TAP to add 15 new routes, 3 from OPO

airbazar · Sun Sep 09, 2018 12:27 pm

Sorry the interview article is in Portuguese only but I'll try to summarize it as best as I can.
https://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/empresa ... as-em-2019

- 15 new aircraft in 2019. They think they can grow the fleet to 133 by 2025.
- Stay dominant in the South Atlantic and become relevant in the North Atlantic.
- Lots of new hires (pilots and flight attendants).
- 3 new routes from OPO: BRU, MUC, and LYS (posted in a different article), and 11 new routes from LIS.
- OPO-EWR to go daily for next Summer (apparently they counted this as one of the 15).
- On-time record and cancellation rate is embarrassing and they are working to resolve it, hiring more crew and new ground handling contract.
- LIS is full but Montijo is not for TAP.

Now my comments: Given that LIS is full I wonder how they can continue to grow like this. I'm not surprised that they are moving back to OPO. Without room to grow in LIS and a new airport nowhere in sight, growing the operation in Porto seems to be the most logical approach. Can't wait to see what these 11 new routes from LIS are going to be.

AsiaTravel · Sun Sep 09, 2018 12:41 pm

Good news for LYS, I'm guessing they are aiming for connecting traffic since easyJet and Transavia already have 1 flight a day each.

Any additional information on the frequency and plane for the LYS route?

SCQ83 · Sun Sep 09, 2018 12:50 pm

SCQ and PMI would make sense from LIS.

SCQ is the busiest airport in continental Spain without a link to LIS. PMI is the busiest airport in Spain where TAP does not fly to.

Maybe PNA or ZAZ too.

Msep003 · Sun Sep 09, 2018 12:56 pm

TAP is a huge player against RAM and european airlines ( AF , BA ,... ) in Africa . They use Airbus 321 Neos for most of the countries served .

PatrickZ80 · Sun Sep 09, 2018 12:59 pm

SCQ83 wrote:
SCQ and PMI would make sense from LIS.

SCQ is the busiest airport in continental Spain without a link to LIS. PMI is the busiest airport in Spain where TAP does not fly to.

Maybe PNA or ZAZ too.

Santiago de Compostela might be "too close", such distances can be done by train.

Palma de Mallorca is a busy airport indeed, but it's mostly holiday makers from northern Europe that go there for a holiday in the sun. Since the sun shines in Lisbon too, that's no reason for the Portuguese to go to Mallorca.

jmmadrid · Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:01 pm

I don't know if I'm lost in translation, but IMHO the Jornal de Negocios interview's last paragraph summarises a very selfish, arrogant and childish approach to Montijo's new airport:

-TAP want the new Montijo airport to be build ASAP
-TAP don't want to pay for it
-TAP don't want Portela's fees to increase to help pay for Montijo
-TAP want all other airlines to move to Montijo
-TAP want to stay in Portela.
-TAP think Montijo cannot/will not sustain long haul flights.

In order words, "Portuguese government, WE cannot grow in Portela, could you build a new airport with your own money and move everybody else there so that WE can have Lisbon's favourite airport for ourselves and with enough room for growth".

Did not read please or thank you in the text

SCQ83 · Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:23 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
Santiago de Compostela might be "too close", such distances can be done by train.

Palma de Mallorca is a busy airport indeed, but it's mostly holiday makers from northern Europe that go there for a holiday in the sun. Since the sun shines in Lisbon too, that's no reason for the Portuguese to go to Mallorca.

TAP flies to VGO and LCG. Vigo is closer to Lisbon than SCQ. Santiago is the main tourism destination in Northern Spain, the reason why Lufthansa or Aer Lingus fly there year-round: https://vivecamino.com/en/new-record-of ... 17_no_477/ Train from Spain to Portugal? They don't even have money to do the new airport and they also scrapped the HSL from Lisbon to Madrid (no funds).

PMI is not only about German tourists going to Arenal. 1) Mallorca has close to 1 million people with one of the highest average incomes in Spain. 2) Mallorca also attracts high-end seasonal tourism from the US or LatAm (connections); even Norwegian had announced intentions to serve PMI-New York seasonally, 3) Portuguese also take beach holidays in Spain (there are flights from OPO/PMI to the Balearics - for instance easyJet started OPO-IBZ this summer -), 4) Mallorca (highest population and job growth in Spain for years now) has a sizeable Latin American community that could use TP services to LatAm, 5) TAP already flies to LPA.

airbazar · Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:28 pm

jmmadrid wrote:
I don't know if I'm lost in translation, but IMHO the Jornal de Negocios interview's last paragraph summarises a very selfish, arrogant and childish approach to Montijo's new airport

They have a valid point. Montijo is to be a Low Cost airport. TAP are not a Low Cost airline. As the only airline with a hub at LIS it makes no sense for them to move any operations to Montijo given that more than 50% of their traffic is connecting traffic. TAP did not ask for Montijo. The Low Cost carriers asked for Montijo. Ryanair in particular.
What TAP wants and have always wanted is a new airport where they can grow but the government has botched that plan enormously and Montijo is nothing more than a very costly bandaid. So I agree 100% with their stance.

a350lover · Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:31 pm

jmmadrid wrote:

In order words, "Portuguese government, WE cannot grow in Portela, could you build a new airport with your own money and move everybody else there so that WE can have Lisbon's favourite airport for ourselves and with enough room for growth".

