GATWICK
OK, joking aside, according to LGW's own figures just over 4,000 households could qualify for this scheme.
£4m pa for the foreseeable future would be a pretty good investment from Gatwick's point of view, if it smoothed the way towards getting their second runway.
£4m pa for the foreseeable future would be a pretty good investment from Gatwick's point of view, if it smoothed the way towards getting their second runway.
Bet he is not the only one thinking like that.
racedo £15k isn't that much when you consider the possible reduction in house values from noise "blight".
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZB/TCX/TOM Long Haul
It is interesting to see how small the ZB and TCX long haul operations have become from LGW this summer, although I realise the former had cut down on long haul a few years back. For a typical week in June/July the schedules are like this:
ZB/MON -
SFB - 2 weekly
TAB - 1 weekly
TCX -
CUN - 2 weekly
HOG - 1 weekly
Admittedly there are a few more flights in the winter with TCX but just 3 weekly flights must be one of their smallest long haul schedules in a very long time from LGW. Their focus on MAN for long haul is quite clear, as there are ~17 weekly flights from there! Meanwhile MON/ZB only have 2 weekly flights to SFB from MAN.
To compare with the above this is Thomson's schedule ex. LGW for a similar week.
AUA - 1 weekly
CUN - 4 weekly
MBA - 1 weekly
MBJ - 2 weekly
MRU - 1 weekly
POP - 1 weekly
PUJ - 2 weekly
PVR - 1 weekly
SFB - 2 weekly
So it seems not all of the charters (yes I know ZB/MON have moved away from that model) have shrunk , although it is interesting to see how routes like SFB have suffered frequency wise against the competition - just 2 flights per week each from TOM/ZB while BA/VS offer 13 each!
ZB/MON -
SFB - 2 weekly
TAB - 1 weekly
TCX -
CUN - 2 weekly
HOG - 1 weekly
Admittedly there are a few more flights in the winter with TCX but just 3 weekly flights must be one of their smallest long haul schedules in a very long time from LGW. Their focus on MAN for long haul is quite clear, as there are ~17 weekly flights from there! Meanwhile MON/ZB only have 2 weekly flights to SFB from MAN.
To compare with the above this is Thomson's schedule ex. LGW for a similar week.
AUA - 1 weekly
CUN - 4 weekly
MBA - 1 weekly
MBJ - 2 weekly
MRU - 1 weekly
POP - 1 weekly
PUJ - 2 weekly
PVR - 1 weekly
SFB - 2 weekly
So it seems not all of the charters (yes I know ZB/MON have moved away from that model) have shrunk , although it is interesting to see how routes like SFB have suffered frequency wise against the competition - just 2 flights per week each from TOM/ZB while BA/VS offer 13 each!
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: London
Posts: 837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Long haul
Does anyone know how the new Norwegian long haul routes are selling, with just a few months until the first flights take to the air?
With a seemingly improving economic outlook, could BA eventually respond with some additional long haul capacity at LGW; I wondered if in time the 787 could join their LGW long haul fleet & potentially open up routes that might otherwise not work?
With a seemingly improving economic outlook, could BA eventually respond with some additional long haul capacity at LGW; I wondered if in time the 787 could join their LGW long haul fleet & potentially open up routes that might otherwise not work?
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Norwegian - Judging by the fact that their fares are only a little below BA/Virgin currently I'd say they are probably selling well, although please do not quote me on this. I cannot see why they wouldn't be, as Norwegian offer a good product and price, and more importantly they have only launched the flights with quite low frequencies. This technique seems to have worked rather well on their med routes launched last year, so it would be nice to see lightening strike twice!
As for BA it was rumoured that the 12 787-10's on order were destined to replace the LGW based 772's. This would be an increase of ~2 aircraft compared to the current fleet, plus I'd imagine there might be a few more seats on each of these. What would happen with the 4 class routes I'm not sure, to have mixed configurations in a fleet of 12 seems a little impractical. I'd imagine the most likely solution would be to also have a couple of 4 class 789's for BGI/BDA and any other routes that may have some demand for first in the future.
As for BA it was rumoured that the 12 787-10's on order were destined to replace the LGW based 772's. This would be an increase of ~2 aircraft compared to the current fleet, plus I'd imagine there might be a few more seats on each of these. What would happen with the 4 class routes I'm not sure, to have mixed configurations in a fleet of 12 seems a little impractical. I'd imagine the most likely solution would be to also have a couple of 4 class 789's for BGI/BDA and any other routes that may have some demand for first in the future.
Having seen the plans for new runway and terminal I am wondering what they will call the new terminal.
They already have North and South Terminals and as new will be South of South Terminal will it be known as the "Deep South Terminal" or the "Beautiful South Terminal"
They already have North and South Terminals and as new will be South of South Terminal will it be known as the "Deep South Terminal" or the "Beautiful South Terminal"
Terminals
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having seen the plans for new runway and terminal I am wondering what they will call the new terminal.
They already have North and South Terminals and as new will be South of South Terminal will it be known as the "Deep South Terminal" or the "Beautiful South Terminal"
They already have North and South Terminals and as new will be South of South Terminal will it be known as the "Deep South Terminal" or the "Beautiful South Terminal"
Never understood why the east terminal is called "south".
today's "Times" says that BA are to be evicted from the N terminal back to the South and EasyJet & Virgin will replace them
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: London
Posts: 837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does make sense to try and find a way to accommodate all easyJet flights in one terminal but the South Terminal has always had something of an image problem in comparison to the North so BA might not be too happy if they're forced to move?
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: London Under EGLL(LHR) 27R ILS
Age: 31
Posts: 500
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently it's a done deal, all easyJet ops at LGW will be from North Terminal. I so wonder if BA have accepted the move to South Terminal. 😕
Seems such a shame considering the investment made to the new check in area!
Seems such a shame considering the investment made to the new check in area!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: On the road
Posts: 914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was under the impression that it would be impossible to fit all Easy ops into either terminal. For the passenger arriving by train the South terminal is actually much better.