VCE's Summer 2012 seasonal timetable was published at the weekend. This is usually the extremely accurate source when it comes to flight ops from the airport.
The schedule show the return of BACF's weekly Saturday charter flight from GLA.
The timetable also shows a 6 x Weekly service operating between STN and VCE starting the 17th September and running through until the end of the Summer 2012 schedule. The flights are showing as operating under the flight numbers 8479 & 8480. Both flight numbers are classed under BA's flight number list as used for BA Cityflyer scheduled services. Does anyone have know if in fact this will be a new destination from LCY and not STN.
Note: When flights are operated by a subsidiary or franchise carrier VCE airport use that carriers own 2 letter/digit IATA code. So flights are shown on the schedule as CJ8479/CJ8480.
Well, now, that is indeed intriguing. I'm not sure though that I can class this timetable as "extremely accurate" as it seems to have its zulu and local mixed up for many destinations - see for example VCE-HAM on the first page where the block time is 50 min northbound and 2 hr 40 southbound (bad Föhn forecast? ). The STNVCE implied block times seem similarly confused. So it may still be a work in progress.
VCE's Summer 2012 seasonal timetable was published at the weekend. This is usually the extremely accurate source when it comes to flight ops from the airport.
Venice Airport - Save S.p.A.
The schedule show the return of BACF's weekly Saturday charter flight from GLA.
The timetable also shows a 6 x Weekly service operating between STN and VCE starting the 17th September and running through until the end of the Summer 2012 schedule. The flights are showing as operating under the flight numbers 8479 & 8480. Both flight numbers are classed under BA's flight number list as used for BA Cityflyer scheduled services. Does anyone have know if in fact this will be a new destination from LCY and not STN.
14th Feb 2012 13:18
LCY it is. VCE LCY 6 x weekly starts 17th September on a E90. On the same day BACF will increase frequency on it's GLA route to up to 6 x Daily. The addition of another E90 to the fleet in September was also announced at the same time.
Flights now available on BA.com but very strangley the flight numbers are not starting following the same series as there existing services. BACF's flight numbers all start BA8xxx the ABZ will carry a flight number starting BA3xxx
Does anyone know why the change?..
Also flight are showing as operating on a E70 operating both C and Y cabins
It's going to be interesting to see the difference with the last time Aberdeen was served from London City, which was by Scot Airways quite some years ago, with a 31-seater Dornier where the loads were quite often down in single figures.
It's going to be interesting to see the difference with the last time Aberdeen was served from London City, which was by Scot Airways quite some years ago, with a 31-seater Dornier where the loads were quite often down in single figures.
BA has the benefit of being able to treat LCY as part of a broader picture. So for example if ABZ-LCY is complemented by a capacity reduction on ABZ-LHR, and/or if high-yield passengers seeking connections from ABZ to AMS/FRA/ZRH/JFK etc are preferentially routed via LCY, those loads might yet make it well into double figures.
One thing that is a little puzzling is the flight number range. Two hypotheses:
(a) the simple one: BACF has just run out of numbers in its existing range
(b) the conspiracy-theory one: this is not a normal BACF route, but some sort of tie-in with a future bmi regional.
On balance I vote for (a) in the absence of any evidence to the contrary!
Point to point traffic would be using LCY, connections would remain at LHR I think. Feeding long haul is the whole focus of the LHR operation whereas LCY is point to point with, I believe, no Flight Connections facility. One has to exit and re-check baggage and join the queue for departures.
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 25th Apr 2012 at 12:33.
A big chunk of ABZ traffic is oil connections on to IAH, DFW, LAS etc.
The ABZ service is very likely to be the end of CityJet's poor DND service over the past year or so - with so much chopoping and changing of schedule/aircraft type.
BACF's route dev dept seem to have been a very sharp bunch so far - so they will be launching this with confidence.
Point to point traffic would be using LCY, connections would remain at LHR I think. Feeding long haul is the whole focus of the LHR operation whereas LCY is point to point with, I believe, no Flight Connections facility. One has to exit and re-check baggage and join the queue for departures.
I agree up to a point (no pun intended). Yes, point-to-point is the main goal of LCY and that's what the large majority of passengers are there for, but I believe in recent years there has been a steady (if modest) increase in connecting traffic. For example, last year Cityjet introduced a "direct transfer facility" - perhaps just a fancy name for jumping the security queue, but it does include a transfer desk and a through-checked-bag capability. Given the highly directional and time-of-day-sensitive nature of traffic at LCY, I'd imagine anything which fills some seats on off-peak flights (e.g. connecting traffic) could be welcome.
I would tend to agree with connections via LCY, I dont think that you can say people who connect go via LHR.
Im fairly certain that people connect onto the BA1-4 services from EDI, GLA etc. I know that if BA ran domestic flights from NQY-LCY i would look at connecting at LCY if heading to NYC.
The one thing i would guess that would put people off would be the lack of a Galleries lounge.
I do think that BA Cityflyer will continue to expand at LCY, and i think that JER & NQY could be the next destinations, JER especially as BA already has a presence at JER, no need for lounge facilities, SSCI machines, handling contracts etc. Same as ABZ really
Im fairly certain that people connect onto the BA1-4 services from EDI, GLA etc. I know that if BA ran domestic flights from NQY-LCY i would look at connecting at LCY if heading to NYC.
It's not bookable on ba.com so unless there's a corporate deal behind the scenes then all JFK traffic goes through LHR. Remember if you are connecting you don't really want to get off the aircraft at Shannon as well as LCY, it's just too much hassle. United are on both GLA / EDI-EWR so no one is going to fly GLA/EDI-LCY-SNN-JFK to fly on an A318 unless they're mad like me....
I think NQY has really seen the peak of London traffic and flybe's LGW will be it for the years ahead. BA might try an off peak summer jolly but only if they think they won't make more nipping off to France or Spain, as to LCY-NQY year round, can't see it.
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 25th Apr 2012 at 16:03.
So does anyone think that Big BA might have some immediate plans for BACF ? new MD, first significant upper management change in 5 years. BACF always looks like its an airline waiting for a plan.
If BA CityFlyer are expanding, what do people think the chances are of starting a LCY-NCL route?
Zero, English domestics into London are dead and gone with a handful of exceptions due to APD and railway "improvements". flybe went into LGW-NCL and LBA and had to drop LBA. Eastern couldn't make NCL-LCY pay on a Jetstream 41 so BA aren't going to succeed on an ERJ-175.
I always thought that CityFlyer, although being a BAConnect spin off would be quite at home at Gatwick, the home of CityFlyer Express and where the RJ100s were delivered. Smaller aircraft on point to point works well at LCY, it might be the savious of a BA presence at LGW. However the cost base would need to be CityFlyer and not Mainline.
). The STNVCE implied block times seem similarly confused. So it may still be a work in progress.