Isn't TAP and the Portuguese Government kinda the same thing? The stake owned by the Government isn't exactly little.

With the tourism markets sort of emerging again towards Turkey, Tunis, North of Africa, etc., I reckon this is definitely quite ambitious. TAP main possibilities I believe remain in Africa, for which new airplanes like the A320LR could be perfect. Punctuality is a BIG BIG issue, so is the fact that LIS can't hardly accommodate any more growth. As I keep writing I see the whole plan a bit unrealistic.

As much as I like the airline and its proposal as a customer, we have gotta admit it's a position in Europe quite peripheral. Star Alliance can't beat much of the tremendous leadership that IAG has in the region (Spain).

SCQ83 · Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:32 pm

They should do Montijo as a low-cost airport and move there Ryanair, Wizzair and whoever wants to.

It could be a very similar situation to BRU and CRL. BRU had 25M PAX in 2017, and CRL 8M.

yeogeo · Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:32 pm

AmricanShamrok posted this link in the Chicago Aviation News thread (post 964):

https://jornaleconomico.sapo.pt/noticia ... ano-352378

which says: "Telavive, Basileia, Dublin, Tenerife, Nápoles, Montreal, Chicago, Washington, São Francisco, Conacri, Porto-Bruxelas, Banjul, Porto-Lyon, Porto-Munique, Newark (diário) serão as novas rotas disponíveis para os passageiros da TAP no próximo ano."

This is not perfectly clear (to me, anyway); seems like an incomplete sentence, but I gathered that the 15 routes are:
Lisbon>TLV/BSL/DUB/TFS/NAP/YUL/ORD/IAD/SFO/CKY along with Porto>BRU/BJL/LYS/MUC/EWR

Anyone here correct or clarify?

a350lover · Sun Sep 09, 2018 1:33 pm

a350lover wrote:
jmmadrid wrote:

In order words, "Portuguese government, WE cannot grow in Portela, could you build a new airport with your own money and move everybody else there so that WE can have Lisbon's favourite airport for ourselves and with enough room for growth".

Isn't TAP and the Portuguese Government kinda the same thing? The stake owned by the Government isn't exactly little.

With the tourism markets sort of emerging again towards Turkey, Tunis, North of Africa, etc., I reckon this is definitely quite ambitious. TAP main possibilities I believe remain in Africa, for which new airplanes like the A320LR could be perfect. Punctuality is a BIG BIG issue, so is the fact that LIS can't hardly accommodate any more growth. As I keep writing I see the whole plan a bit unrealistic.

As much as I like the airline and its proposal as a customer, it has a position in Europe quite peripheral. Star Alliance can't beat much of the tremendous leadership that IAG has in the region (Spain).

LXwing · Sun Sep 09, 2018 2:08 pm

airbazar wrote:
- 3 new routes from OPO: BRU, MUC, and LYS (posted in a different article), and 11 new routes from LIS.
- OPO-EWR to go daily for next Summer (apparently they counted this as one of the 15).

Small corrections:
OPO-EWR will go 6xw not daily, and it is not being counted as one of the 15 new routes. OPO will see 4 new routes not only 3 (title should be corrected). The missing one is said to be OPO-TER, to be announced soon.

Cointrin330 · Sun Sep 09, 2018 2:10 pm

Anyone know if UA will resume EWR-OPO for S'19?

LXwing · Sun Sep 09, 2018 2:11 pm

yeogeo wrote:
AmricanShamrok posted this link in the Chicago Aviation News thread (post 964):

https://jornaleconomico.sapo.pt/noticia ... ano-352378

which says: "Telavive, Basileia, Dublin, Tenerife, Nápoles, Montreal, Chicago, Washington, São Francisco, Conacri, Porto-Bruxelas, Banjul, Porto-Lyon, Porto-Munique, Newark (diário) serão as novas rotas disponíveis para os passageiros da TAP no próximo ano."

This is not perfectly clear (to me, anyway); seems like an incomplete sentence, but I gathered that the 15 routes are:
Lisbon>TLV/BSL/DUB/TFS/NAP/YUL/ORD/IAD/SFO/CKY along with Porto>BRU/BJL/LYS/MUC/EWR

Anyone here correct or clarify?

