Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Croatia Airlines ordered to launch Osijek flights

Time running out for Osijek - Zagreb service launch

The Croatian government has ordered its national carrier to launch flights from Osijek to Zagreb by the end of the year. However, with just over two weeks left until 2012 comes to a close, it looks unlikely that Croatia Airlines will manage to lease a small commuter aircraft, put tickets on sale and inaugurate the flights. Osijek Airport CEO, Domagoj Marinić, believes Croatia Airlines is stalling with the flight launch since the route to Zagreb is unprofitable. “Croatia Airlines insists it is working through complex procedures to lease a thirty seat aircraft from Hungary. I would ask them to hurry up”, Mr. Marinić says.

The Croatian government has the right to order its national carrier to launch flights between cities within the country if the service is deemed vital for socio-economic development. The decision must be respected regardless of whether the route is profitable or not. “We have requested for the service to be launched prior to the Christmas holidays while the government has ordered for the flights to be inaugurated by the end of the year”, Mr. Marinić says. Osijek Airport, which has no scheduled flights, handled only 2.171 passengers in the first ten months of the year, down 91% on the same period in 2011. According to an earlier agreement with the airport, Croatia Airlines’ flights between Osijek and Zagreb are to operate five times per week with services to Dubrovnik and Split to be introduced on a seasonal basis over the summer months.

The Croatian carrier hopes to lease an Embraer EMB120 for exclusive use on its Osijek flights. The thirty seat turboprop would be leased from Budapest Aircraft Service. It features a 2+1 seat layout and has low operating costs. The lease of the aircraft was first announced in August when Osijek Airport held talks with Croatia Airlines for flights to operate between Osijek, Zagreb and Split over the 2012/2013 winter season.

24 comments:

  1. My oh my, what is this? Is there some important MP that wants to go by air home over the holidays or what???

    ReplyDelete
  2. If you take a car for two hours you are in Zagreb or Belgrade and you can chose many flights.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. These flights are not opened because of P2P passengers but for connections. Departures and arrivals are adjusted to that goal.

      Delete
  3. Btw BEG is closer and it offers much cheapers fares. Also much easier to get to australia from BEG.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Evo popricao sam se sa disom Osjecke zracne luke nekih 45 minuta. I potvrdio mi je sve sto sam saznao od izvora u CTN-u

    1. I dalje se nadaju se da ce letovi poceti pocetkom prosinca. Frekvencija prema ZAG je 5 puta tjedno. Ujutro za ZAG, povratak oko 15:00 h. U ljetnoj sezoni otvaraju se SPU i DBV.

    2. Sami su postavili cijelu pricu i prezentirali je CTN-u. Dosli su sa gotovim projektom i postavili ga na stol, a kasnije je ispalo da je to CTN-ov projekt. Doslovce su morali moljakati, forsirati, silovati, stavljati pred svrsen cin u medijima, obilaziti vrata.

    3. U CTN-u su ih blijedo gledali i razgovori su tekli poput "a u koliko bi vi sati da se leti? Kakav bi broj frekvencija? Hocete povratak u 14:00, 15:00 ili 17:00 sati". Nikakva istrazivanja trzista, nikakva prica o isplativosti, konekcijama, vremenu transfera... samo brija o PSO koji pokriva break-even, a sve ostalo je nebitno.

    4. Hrvatska turisticka zajednica ih je otkantala jer da nema interesa u potpori (subvenciji) turistickih linija iz/za OSI. Ovo je preglupo, poglavito u kontekstu linije OSI-SPU i OSI-DBV. Po cemu se to Slavonski turista koji dolazi na Jadran razlikuje od Engleskog, Francuskog, Ceskog, Ruskog ili Skandinavskog?

    5. Bivši management je uzasno puno energije trosio na opravdanje "kako se nešto ne moze napraviti". Da je bar nesto od te silne energije ulozio u uvjeravanje da se nesto napravi.

    6. Uzasno se trude dovuci jednu ili dvije linije za Njemacku (smatraju dobrim da jedna bude MUC ili STR, a druga FRA ili CGN), stabilizirati linije prema ZAG, SPU, DBV, kasnije eventualno u sezoni uvesti RJK, PUY i ZAD. Wizz im je ozbiljan kandidat za London, oni sami su bili malo skepticni, ali Wizz je rekao "ma London uspjeva odakle god ga pokrenemo, to ne moze omanuti". Wizz jedini ne trazi nikave subvencije. Puno sastance po kompanijama, obilaze, prezentiraju, mole...


