GATWICK
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Emirates are pretty unique, Qatar and Etihad moved out of LGW completely. LHR-LAS is connection heavy so LGW-LAS takes the overflow. I did try and explain why Miami is different. It's a fair point about trying new things, Norwegian won't be that new, it'll be muscling in on Thomson, Thomas Cook and following low cost leisure like Freddie Laker. Actually Miami might work, I'd be surprised it was from a legacy network like BA. A non daily leisure flight focussing on P2P might be an option but there's a heavy BA/AA presence on the LHR route.
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 10th Sep 2013 at 08:27.
It's worth noting that Emirates fly London-Dubai 8 times per day. That's an extraordinarily high number of flights / seats when so many people are flying to Dubai just to connect to somewhere else.
NY is more of a destination in its own right - many more people on that route want to go to NY rather than connect onto another destination. It should also be noted that London-NY links 2 of the world's largest commercial and financial centres - the number of bankers, lawyers and directors of large companies with hefty expense accounts is quite extraordinary
NY is more of a destination in its own right - many more people on that route want to go to NY rather than connect onto another destination. It should also be noted that London-NY links 2 of the world's largest commercial and financial centres - the number of bankers, lawyers and directors of large companies with hefty expense accounts is quite extraordinary
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skip
you makes some interesting points about the demographic and there is some truth in that!
I also agree that it will never be a major international hub with LHR around the conner and a single runway, but there is long haul opportunities and the owners have done sone excellent work since the acquired it, whilst many will see it as just more shops, the whole approach to security is a lesson to many airports on how it should be done, with staff that are 99.9% of the time civil,friendly even!
uk border agency is still a bottleneck when arriving although that area is being increased in size at present, in a nut shell it is far better than STN MAN EMA from a customer experience
Flybe are leaving because they need the £20m from Easy more than they need LGW
you makes some interesting points about the demographic and there is some truth in that!
I also agree that it will never be a major international hub with LHR around the conner and a single runway, but there is long haul opportunities and the owners have done sone excellent work since the acquired it, whilst many will see it as just more shops, the whole approach to security is a lesson to many airports on how it should be done, with staff that are 99.9% of the time civil,friendly even!
uk border agency is still a bottleneck when arriving although that area is being increased in size at present, in a nut shell it is far better than STN MAN EMA from a customer experience
Flybe are leaving because they need the £20m from Easy more than they need LGW
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DY Winter 13/14
The rumour mill seems to be in full swing with news of another load of new routes for DY ex LGW to AGA , RAK , VIE , SZG , BGO
Also increase in frequencies to AGP , TFS and ALC
Anybody have any concrete info if this is actually true and if there are any others still to come
Also increase in frequencies to AGP , TFS and ALC
Anybody have any concrete info if this is actually true and if there are any others still to come
Trans-Atlantic
Skipness has presented a well-argued case.
I think he may have overlooked Gatwick's best chance for new trans-atlantic services. If NAS want to operate ex-UK long-haul, they will be able to make serious money operating from Gatwick, especially to NYC.
NAS want to be as low-cost as practical (hence the different ownership and company domicile operating the 787s). That will rule out Heathrow, so they would be serious about making Gatwick work. They are looking for a decent catchment area in terms of population, affluence and propensity to travel, and Gatwick has supported trans-atlantic services before. They will be able to fill their aircraft in single-class configuration at decent yields with no competition.
Any legacy carrier will only join the fight as a spoiler, or as a result of lack of LHR slots. Any US airline not currently operating into London would sensibly choose Gatwick, but would be on the lookout for LHR slots if they became available.
If NAS started such services, on a daily frequency, I think they could 'own' the route quickly, deterring others from competing. They would be operating economical and modern aircraft on a low-cost model, offering good customer service, from an increasingly recognized and respected brand. They wouldn't be comparing LGW-NYC with LHR-NYC, but with other long-haul services on thinner routes. The operation could offer them some serious returns.
I think he may have overlooked Gatwick's best chance for new trans-atlantic services. If NAS want to operate ex-UK long-haul, they will be able to make serious money operating from Gatwick, especially to NYC.
NAS want to be as low-cost as practical (hence the different ownership and company domicile operating the 787s). That will rule out Heathrow, so they would be serious about making Gatwick work. They are looking for a decent catchment area in terms of population, affluence and propensity to travel, and Gatwick has supported trans-atlantic services before. They will be able to fill their aircraft in single-class configuration at decent yields with no competition.