This is basically it, except that BJL is a route for LIS not OPO and that EWR is not counted as a new route. There will be OPO-TER apparently to be announced soon as a fourth route for OPO.

LXwing · Sun Sep 09, 2018 2:39 pm

airbazar wrote:
jmmadrid wrote:
I don't know if I'm lost in translation, but IMHO the Jornal de Negocios interview's last paragraph summarises a very selfish, arrogant and childish approach to Montijo's new airport

They have a valid point. Montijo is to be a Low Cost airport. TAP are not a Low Cost airline. As the only airline with a hub at LIS it makes no sense for them to move any operations to Montijo given that more than 50% of their traffic is connecting traffic. TAP did not ask for Montijo. The Low Cost carriers asked for Montijo. Ryanair in particular.
What TAP wants and have always wanted is a new airport where they can grow but the government has botched that plan enormously and Montijo is nothing more than a very costly bandaid. So I agree 100% with their stance.

This
The main unknowns in this matter are if and when Montijo will be a reality. I still think that Montijo as a commercial airport will hardly see the light of day...

santos · Sun Sep 09, 2018 2:50 pm

Some really good additions, specially TLV, DUB, CKY
Didn’t TP announce NKC as well?

gatibosgru · Sun Sep 09, 2018 3:10 pm

Lots of *A connections

Kikko19 · Sun Sep 09, 2018 3:32 pm

And EZE...

yeogeo · Sun Sep 09, 2018 3:43 pm

PatrickZ80 wrote:
SCQ83 wrote:
SCQ and PMI would make sense from LIS.

Santiago de Compostela might be "too close", such distances can be done by train.

Not really in this case.
Last September I tried to book an even closer train or bus transfer from Santiago to Porto but found only inconvenient transfers at the border in either bus or train and trips of 3.5 to 4.5 hours, (driven would have taken an hour and a half). I ended up hiring a driver to pick us up in Santiago; would have gladly flown to LIS.

https://www.rome2rio.com/map/Santiago-d ... tela/Porto

SCQ83 · Sun Sep 09, 2018 4:04 pm

yeogeo wrote:
Not really in this case.
Last September I tried to book an even closer train or bus transfer from Santiago to Porto but found only inconvenient transfers at the border in either bus or train and trips of 3.5 to 4.5 hours, (driven would have taken an hour and a half). I ended up hiring a driver to pick us up in Santiago; would have gladly flown to LIS

Connections by train between Portugal and Spain and close to non-existent due to lack of investment from the Portuguese side; it is hard to make an international train line work when one country (Portugal) does not the means to invest one Euro.

1. Santiago-Porto: you should take the high-speed train to Vigo (closest major city about 25 km to the Portuguese border) then a 2-daily (?) old and slow Comboios train to Porto. So it will take forever even if you find a way to make connections work.

2. Madrid-Lisbon: you should think this would be better? Well there is 1 daily night train (!). 11 hours for 600 km. Madrid-Barcelona is the same distance and takes less then 3 hours.

3. Southern Coast (Algarve - Seville). Forget about it... there is no train.

jmmadrid · Sun Sep 09, 2018 4:08 pm

airbazar wrote:
They have a valid point. Montijo is to be a Low Cost airport. TAP are not a Low Cost airline. As the only airline with a hub at LIS it makes no sense for them to move any operations to Montijo given that more than 50% of their traffic is connecting traffic. TAP did not ask for Montijo. The Low Cost carriers asked for Montijo. Ryanair in particular.
What TAP wants and have always wanted is a new airport where they can grow but the government has botched that plan enormously and Montijo is nothing more than a very costly bandaid. So I agree 100% with their stance.

But it's not like it's not TAP's problem.

It IS also their problem, and it's affecting them, so they should take a more constructive approach and compromise on something. If they want/need more slots at LIS, then they should "contribute" to a solution. All I see from their side is demands, demands, demands, oh and then some legal threats.

What they seem to want right now is for someone else to pay for the new airport and then get the lion's share of all the slots that will become available at Portela for free. Not going to happen.

LXwing · Sun Sep 09, 2018 4:58 pm

jmmadrid wrote:
But it's not like it's not TAP's problem.

It IS also their problem, and it's affecting them, so they should take a more constructive approach and compromise on something. If they want/need more slots at LIS, then they should "contribute" to a solution. All I see from their side is demands, demands, demands, oh and then some legal threats.

What they seem to want right now is for someone else to pay for the new airport and then get the lion's share of all the slots that will become available at Portela for free. Not going to happen.

