EDINBURGH
BA still cancelling Scotland flights tonight
My understanding is that it's BA's policy that whenever there is any disruption to the schedule it is the domestic services which get pulled first - this is to allow them to try and keep the rest of the schedule going.
Their reasoning is that it is easier to find alternatives modes of transport for domestic flights - GLA/EDI (and MAN) are lucky(!) that they have the BD option, unlike here at NCL.
Their reasoning is that it is easier to find alternatives modes of transport for domestic flights - GLA/EDI (and MAN) are lucky(!) that they have the BD option, unlike here at NCL.
Oh I and I am sure a few others understand the policy only too well (does not mean to say we have to agree with it) - hence the reason we fly BD and for also for me EasyJet down to Gib rather than BA.....because BA cannot be trusted to operate...and as I havementioned previously it can - on many an ocassion without booking well in advance cost a significant number of UK pounds for LHR - EDI or GLA. Dont know why they just dont pull from the route totally....mind you that will probably come.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dont know why they just dont pull from the route totally....mind you that will probably come.
Err, maybe because there's a lot of demand on that route and BA make a fair amount of money out of it?Quite understand your decision to fly other airlines rather than risk BA cancelling, but you must admit the reason BA do cancel domestics first is not out of some sort of spite towards Northerners but because operationally it is the most sensible thing to do when they have to cancel some LHR services.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Prestwick, Scotland
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CC
Its a very easy policy to grasp. Like before Christmas the tale of passengers being mucked about at T5 for three hours collecting their baggage in groups of 6 then being bussed north. What's that ? 10 hours to EDI or GLA ? After arriving longhaul ? And paying whatever ?
What you may not be able to grasp is that BA operates a hub at LHR. T5 does not exist for the sole purpose of transporting Londoners, or does it ? Hub and spoke. The spokes should drive the volume, helping fill all those big 747's that can't be flown from the regions. (They used to.)
So, it's simple. Those from the regions should use other airlines and airports. eg from GLA, to AMS, Dubai, Newark. Result, the spokes feed less, the 747's carry less, and the operation shrinks. The shuttle operation is a shadow of it's onetime self, so the feed must be well down.
But that's OK, because it's BA's business model to render the domestic flights unreliable. The pity is, BA removes itself from the choice we the Customers have.
Lastly, this carry-on only really seems to have manifested itself over the last two winters. Previously when the shuttle was a prime operation, the diverted passengers to GLA/EDI/PIK we sent south on shuttles. So there has been a complete change of model - and the fundamental appears to be that T5 has not enough parking stands. The 777's diverted to PIK and GLA this past week have terminated here, with pax overnighting in hotels. Not because LHR is closed - other airlines were still landing. Because BA could not park aircraft. In these circumstances do they even try to park at T1, T2 ramps, T3, T4 and the cargo ramps ? What they do do is divert people north who want to be in LHR, and cancel flights north for people to do not want to be in LHR ! BA clearly need to sort out their winter operation at LHR, before their onetime Customers do it for them. And volume at LHR cannot be that different to two years and more ago - if anything volume should be down.
Its a very easy policy to grasp. Like before Christmas the tale of passengers being mucked about at T5 for three hours collecting their baggage in groups of 6 then being bussed north. What's that ? 10 hours to EDI or GLA ? After arriving longhaul ? And paying whatever ?
What you may not be able to grasp is that BA operates a hub at LHR. T5 does not exist for the sole purpose of transporting Londoners, or does it ? Hub and spoke. The spokes should drive the volume, helping fill all those big 747's that can't be flown from the regions. (They used to.)
So, it's simple. Those from the regions should use other airlines and airports. eg from GLA, to AMS, Dubai, Newark. Result, the spokes feed less, the 747's carry less, and the operation shrinks. The shuttle operation is a shadow of it's onetime self, so the feed must be well down.
But that's OK, because it's BA's business model to render the domestic flights unreliable. The pity is, BA removes itself from the choice we the Customers have.
