FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1986
1986 - 0610.PDF
AIR TRANSPORT Regionals vs airports—the sparks fly EINDHOVEN Philips Conference Centre, Philips glossy brochures (weight 500g) in hand, dinner courtesy of Philips; one would have been forgiven for expecting a conference on electronics rather than on European regional airlines and airports. Eindhoven's skyline is dominated by flashing Philips Gloeilampen. Two in three of the population are employed by the electrical giant. Philips Aviation buildings dwarf the international terminal built with the aid of... Philips. But Philips chairman Wisse Dekker had a kind word for regional airlines—they are, after all, a convenient means of trans porting cassette players around the world—and a touching faith in the Euro pean Commission's inten tions to free them from the present stifling regulations, reports Julia Hayley. Regional airlines in Europe have many grievances. They like the idea of liberalisation but feel too vulnerable to go the whole way. They want to have their cake and eat it—to be protected in an open market. Because their operations are restricted, ostensibly to prevent them competing directly with major, usually state-owned, carriers, they are one of the main forces push ing for the liberalisation of air services. A directive was issued in 1983 to carve out a market niche for regional operators separate from that of the majors and railways, but it has hindered rather than helped them. Under current EEC rules they can fly only between category 2 and 3 airports using aircraft of under 70 seats. They can operate freely on routes of over 400km, but on shorter stages only where an aircraft is substantially faster than existing surface links. Another catchphrase anulls their operation when "an indirect scheduled service already exists between the two airports concerned or between airports within 50km NLM operates F.27s and F.28s from Eindhoven, a category 3 airport opened in 1984 of either of them offering a transit time between flight sectors of less than 90 minutes". The discussion centred on liberalisation and the form it should take. Speakers were adamant that total deregu lation was not an issue. "I have not yet encountered a European who wants US-style deregulation," said Hans Raben, director general of air transport for the Netherlands. "Nobody is suggesting it, nobody is saying it's possible. It's a false question and some thing we should not devote more time to." That said, the present envi ronment is hostile to regional expansion. "The 1983 Direc tive fails on all points," said Frederik Sorensen, head of the EC Air Transport Division. "It does not make it easier to move within the community. "It is now generally under stood that we have to reduce the restrictions," he went on. "We should think in terms of introducing fifth freedom rights, category 1 access, and a European-wide computer reservations system," he said. These are included in the new Directive which goes before the EEC Transport Commit tee in April. The response was un- enthusiastic. Forget the fifth freedoms, said a Bristol Airport speaker. "If we have a conference here in ten years we'll still be talk ing about fifth freedoms. Let's concentrate on seat limits and category 1 inhibitions, where there's room for progress". "What we need is a new directive, not a new strait- jacket," said president of Maersk Air, Bjorn Hansen. Fifth freedoms under the new legislation are intended to apply only to aircraft of under 30 seats, he pointed out. "Why come out with a directive that favours an aircraft not even produced in the EEC? Why not let the airlines and free market forces decide?" Others agreed that airlines are now generally old enough to make their own equipment decisions without EEC guid ance. Sorensen, too, was unhappy with the 30-seat limit. It would in practice be 19 seats because of the gap in the market for 20-30-seaters, he pointed out. "But we shouldn't forget about fifth freedoms," he insisted. "The question has been in play for a long time, and only just failed to get through. We stand a chance, and it would be wrong in a Community context to forget it. It would be in the interests of the airlines to maintain a higher utilisation rate." "Bilateral agreements should not be ignored in favour of a multilateral effort on liberalisation," said Ulrich Meier of Lufthansa. "Air transport is a bilateral matter involving moving from A to B, and it is a lot easier to get bilateral than multilateral agreements". Regionals and trunk car riers have an uneasy relationship. Meier, as one of the few major airline repre sentatives, went on to try and demarcate their territory. "It's true that large carriers have left a gap. We're quite aware of it and prepared to leave that room to others." "There's no way a major can economically operate a 30-50-seat aircraft," said Aerospatiale's Alain Brodin. "There's a lot of room in Europe for co-operation FLIGHT INTERNATIONAL, 22 March 1986
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
