MANCHESTER
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Delta to fly to JFK
Havent seen it mentioned here but from May 2006 Delta will fly a 767-400 to JFK.
DL154 ETA 0830; DL155 ETD 1030 [Mon-Sun]
What do pepople think of this?
Think that Conintental will reintroduce their second service next summer?
Or perhaps this really will push BA out of the JFK route for good?
DL154 ETA 0830; DL155 ETD 1030 [Mon-Sun]
What do pepople think of this?
Think that Conintental will reintroduce their second service next summer?
Or perhaps this really will push BA out of the JFK route for good?
Page 2 of this thread Johnny.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why isnt BA big at man, bhx and gla? both long-haul and european? there are such large operations at us regions with the major (traditional) carriers- i dont understand why BA is almost non-existant at our own regional airports-surely we have enough passenger demand to support it?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: manchester
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd love for BA to operate flights to lax and bkk etc from MAN but they dont. main reason being as had been said on other posts on this site. London does not have a big enough catchment area for all of ba's flights so they have shuttles connecting in. BA have some sort of idea that lh out of anywhere other than lon is a bad idea which is why the only lh outside of lon in man0jfk which is always under threat of being cut.
Watch this space.....Long Haul B757s from the regions.
(Sorry Dr I, I had to do it!)
(Sorry Dr I, I had to do it!)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not as if they didn't try. BA flew to JFK with an L1011 from Glasgow, then a 763, moved it to Newark, back to JFK, changed it to a 757, extended it to Boston, dropped Boston, moved back to a 763 summer only and then gave up. Basically every pax on the Glasgow flight was potentially one less ona London service. Go where the money is chaps.
Now if Loganair bought a 767 on the BA franchise.....
Now if Loganair bought a 767 on the BA franchise.....
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The truth is that sadly the mere mortals that fill up the back of the plane in economy just don;t make the airlines any money on long haul routes, What BA would beed is a full Business cabin everyday, and from MAnchester that won;t happen as he area is not rich enough. Lufthansa does long haul from DUS and MUC because these are huge manufacturing, wealthy areas of Germany. Unfortunately, we are now a service sector ecenomy in the North and that doesnt equal high business class yields.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Stockport
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to work in Business travel and we had plenty of pax who were willing to pay the money but wanted to fly British Airways because of their frequent flyer
and corporate discounts, but were not happy with the state of the B767 on New York or lack of destinations so guess what
they got the good ole shuttle to Heathrow
G-I-B
and corporate discounts, but were not happy with the state of the B767 on New York or lack of destinations so guess what
they got the good ole shuttle to Heathrow
G-I-B
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True - it was BA trying to persuade their own pax to stop shuttling that killed the Glasgow-JFK run. They knew the demand was their becasue they were still flying with BA - through London!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hmm Vuelo
Not convinced with your argument there although there is an element of truth in it.
But did you know that the NW of England (which is not the only part of MAN's catchment area) has a GDP that is greater than that of Denmark, Portugal or Greece to name a few? Not that poor! All relative really. Compare the long haul offerings from Copenhagen, Lisbon or Athens.
As GIB has pointed out, there are plenty of people in the MAN catchment area who are prepared to shell out for high quality services (ie C-Class) - I'm one of them for instance, but ONLY if it's value for money. I'm afraid the BA 767 that ops the NY service is old hat (and no offence to the flt crew who are invariably magnificent).
People tend to vote with their feet in a free market.
Cheers
Not convinced with your argument there although there is an element of truth in it.
But did you know that the NW of England (which is not the only part of MAN's catchment area) has a GDP that is greater than that of Denmark, Portugal or Greece to name a few? Not that poor! All relative really. Compare the long haul offerings from Copenhagen, Lisbon or Athens.
As GIB has pointed out, there are plenty of people in the MAN catchment area who are prepared to shell out for high quality services (ie C-Class) - I'm one of them for instance, but ONLY if it's value for money. I'm afraid the BA 767 that ops the NY service is old hat (and no offence to the flt crew who are invariably magnificent).
People tend to vote with their feet in a free market.
Cheers
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caslance
Ah yes Caslance they do for the moment, but I have it on good authority that come December 1st, they revert to a single daily service, albeit with a larger aircraft ( B.767-400), for the rest of the winter programme. So the question remains, will they re-introduce the second service? We'll just have to wait and see!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Stockport
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The B757 have the same seating as B767
but a lot less cargo and this year the airport authority managed to get Continental to change from 2 B757 to a mix of B757/B767, therefore next year I would think Delta if they get their act together stand a very good chance of picking up a lot of cargo due to their conections at JFK and a large cargo capacity on their B767-400
G-I-B
but a lot less cargo and this year the airport authority managed to get Continental to change from 2 B757 to a mix of B757/B767, therefore next year I would think Delta if they get their act together stand a very good chance of picking up a lot of cargo due to their conections at JFK and a large cargo capacity on their B767-400
G-I-B
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Continental were to put 2 x 757's on the route they can kiss goodbye to most cargo bookings as the 75's have a cargo uplift of a Vauxhall Astra Van (and that is probably being mean to Astra Van's).
They will no doubt put 1 x 757 and 1 x 767 as per this year, otherwise they can kiss goodbye to the cargo revenue .
Rob
They will no doubt put 1 x 757 and 1 x 767 as per this year, otherwise they can kiss goodbye to the cargo revenue .
Rob
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: EGCC
Age: 74
Posts: 979
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could not agree with you more with regards to Continental - they would be shooting themselves in the foot if they were to move to an all B757 programme.
You have to remember that the plans for summer 2005 was for 2 B757s, but as has been said the airport authority appears to have drawn their attention to the error of their ways. Hopefully the same will happen for next year, once the schedules have been tweeked.
Now to passenger figures. It is good to see from the airport's website that terminal passengers were up 5.26pc to 2,047,535 for October. The strongest growing sector was scheduled International traffic at 16.48pc and domestic at 3.7pc (will we finally see a month were the domestic percentage increase in passengers will the larger than the increase in movements - ie the loadfactors get better?).
By the way, the increases at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted for the same month were -0.08, +2.5, +0.6 respectively, so Manchester certainly appears to have had a good throughput.
Scottie Dog
You have to remember that the plans for summer 2005 was for 2 B757s, but as has been said the airport authority appears to have drawn their attention to the error of their ways. Hopefully the same will happen for next year, once the schedules have been tweeked.
Now to passenger figures. It is good to see from the airport's website that terminal passengers were up 5.26pc to 2,047,535 for October. The strongest growing sector was scheduled International traffic at 16.48pc and domestic at 3.7pc (will we finally see a month were the domestic percentage increase in passengers will the larger than the increase in movements - ie the loadfactors get better?).
By the way, the increases at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted for the same month were -0.08, +2.5, +0.6 respectively, so Manchester certainly appears to have had a good throughput.
Scottie Dog
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
