I consider it totally credible that BA are considering re-instating LHR-LBA. They have a large number of slots they need to protect at LHR and they need to do that in the way they consider will produce the best commercial results, given the constraints of those slots.
The period BA needs to protect will stretch far beyond 13 months. Let's not forget that a longhaul aircraft can only use one slot pair per day. and some slot pairs will be unsuitable for the required longhaul.routes. Planned deliveries of new longhaul aircraft are gradual, only a few extra airframes for 2013 . BA will not want to throw capacity at longhaul if it risks trashing their yields. Expansion will be measured and take place over many years.
BA may well take the view they have sufficient frequencies and capacity already on existing shorthaul routes. Some or all of BMI’s LHR-MAN slots could transfer straight across to LHR-LBA and larger aircraft deployed on LHR-MAN to compensate for a perceived capacity shortfall..
Then there is that BA statement in FT.com last week announcing the departure of Digby Jones due to possible conflicts of interest with his new post at Flybe:
“We’re keen to strengthen our regional network in the UK,” said a BA spokesman last week,referring to routes between London and the regions.
A misquote, or a U-turn ? My guess is that BA are looking hard at the commercial implications. Presumably there will be competing interests for resources within BA and I would not pretend to know the outcome.