing the Atlantic shortly on a Southernly route. 311 pax on board.

I'd like to add couple of things to this short report.
-I paid $725 one way for "S" class Economy ticket, purchased one day before the flight through a travel agent. TK is not the cheapest out of JFK. I always say this. I almost bought a one way ticket New York-Lisbon-Rome on TAP last night. It was only $215 for travel next year.
-The on board service is going not as good as used to be. It is so rushed. With the recent profits TK should bring back 16 FA's on board these flights as opposed to the current 11. Food service is really slow, bathrooms doesn't get enough attention. It is not nice to see FA's trying to eat their dinner, back in the galley just before landing.
-And about the pax on board. Sometimes I feel like I am on Noah's Ark. Seems like they put two people from every nation on TK's JFK flights. Such an incredible variety of pax.

Also, congrats to TK on their Q3 and YTD numbers. With these numbers, we can expect a firm order on those 787's (fingers crossed)

What I see is that, they need to finalize refurbishment of a332s asap and finalize 787 order asap as well
77w is too big for many routes, a mix of 788/789 is needed

Seems like some minor capacity reduction more than anything. Probably too early to talk about it anyway.

Tkfan wrote:

.....
Stunning results for ESB, I guess it's the only major Airport with positive growth rates throughout the year.
Very likely that it will break the 15 million mark this year

I have a question to our Forumers from Ankara, or others flying to/from ESB.

According to DHMI, ESB Terminal has a capacity of 10 million a year. Jan-Oct 2017 we saw almost 13 million pax in Ankara. Is there any kind of congestions or rush-hours?

On a positive side, it's nice that they build the 'second' runway well in advance. It will avoid queues like in SAW.
I don't know how accurate it was, I remember to have seen a Masterplan with a second Terminal planned south of the current and inbetween the runways. Are there such plannings??

In fact the new runaway being built is the third one because there is already two parallel runaways but the third will be utilized for simultaneous flight departures and landings so will help during the three wave of arriving/departing flights in the morning, mid-day and late night.

I saw today that there is a connection being built from the international side of the terminal towards the 3rd runaway.

ESB can handle 20 million easily but another terminal is necessary if the growth will continue at this rate..

Tkfan wrote:

Tkfan wrote:

.....
Stunning results for ESB, I guess it's the only major Airport with positive growth rates throughout the year.
Very likely that it will break the 15 million mark this year

I have a question to our Forumers from Ankara, or others flying to/from ESB.

According to DHMI, ESB Terminal has a capacity of 10 million a year. Jan-Oct 2017 we saw almost 13 million pax in Ankara. Is there any kind of congestions or rush-hours?

On a positive side, it's nice that they build the 'second' runway well in advance. It will avoid queues like in SAW.
I don't know how accurate it was, I remember to have seen a Masterplan with a second Terminal planned south of the current and inbetween the runways. Are there such plannings??

A bit off-topic question(s), but might help:

There are certain parameters when you want to calculate the capacity of a runway. It depends basically on the number of ATMs (air traffic movements), or simply expressed as the number of aircraft landing or taking off from that runway within a defined period of time. So ICAO has devised a number of formulas for his. These depend on the fact if there's a single runway, or if there are multiple (dependent or independent) runways. I have the basic charts but cannot load these for my technical incapability.

But when it comes to determining the pax handling of a terminal, I guess there are quite a number of factors involved (Area, number of gates --- jetways and/or bus gates --, baggage handling system, etc.) . I guess, even the number of toilets do count. But are there any practical formulas to make this calculation?

Istanbul's New Airport is going to open with a single large terminal with the first phase with 2 parallel, independent runways with a third one to be added possibly 2 years later on. It is calculated that these 2 runways can handle around (nominal figures, not hormoned figures as being experienced at AHL, currently...) 370.000 ATMs annually so at an average of 200-210 seats per ATM (assuming 100% LF) so can well serve around 74-78 million pax, annually. The third runway will increase this figure up to possibly to 100 million plus. The single terminal is claimed to have a capacity of 90 million pax, again presuming a "nominal" figure. My gutfeel is that it may be pushed up to maybe 110-120 million, in case of need and with the presence of the third runway.

But now there are some claims, supposedly based on some mathematical facts, that the terminal is capable of handling 150 million pax annually. This assumes the operation of all jetways (a max of 114 Category C & E aircraft can dock) and bus gates (there are 60 remote stands).

Why should the IGA guys repeatedly announce a "90 million terminal" if in fact they are building a "150 million one"?

Anybody has a more detailed and provable idea?