Sure it's TAP's problem as well, that's why they keep complaining and saying that something must be done soon regarding LIS expansion and/or addition of a secondary airport. While Vinci (the airport operator) keeps dragging their feet and collecting ever increasing airport fees with the passenger boom is LIS.
What do you suggest that TAP should due to contribute? :stirthepot:

Maybe propose to split their operations between LIS and Montijo like BA with LHR and LGW? That would be suicide for a smallish airline like them. Or happily accept more airport surcharges in LIS to pay for a new airport they don't intend to use? Currently every airline is already paying more than what is acceptable in LIS.
Have you noticed what Ryanair has been saying from the beginning about Montijo? O'Leary keeps saying they won't move any route to Montijo (only add if fees are low enough) but says it should be ready for operation in 6 months or so. Now there's a practical guy... :lol:

The thing is, no one is going to abandon slots at LIS to move to Montijo if it does ever happen, some of the low costs will only use it for growing operations. Thus, there will be no slots freed at LIS for TAP or anyone else to take. And that's why LIS also has to increase its capacity by adding new terminals and taxiways and other facilities, something that Vinci has almost not done until now, they just keep overmilking the cow until it falls ill.
I'd be complaining a lot too if I was in charge of an airline operating at LIS... :shock:

jmmadrid · Sun Sep 09, 2018 6:17 pm

LXwing wrote:
What do you suggest that TAP should due to contribute? Maybe propose to split their operations between LIS and Montijo like BA with LHR and LGW? That would be suicide for a smallish airline like them. Or happily accept more airport surcharges in LIS to pay for a new airport they don't intend to use? Currently every airline is already paying more than what is acceptable in LIS.

Don't get me wrong, I do not see an easy way out of this mess. All options on the table are bad, including maintaining the status-quo: No new airport, Portela remains overcrowded and TAP cannot grow. This is one of these cases where unfortunately you need to choose the lesser evil.

I would probably -and reluctantly- remove the "happily" from your question and just accept that airport surcharges, if well negotiated, can turn out to be a good investment when new slots at LIS become available in the future.

Otherwise, develop a hub in OPO, funnel most connections through it, and increase the O&D percentage on all LIS flights.

SCQ83 · Sun Sep 09, 2018 6:20 pm

Apparently TAP will add also an additional daily flight from OPO to MAD in S19.

So OPO-MAD will be up to 82 weekly flights each way :shock:

next summer, with 66 flights in legacy carriers (IB/TP/UX). By comparison OPO-BCN will be only 45 weekly flights, with only 14 on legacy carriers (TP). Despite Porto-Madrid being only 550 km by car, and to BCN more than double the distance (1150 km).

I reckon in 2019 Madrid could become the 2nd largest international market from Porto after Paris and ahead of London. While BCN could be easily go down to the 7th place after Paris, Madrid, London, Geneva, Frankfurt and Brussels. A tale of two cities.

yeogeo · Sun Sep 09, 2018 6:23 pm

SCQ83 wrote:
Connections by train between Portugal and Spain and close to non-existent due to lack of investment from the Portuguese side; it is hard to make an international train line work when one country (Portugal) does not the means to invest one Euro...

Interesting - Thanks for the insight.

LXwing wrote:
OPO-TER apparently to be announced soon as a fourth route for OPO.

What's the story with TER? On Terceira in the Azores, I see, but what of it being owned by the Portuguese Air Force??

Kikko19 · Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:44 pm

jmmadrid wrote:
LXwing wrote:
What do you suggest that TAP should due to contribute? Maybe propose to split their operations between LIS and Montijo like BA with LHR and LGW? That would be suicide for a smallish airline like them. Or happily accept more airport surcharges in LIS to pay for a new airport they don't intend to use? Currently every airline is already paying more than what is acceptable in LIS.

Don't get me wrong, I do not see an easy way out of this mess. All options on the table are bad, including maintaining the status-quo: No new airport, Portela remains overcrowded and TAP cannot grow. This is one of these cases where unfortunately you need to choose the lesser evil.
There's a way. Build a new airport. And the same day it'll be open close down the Portela airport. A la Hong Kong... 2 runaways /max 3. It won't happen before 2030 IMHO.
I would probably -and reluctantly- remove the "happily" from your question and just accept that airport surcharges, if well negotiated, can turn out to be a good investment when new slots at LIS become available in the future.
J
Otherwise, develop a hub in OPO, funnel most connections through it, and increase the O&D percentage on all LIS flights.

boeingbus · Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:52 pm

Surprised they haven't announced OPO to BOS. I thought it would be a sure thing with the A321NEOs.

Aisak · Sun Sep 09, 2018 8:22 pm

SCQ83 wrote:
Connections by train between Portugal and Spain and close to non-existent due to lack of investment from the Portuguese side; it is hard to make an international train line work when one country (Portugal) does not the means to invest one Euro.

I wouldn' blame them for sure. I wonder if I would do anything different considering the status of HST in Spain.

For LIS-MAD line... I would not waste 2 cents on thinking about it. Let's say you build a HS rail from LIS to the Spanish border. What for? Then what...? Given how updated, modern, comfortable and reliable (pun intended) the train is from Badajoz-Extremadura to Madrid-Chamartin.

