GATWICK

[PAXboy]

LHR is full. Have you:

• sat in the taxy queue for departure for 45 minutes? (engines running)
• been onboard when a slot has been missed?
• arrived on time and then been in the stack for 20 minutes?
• arrived at the allocated gate but it's still full and there is no other gate to send you to?
• waited for immigation?
• waited for bag handling?

These are but a few ways that LHR has dealt with the problem. If they had to prevent all routine inbound holding and outbound taxy delays? Then count how many a/c they can handle.

Bear in mind that, in some ways, LHR is rather like the NHS. The NHS broke ten years ago but is kept going by staff working above and beyond and without overtime. LHR is kept working because they have bent all the rules and restrictions and enough clients STILL want them enough to pay through the nose. Both LHR and the NHS are providing a service long after most others would have ground to a halt.

LGW (and I'm not anti) has benefitted by having flights taken away from it that has allowed more new clients to come in and keep it busy.

[Itchin McCrevis]

that is the PR spin I have been hearing for years. Maybe I am completely stupid and have got it all wrong

Oh come we know you are neither stupid or gulible enough to take PR soundbites at face value - everyone knows the term "full" in this context is not an absolute, it is a relative - Air Transport in the UK is growing by around 6%, Heathrow is only managing 1-2% - so it is "full" in the sense that it can't keep pace with market growth any more. The Norwegian case you quote is merely one example of other airports taking up the 4-5% diiferential which would be at Heathrow if it had the option.

With a few tweaks here and there the wit of man is never beyond wringing out the odd extra slot or increment of capacity every year - a percentage of which has to go first to new entrants under slot allocation rules thus allowing in the occasional (low frequency) Vietnam's and Garuda's . Failing that it is still possible to buy your way in to Heathrow under slot trading rules if you have the cash.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

continuing basis to take services from Lgw.

The decision is taken by the operator who finds LHR a more profitable operation than LGW in this market. It's not a LGW service by right stolen by another business, it's a London route choosing an airpoert that fits it's business model better, with GA and VN due to alliance connectivity at T4, albeit limited.

this must be starting to have an effect on lost revenue to the big 3 across the Atlantic and their cosy arrangement to try and funnel us all through high fares Lhr.

One of the main complaints on the Manchester thread, and it's a good point is this. MAN cannot compete with LHR for point to point long haul as LHR keeps siphoning off traffic on cheaper connections than MAN's direct can offer. This is because, e.g. LHR-NYC has so much frequency and capacity that the airlines are effectively capacity dumping Economy seats. Now, both of these cannot be true at the same time. It's great that Norwegian are offering a good deal in the market, but it's not that much cheaper than some of the other deals on offer.

btw who are the big three?
North American / Caribbean Transatlantic Deps LHR 2015S
AC 11 daily
DL 12 daily + VS 17 daily = 29 daily
UA 17 daily
AA 17 daily + BA 49 daily = 66 daily

[True Blue]

I refer to the alliances as opposed to individual airlines. I am not suggesting that Norwegian are much or any cheaper, rather that this is revenue that would have hit the bank accounts of the alliance airlines that is not now doing so. In many cases, flying to Lhr was the only option, e.g. London - Boston. Next year, some of those pax will use Lgw. And that revenue erosion will get worse if Norwegian starts to introduce more direct flights from local airports. I know that a hub system is marketed as a great benefit to us, but is a far bigger benefit to the airlines themselves. They must be starting to wonder about revenue erosion.

[Seljuk22]

Norwegian will launch Boston on 27th March (instead of mid May) and will fly 5 times a week (original planned 4 times a week).

[Fairdealfrank]

Don't forget that, to some extent, new carriers entering the market and offering lower fares does generate new business from pax who would not have considered doing the journeys at the higher fares charged by the legacies. U2 and FR are classic examples of this.

BTW, be under no illusion that LHR is full and has been for many years!

[True Blue]

Cathy return to Lgw

So Cathay are returning to Lgw from September 2016, 4 times a week with the A350.


Cathay Pacific?s new Gatwick service to offer more choice and flexibility for London travel

[Itchin McCrevis]

So Cathay are returning to Lgw from September 2016, 4 times a week with the A350.

HKG is a big market so it's a sure bet that LGW will have enough local demand to support a service. That still makes it 5 x 777's from LHR daily versus 0.6 x 350's daily (and that's just Cathay), although we should reasonably expect LGW to work up to a daily service in time.

This does not prove that Gatwick is the answer to the London problem.

[cornishsimon]

It's a nice addition to the LGW portfolio. Plus some limited BA feed, some duplicates of LHR routes such as GLA and EDI but some new additions for CX such as JER etc


cs

[True Blue]

Another forum reporting that EK want to go 4 daily to Dubai next summer and 5 daily winter 16/17.

[cornishsimon]

What equipment are EK looking to use ?


cs

[Plastic787]

Hopefully in low vis it's not the equipment that means nobody else can use the ILS

[wallp]

Originally Posted by True Blue

So Cathay are returning to Lgw from September 2016, 4 times a week with the A350.


Cathay Pacific?s new Gatwick service to offer more choice and flexibility for London travel

So finally they've confirmed. You'd think that there is every reason to hope this route can prove successful and lead to an eventual daily service. Has this route happened because of the A350?

So this will be another heavy using South Terminal. I imagine the South Terminal will be quite congested at peak times

[kcockayne]

If it is going to happen 4 times weekly, then they must be planning on an eventual daily service, mustn't they ? Just a matter of, "how soon"?

[True Blue]

With the delay to the runway expansion decision and Lhr being allegedly full (although someone did post, maybe on the Lhr thread that the load factor there is about 76%), will we see more long haul as airlines start to hedge their bets and want to secure more slots before the full sign goes up at Lgw as well.

[rutankrd]

No- Further Long haul will continue to seek (buy) access to Heathrow for the foreseeable future in a very managed way.

Heathrow will continue to lose short haul frequencies and the results will be decline in % of transfer traffic however with an up side for airline yields- particularly for IAG and leading *A carriers as terminators are far greater than those from transfer/transit tickets.

Typically the short haul sector books a loss on transfer traffic particularly in the back of the bus so to speak.

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by True Blue

and LHR being allegedly full (although someone did post, maybe on the LHR thread that the load factor there is about 76%)

There's no contradiction there, sounds like you're confusing runway utilisation with passenger numbers.

[Itchin McCrevis]

will we see more long haul as airlines start to hedge their bets and want to secure more slots before the full sign goes up at Lgw as well.

Yes - we already are seeing it, long haul growth at Gatwick has pushed out short-haul growth already for Summer 16. Gatwick want this of course and their pricing policy is being geared towards it. The only other game in town for long haul is Stansted and most really don't want to go there yet so expect an increasing long haul slot grab at Gatwick over the next few years.

This will be in addition to, not in place of, the Heathrow situation that Rutankrd describes.

[True Blue]

I see Norwegian has Oakland on sale on their site and Lax increases to 5 a week from May 16.

[canberra97]

True blue

Norwegian announced LGW to Oakland and the increase to LAX a week ago.