International Pier - Airbridges

[Speedbird Julie]

Hopefully the improvements in the boarding arangements are appreciated by loco carriers. Do all FR/EZY flights use the E pier - I think I've seen EZY ones on the Int/W pier?

The taxiways sound like a big job, I'm not sure the previous £8m of improvements for the EK A380 have necessarily paid off how we might have hoped, so it'll be interesting to see how that progresses.

It's good to hear things seem to be moving on the infrastructure front since the takeover, hopefully things are also moving forward wrt things like route development and transport connections.

Both easyJet and Ryanair will operate will all three piers. The FR Dub is almost always stand 9 or 5, if not it’s 6, 7 or 8. If they’re occupied then it’s any other stand in the airport. Stand 36 is the preferred stand on the international pier as inbound and outbound pax don’t cross paths so preboard is an option.

easyJet just the same will operate from anywhere. Typically all domestic arrivals come on east pier and all internationals are on intl, however international arrivals will go to east pier with pax bussed to arrivals if no space on the pier. easyJet will often send requests for hot spins - if they do its best to try get the aircraft on stands 3, 26 or 30L as they offer the most preboard space across the airport and preboarding can still start as inbound pax are disembarking regardless of activity on other stands.

As for the improvements that where put in place for EK, the airport did enough to be allowed the A380, but not enough to be fully licensed something that has caused a bit of a rift between GLA and EK which is slowly but surely going away. The second daily flight is something EK have always wanted to return as the A380 often has its hold space maxed out and cargo is lost to the likes of LH and BA, but, are only going to bring it back when the airport holds up its end of the bargain

This is interesting info re EK and the second daily service. Thank you for posting.

[Iain]

Sounds like EK are a little unreasonable tbh. GLA spent millions to accommodate 1 EK flight per day and their response is to be piqued and say it's not enough. Meanwhile they've happily gone into EDI, who don't have the facilities they're demanding at GLA and have made zero of that expenditure to accommodate them.

Similarly, if we look across the Irish sea, DUB apparently refused to upgrade infrastructure to accommodate an EK A380 when asked (due to the disruption and and cost) and EK have just continued with 2x daily 77W.

Why does GLA have to spend millions on upgrades (that aren't required by any other airlines) for 1 or 2 EK flights per day, but EDI and DUB don't?

[Planeenthusiast]

Rather than focussing about what happened previously, wouldn’t it be more worthwhile for GLA management to do whatever is needed to secure the existing daily service moving forward? It’s no secret that EDI is actively trying to persuade EK to expand and compete equally in relation to frequency with another airline who already operate twice daily. I’m pretty sure the new management will have made EK aware of the ownership changes and their willingness to work together.

[Speedbird Julie]

Rather than focussing about what happened previously, wouldn’t it be more worthwhile for GLA management to do whatever is needed to secure the existing daily service moving forward? It’s no secret that EDI is actively trying to persuade EK to expand and compete equally in relation to frequency with another airline who already operate twice daily. I’m pretty sure the new management will have made EK aware of the ownership changes and their willingness to work together.

I'm hopeful that GLA are being very aggressive in their courting of QR

[kenneth1]

It is certainly interesting to hear what is going on to improve the operational side of things. I guess we will have to wait for some statement from the new owners regarding any short/long term development/expansion plans. So far this seems encouraging.

[Clive]

Rather than focussing about what happened previously, wouldn’t it be more worthwhile for GLA management to do whatever is needed to secure the existing daily service moving forward? It’s no secret that EDI is actively trying to persuade EK to expand and compete equally in relation to frequency with another airline who already operate twice daily. I’m pretty sure the new management will have made EK aware of the ownership changes and their willingness to work together.

I'm hopeful that GLA are being very aggressive in their courting of QR

They will be for sure.

[bill]

Sounds like EK are a little unreasonable tbh. GLA spent millions to accommodate 1 EK flight per day and their response is to be piqued and say it's not enough. Meanwhile they've happily gone into EDI, who don't have the facilities they're demanding at GLA and have made zero of that expenditure to accommodate them.