And looking north to OPO... The thing is not better from the Spanish side. There's only Coruña-Santiago-Vigo HSR ( three biggest cities, all three being the only Galician cities with airport LCG SCQ and VGO). But this line is isolated from the rest of Spanish HS network. And won't be linked in quite some time, so there is the need to change the railway width two times for journeys between Galicia and Madrid.

Again If Portugal wanted to build a HS line north from OPO what would one expect at the Spanish side? Just the old non-HS compilant tracks. And no serious expectation to be upgraded. At least not while the link to Madrid is not complete

I wouldn't blame Portugal for using scarce resources on other matters.

Even if the funds come from the EU. Once built, the HS tracks are no cheap to maintain.... again, way more money dumped on it.

SCQ83 wrote:
So OPO-MAD will be up to 82 weekly flights each way next summer, with 66 flights in legacy carriers (IB/TP/UX). By comparison OPO-BCN will be only 45 weekly flights, with only 14 on legacy carriers (TP). Despite Porto-Madrid being only 550 km by car, and to BCN more than double the distance (1150 km).

[/quote]

Well, those statistics are somehow tricky.... Of course MAD will have more traffic. MAD serves as the hub for both IB and UX. That's why they fly the route. It does not matter how distant BCN is.

LIS is at max capacity and TP has to rely on a second airport to grow. It's like BA with LHR and LGW. The good thing about OPO is that it gets a whole diferent catchment area.

Aisak · Sun Sep 09, 2018 8:42 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
Anyone know if UA will resume EWR-OPO for S'19?

Given how UA is focussing EWR to O/D and IAD for connecting traffic, I don't know if what can be effectively seen as a 2nd daily OPO-EWR can make it almost on its own.
Maybe just putting the UA code on the TP services and throw some US-EWR connections with the TP code on it.

jmmadrid wrote:
LXwing wrote:
What do you suggest that TAP should due to contribute? Maybe propose to split their operations between LIS and Montijo like BA with LHR and LGW? That would be suicide for a smallish airline like them. Or happily accept more airport surcharges in LIS to pay for a new airport they don't intend to use? Currently every airline is already paying more than what is acceptable in LIS.

Don't get me wrong, I do not see an easy way out of this mess. All options on the table are bad, including maintaining the status-quo: No new airport, Portela remains overcrowded and TAP cannot grow. This is one of these cases where unfortunately you need to choose the lesser evil.

I would probably -and reluctantly- remove the "happily" from your question and just accept that airport surcharges, if well negotiated, can turn out to be a good investment when new slots at LIS become available in the future.

That's probably the same thing happening with BA at LHR. BA doesn't want 3rd runway as it would mean more costs for all operators and BA will benefit less than others. Pretty much like TP at LIS. More costs to open up capacity that will not retun to TP as much as other players.

jmmadrid wrote:
Otherwise, develop a hub in OPO, funnel most connections through it, and increase the O&D percentage on all LIS flights.

That's similar to what's happening at the other side of the pond with AA at PHL/JFK and UA at IAD/EWR. But not sure if OPO has the Hub capabilities to do it. But good thinking although risky.

If you shift connecting capacity from LIS to OPO there will be less seats needed on LIS flights. If the airport is so congested, instead of small planes at high frequency, some services could be drop consolidating on bigger planes. Others might not be sustainable solely on O/D traffic and be dropped altogether. I could reach the point where a competitor seems more appealing, but overall I like the idea

jmmadrid · Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:27 pm

Aisak wrote:

For LIS-MAD line... I would not waste 2 cents on thinking about it. Let's say you build a HS rail from LIS to the Spanish border. What for? Then what...? Given how updated, modern, comfortable and reliable (pun intended) the train is from Badajoz-Extremadura to Madrid-Chamartin.

Aisak, the HS Train between Madrid and Lisbon was designed many years ago, and received generous funding from the EU. Supposed to link both cities in 2 hours 45 minutes.

However, it was the very first casualty of the financial crisis in 2008, and the portuguese government cancelled the construction of the Lisbon/Spanish border sector. As a consequence, Spain lost interest but did not abandon the project altogether because the Community of Extremadura is very vocal in regards to their needs.

Spain has steadily continued with the development of the Badajoz/Madrid sector. Progress is modest and they expect to start some type of service in 2020. The portuguese politicians will believe it when they see it and will eventually develop their side of the project. No one should hold their breath, though.

LXwing · Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:08 pm

yeogeo wrote:
What's the story with TER? On Terceira in the Azores, I see, but what of it being owned by the Portuguese Air Force??