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So purger whats your job? You go and talk to airport managers? Do you get paid?

      Delete
    2. I am manager in my own company. In same time I work as consulter for HSPP (Croatian Airline Pilot Union) and journalist for Aeronautika. I made studies for several air companies in region.

      Delete
  5. If not now, from July 1st 2013 onwards will become PSO like it or not.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Etihad places its codeshare on Alitalia's and Jat's flights between Belgrade and Rome.

    ReplyDelete
  7. To lease a plane, no matter how small, cheap and cost-effective it is, for 1 - 1,5 block-hour a day, 5 days a week, is not only stupid, it's idiotic. And it's exactly what I could expect from any ex-yu "flag carrier".

    On the other hand, RJK-SPU/DBV vv is badly needed, and if I'm not wrong, already announced, too. But one or two flights a week between north, central and south Adriatic means nothing. What is needed, is morning and evening daily connection, both ways. If we add to that OSI connections to/from Adriatic, I'm pretty sure that
    OSI - ZAG - RJK -SPU - DBV, on small Embraer, departing OSI 07.00 and 15.30, and departing DBV 11.00 and 19.30, monday through friday, is the best solution, for the beginning.

    On this way, OSI has connection to/from ZAG in both "waves", and to adriatic airports, and simultaneously connections between north and south adriatic is established, not to mention even ZAG-RJK segment,which operates today as minibus service.

    And I'm sure these flights could be transferred to Q400 and be self-sustained and profitable, in peak season, June-September period. Embraer for winter timetable, and Q400 for Apr,May,Oct as PSO.

    But then, maybie I don't know one thing about civil aviaton, as I was told here the other day.
    Therefore I'll be happy to hear differnt opinions which will prove I'm wrong with this idea.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Why on earth ZAG-RJK what is just one hour driving.

    12345--
    OSI-RJK-SPU-RJK-OSI-DBV-ZAD(-2--5--)/PUY(1--4---)/BRI-DBV-OSI-RJK-SPU-RJK-OSI

    -----6-
    OSI-RJK-SPU-RJK-OSI

    ------7
    OSI-RJK-SPU-RJK-OSI

    ReplyDelete
  9. BRI is just on --3----

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With 3 planes based in OSI, one feeding ZAG, second for Adriatic services the way you described, and the third for other regional flights, let's say in 2020, your proposal makes sense.

      If you stated times for abovementioned flights and how the plane gets back to OSI to operate RJK/SPU/DBV/PUY/ZAD/BRI, maybie I could understand it.

      At the same time, it's the answer to the question why on earth ZAG-RJK : Because I can't see other way to operate ZAG-OSI vv, OSI-Adriatic vv, and north-south adriatic vv, doble daily, with one plane. And if you don't have it double daily, then you don't have it at all.

      Let me remind you too, that OU used to operate daily ZAG-RJK-PUY, and that after 6 months of operation LF was about 70%; of course, service was cancelled when it got accustomed and when LF started to grow. In addition to that, OU minibus takes about 2,5 hours from Pleso to Rijeka, not 1, transit passengers count too, not everyone is P2P, not all people can use car always, roads are congested often due to traffic (summer) or weather (winter), there are people who travel to northern islands, not only the city of Rijeka, European Coastal (if God=state administration finally stop blocking it) has ZAG-RJK as one of the services planned, and so on and so on.

      I hope you'll be satisfied with my explanation.

      Delete
    2. It is not OSI-ZAD, OSI-PUY etc, but as it was written. That means passenger to ZAD has one stop in DBV. By my suggestion you have