Lastly, this carry-on only really seems to have manifested itself over the last two winters. Previously when the shuttle was a prime operation, the diverted passengers to GLA/EDI/PIK we sent south on shuttles. So there has been a complete change of model - and the fundamental appears to be that T5 has not enough parking stands. The 777's diverted to PIK and GLA this past week have terminated here, with pax overnighting in hotels. Not because LHR is closed - other airlines were still landing. Because BA could not park aircraft. In these circumstances do they even try to park at T1, T2 ramps, T3, T4 and the cargo ramps ? What they do do is divert people north who want to be in LHR, and cancel flights north for people to do not want to be in LHR ! BA clearly need to sort out their winter operation at LHR, before their onetime Customers do it for them. And volume at LHR cannot be that different to two years and more ago - if anything volume should be down.
Very well said PIK. Particularly when many pax have actually come in or are going long haul anyhow via LHR.
In fact Lufthansa were seen during the past couple of weeks with A340 and 747? on the Frankfurt route helping to cut down the number of pax held up at LHR when the shorthaul flights were cancelled. Indeed in the past BA have also utilised larger aircraft to GLA and EDI when there had been a cancellation run - albeit as pointed out when the shuttle service was actually a hourly shuttle service. Obviously though - now we can just take the train (journey into city centre - do BA put us on the LHR Express express to Paddington (more likely the connect) and then the tube or do they bus pax to Euston and then endure the train ride......yes we all fully understand the policy of BA....
In fact Lufthansa were seen during the past couple of weeks with A340 and 747? on the Frankfurt route helping to cut down the number of pax held up at LHR when the shorthaul flights were cancelled. Indeed in the past BA have also utilised larger aircraft to GLA and EDI when there had been a cancellation run - albeit as pointed out when the shuttle service was actually a hourly shuttle service. Obviously though - now we can just take the train (journey into city centre - do BA put us on the LHR Express express to Paddington (more likely the connect) and then the tube or do they bus pax to Euston and then endure the train ride......yes we all fully understand the policy of BA....
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When complaining about the crap service from BA on the shuttle there's a few things to bear in mind. The London market has changed massively since the days of 12 flights a day at EDI. Indeed in 1990 GLA saw 14 B757s on a weekday. Then came the locos and down came the price. So no backup aircraft and fewer pax. There is no room at LHR on a good day! So come the snow no chance. Were pax not offered a LCY or LGW option to get home? Indeed do BMI not carry the displaced BA pax hence another reason to go and fly.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA Cancel of Domestics
I don't know why people think it is sensible to cancel GLA/EDI/MAN.
London to Brussels : 2 Hours with Eurostar (Save their own recent problems)
London to Paris : 2.5 hours apprx Eurostar
London To Edinburgh by train: 4.5 hours !
London to Brussels : 2 Hours with Eurostar (Save their own recent problems)
London to Paris : 2.5 hours apprx Eurostar
London To Edinburgh by train: 4.5 hours !
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North of Hadrian's Wall
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's call a spade a spade here. BA don't care a stuff about anything outside London. It's high time somebody took them to court under trades descriptions act for using the term "British" in their name. Their attitude to Scotland in particular has been all too clear for years. They never put any effort into direct services, and more recently pulled out from manning their own stations, closed the Glasgow crew base, and ended the franchise agreement with Loganair. I'd say "good riddance London Airways" if they did pull out altogether and leave the route for someone else to develop.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
theredbaron you clearly have no commercial know how. A Hell of a lot of effort went into making BA services run outside of London for years, however due to the unionised and remarkably high cost base, they couldn't make it pay then, and they have even less chance now. GLA-JFK never made money as the business class punters preffered to be booked over LHR !
A lot of moneyhas been lost over the years in UK regional flying within BA. BHX, MAN, GLA and EDI were not cash cows.
There was no prospect of any significant return on capital investment which is why they used the old BAC111s and B737-200 ex LHR hand me downs for so many years.
The new lithe and nimble competitors like easyJet don't have in house handling staff at bases, they use handling agents as is the industry norm going forward. No pensions or militant unions to worry about there!
