Saturday, November 5, 2011

Adria drops Banja Luka

Adria farewells Banja Luka
Adria Airways has suspended flights to Banja Luka after the entity government pulled its subsidies, despite initial plans to operate the route throughout the winter season. Originally, the Slovenian carrier listed Banja Luka as one of its suspend destinations as a result of its cost cutting push. However, only a few days later the airline reversed its decision and returned Banja Luka to its schedule with new timing. The Government of the Entity of Republika Srpska made a decision earlier in the week to suspend its subsidies for the unprofitable route. Out of a total of 969 flights operated, there were only 4.800 passengers onboard, or an average of five people per flight.

Banja Luka Airport, which is drowning in debt and nearly lost its status as an international airport earlier this year, will soon handle more flights. On top of the existing four weekly flights to Zurich operated by B&H Airlines, from December 1, the Bosnian carrier will launch flights from Banja Luka to Copenhagen twice per week which should contribute to improved passenger figures. In October, Banja Luka Airport handled 830 passengers, an increase of 92.1% compared to the same month last year. By the end of October, the airport saw 7.245 passengers, thus making it the third busiest airport in the country after Sarajevo (with 526.863 passengers) and Mostar (with 34.243 passengers) and ahead of Tuzla (with 4.124 passengers).

The Banja Luka based Sky Srpska, which was expected to be launched this year, is still without an aircraft. Although plans were made to purchase two Embraer jets in 2011, these plans have now been moved for next year.

24 comments:

  1. Well, third-busiest isn't so bad.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And what will happen with unfortunate Sky Srpska then? I know some nice ladies working there.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Adria Airways flying to BanjaLuka BL, not flying to BL, flying to BL not flying to BL.
    4-5 pax x flight average and flying ... Adria is a real shit hole!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Shame, even though the planes were empty, it was a nice link, I flew LGW-BNX via LJU, was very cool, byt sad to seean empty plane.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It was wasting of time for adria which was into money money money from government. You cannot make real business if u have 10 people on board, even if the government is giving you a money. pitty that bosnians from banja luka do not fly that often, but what can we do...
    regards to all serbians and slovenians!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Evo zore, evo dana...

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Evo zore, evo dana, evo Jure i Bobana... :)

    ReplyDelete
  11. finally !

    another problem I see at Adria is the fleet utilization (average a/c block hours... some CR9 or A319/320 fly sometimes 1 return flight a day...

    cutting destinations but sitting on the aircrafts is no good either..

    ReplyDelete
  12. Airport BNX should ask JU to connect them with BEG and OS to do VIE. These routes to JU's and OS's hubs were already flown some 6 or 7 years ago and did well to everyone (psgrs, airports, airlines). Two to three point-to-point flights from BNX to ZRH are welcome (LX would be great for transfer psgrs). Same goes to Scandivanian destinations as well as MOW. But, before all above mentioned happens, AP BNX needs to improve it's safety and quality of services. Sadly, with actual and past management of AP BNX, it will never happen.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Finally!
    Its a disgrace for any airline to collaborate in this nonsense....subsidizing nearly empty planes!
    It would make more sense to pour out the tickets for free!
    At least the planes wouldnt be
    empty!
    I have lost respect for every airline which only grabs tax payers money by engaging in such a
    corrupted scheme!
    The same with the WindJet to Nis service...grabbed the taxpayers money and then pissed off...

    ReplyDelete
  14. Only flight that can have success from Banja Luka is OS to VIE.

    With subventions from INI and BNX there is chance for synergy and one plane with time table like:

    INI 0600 – 0645 BNX 0715 – 0845 MUC 0915 – 1045 BNX 1115 – 1200 INI 1230 – 1530 IST 1600 – 1700 INI 1730 – 1815 BNX 1845 – 2000 VIE 2030 – 2145 BNX 2215 – 2255 INI

    latter second plane can fly to TIV
    BNX 0700 – 0900 FRA 0930 – 1130 BNX 1200 – 1245 TIV 1315 – 1500 FCO 1530 – 1715 TIV 1745 – 1830 BNX 1900 – 2030 MUC 2100 – 2230 BNX 2300 – 2345 INI

    INI 0600 – 0645 BNX 0715 – 0900 ZRH 0930 – 1115 BNX 1145 – 1230 INI 1300 – 1600 IST 1630 – 1730 INI 1800 – 1845 BNX 1915 – 2030 VIE 2100 – 2215 BNX

    ReplyDelete
  15. Purger,

    very interesting observation and I agree with most of it. Another BIG problem is marketing, presenting to people benefits of flying, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  16. If a corrupt government entity wants to hand out money from some of the poorest people in Europe to enable an airline to fly 3 or 4 pax per flight, i'd gladly take the cash if I were JP. Don't see any other airline wanting to fly into this airport that is managed by governemt cronies.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Current Adria Airways fleet situation

    -aircrafts types and quantity,
    - full owner (paid), on leasing date for single aircraft

    Situation is so fluid ... got lost.
    But curious:)
    Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  18. 2 Airbus 320 stored (1 to be scrapped ... anyone knows more)
    1 Airbus 320 operational.
    2 Airbus 319 both operational and leased.
    6 CRJ 200 all operational, one leased other five owned
    4 CRJ all operational, two leased two owned.

    Are these data correct?
    Anyone can add some more info :)
    Owned aircrafts are they fully paid for?
    Seems a large fleet for the Adria current network.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Purger,I agree with everything except
    taking subsidies !
    A good airline does not take subsidies from airports to fly there!
    Every connection which is not profitable should get stopped !

    ReplyDelete
  20. @Purger
    Way to go, mate! That way all regional airports can be connected. The only problem is that all EX-YU airlines have a problem with megalomania and instead of operating planes like ERJ's with 35-50 seats, they operate planes they cannot fill.
    Using the same pattern you suggested, OHD, OMO, TZL, OSI, MBX, etc. can have a direct link with big hubs in Europe.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Hey Lento,

    Problem is that jet planes of that size are very costly and don't seem to make money. You see that operators of 50 seat regional jet aircraft move away from them back to turbo props all over the world. I think it would be better to have 30 to 40 seat turboprops operations from these airport feeding the main hubs in the region.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Dreamers on large scale.
    All these mentioned small airports should be connected with any of regional hubs by small air traffic companies (2 pilots & secretary). So, this is a chance and space for small businesses and not for existing airliners with big overhead costs. Of course, this is not inovation for Nobel award. This way exists all over the world, from off'shore platforms, touristis islands, bigger oil and gas plkants in desert, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  23. At least B&H Airlines stepped in to fill the void. I just hope that the passenger numbers warrant them staying.

    I know the local government would never provide subsidies to B&H Airlines, but that would be one way to keep an airline at the airport on a more permanent basis.

    Also I think BEG and VIE are too close for major passenger numbers. LGW, AMS, Scandinavia, or Germany might be more successful and also provide connections to North America.

    This also doesn't seem like a great economic climate to start a new airline. Plus with such a name you are alienating many passengers. When you go from 4.5mil (most idealistic number) of potential passengers and cut that by more than half you are likely not going to succeed.

    Well good luck to BNX.

    ReplyDelete
  24. @ last anonymous.

    You raise a good point. I've wondered this myself - why DON'T small entrepreneurs get into this space with small planes and small companies feeding hubs.

    ReplyDelete

Before posting a comment be mindful of other participants and readers. EX-YU Aviation News does not tolerate insults, excessive swearing, racist, homophobic or any other chauvinist remarks or provocative posts with the intention of creating further arguments. Such comments will be deleted as soon as possible. The opinions expressed by those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of EX-YU Aviation News. Thank you for your cooperation.