Sunday, August 12, 2012

ČSA snubs EX-YU

No flights between Prague and EX-YU this winter
For the first time in over a decade the EX-YU region will have no direct flights to Prague during the winter season. Earlier in the week, ČSA Czech Airlines finalised its 2012/13 winter schedule with no city within the former Yugoslavia featured. Due to financial problems, ČSA suspended flights to Belgrade in 2011 and Skopje in 2012. Earlier in the year the Czech carrier relegated its Zagreb and Ljubljana services to its smaller regional partner Central Connect Airlines (CCA). However, the airline declared bankruptcy in June. ČSA considered resuming flights to the Croatian and Slovenian capitals this winter but in the end decided against the move.

Zagreb was ČSA’s first international destination, launched back in 1930. Last winter season the Czech carrier operated flights to 54 cities in 34 countries. A year later its jets will be seen in 41 cities and 30 countries. It holds a monopoly on over 40% of its routes. The airline once relied on transit passengers from the former Yugoslavia.

On the other hand, no EX-YU carrier operates flights to Prague either. Jat Airways maintained flights to the Czech capital until the winter of 2008. In the summer of 2009, B&H launched services from Sarajevo to Prague. However, the four weekly flights lasted only until September, when they were cancelled due to poor loads.

21 comments:

  1. such a pitty

    i wish they come back one day though

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm not surprised, can't really see sufficient air traffic to Prague from ex-YU. Most tourists take bus arrangements, and connecting passengers prefer larger airports in the region, such as MUC.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. it's not about preferrence it's about price. OK was way too expensive

      Delete
  3. Same case with Aerosvit, they were really too expensive on this market. With smarter pricing they could have become a solid 3rd player on the BEG-MOW route, instead of that TK is taking that place now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aerosvit's failure in Belgrade was not primarily because of its pricing technique but due to the equipment used on the route.
      It is almost impossible to make a profit on such a route by using an E-145 with the current oil prices. They have only managed to secure a loadfactor of roughly 45%.

      Delete
    2. Actually they were using a 737-400 on the route.

      Delete
    3. Actually they weren't. The B737-400 was used when the route was operated once, and later on twice per week, from Kiev to Belgrade via Sofia.
      Then later on Aerosvit was leasing the E145 from Dnieprsomething airline. Occasionally they would send the Antonov but that was quite rare.

      Delete
    4. Why do you like to lie so much (and when caught in the lie to lie even more)? The main type used on the route was the Boeing 737 in -400 and -500 variation, and that both from Aerosvit AND Dniproavia's respective fleets. (That's the name of the airline in question, to educate yourself and it's not a minor one.) "Dniprosomething" sounds quite unprofessional for a wanna-be aviation expert.
      Secondly, those planes WEREN'T leased, the two companies are part of the same mother-company, the Ukraine Aviation Group (Privat Group of Ukr.). Third, flights were operated 3 to 4 times per week, instead of "one to two", i really don't see where are you getting your info. from, must be a highly unreliable source. Or you're just guessing (as usual when you don't know something). Flight were launched with the 737, certainly not with the E-145. I flew the route several times in different periods and it always was a 737-400 in my case. We've seen some E-145 only in the late 2010. So i really can't see why you're so obsessed with it, maybe you're a nutso fan of Embraer, who knows...

      Delete
    5. My information comes from Belgrade airport so they are far more reliable than your: I flew on it once or twice.
      The route was operated initially via Sofia when the B737s were used.
      When Belgrade went direct, that is detached from Sofia, the capacity was reduced because the frequency was increased. That is when the E145s were used as the flights were increased to four times per week.
      E145 was replaced by higher capacity aircraft (Antonovs and Boeings) only when there were more passengers to justify it, they were never schedule to operate to Belgrade but only acted as subs.

      Your argumentation is quite weak I must say and quite primitive. You might want to work on that.

      Delete
    6. You are contradicting yourself constantly. I never said there were NO E-145 at all, you was insisting on that but later realized your blunder. For the first several years and at the end 737 was the main type, with or without SOF, 3/4 times a week. As for your info i don't see what kind of capacity upgrade is from the E-145 to the An-148?! O<o You're very poorly informed, so stop spreading disinformation around you, it doesn't give you any credit you're hoping to receive.

      Delete
    7. In any case, the pricing was inadequate and the demand scarce. Loads were between 50% to 70% otherwise, i really, really can't see where are you getting your numbers from. Only an ATR would have made the route viable. Besides very few passengers used VV to connect further, unknown non-Western airline. Serbs prefer Turkish and LH ;) Colonially faithful...

      Delete
    8. Guys, that's too much of a temper for a discusion over a plane type issue. Personally i remember only 737s from Kiev. Anyway, miraculously, LO (a comparable airline) is still around in BEG and that with an E-170/195, with no plans to axe the route as far as i hear.

      Delete
  4. Replies
    1. yes MOW is IATA code for Moscow, all Moscow airports, as there are three international airports in use (Domodedovo DME, Sheremetyevo SVO and Vnukovo VKO) , like you would have for London (LON) but each airport has its own IATA code (LHR, LGW, STN, LTN, LCY, SEN) or for Paris is PAR, but CDG,ORY, BVA.

      Delete
  5. FYI Aerosvit operated KBP-BEG route, not MOW-BEG...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oh, we didn't knew it! TK as well? Maybe we were talking about segments, not direct flights, smart guy. You deserve two slaps for that.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think that there is enough O/D traffic between BEG and PRG for at least 3 x AT7 flights BEG/PRG/BEG.
    Don't forget that JAT would feed these flights also ex LCA/SKP/TGD/TIV and SKP.
    I think its just the dinosaurs mentality of JAT management and the lack of a/c.

    ReplyDelete
  8. If people from Balkans dont fight about politics,
    they fight about which airplane some airline
    used in distant past...

    Or they nearly kill each other because they can not agree on the colour their ice-cream had before eating it up!

    I advise every psychiatrist to follow this blog regularly!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Spot on.
      This is only reason I am following this blog, as often as, I could.

      Delete
  9. if an airline is in troubles, it cuts first non or only small profitable routes. Seems that ex YU for OK was one these routes
    OS and LO will be happy to take over

    ReplyDelete
  10. Any deeper data guys on LO's service to BEG (LF%, passenger destinations transit vs. OD etc)?

    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.