I am pretty sure that the capacity of an airport, like any other building, is limited by the bottleneck of its design - the subsystem of it with the least capacity. If baggage system is limited capacity-wise, then the number of gates will mean nothing. If apron capacity is limited, then you can employ as many check in agents as you want and there will be capacity limits. Even the airlines flying to that airport limit capacity - i.e. if you have an airline like Aegean which only employs narrowbodies, then you can only have 150-200 pax per flight, whereas in LHR you have an average of 250-300 pax per flight due to widebodies. But static capacity is definitely limited by the weakest link in the design.

Tkfan wrote:

I have a question to our Forumers from Ankara, or others flying to/from ESB.

According to DHMI, ESB Terminal has a capacity of 10 million a year. Jan-Oct 2017 we saw almost 13 million pax in Ankara. Is there any kind of congestions or rush-hours?

ankaraflyjet wrote:

In fact the new runaway being built is the third one because there is already two parallel runaways but the third will be utilized for simultaneous flight departures and landings so will help during the three wave of arriving/departing flights in the morning, mid-day and late night.

I saw today that there is a connection being built from the international side of the terminal towards the 3rd runaway.

ESB can handle 20 million easily but another terminal is necessary if the growth will continue at this rate..

As I have shared my opinions long time back, I'm totally against any extension of ESB.

As you may know, ESB was built in 1950s by US. Its location is against natural roads of Ankara and the geography between ESB and Ankara city center has to go through difficult terrains. Its catchment area other than Ankara is nearly ZERO. The only possible way to explain selection of its location may be because during cold war time, it was a better place to position strategic bombardment aircrafts against USSR.

I think new airport of Ankara (which has to be named ANK by the way) has to be position to the west of the city, on the natural roads of Ankara towards west, north and south. By this way, new ANK airport can be connected to already present high speed rail lines to Eskisehir, Konya and Afyon (even Bursa and Usak). New railway lines can be added towards north to Beypazari and Bolu. By this way, ANK can be linked to these cities less than 1hr train connection (a la AMS). Also flight time to IST and Europe can be reduced by 10-15min. Even the fuel saving will finance this new airport. The best location is the already available Temelli Airport with one 2x3 lane motorway to Ankara and west of Turkey, and with high speed raillines to west and south. By this way, ANK can become a hub, not only for Ankara but also for central west/south Anatolia. Also travel time from ANK to Ankara city center will reduce to 20min compared to 1hr of ESB. Also subway line to Cayyolu can be linked to ANK in a cheap and quick way, against very difficult and expensive to be built ESB subway which is not in the horizon as of today.

Announced at Dubai Air Show, Turkish Airlines and Pratt & Whitney agreed to extend their Turkish Engine Center joint venture for another 5-years.
Since founding in 2010 the facility has serviced 600 engines and generated a $34mil profit in 2016.

Is there any chance for TK to lease EYs 77L s for starting Syd
Also i read that EY hs some problems, what about leasing some 787s as well, as far as I know Boeing offered lease of 787s as part of the deal

ist2014 wrote:

Is there any chance for TK to lease EYs 77L s for starting Syd
Also i read that EY hs some problems, what about leasing some 787s as well, as far as I know Boeing offered lease of 787s as part of the deal

Very much unlikely!

EY has only 5 77L2s in their current fleet (not as many as QR & EK), which they cannot afford to lease to a third party. Besides these frames have an "F" cabin and I cannot imagine (at this time) TK can re-start any "F" service even on a limited route (like IST-Australia) after the problems and possibly material losses they experienced during the leases of Jet Airways 77W's.

It is a more intelligent attempt to lease 789, rather than any 788s. TK's MoU is for 789s, anyway. EY does have part of its 789 fleet with two-class 789s; can't tell if they will be willing to lease 3-4 frames, though!... QR only has 788s, so may not be a very viable solution for TK.

Here is a preliminary schdedule for TK's 737 MAX 8's for late 2018; according to routesonline:

"Configuration of the 737 MAX 8, is J16Y135. The airline’s internal configuration identification is 78D.
Istanbul Ataturk – Algiers 1 daily TK653/654
Istanbul Ataturk – Cologne 1 daily TK1677/1678
Istanbul Ataturk – Djibouti – Mogadishu 1 daily
Istanbul Ataturk – Dublin 6 weekly TK1977/1978
Istanbul Ataturk – Esfahan 1 daily
Istanbul Ataturk – Lisbon 1 daily TK1755/1756
Istanbul Ataturk – Nairobi 1 daily
Istanbul Ataturk – Skopje 1 daily TK1005/1006
Istanbul Ataturk – Sofia 1 weekly TK1027/1028 (Day 7)
Istanbul Ataturk – Vienna 1 daily TK1889/1890
Istanbul Ataturk – Yanbu 1 daily"

TC-LJL, TK's first 77F completed its first flight at PAE:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE231

Here is a screen grab from the Paine Field web cam right after it landed:

I reas some news about 797 at kokpit.aero
Specification is 220-275 with a range of upto 9000 km. I assume 9000 range is for smallest variant
There is no doubt that TK can deploy big versions at European, Asian and African routes, no range problem
What about small version, i think 9000 KM is not sufficient for opening new routes in Amerikan continent, may be some african routes
But any way, it can be a perfect machine for TK, hope this time they order early, eeceive some good discount and early access

In reality, the B797 for TK can fly 6,700km nonstop from IST with a full payload of pax (210-220) + cargo (7-8 tons) and not 9,000km.