TER is an military airport belonging to the Portuguese state which is used by the Portuguese Air Force and also the US Air Force, besides hosting civil operations as well (TAP, Azores/SATA and Ryanair, for the most part).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lajes_Field

LXwing · Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:20 pm

jmmadrid wrote:
LXwing wrote:
What do you suggest that TAP should due to contribute? Maybe propose to split their operations between LIS and Montijo like BA with LHR and LGW? That would be suicide for a smallish airline like them. Or happily accept more airport surcharges in LIS to pay for a new airport they don't intend to use? Currently every airline is already paying more than what is acceptable in LIS.

Don't get me wrong, I do not see an easy way out of this mess. All options on the table are bad, including maintaining the status-quo: No new airport, Portela remains overcrowded and TAP cannot grow. This is one of these cases where unfortunately you need to choose the lesser evil.

I would probably -and reluctantly- remove the "happily" from your question and just accept that airport surcharges, if well negotiated, can turn out to be a good investment when new slots at LIS become available in the future.

Otherwise, develop a hub in OPO, funnel most connections through it, and increase the O&D percentage on all LIS flights.

OK, we can then agree for the most part. Two important things should be kept in mind, though.
Firstly, TAP will hardly ever agree on paying any surcharge to subsidize the development of Montijo commercial operations because, as I said before, virtually no slot will be freed by such development as most operators in LIS are either not interested in moving there (the legacies) or would only add frequencies there (the low costs) without moving any from LIS. Thus, there is virtually no gain for TAP.
Secondly, to add more routes in OPO and move some hub operations there looks nice on the short term, but we should remember that OPO is also growing fast into a congestion state similar to that of LIS. And although it can receive much easier expansion that LIS, it again requires the action of Vinci which is also the concession owner for the airport just as LIS. Which does not look easy, as LIS is seeing. For Vince it is more attractive to raise the fees with increasing traffic than to go ahead with expansion unless as a last resort.

LXwing · Sun Sep 09, 2018 10:25 pm

boeingbus wrote:
Surprised they haven't announced OPO to BOS. I thought it would be a sure thing with the A321NEOs.

It's still too early for that, TAP only starts to receive the first LR from December/January, and only a few of them (4?) until the end of 2019. The first priorities for the LR besides the already announced OPO-EWR should be from LIS to NAT, IAD, and probably YUL. Everything else can only start from 2020, I guess.

yeogeo · Sun Sep 09, 2018 11:39 pm

LXwing wrote:
yeogeo wrote:
What's the story with TER? On Terceira in the Azores, I see, but what of it being owned by the Portuguese Air Force??

TER is an military airport belonging to the Portuguese state which is used by the Portuguese Air Force and also the US Air Force, besides hosting civil operations as well (TAP, Azores/SATA and Ryanair, for the most part).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lajes_Field

Thanks!
Its funny, I looked at that wiki page before you posted, but they make absolutely no mention there of the commercial service at TER - strange.

gatibosgru · Sun Sep 09, 2018 11:43 pm

boeingbus wrote:
Surprised they haven't announced OPO to BOS. I thought it would be a sure thing with the A321NEOs.

Was just about to post the same. Plenty of range and capacity small enough that it could work?

LXwing wrote:
boeingbus wrote:
Surprised they haven't announced OPO to BOS. I thought it would be a sure thing with the A321NEOs.

It's still too early for that, TAP only starts to receive the first LR from December/January, and only a few of them (4?) until the end of 2019. The first priorities for the LR besides the already announced OPO-EWR should be from LIS to NAT, IAD, and probably YUL. Everything else can only start from 2020, I guess.

Shouldn't the regular NEO have enough range for OPO-BOS? At 2,732 nm it should be able to do it comfortably, no?

LXwing · Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:07 am

Sure, the regular NEO is good for that route. The problem is that TAP's regular NEOs are configured at CY216 seats with the usual eurobusiness section (blocked middle seat), which is not acceptable for TATL since TAP is not a low cost operator. Their upcoming LRs will have only about 175 seats and a proper full-flat business class.

gatibosgru · Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:12 am

LXwing wrote:
Sure, the regular NEO is good for that route. The problem is that TAP's regular NEOs are configured at CY216 seats with the usual eurobusiness section (blocked middle seat), which is not acceptable for TATL since TAP is not a low cost operator. Their upcoming LRs will have only about 175 seats and a proper full-flat business class.

Thanks for the clarification! Makes sense that the LR would have a C cabin.

santos · Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:39 am

TP has just confirmed the schedule for DUB, BSL and TLV this morning.
2x Daily DUB A319/A320
2x Daily BSL A319/A320
1x Daily TLV A321LR
http://www.presstur.com/empresas---nego ... -basileia/

airbazar · Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:34 am

jmmadrid wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I do not see an easy way out of this mess. All options on the table are bad, including maintaining the status-quo: No new airport, Portela remains overcrowded and TAP cannot grow. This is one of these cases where unfortunately you need to choose the lesser evil.

