Irregularly Scheduled Flights for Point-to-point Carriers

While air travel has experienced a significant drop in fares during last decade and numbers of travelers increased, lodging is now the biggest expanse for part of costumers. So far low cost carriers who tend to use point-to-point system has paid no attention on setting their schedules so that trip can be done with maximum days and minimum nights at the destination. Many of destinations are served just 2-4 times a week. A twice-daily service on mornings and evenings would be ideal for travelers but most of routes can not sustain so big passenger flow and aircrafts still need to be somehow utilized during the rest of day.
These low-frequency schedules are usually created assuming that flights must be distributed as evenly as possible trough the week so granting similar headways regardless whether the time between the flights is used on sightseeing and business or sleeping. I think an airline that offers a longer stay at destination city without additional night at hotel would definitely attract and induce new costumers.
How to achieve this? Actually it is very easy – joust bringing some mix in the morning and evening destinations.
Here is an example on aircraft from Wizz air Sofia base. Morning flights are performed to FCO and CLR, evening flights to BGY and BCN. If Wednesday’s and Sunday’s FCO flights are made in evening and BGY flights in morning, Thursday’s CLR flight in evening and BCN in morning we could get 6 superb city break possibilities.
 

Such transformations also create inconvenient flight pairs but – as LCC costumers are usually flexible with travel dates – most passengers will benefit from the shifted schedule. Midday destinations too can be put in other timing, but the gain will be much smaller.
The convenient flight pairs in mornings and evenings work symmetrically for travelers from booth cities. Actually - if the traffic flow is one sided - problems might appear on some segments. For hopelessly one-sided traffic - to a tourist resort for instance - midday or night flights would suit better.

Does River Daugava Waterway Make Any Sense?

Some water transport enthusiasts in Latvia have lately raised idea using river Daugava as inland waterway following the canal development trend in Western Europe. Daugava was an important trade route starting from Middle Ages to 1860ies - when an extensive railway network was built. The first goal of the project I remember was connecting the Baltic Sea with the Black sea; now - as I understand form Mr. Uldis Pumpurs (sorry – in Latvian only) – the idea is to connect Vitebsk region in Belarus with Riga port. Initially I was very skeptical about this vision but doing a little research gave a little more credit for the project.  

Finding the Freight
Vitebsk region is the flagship of Belarusian export and – according to some sources – accounts for 68% of nation’s foreign trade. Petrol, electricity, sewing machines, TV sets, bricks, clothing, footwear, food and other goods are produced in the region. Water transport is very cheap, has big capacity and is rather slow. The main candidates for using boats are: timber, peat, construction materials and – already existing industry output – clothing, carpets, shoes and electronic devices. But here we come to a dead end – in Europe we can find territories already connected to ports and with resources of timber, peat and production if construction materials. Belarus is a country that tends to export goods with added value and smaller volume not raw materials. Maybe it is possible that the waterway could depend on manufacturing output at the beginning (less sensitive to transport costs) and gradually induce timber cutting, peat extraction, brick production and other freight that is very sensitive on transport costs.

New Structures Needed
Two big technical problems exist in this project. First – no possibilities for vessels to cross the three existing dams of power plants in Latvia. This can be solved by building locks or some kind of boat elevator. Second - and the biggest – Daugava upon Jēkabpils are shallow. The technical specifications and the corresponding depth are still unknown, but it is clear that rising river level or deepening the channel is required. Upstream Daugavpils is located nature park Daugavas loki – a scenic and environmentally valuable area. A solution that do not effect the park is mandatory (bypass canal for instance).

Most of canals in Europe were built more than a century ago using cheap labor, state funding and little estate costs. In case of proposed Daugava waterway the capital costs would be paid by the users – and I doubt that vessel transport will have significantly lower costs than rail or road transport. Current estimate of the total construction costs is €2 billion. (Cost of LGV Est 400km high speed line is about €4 billion) The length of Daugava from Vitebsk to Riga is about 570km, 420 km in a straight line.

The White Elephant in Existing System
Transport systems in Latvia and Belarus are road and rail not water based because the Industrial Revolution here came when railways were considered more progressive than inland waterways. In Western Europe these systems where introduced and developed simultaneously – and used till nowadays. Countries like France on Germany are improving their canal networks just because they have them. The same is why US do not build high-speed railways – because they do not have a good service of regular rail and all movements are done using other modes of transport.

Water transport would loose attractiveness if one extra reloading is required so the factories must be located right next to the river. Where they are now? Of course near railways. This is a very big block for the project – virtually all of the Daugava waterway costumers must be induced; I do not see any reason why existing factories would relocate themselves or ad one more reloading at local boat station on their delivery route.