So this means it can fly maximum:

Southbound to Lusaka
Eastbound up to Dhaka or Colombo
Westbound up to Greenland

The main usefulness of the B797 for TK initially is to use it on African routes currently operated by B738 or A321 that have high SF year round as well as excess baggage demand.

Many EU routes too flown currently by the A321 that have good cargo demand year round can see some of their multiple daily flights upgraded to the B797.

In Asia the aircraft opens up new route possibilities such as HYD, MAA and BLR which do not warrant an A333 or B77W to be operated for the first 2 years. This aircraft size type is also better suited to replace the A330s used currently on all Pakistan and KTM bound flights.

Routes which do not currently see 75-80% year round on the A332/A333 across TK's network should be downgraded to the B797 (if ordered) in order to lower costs and boost SF accordingly.

TK787 wrote:

TC-LJL, TK's first 77F completed its first flight at PAE:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE231

Here is a screen grab from the Paine Field web cam right after it landed:

Found this pic too. Any info what routes it will be used on?


https://twitter.com/AeroimagesChris/sta ... 7942918144

Efhkspotter wrote:

Any info what routes it will be used on?

Hopefully on HKG!...

We had to wait more than 2 weeks in this month to received our goods shipped from HKG by TK. We received scheduled departures 2 times. Both were cancelled later on. Finally, last weekend they were transferred to IST and then today to ESB. We paid TK a lot of money for a sea transport performance.

TK desperately needs this bird and its twin to join its far east operations.

On another note: I think airline cargo operations needs rules and rights similar to IATA passenger rules. Todays manufacturing operations needs just in time delivery of supplies. Airline cargo operators have to fulfill their obligations when they schedule a delivery. They have to sell tickets rather than promises.

My 2 cents.

TC-LJL doing a longer trial run today
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/BOE231

Edit: Not sure what happened. I was waiting for it to land on the live PAE webcam. And it just flew over the runway going South. But the flightaware shows it as landed. Not sure, what to believe

Last edit: Mystery solved. So, looks like it did a full circle and landed few minutes later. I was able to see it this time Cool.

TK105 wrote:

My 2 cents.

I don't know if you aware but airlines offer various cargo products - think of them as classes like First, Business, Economy, etc, that often will come with their own different transportation priorities.

For example, think of a regular shipment via a consolidator as a basic economy class booking. If you want higher prioritya and shipment guarantee you can buy up to higher classes of service.

While some airlines like Lufthansa, KLM have many such products including ones with guarantees, TK has something called "TKPlus", which is its top priority product, and cargo moves on the first available flight.

Basically, you get what you pay for.

LAXintl wrote:

TK105 wrote:

My 2 cents.

I don't know if you aware but airlines offer various cargo products - think of them as classes like First, Business, Economy, etc, that often will come with their own different transportation priorities.

For example, think of a regular shipment via a consolidator as a basic economy class booking. If you want higher prioritya and shipment guarantee you can buy up to higher classes of service.

While some airlines like Lufthansa, KLM have many such products including ones with guarantees, TK has something called "TKPlus", which is its top priority product, and cargo moves on the first available flight.

Basically, you get what you pay for.

I often read about the high volume of HKG destined Cargo, and am aware it's difficult to get slots...

Is it feasible to move some of that business to nearby Shenzen?
Or increase Guangzhou Cargo flights?
Does it depends on bilaterals? Often Cargo flights are unlimited.

Tkfan wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

TK105 wrote:

My 2 cents.

I don't know if you aware but airlines offer various cargo products - think of them as classes like First, Business, Economy, etc, that often will come with their own different transportation priorities.

For example, think of a regular shipment via a consolidator as a basic economy class booking. If you want higher prioritya and shipment guarantee you can buy up to higher classes of service.

While some airlines like Lufthansa, KLM have many such products including ones with guarantees, TK has something called "TKPlus", which is its top priority product, and cargo moves on the first available flight.

Basically, you get what you pay for.

I often read about the high volume of HKG destined Cargo, and am aware it's difficult to get slots...