I would probably -and reluctantly- remove the "happily" from your question and just accept that airport surcharges, if well negotiated, can turn out to be a good investment when new slots at LIS become available in the future.

Otherwise, develop a hub in OPO, funnel most connections through it, and increase the O&D percentage on all LIS flights.

Sadly I'm in the camp that we will never have another airport for Lisbon in my lifetime, let alone a replacement airport. It's been at least 50 years since a new airport has been in the discussion. The major sticky point is the fact that there is no space in the district of Lisbon to build an airport and the Lisbon politicians are not willing to allow that one of the main economic drivers for the country and source of great political power, leave their district. This is why they are somewhat enamored with the idea of a Low Cost airport in Montijo, because they get to keep the major airport in Lisbon while looking like they did something. And it's also why Alcochete was abandoned so quickly, because while it is the ideal location financially and geographically, it is in the District of Santarem which is looked at kinda of a second class district. And this is why they all really, really wanted Ota despite being a less than ideal location both financially and geographically, because Ota is IN the district of Lisbon.

With that said, Vinci and the government have better figure out how to expand LIS because that will be the only airport for a very, very long time. And in the short term I think TP needs to consider expanding their late evening connection bank to include TATL flights. I personally believe that there is a significant untapped market for eastbound daytime flights from N.America. Thanks to Portugal's timezone, an early morning departure from the U.S. East Coast not only allows for connections into most major European cities such as MAD, BCN, LHR, CDG, MUC, it also allows for very good connections to Africa. And if this new proposal to eliminate time changes in the EU goes through, it would make this option even more viable.

LXwing wrote:
Sure, the regular NEO is good for that route. The problem is that TAP's regular NEOs are configured at CY216 seats with the usual eurobusiness section (blocked middle seat), which is not acceptable for TATL since TAP is not a low cost operator. Their upcoming LRs will have only about 175 seats and a proper full-flat business class.

Has TP received any A321NEOs? If they've decided that they only want the LR's for TATL it's one thing but if not they could very well change their opinion and install the same exact TATL config on a "regular" A321NEO. Primera is currently flying CDG-BOS with 198 seats so the aircraft clearly has enough range for Portugal-BOS.

What I'd REALLY like from BOS is a morning departure.

LXwing · Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:48 pm

airbazar wrote:
LXwing wrote:
Sure, the regular NEO is good for that route. The problem is that TAP's regular NEOs are configured at CY216 seats with the usual eurobusiness section (blocked middle seat), which is not acceptable for TATL since TAP is not a low cost operator. Their upcoming LRs will have only about 175 seats and a proper full-flat business class.

Has TP received any A321NEOs? If they've decided that they only want the LR's for TATL it's one thing but if not they could very well change their opinion and install the same exact TATL config on a "regular" A321NEO. Primera is currently flying CDG-BOS with 198 seats so the aircraft clearly has enough range for Portugal-BOS.

What I'd REALLY like from BOS is a morning departure.

They already got 1 A321NEO and it's the said CY216 configuration as it will replace the current A320 and A321 medium haul fleet. Their LRs will have 168 seats only (I think with C12), and are bound for medium/long haul routes only. There is no need to create additional configurations on different subtypes, as the LRs will start arriving in a few months. Interestingly, the LRs will be used for the LIS-TLV route announced today, so not only TATL. I think in the future they'll be used on some African routes also.

LXwing · Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:52 pm

santos wrote:
TP has just confirmed the schedule for DUB, BSL and TLV this morning.
2x Daily DUB A319/A320
2x Daily BSL A319/A320
1x Daily TLV A321LR
http://www.presstur.com/empresas---nego ... -basileia/

Yep, these are just the first from the upcoming routes, which are now officially announced to start on April 2019 and already on sale. The others will be announced soon, to start between July and September/October 2019.

SCQ83 · Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:56 pm

There is something that puzzles me about the OPO hub.

If they are trying to set a 2nd hub in OPO adding more and more European flights, where are they going to connect to? Currently the only long-haul destinations from OPO are EWR, GIG and GRU. The Brazilian destinations are in quite a low frequency. I mean I don't think a lot of people will connect BRU-OPO-EWR when there are already so many available (non-stop or connections) options.

Samrnpage · Mon Sep 10, 2018 1:03 pm

Is Monjito airport going to be the new main airport?

LXwing · Mon Sep 10, 2018 1:10 pm

SCQ83 wrote:
There is something that puzzles me about the OPO hub.

If they are trying to set a 2nd hub in OPO adding more and more European flights, where are they going to connect to? Currently the only long-haul destinations from OPO are EWR, GIG and GRU. The Brazilian destinations are in quite a low frequency. I mean I don't think a lot of people will connect BRU-OPO-EWR when there are already so many available (non-stop or connections) options.

