new longhaul routes for BA LHR??
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
new longhaul routes for BA LHR??
Hi all,
Just wondering if anyone knows about any new routes that BA are considering for their longhaul operations?
Surprises me that BA don't fly to Kuala Lumpur or Seoul etc?
Anyone shed any light? Also heard a rumour they will be flying to Baghdad as of 2007. Have they flown there before?
Just wondering if anyone knows about any new routes that BA are considering for their longhaul operations?
Surprises me that BA don't fly to Kuala Lumpur or Seoul etc?
Anyone shed any light? Also heard a rumour they will be flying to Baghdad as of 2007. Have they flown there before?
A Runyonesque Character
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 74
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Also heard a rumour they will be flying to Baghdad as of 2007. Have they flown there before?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: scotland
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In relation to Kuala Lumpur here is the reasoning in a BA Press release from 11/10/2000 cant link to story im afraid.
Im sure BA did serve Seoul at one point but dont know why the came of the route, most likely cost cutting.
The same is true of the Taipei route under British Asia Airways title and the Manila route as BA had released this in December 2001.
From Heathrow, British Airways will suspend all services to Kuala Lumpur from the start of next summer season, because of the poor commercial performance of the route. It will offer customers connections to Malaysia over Singapore and maintain a sales presence in the country.
The same is true of the Taipei route under British Asia Airways title and the Manila route as BA had released this in December 2001.
British Airways today announced that it will be suspending its services from Hong Kong to Manila and Taipei from 4th March 2002. The suspension of these routes represents part of a series of measures which have been taken by British Airways to address the downturn in the airline industry in recent months and is in line with the airline’s strategy of reducing capacity.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: brighton
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA holds the rights to fly to Baghdad from London, the service was suspended due to the Gulf War and I think their was a BA 747 was destroyed while on the ground in Kuwait !
However, have heard BA looking at alot of Routes to add to its network both on LH and SH.
However, have heard BA looking at alot of Routes to add to its network both on LH and SH.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA don't fly to KL for two reasons:
1) KLIA has enormous landing fees which strip the profitability out of the route.
2) MAS, as the state run airline, dump seats on the market at below costs price so BA can't compete. Note MAS don't pay landing fees at KLIA.
1) KLIA has enormous landing fees which strip the profitability out of the route.
2) MAS, as the state run airline, dump seats on the market at below costs price so BA can't compete. Note MAS don't pay landing fees at KLIA.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"1) KLIA has enormous landing fees which strip the profitability out of the route."
You are right about MH, but KUL now has lowered its landing fees considerably to attract more foreign carriers. KUL doesn't have the amount of foreign carriers as its near rival, Singapore.
Compared to AFKL/LH, BA serves not as many destinations. CAN,KUL,ICN,NGO,KIX etc!
You are right about MH, but KUL now has lowered its landing fees considerably to attract more foreign carriers. KUL doesn't have the amount of foreign carriers as its near rival, Singapore.
Compared to AFKL/LH, BA serves not as many destinations. CAN,KUL,ICN,NGO,KIX etc!
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Part of the reason for that is BA is slot limited at its home base unlike AF/LH, so there are only a finite number offlights which can be operated per day. The accountants have worked out that we can make moer money from those slots by offering mulitple flights per day to a narrower range of destinations than single flights per day to a broader range. I'd certainly like to see a few more destinations but the immediate outlook is 3xHKG, 7xJFK, 3xLAX, 2xJNB, 2xCPT, 2xSIN etc etc.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Dublin
Posts: 1,806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have heard rumour....ONLY RUMOUR that KL could be back on the cards in the not too distance future. I have also heard that New Zealand is being looked at. But we must remember that BA just dont have the aircraft at the moment to be planning any major routes!!! Shanghai has some tricky scheduling involved in order to get an aircraft and despite a number of routes in the last year being suspended, the aircraft are being used to increase frequencies elsewhere!
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KUL
Have never been to KUL (dad born there), but from an Architectural point of view it looks truly impressive. Isn't the terminal so vast that it has its own mini jungle in the centre?
I don't know if anyone's ever plotted a relationship between grandiose Architecture and commercial failure, but it looks like KUL is a prime case!
And apparently (according to Wikipedia) local residents have stopped the old Subang from being re-opened as a no frills hub. Glad to see nimbyism in bed with vested monopoly interests isn't just a British phenomenon, but when even BA are reluctant to serve the so-called "proper" airport in a city, it really suggests that the planners have shafted things up big time.
I'm sure Eden Project International is a very good place to spend a few hours on the way to Oz, but I can't see any logic in the bean counters wanting to go there when the odds are so stacked up against them at both ends.
I don't know if anyone's ever plotted a relationship between grandiose Architecture and commercial failure, but it looks like KUL is a prime case!
And apparently (according to Wikipedia) local residents have stopped the old Subang from being re-opened as a no frills hub. Glad to see nimbyism in bed with vested monopoly interests isn't just a British phenomenon, but when even BA are reluctant to serve the so-called "proper" airport in a city, it really suggests that the planners have shafted things up big time.
I'm sure Eden Project International is a very good place to spend a few hours on the way to Oz, but I can't see any logic in the bean counters wanting to go there when the odds are so stacked up against them at both ends.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Too far from the equator
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KLIA ahead of its time but....
KLIA was built at a time when the Malaysian economy was doing its tiger thing in the mid-90's , was aimed at being ready for the Commonwealth Games in 98 and then suffered some bad luck. The economic downturn , SARS , 9/11 , Iraq etc etc have all conspired to make it appear a white elephant.
It has had to offer lower/zero landing fees to attract back some of the airlines who left . Part of the problem is that MAS have so undercut others airfares ( as well as provided one of the great cabin standards in all classes) that they have chased away a lot of the competition that the airport needs.
I have just had the enjoyable experience of working out of KLIA for a few months and was overly impressed by the airport , its infrastructure and the great railway system connecting it to the city. To sweeten the decision to keep the locos at KLIA ( they wanted to go back to Subang ) they are building a dedicated terminal for them.
The only drawback is that ATC is way behind the pace needed for an airport this size to truly develop properly. The gap between takeoffs , even on a VMC day and with a dedicated runway , is very deflating . Approaches are not much better . Wo betide you if you get within 8 miles of the one ahead.
If they can sort the ATC out , then Malaysia have a perfect set-up for the years ahead , when the economy will surely revive , the visitors will return , and they will not have to spend another cent on it , apart from add the odd runway/terminal as needed.
Can't wait to get back.
It has had to offer lower/zero landing fees to attract back some of the airlines who left . Part of the problem is that MAS have so undercut others airfares ( as well as provided one of the great cabin standards in all classes) that they have chased away a lot of the competition that the airport needs.
I have just had the enjoyable experience of working out of KLIA for a few months and was overly impressed by the airport , its infrastructure and the great railway system connecting it to the city. To sweeten the decision to keep the locos at KLIA ( they wanted to go back to Subang ) they are building a dedicated terminal for them.
The only drawback is that ATC is way behind the pace needed for an airport this size to truly develop properly. The gap between takeoffs , even on a VMC day and with a dedicated runway , is very deflating . Approaches are not much better . Wo betide you if you get within 8 miles of the one ahead.
If they can sort the ATC out , then Malaysia have a perfect set-up for the years ahead , when the economy will surely revive , the visitors will return , and they will not have to spend another cent on it , apart from add the odd runway/terminal as needed.
Can't wait to get back.