BA are not some flag carrier on an emotional journey to care about Scotland. They serve all three of their remaining bases from GLA and EDI and people have the choice to use the hub at LHR T5 or use the many other choices from Scotland. Let's be real, Emirates is a much better option for many people.
This is the kind of emotionally charged nonsense should be left in the student union, presumably in the "soon to be Republic of Scotland" you will be building!
A lot of moneyhas been lost over the years in UK regional flying within BA. BHX, MAN, GLA and EDI were not cash cows.
There was no prospect of any significant return on capital investment which is why they used the old BAC111s and B737-200 ex LHR hand me downs for so many years.
The new lithe and nimble competitors like easyJet don't have in house handling staff at bases, they use handling agents as is the industry norm going forward. No pensions or militant unions to worry about there!
BA are not some flag carrier on an emotional journey to care about Scotland. They serve all three of their remaining bases from GLA and EDI and people have the choice to use the hub at LHR T5 or use the many other choices from Scotland. Let's be real, Emirates is a much better option for many people.
It's high time somebody took them to court under trades descriptions act for using the term "British" in their name. Their attitude to Scotland in particular has been all too clear for years.
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 19th Jan 2010 at 12:38.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North of Hadrian's Wall
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skipness: I worked for many years in close partnership with BA and know first hand what their senior management's attitude was towards regional operations. The GLA-JFK service was left to the regional management to manage and market - i.e. well intentioned people but with zero experience of such an operation. There were powerful figures down south who eagerly awaited the day when they could gleefully tell Glasgow "you've failed". If the service had been properly marketed there is no doubt in my mind that it would have succeeded, just as Continental's has from both GLA and EDI. And just look at the other successful routes out of Edinburgh being flown by foreign full-service carriers (eg AF,LH,KL,SK) - where is "our" flag carrier? .
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 a flag carrier and hasn't been since 1987 when it was privatised.
Each "flag carrier" flies to it's hub from EDI, including BA. The airlines mentioned have similar business models, regional flying point to point in Europe is a loco segment, spoke to hub a legacy segment.
BA fly EDI spoke to LHR hub, as do LH EDI-FRA, AF EDI-CDG, KL EDI-AMS, and SK EDI-CPH through BMI. They feed traffic to the continental hub, if BA flew to any of these cities they would be feeding nothing and operating against a dominant competitor. With the locos taking the cheap fares and the competitor taking the connecting traffic there is not enough left to make a sustainable business case for BA.
I agree about the management split though as GLA-JFK passengers were being siphoned off existing Scotland-LHR-JFK which London management were not happy about even then. I can understand why, if disagree with their logic.
And just look at the other successful routes out of Edinburgh being flown by foreign full-service carriers (eg AF,LH,KL,SK) - where is "our" flag carrier? .
BA fly EDI spoke to LHR hub, as do LH EDI-FRA, AF EDI-CDG, KL EDI-AMS, and SK EDI-CPH through BMI. They feed traffic to the continental hub, if BA flew to any of these cities they would be feeding nothing and operating against a dominant competitor. With the locos taking the cheap fares and the competitor taking the connecting traffic there is not enough left to make a sustainable business case for BA.
I agree about the management split though as GLA-JFK passengers were being siphoned off existing Scotland-LHR-JFK which London management were not happy about even then. I can understand why, if disagree with their logic.
Using the same logic then - are we saying that BA who feed a significant number of flights from/to Heathrow as the "flag carrier" to the near continent are, on the whole, feeding europeans into Heathrow for onward flights around the world thereby poaching the passengers of the major European airlines of their own country, leaving such airlines full of Scottish flyers feeding in from Glasgow and Edinburgh......phew...what a complicated world of commerce aviation is!
Nivsy
Nivsy
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How come is it that scotland cant sustain airline or have a national flag carrier of its own we have seen so many scottish airlines come go out over the years.
with a population of 5m+ and more if you could attract people from northen england and connecting passangers
with a population of 5m+ and more if you could attract people from northen england and connecting passangers