I have to come to a conclusion that this project is heading to nowhere. I see almost no existing costumers. In long term Daugava waterway would create some depending industries and traffic but until then the project would be a financial failure. More welome are investments in existing railway system.

A way passengers could handle the luggage by themselves

Lately I came to a conclusion that Ryanair’s idea about passengers handling their own luggage is a genius not an insane idea. Look how I imagine it:
1. Passenger comes to an airport with piece of luggage and goes straight to the security check.
2. Before hand luggage scan and X-rays he puts his “checked-in” luggage on a special conveyor with goes to luggage scans.
3. Right after personal security check passenger goes to a baggage carousel where he gets his scanned and sealed (for instance wrapped in plastic) piece of luggage.
4. Passenger goes straight to the aircraft and gives his luggage to the baggage handler who checks weather the seal is undamaged and nothing has been taken out.
5. After landing passenger gets his piece of luggage right next to the airplane and goes to the city or next flight.
So we could forget about 1) missing luggage; 2) waiting for luggage delivery; 3) most of baggage handlers and handing systems; 5) check-in and check-in counters as ticket and ID checks can be done onboard; 6) gate agents as no bags could travel without owner; 7) all or most luggage restrictions.

Unlike Ryanair’s initial proposal - the luggage is sealed with allows to carry liquids and sharp items. On the other hand – the airports must be fully re-designed – so this system couldn’t be introduced quickly and without investments.

A Rescue Plan for Estonian Air

Estonian Air fleet consist of two B737-500 and two 737-300. The two Saab 340 props are operated by subsidiary Estonian Air Regional. While industry’s average passenger drop in 2009 is forecasted at 3.1% Estonian air passenger figures in October shrunk by massive 31.9 %. The main reason for such a dramatic drop is cuts on frequencies with caused fewer passengers and even more cuts again. Even the new routes (to increase the aircraft utilization) are opened on low frequencies. As a result Amsterdam and Brussels are served only three times a week; Moscow, Kiev, London, Munich only twice weekly. No service to Paris and Berlin will be provided during week examined (January 11-17, 2010). Reasonably served B737 middle-range destinations are Copenhagen (19x weekly), Stockholm (10x weekly + more flights by Estonian Air Regional) and Oslo (5x weekly).

Although the fleet was cut this year - the aircraft utilization stands only at 57% - with means one plane is still odd.
The management always refers to low passenger demand and hopes for arrival of the new CRJ900NG whose smaller capacity and economics will allow operating more frequently.

Instead of cutting capacities I advise to expand the market. Riga airport on therouteshop.com has announced lack of five weekly flights from Riga to Paris. Estonian Air from Tallinn could pick up passengers at Riga organizing the route TLL-RIX-CDG(or even better ORY)-RIX-TLL. airBaltic is concentrating on mid-day flights to Western destinations and we see less and less evening and morning departures from Riga to Brussels and since KLM left – no evening and morning flights to Amsterdam. This mean Riga have a gap in market for time-sensitive passengers to Brussels and Amsterdam and Estonian air could cover it.
It would be a bad idea for Estonian air to enter Riga-London (daily by airBaltic, 2x daily by Ryanair and coming 3x weekly by Wizz Air) and Riga-Berlin (up to 3x daily airBaltic) so planes to London and Berlin may stop at Palanga. Palanga-London is highly attractive route with no direct competition. Palanga – Berlin is bit less attractive but - although slower than London - would gain passengers.

The aircraft utilization would be: 1st to Copenhagen in morning, Berlin in midday, Copenhagen in evening; 2nd to Stockholm in morning, Oslo or Moscow in midday, Stockholm in evening; 3rd to Brussels and Paris (time of day depending on Brussels); 4th to Amsterdam and London (time of day depending on Amsterdam).
Such routing would decrease demand on Copenhagen so no midday flight needed. Munich, Kiev and other low frequency destinations most probably must be dropped.

Cutting Costs on Riga Northern Transport Corridor

Riga Northern Transport Corridor is the most ambitious and most car-centered project in Riga ever seen (http://www.ziemelukoridors.lv). The aim is to build a 27-30 km urban highway and a high bridge (or a tunnel) across river Daugava. Meanwhile the main goal is to provide better truck connections to the port. I propose to abandon the any plans for elaborating the car traffic within Northern Transport Corridor because:
1. Cutting travel times on car will encourage suburban sprawl thus damaging natural environment, making car-dependant communities and putting tax flow away from Riga;
2. The new development sites – with are patronized by the planners – will be car- not mass transit- based so encouraging even more sprawl and damaging current CBD (with needs activities to be added not to cut);
3. The traffic shifted to the Northern Transport Corridor will not lower the flow on existing streets and bridges because the spare capacity will be used by people now using public transport. The centre by-pass may be developed from the Southern and Salu bridges by further upgrading their access roads;
4. There will be small benefits from the project unless it is fully realized;
5. Sky-high expanses (no matter private of public funding) for massive construction and vast properties needed;
6. Damaged urban environment by noise and fragmentation.