Is it feasible to move some of that business to nearby Shenzen?
Or increase Guangzhou Cargo flights?
Does it depends on bilaterals? Often Cargo flights are unlimited.

Due to my experience, Shenzhen manufactured merchandise and the associated cargo destined to Europe and Middle East is largely transshipped to Hong Kong before flying. TK is not the only example. Guangzhou (ex-Canton) made merchandise and the associated cargo will fly out of CAN. If you go northwards, then Beijing & Shanghai (Pudong) will be in the picture. Somehow, Shenzhen Airport doesn't service the Western World. Hong Kong also bases big warehousing capacity from which you may ship out the merchandise by air or by ocean freight. Chinese (actual PRC) side like Shenzhen don't boast that much of warehousing capacity (despite the fact there are more than one "smallish" seaports nearby Shenzhen)...

royroy wrote:

I work in cargo in the UK and trust me every airline completely full everywhere at the mimute. The industry is crazy busy. You have people paying freight prices 10times the amount they pay in summer and booking 2 or 3weeks ahead

what is happening right now, I have never seen in my 17 years in the industry, just crazy

does anybody have update which A330-200 has already updated business class layout?

cheers
Avianca

Avianca wrote:

does anybody have update which A330-200 has already updated business class layout?

cheers
Avianca

So far, only TC-JNE has been updated and is in active service. TC-JNB is under repairs/modifications/base check or the like since it's not flying for the last 2 weeks. The three others are in active service with the old (original) cabins.

Another happy TK Business Class customer; with a trip report:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1379431

So news that the 3rd airport has been assigned its IATA and ICAO codes.

New airports ICAO code will be LTFM while IATA code will be transferred from the current airport and retain IST.
Ataturk, in turn, will be reassigned IATA code of IAT.

Not publicly announced but I understand from sources the new airport will be named after Fatih Sultan Mehmed under whose reign Constantinople was captured in 1453.

I heard about the new ICAO/IATA codes.
LT codes are reserved for Turkey.
LTFM is the next code avail right after LTFL (Kesan Air Base).
Any ideas why LTDA is Hatay but they skipped the rest of LTD... and LTE... series and went to LTF. codes? Thanks.

Does anyone know if TK will order more cargo aircraft?

TK787 wrote:

I heard about the new ICAO/IATA codes.
LT codes are reserved for Turkey.
LTFM is the next code avail right after LTFL (Kesan Air Base).
Any ideas why LTDA is Hatay but they skipped the rest of LTD... and LTE... series and went to LTF. codes? Thanks.

I'm not 100% sure about this ICAO coding case for Turkey, but I remember something that the country is somehow divided in east and west regions so new airport code assignments are now made according to the geographical locations.

If the name for the new airport turns out to be true, then so be it.. still a better name and more appropriate than what many people thinkt it will be named after..

On another note, how is CCS doing for TK? There is certainly a lot less competition there now (not really up to date though who went out/reduced frequencies and who only did it temporarily). I remember when this used to be the turco-venezuelan thread, so it would be interesting to have an update.

If they are keeping the IATA code IST and moving it from Yesilkoy to new Airport, why not do the honorable thing and keep the Ataturk name as well. We know there won't be an airport at yesilkoy (the government confirmed this) so there won't be any confusion. Welcome to Istanbul Ataturk Airport vs Welcome to Istanbul Fatih Sultan Mehmed Airport. It just doesn't make any sense, and its hard not to look for a secret agenda even considering the newfound love for The founder of our Country...

I am sure the 777F will help a lot with Asia cargo. Will this be the single 777F or are there more to be delivered? Thanks

gokmengs wrote:

If they are keeping the IATA code IST and moving it from Yesilkoy to new Airport, why not do the honorable thing and keep the Ataturk name as well. We know there won't be an airport at yesilkoy (the government confirmed this) so there won't be any confusion. Welcome to Istanbul Ataturk Airport vs Welcome to Istanbul Fatih Sultan Mehmed Airport. It just doesn't make any sense, and its hard not to look for a secret agenda even considering the newfound love for The founder of our Country...

I am sure the 777F will help a lot with Asia cargo. Will this be the single 777F or are there more to be delivered? Thanks

It would most definitely be the most honourable thing to name the new airport after Atatürk but well let's see and hope for the best..

TK has two 777Fs on order, the second one is taking shape as well: https://instagram.com/p/Bb1BGFdBtD3/

Funniest thing, while looking at the posts here; TK ad with Morgan Freeman came up on CBS morning news, 7:25am NY time.
Strangely, this ad is in English and there were English subtitles as if we can not understand Morgan Freeman

Please continue here:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1380053

Moderators, could you please archive this thread, since I've started the new months thread. Thank you.