      OSI-RJK 123456- + 12345-7
      OSI-SPU 123456- 1stop + 12345-7 1stop
      OSI-DBV 12345--
      OSI-ZAD -2--5-- 1stop
      OSI-PUY 1--4--- 1stop
      OSI-BRI --3---- via DBV
      RJK-OSI 123456- + 12345-7
      RJK-SPU 124456- + 12345-7
      RJK-DBV 12345-- 1stop
      RJK-BRI --3---- via DBV 2stop
      SPU-RJK 123456- + 12345-7
      SPU-OSI 123456- 1stop + 12345-7 1stop
      DBV-OSI 12345--
      DBV-RJK 12345-- 1stop
      DBV-ZAD -2--5--
      DBV-PUY 1--4---
      DBV-BRI --3----
      ZAD-DBV -2--5--
      ZAD-OSI -2--5-- 1stop
      PUY-DBV 1--4---
      PUY-OSI 1--4--- 1stop
      BRI-DBV --3----
      BRI-OSI --3---- via DBV
      BRI-RJK --3---- via DBV 2stop

      RJK-ZAG doesn't have any chance even with all transfer passengers. By car you need 60-75 minutes to ZAG. To go to Rijeka Airport (Krk) from Rijeka it is at least 30 minutes + flight = 75 minutes, so why will you use plane for that. And how many potential passengers you have from Krk island?

      RJK-ZAG would be one of the shortest route in World (just 165 km with, and cities are connected by highway).

      At which year was OU line ZAG-RJK-PUY?

      Delete
    3. It was 1994, it was atr42, daily, evening from ZAG, morning from PUY/RJK. In the beginning it was empty, after some time it became FULL, but then it was terminated. Like similar "brilliant" decisions to terminate Moscow, Istanbul, Madrid...

      Delete
  10. @ Pozdrav iz Rijeke and Purger,

    I also don't think there is a demand for ZAG-RJK but I suggested this on a previous post.

    Base the aircraft(s) in Split and problem solved.

    SPU 0620/0710-OSI 0740/0820-ZAG
    ZAG 0850/0930-OSI 1000/1050-SPU
    SPU 1130/1210-RJK 1240/1350-DBV
    DBV 1420/1530-RJK 1600/1640-SPU
    SPU 1720/1810-OSI 1840/1920-ZAG
    ZAG 2030/2110-OSI 2140/2220-SPU

    If you look closely to major regional operators, they minimise the time an aircraft spends on the ground. This way they can offer the maximum service for them most competitive price. The above sectors could easily be run 7 days a week using 4 or 5 complete crews and one aircraft with a second available when the main aircraft is in maintenance.
    Charging an average of 50 euro's per ticket per sector (this is very competitive when compared to car bus or train) and a load factor of 60% could bring an annual revenue of almost 4 million euro's.

    Best estimates of lease for the aircraft would be about 400,000 euro's per year.
    Crew 400,000 euros per year.
    Fuel 600,000 euros per year.
    This leaves 2.6 million to cover landing fees, ground handling, ATC and the rest which OU should be able to secure at a reasonable price.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @ Pozdrav iz Rijeke and Purger,

    I also don't think there is a demand for ZAG-RJK but I suggested this on a previous post.

    Base the aircraft(s) in Split and problem solved.

    SPU 0620/0710-OSI 0740/0820-ZAG
    ZAG 0850/0930-OSI 1000/1050-SPU
    SPU 1130/1210-RJK 1240/1350-DBV
    DBV 1420/1530-RJK 1600/1640-SPU
    SPU 1720/1810-OSI 1840/1920-ZAG
    ZAG 2030/2110-OSI 2140/2220-SPU

    If you look closely to major regional operators, they minimise the time an aircraft spends on the ground. This way they can offer the maximum service for them most competitive price. The above sectors could easily be run 7 days a week using 4 or 5 complete crews and one aircraft with a second available when the main aircraft is in maintenance.
    Charging an average of 50 euro's per ticket per sector (this is very competitive when compared to car bus or train) and a load factor of 60% could bring an annual revenue of almost 4 million euro's.

    Best estimates of lease for the aircraft would be about 400,000 euro's per year.
    Crew 400,000 euros per year.
    Fuel 600,000 euros per year.
    This leaves 2.6 million to cover landing fees, ground handling, ATC and the rest which OU should be able to secure at a reasonable price.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Q400:
    OSI 0740 - 0820 ZAG doesn't have any sense. It will have connection just to FRA. OSI flight must come to ZAG before 7:30 to have connection to CTN flights. Same thing is back ZAG 2030 - 2120 OSI. If your flight to OSI leaves before 21:15 you can not have connections from Europe via ZAG to OSI. And OSI-ZAG-OSI as P2P without transit passengers is waste of money, there are no potential passengers for P2P on that route.

