GATWICK

[kcockayne]

Skipness is correct. Gatwick will never be an equivalent airport to Heathrow. Unless, you close down Heathrow & build the 3rd. Runway that it should have had - at Gatwick. & then you'd need a 4th. Runway at Gatwick !

[The96er]

Aviator have been appointed as the new ground-handling agent to British Airways at London Gatwick. This will be for Ramp, Operations and Dispatch services, effective from 9th November 2015.

Swissport didn't last long then. I wonder which station will be next. Menzies are under an improvement notice for the EDI/MAN/GLA contract I believe.

[True Blue]

I think we will just agree to disagree. There is no way that I believe any airline, faced with a decision which is expand into Lgw or lose out on a growing market will walk away from London and put additional capacity elsewhere.

Nor do I accept the figures being quoted as being the economic benefit to Britain. On far too many occasions in the past we have had these wonderful forecasts that have never come near the mark. Think about it, how could you forecast economic benefit maybe 30 years from now, in the tens or hundreds of billions.

If you guys are correct about the runway going to Lhr, I would also suggest that it carries risk for the likes of Ba and the other large carriers there. How will they feel if they are joined by new Lcc'c like Easyjet and Ryanair?

I suggest that as these two must soon be running out of decent options for expansion and getting into Lhr allows for a host of new opportunities. Over the next 10 years both will change, it is the natural order of maturing as a company. Ten years from now they could be offering connections and long haul. Note recent comments from Fr that they would like to offer connections for long haul.

Whichever airport gets the runway, it will bring changes, opportunities and risk for some.

TB

[Skipness One Echo]

There is no way that I believe any airline, faced with a decision which is expand into Lgw or lose out on a growing market will walk away from London and put additional capacity elsewhere.

OK, it's a case of market behaviour, it's worth trying to understand this as it drives the dynamics of the London airports. Let's take a real example, China Southern want to add capacity into London, they have ample capacity at AMS at a SKYTEAM hub, do they
a) Try Gatwick
b) Keep one flight at LHR and expand AMS as they can't get more LHR slots.

It's b) alas.

Now Air China tried LGW and walked away as soon as they got a second LHR flight. Korean Air did EXACTLY what you are thinking, put capacity into LGW and found (this should not have been a shock as this is what killed BA's hub without the hubbub) that premium passengers wouldn't touch Gatters if they could choose LHR. Hence LGW flights were pulled as they were badly underperforming relative to LHR. The "growing market" can be served in long haul much better via a partner hub than a direct LGW flight.

Let's name one single long haul network carrier looking to launch service from Gatwick currently? I can't think of any sadly.
Perhaps Air Canada Rouge, right market for them, point to point leisure against Air Transat. I look forward to seeing them but will customers choose to connect with them over Air Canada? Does it matter in that market as I bet they'll do rather well.
Sadly LGW actually just lost another one airline as Caribbean Airlines are pulling out as the B767s are going back at end of lease next spring.

You're right in a short haul sense, the LHR business case is predicated on long haul which is why hub capacity needs to be there and not at Gatwick where not one single airline has managed to build a sustainable and profitable hub. Gatwick is brilliant as point to point short haul airport, the North Terminal rebuild is impressive as it's optimised for easyJet, it is going to be the jewel in the network for the Orange guys. All modern and airbridges for most services most days with many more A320s / B737s along the pier as stands are built to accomodate two narrow bodies instead of one heavy. It's a really improved experience, for the market they're good at !!!!

If you guys are correct about the runway going to Lhr, I would also suggest that it carries risk for the likes of Ba and the other large carriers there. How will they feel if they are joined by new Lcc'c like Easyjet and Ryanair?

easyJet might do at LHR what they did to BA short haul at Gatters, BA would be very wary of EZY getting in. Ryanair don't want the hassle, even their new focus on larger airports doesn't favour heavily slot constrained airports, they even walked away from most non-Irish LGW routes.

[kcockayne]

it's not a question of anyone being right, & the runway going to Heathrow. It probably won't go anywhere !
Neither is it a question of airlines not being willing to use Gatwick (as opposed to Heathrow); although most long haul " prestigious" airlines would move to Heathrow as soon as the opportunity occurred.
Nor is it a question of being "anti-Gatwick". In my case I would love Gatwick to get another runway & lots of long haul services - because it would save me the trudge from there to Heathrow to connect !
It is simply that an extra runway at Gatwick might benefit Gatwick, in terms of more "bucket & spade" & European ex- pat routes but, otherwise, it will fail to attract any airlines from Heathrow &, if it does get " prestigious airlines " coming in with new long haul services, they will move to Heathrow if they get the chance.
On the other hand, a new runway at Heathrow will attract new long haul services by airlines who want to be there. It may also get new domestic services to connect with them.
" Prestigious airlines" won't move to Gatwick unless Heathrow is closed.

[Fairdealfrank]

High-end beach fleets

A friend of mine and his family living in Manchester are flying LGW-MCO this month and paying £1000 each rtn on BA. Asked why he is not using the VS 2 x daily 747 MAN-MCO he replied that the fare is £1600 rtn!!! That is certainly high-end leisure, even at BA's fares.

They would be lucky to even get seats ex MAN that`s why the fares are so high.

Ian

High season, what do you expect. No discounting in the school summer holidays!!