Similarly, if we look across the Irish sea, DUB apparently refused to upgrade infrastructure to accommodate an EK A380 when asked (due to the disruption and and cost) and EK have just continued with 2x daily 77W.

Why does GLA have to spend millions on upgrades (that aren't required by any other airlines) for 1 or 2 EK flights per day, but EDI and DUB don't?

Hear hear. Always been my point since the A380 fiasco began. EK have shown no loyalty to us as you say, in fact it cost us money to host them. Go after other ME carriers now.

[Planeenthusiast]

Sounds like EK are a little unreasonable tbh. GLA spent millions to accommodate 1 EK flight per day and their response is to be piqued and say it's not enough. Meanwhile they've happily gone into EDI, who don't have the facilities they're demanding at GLA and have made zero of that expenditure to accommodate them.

Similarly, if we look across the Irish sea, DUB apparently refused to upgrade infrastructure to accommodate an EK A380 when asked (due to the disruption and and cost) and EK have just continued with 2x daily 77W.

Why does GLA have to spend millions on upgrades (that aren't required by any other airlines) for 1 or 2 EK flights per day, but EDI and DUB don't?

Hear hear. Always been my point since the A380 fiasco began. EK have shown no loyalty to us as you say, in fact it cost us money to host them. Go after other ME carriers now.

Absolutely understand the points of view regarding EK’s loyalty etc and the costs. On the flip side of the coin. They have served Glasgow for many years. They have boosted pax numbers. They have what appears to be a solid customer base. Where would Glasgow be without them? Significantly fewer pax. The loss of one of the world’s legacy airlines. The businesses within and outwith the airport who benefit from EK’s presence. Right now, I don’t think Glasgow can afford to lose them.

[Clive]

Sounds like EK are a little unreasonable tbh. GLA spent millions to accommodate 1 EK flight per day and their response is to be piqued and say it's not enough. Meanwhile they've happily gone into EDI, who don't have the facilities they're demanding at GLA and have made zero of that expenditure to accommodate them.

Similarly, if we look across the Irish sea, DUB apparently refused to upgrade infrastructure to accommodate an EK A380 when asked (due to the disruption and and cost) and EK have just continued with 2x daily 77W.

Why does GLA have to spend millions on upgrades (that aren't required by any other airlines) for 1 or 2 EK flights per day, but EDI and DUB don't?

Hear hear. Always been my point since the A380 fiasco began. EK have shown no loyalty to us as you say, in fact it cost us money to host them. Go after other ME carriers now.

Absolutely understand the points of view regarding EK’s loyalty etc and the costs. On the flip side of the coin. They have served Glasgow for many years. They have boosted pax numbers. They have what appears to be a solid customer base. Where would Glasgow be without them? Significantly fewer pax. The loss of one of the world’s legacy airlines. The businesses within and outwith the airport who benefit from EK’s presence. Right now, I don’t think Glasgow can afford to lose them.

Fully agree. I think it was a good and necessary piece of business for GLA to 1. Land EK, 2. Keep them for so long 3. Build the lounge and A380 facilities. I do find it odd that people criticise GLA for doing that but would crucify them if the business was given away to EDI.

WRT exclusivity deals - quite possibly GLA had one with EK that lasted all those years.

[bill]

[
Fully agree. I think it was a good and necessary piece of business for GLA to 1. Land EK, 2. Keep them for so long 3. Build the lounge and A380 facilities. I do find it odd that people criticise GLA for doing that but would crucify them if the business was given away to EDI.

WRT exclusivity deals - quite possibly GLA had one with EK that lasted all those years.

Agree fully with points 1 & 2 but totally disagree with 3 mate. EDI, for no viable financial outlay whatsoever have the same as us. A daily flight to DXB. In this regard, it doesn't matter that it's a T7 v's our A380. They have EK daily to DXB, same as us. That's what the paying public will see. They also have other ME airlines operating, so what I'm saying is, if there's an exclusivity deal still in place, once it expires court the other airlines and stop being EK driven.
The whole EK lounge/A380 airbridges was in my opinion a vanity project. We could have put the millions spent on this to better use. EK played the aviation version of the honey trap. We walked right into it with our flies undone.
And, breathe.....