OPO is not exactly a hub as it relies almost exclusively on O&D. They are adding European routes that are also depending mostly on O&D (LYS and MUC, for example). With the lack of capacity at LIS I think they will try to start more routes from OPO, but I don't see a place for more than a few additional long haul routes at best, say BOS, YYZ, YUL, LAD and the like. The OPO-EWR going near-daily will help on some TATL connections, but any other long haul route will not be daily so would have limited connectivity. So IMHO they will not have significant hub activity in OPO for the foreseable future.

SCQ83 · Mon Sep 10, 2018 1:24 pm

LXwing wrote:
OPO is not exactly a hub as it relies almost exclusively on O&D. They are adding European routes that are also depending mostly on O&D (LYS and MUC, for example). With the lack of capacity at LIS I think they will try to start more routes from OPO, but I don't see a place for more than a few additional long haul routes at best, say BOS, YYZ, YUL, LAD and the like. The OPO-EWR going near-daily will help on some TATL connections, but any other long haul route will not be daily so would have limited connectivity. So IMHO they will not have significant hub activity in OPO for the foreseable future.

Obviously they also add BRU and MUC because those are Star Alliance hubs, so they can add to Brussels and Lufthansa. For instance at the moment, BRU-OPO on Brussels is only seasonal, limiting connectivity in BRU both to Eastern/Northern Europe or North America. With 2 daily on TAP, connections at BRU will be feasible. If they were thinking only on O&D and not connections in BRU, 2 daily on OPO-BRU would be a killer as a starter.

But if they keep adding more European flights in OPO, at some point they will need to rely to some extent on long-haul connections.

airbazar · Mon Sep 10, 2018 2:03 pm

LXwing wrote:
They already got 1 A321NEO and it's the said CY216 configuration as it will replace the current A320 and A321 medium haul fleet. Their LRs will have 168 seats only (I think with C12), and are bound for medium/long haul routes only. There is no need to create additional configurations on different subtypes, as the LRs will start arriving in a few months. Interestingly, the LRs will be used for the LIS-TLV route announced today, so not only TATL. I think in the future they'll be used on some African routes also.

Thank you. That makes sense.
And I agree that the NEO will make its way into Africa. It will allow TP to expand and solidify its position in Africa and it's one reason why i think they should optimize their evening bank at LIS for more connections to Africa, especially from N.America.

If I'm not mistaken with the addition of Conakry and Banjul TP will have the most non-stop African destinations of all European carriers behind TK and AF. The NEO should allow them to fly to Sao Tome non-stop but I don't know if that's worth the investment. Douala and Libreville should make good future additions.

SCQ83 wrote:
There is something that puzzles me about the OPO hub.

It's not really a hub. It's more of a Focus city. It has its own O&D market. More capacity and routes from OPO frees up capacity in LIS. In an ideal situation TP would love to channel all its traffic to/from OPO via LIS but they can't because LIS is full.
I think the capacity/freq. increase in OPO-EWR is a direct response to the huge demand that we are seeing in the U.S. for tourism to Portugal. UA this past Summer also added EWR-OPO and TP is responding. How long it will last we shall see.

LXwing · Mon Sep 10, 2018 3:46 pm

airbazar wrote:
And I agree that the NEO will make its way into Africa. It will allow TP to expand and solidify its position in Africa and it's one reason why i think they should optimize their evening bank at LIS for more connections to Africa, especially from N.America.

If I'm not mistaken with the addition of Conakry and Banjul TP will have the most non-stop African destinations of all European carriers behind TK and AF. The NEO should allow them to fly to Sao Tome non-stop but I don't know if that's worth the investment. Douala and Libreville should make good future additions.

A non-stop to São Tomé is definitelly in the cards for the NEO, whether LR or not.
Agreed for Douala and Libreville, although I've heard more talk about adding Nouakchott and Niamey and returning to Bamako.
A correction on my previous post: the A321LR will have indeed 168 seats but I think with C16 and not C12 as I said above.

babastud · Mon Sep 10, 2018 3:54 pm

Any word on the SFO proposed route?

jmmadrid · Mon Sep 10, 2018 4:12 pm

LXwing wrote:
With the lack of capacity at LIS I think they will try to start more routes from OPO, but I don't see a place for more than a few additional long haul routes at best, say BOS, YYZ, YUL, LAD and the like. The OPO-EWR going near-daily will help on some TATL connections, but any other long haul route will not be daily so would have limited connectivity. So IMHO they will not have significant hub activity in OPO for the foreseable future.

There's a growth opportunity in West Africa.

TAP already flies to many destinations there, and I believe that a large percentage of the passengers on those routes are connecting from places in Europe.

TAP could identify the top 5 origin cities and the top 5 destination cities and replicate the model in OPO. Late evening departures from OPO and early morning arrivals to OPO would make it easy to connect with the main european cities.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net