Hence there were at least 5 families on our BHX-JFK-MCO routing a couple of weeks ago with American Airlines! £500 return paid, VS/BA wanted £1000+ for non stop(from LGW or MAN)

Flights requiring a change of plane at a hub are usually cheaper than non-stop.

So as the market grows and airlines want to add capacity, what do they do. Lhr is full, we are told. To me, Lgw is a better bet than Stn, although Lgw is very busy as well.

Keep in mind this growing market, but the new runway goes to Lgw. What do the airlines that need to add capacity do? Walk away? Or the new ones with maybe new routes?

Yes, yields are higher at LHR than at LGW, they are also higher at AMS, CDG, FRA, MAD then at LGW. Look at the destinations available at these airports that are not available at LHR/LGW, particularly long haul.

If chasing yield that is not available because of a lack of capacity at LHR and the expense of slot acquisition, why would carriers not go LHR’s competitor airports? At least the expense of slot acquisition is avoided.

In my opinion, there is no way they will take that extra capacity to a continental airport. Away from one of the best markets there is.

Why? The evidence is all around us! Most longhaul use LGW as a "waiting room" for LHR.

Nor do I accept the figures being quoted as being the economic benefit to Britain. On far too many occasions in the past we have had these wonderful forecasts that have never come near the mark. Think about it, how could you forecast economic benefit maybe 30 years from now, in the tens or hundreds of billions.

If you guys are correct about the runway going to Lhr, I would also suggest that it carries risk for the likes of Ba and the other large carriers there. How will they feel if they are joined by new Lcc'c like Easyjet and Ryanair?

It’s about the LAST thirty years. A third rwy at LHR is about catch-up: a fourth rwy is about the future.

As for no-frills carriers, unlikely to see FR at LHR (the talk of providing connecting flights was for the non-existant longhaul at STN). As for U2, would expect a big VY presence at LHR to take it on, all speculation of course!

it's not a question of anyone being right, & the runway going to Heathrow. It probably won't go anywhere !

Regretably, this is probably a very accurate comment. Indecision, dithering and delay will strike again.

" Prestigious airlines" won't move to Gatwick unless Heathrow is closed.

LHR isn’t closing which is why Boris Island was a non-starter, so it’s a moot point and by no means guaranteed. LHR closure would be the gift that keeps on giving for AMS, CDG, FRA, MAD, etc..

[cornishsimon]

Hearing BA are to launch LGW-LIM next year. 3 weekly.
cs

[True Blue]

I am reading that Lim has been announced by BA from Lgw.

TB

[LGWAlan]

Wed/Fri/Sun in Amadeus - BA2239/38

Fri/Sun 1155-1830/2000-1420
Wed 1350-2025/2155-1615

[LadyL2013]

That's not going via SJO by any chance is it? Both launch on the same day.

[adfly]

Flight time of 12 hrs 30 would say otherwise, an interesting addition for BA at LGW, and not one that many people (including myself) would have foreseen.

[LadyL2013]

I guess that will be a big hit with the Gap Year crowd. Although that many a week, surprises me. I can't see them filling that many flights.

[wallp]

Wow, Lima - what a fantastic addition to the BA operation. Am I right in thinking that this route was once served from Gatwick in the B Cal days?

I wonder if BA might look at other South American routes from Gatwick too - perhaps Columbia, Chile?

[canberra97]

Wallpaper

British Airways have previously operated LGW to LIMA from 1987 upto until about 2001 with a short break in some years so this actually is a resumption of the route.

Although LGW to Lima was actually a route inherited by BA when they took over the South American routes from BCAL in 1983/4 and then operated from LHR until the time when BA had a second hub at LGW during Rod Eddingtons reign with all South American routes operating from the airport up until 2002.

Former BCAL destinations from GATWICK, although some were not taken on by BA when they took over BCAL flights to South America in 1982/3.

ARGENTINA
Buenos Aires

BRAZIL
Recife
Rio De Janeiro
Salvador de Bahia
São Paulo

CHILE
Santiago

COLOMBIA
Bogota

EQUADOR
Guayaquil
Quito

PERU
Lima

VENEZUELA
Caracas

[toledoashley]

Certainly from a retail point of view people are being more adventurous with their holiday time, not just the usual Caribbean, Indian Ocean - but combining more in their holiday.

There is certainly an emerging market for places like Costa Rica and Peru, and you could add Vietnam/Cambodia to that list as well.

[LadyL2013]

I'm certainly surprised it's taken this long for places like Costa Rica to get a direct flight, it's been a rapidly growing market for at least 5 years now. I have to give TOM praise for being the first to dip their feet in the water with various routes from LGW such as Liberia and Phuket.

[canberra97]

LadyL2013

You are aware that BA actually had direct flights from LGW to SJO Costa Rica from 2000 to 2001 but were dropped shortly after 9/11 so this is actually a resumption of the route.

Sean

[True Blue]

Been reading about the two new BA long haul routes out of Lgw on other forums. It is amazing the comments, that started almost immediately, wondering how quickly they will move to Lhr. Is it not possible for these people to think that maybe BA are quite happy for them to operate from Lgw, even for the long term? It seems that some are of the opinion that nothing is worthy if not operating from Lhr.

TB

[Skipness One Echo]

Right routes for Gatwick, no need to be at a constrained two runway LHR.

[kcockayne]

TrueBlue

I've been looking, but I can't find a single comment since the announcement of these two new routes that suggests that they would move to Heathrow.
where did you see these ?