I propose building a brand-new Truck-Only System (TOS) so boosting manufacturing and freight transit. TOS would consist of two lane road – fully or partially separated from city streets with off- and on- ramps near industrial activities and port facilities, other main streets. These roads would not have junctions with roads to or in residential areas. 

TOS have several pros over urban highway:
1. 2 (or - if reasonable - 1) lanes unlike 6 in highway, so less need for extra properties. See stage 4 – in the base variant it is located on unused railroad branches, even using the existing bridge over river Jugla;
2. Smaller speeds thus smaller radius thus higher use of existing public land and higher integration in the landscape;
3. Less traffic over river Daugava so ferry line, moveable bridge or transporter bridge would be enough;
4. Smaller junctions;
5. May be used for public transport and emergency vehicles;
6. Good usability if just few sections are built (see picture – stages in prioritized order)
7. Very easy pedestrian crossings – just zebra crossing or no marking at all.

By such a system the main goal – making truck traffic to port easier – will be reached and will have spare capacity for decades. The saved resources must be invested in public transport.

Riga to Frankfurt - Prices of LH, BT and FR

Riga to Frankfurt is the only route from Riga with three competing airlines. Although airBaltic sell some Lufthansa connections – RIX to FRA seems to be at battlefield. airBaltic started this route in September as an important business destination for the connecting traffic but will BT steel Riga to Frankfurt O&D traffic?

Booth LH and BT operate the route daily and with the same type of aircraft, but – as airBaltic 737-500 has more dense seating - BT’s weekly seat capacity is higher.
Ryanair use more distant Hahn airport with is specialized in “illegal” transfers and serving other surrounding communities rather than Frankfurt city. Since BT’s entrance FR is no longer the only alternative to LH high fares (see graph) so the demand may be down (no proof).

As Lufthansa sustain a complex fare system with one-way tickets about the same price of a round trip – the round trip fares in this research is divided by two. So even don’t try to book them – they are imaginary fares. Lufthansa ticket include 20kg of checked-in baggage, booth BT and FR don’t.
The price graph clearly indicates – Ryanair is the cheapest option, then comes airBaltic, then Lufthansa. Variation of LH’s prices is extreme - from €147 to €510. It seems obvious that Lufthansa want to bring traffic to their hub instead of wasting the seats for the short Riga to Frankfurt service by offering more reasonable fares.

Riga Back in 1700

A detailed map of Riga surroundings was drawn when Saxons blocked the town in 1700. The map is drawn in scale and shows features of Riga surroundings: roads, churches, windmills, pubs, manors and other elements.

Daugava river has overcame major transformations – the right riverbank has gone further in river (most notably upstream and downstream the city). All islands have new configurations. Just a few elements other than the inner town can be recognized in modern city:

1. A road to Vidzeme (the road to bottom right corner of the old map) is now Brīvības Street. The old location seems to be bit further to North. The place where the road went trough a palisade fence is now the busy section of Brīvības Street between Lāčplēša Street and Ģertrūdes Street (pictured).
2. Jesus church is clearly marked in the old map but the location of current church is different. The modern church (pictured) is already the 4th Jesus church building and was fininshed in 1822.
3. Pasture dam – now Pulkveža Brieža iela. It is an old dike built trough a wet pastureland. An alley on the dike is drawn in the map. No trees have survived till nowadays but Pulkveža Brieža Street (see picture) is still exactly at the same location. 

Estonian Air vs airBaltic on TLL – VNO

Tallinn to Vilnius route is the longest Baltic domestic route (530 km) and accounts for 7% scheduled seat capacity and for 10% departures on intra-Baltic aviation network. This route has suffered much from flyLAL bankruptcy (lost 2 daily departures) and from airBaltic Vilnius reductions (lost 2 more daily departures). Currently TLL-VNO is the only route where Estonian Air and airBaltic compete directly. As airBaltic has withdrawn morning an afternoon flights just six-weekly evening flights are left operated in an interesting pattern. Planes makes a triangle route RIX – TLL – VNO – RIX or vice versa departing 19:20 from booth Vilnius and Tallinn. Estonian Air is frequency leader on TLL – VNO but airBaltic offers more seats.

Estonian Air offers 2nd daily flights on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays while airBaltic fares are lower on all days in October and November. BT’s fares typically start at €67 while OV’s at €78.