    2 flights per day OSI-ZAG-OSI is too much. No, market for that frequency. Also who will fly on ZAG 0850 - 0930 OSI and on OSI 1840 - 1920 ZAG flights? P2P? How many of them are there every day?

    With OSI-RJK-SPU-RJK-OSI-DBV-ZAD you have break eve with

    5 pax on OSI-RJK + 10 pax OSI-SPU + 5 pax RJK-SPU

    back 10 pax SPU-OSI + 5 pax SPU-RJK + 5 pax RJK-OSI + 5 pax RJK-DBV + 5 pax OSI-DBV + 5 pax OSI-ZAD + 10 pax DBV-ZAD

    And to have 5 to 10 pax for those legs per day that is nothing isn't it?

    To have direct flights OSI-DBV, RJK-DBV, SPU-OSI you must have at least 15-17 pax on Embraer 120 to make it break even (with subventions) on each flight what is too mach comparing to potentials of market.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Purger, Q400

      I don't know about OSI, but there are 5 buses RJK-DBV daily, plus 1000 passengers/cars capacity ferry during summer season (which is likely to be terminated!) plus numerous cars, car rentals, and not very rare even people driving to ZAG to take plane to/from DBV.

      I'm afraid you both didn't catch my idea, which is to operate
      OSI-ZAG, OSI-Adriatic, and north-south Adriatic with one single plane, and minimum costs, twice daily (so people can complete their business, or tourist visit, and come back the same day).

      Segment RJK-ZAG is not here because of demand, you forgot that pasengers from OSI to RJK,SPU and DBV are onboard from ZAG to RJK, plus those few (or more) P2P's. Just btw, I remember flight RJK-ZAG with 34 transit passengers from RJK to PAR (don't remember CDG or ORY). And if OSI-ZAG makes sense for transits, I wonder why RJK-ZAG wouldn't. After all, RJK doesn't have that many direct regular services to rely on them for everyone.

      Providing services on workdays only, or with reduced traffic on weekends, it could be operated with 3 crews, which could lower operational costs, too. So, I still think it's the best solution, repeating, for the beginning.

      Delete
  13. OSI-ZAG does not make sense the same way as RJK-ZAG doesn't make sense. As you can see I am against that idea, and I thing that bypassing ZAG should be best solution. If routes for 165 km can work you will have million of them in Europe, but you don't have them in countries much richer than Croatia. And, please don't tell me story about fast trains because I am not talking about UK, Germany and France.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hey, man, you talk now as I was the one who ordered EMB to be leased and OSI-ZAG to be introduced.

    On the contrary, I think it's stupid to waste time and money to lease EMB. If I was head of CTN I would have never done that (except if PM as my friend had ordered it).

    But it's even more stupid to lease it for 1,5 hours, 5 days a week.

    Considering plane being already here, and operating already OSI-ZAG-OSI, I just wanted to say how more, or most of it can be taken.

    Considering flights (both OSI-ZAG and RJK-SPU/DBV) being PSO, I just wanted to say how most of "social" and "connecting" function of "national carrier", providing really good connection, can be
    fulfilled, with that one sole aircraft, and following logic of "order", especially "adding" southa driatic destinations which could increase profitability.

    You keep insisting on particular ZAG-RJK and ZAG-OSI segments, which I never said could be profitable as particular segments, not seeing context and "whole picture" I was talking about.

    And if you ask me what would I do with this EMB as part of OU; I would base it at RJK and operate morning and evening SPU and DBV and noon and afternoon VIE and MUC, daily (weekend reduced)

    ReplyDelete
  15. What have we learnt in Aviation in the past 10 years????
    With a good brand and marketing, we can actually create, improve or alter an existing or potential market. It is not impossible to change the behaviour of existing passengers who at this time choose bus, train or ferry. Your not going to convince them to fly between say RJK and DBV if your charging 200 euros (just because you think you only going to get 7 passengers and than want to cover costs) when they can take the bus for 50 euros. But if you make yourself known and offer a very competitive service than you can start to convince people to fly and also at the same time create a new market by making it more simple for people to get around so thus they are more likely to travel. This is where LCC have been most successful by creating new markets and not just moving in on existing ones.

    EMB-120s would work for OU but the real question is does OU know how to make it work for them.

    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.