Any legacy carrier will only join the fight as a spoiler, or as a result of lack of LHR slots. Any US airline not currently operating into London would sensibly choose Gatwick, but would be on the lookout for LHR slots if they became available.
If NAS started such services, on a daily frequency, I think they could 'own' the route quickly, deterring others from competing. They would be operating economical and modern aircraft on a low-cost model, offering good customer service, from an increasingly recognized and respected brand. They wouldn't be comparing LGW-NYC with LHR-NYC, but with other long-haul services on thinner routes. The operation could offer them some serious returns.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Oslo, Norway
Age: 63
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think American Airlines will be able to react the same way this time. First there is the chapter 11 thing and then there is the U.S. Justice Department antitrust concerns over the merger with US Airways.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Norwegian start LGW-NYC, I have little doubt BA would respond. They let easyJet in on short haul and look what happened, I believe they would defend their core territory. Are Norwegain even looking at this? Surely a leisure / sun route would make way more sense?
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 10th Sep 2013 at 17:45.
The rumour mill seems to be in full swing with news of another load of new routes for DY ex LGW to AGA , RAK , VIE , SZG , BGO
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Firstly the long haul product isn't single class, it's got a posh bit up front.
Route wise no secret that frequency will increase on med route from April 2014 for new routes you like me will have to await until they're are announced.
I don't think Easy will worry too much, Norwegian are a much bigger threat to Monarch in the short term, Monarch is perceived to be a quality product some what above the likes of Easyjet, the reality is one of lack lustre staff, delays and nothing special on board, Norwegian is increasingly seen like a breath of fresh air in the LoCo market.
This is no Aer Lingus flash in the pan
Route wise no secret that frequency will increase on med route from April 2014 for new routes you like me will have to await until they're are announced.
I don't think Easy will worry too much, Norwegian are a much bigger threat to Monarch in the short term, Monarch is perceived to be a quality product some what above the likes of Easyjet, the reality is one of lack lustre staff, delays and nothing special on board, Norwegian is increasingly seen like a breath of fresh air in the LoCo market.
This is no Aer Lingus flash in the pan
I don't think Easy will worry too much, Norwegian are a much bigger threat to Monarch in the short term, Monarch is perceived to be a quality product some what above the likes of Easyjet, the reality is one of lack lustre staff, delays and nothing special on board, Norwegian is increasingly seen like a breath of fresh air in the LoCo market.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London, UK & Europe
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think Easy will be keeping an eye.......
I don't think Easy will worry too much, Norwegian are a much bigger threat to Monarch in the short term, Monarch is perceived to be a quality product some what above the likes of Easyjet, the reality is one of lack lustre staff, delays and nothing special on board, Norwegian is increasingly seen like a breath of fresh air in the LoCo market.
Last edited by j636; 10th Sep 2013 at 22:18.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Southampton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skipness I do not think your wrong as you make some valid points which I totally agree with but the thing is you answer ALL your posts in a totally ARROGANT manner, its as if your making a statement full stop and what ever you state is true, alot of of it is but to be honest I find you arrogant thats why, not just on here but on other aviation forums, when ever I see your name I think what the hell is he going to preach now!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: cornwall, uk
Posts: 1,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Norwegian start LGW-NYC, I have little doubt BA would respond
Likewise I agree.
Norwegian would no doubt win on price, BA would win on connectivity especially if it went into JFK as customers would have the ability to book onward connections on the AA network.
Would AA not also share half the profit or loss on the route if it came under the AA/BA transatlantic tie up ?
cs
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Warrington, UK
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Italian low-cost carrier Air One is set to make a return to LGW with a couple of new routes to Sicily: Catania and Palermo will be both served thrice weekly, starting from March/April 2014.
Last edited by Keyvon; 11th Sep 2013 at 08:49.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Would AA not also share half the profit or loss on the route if it came under the AA/BA transatlantic tie up ?
If BA play a spoiler to DY, there's no business case for staying if Norwegian give up. The yield is undoubtedly much higher flying the same people and aeroplane out of Terminal 5. Commercially that's what's always made sense.
Of course Norwegian haven't even announced it yet. Isn't it wierd how an airport is seen as somehow failing if it lacks a New York route?
but to be honest I find you arrogant thats why, not just on here but on other aviation forums, when ever I see your name I think what the hell is he going to preach now!
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 11th Sep 2013 at 09:52.
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: England
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies if this has already been asked and answered but when the second runway was built, I don't understand why at the time they didn't build it south of the main runway. Yes, I imagine there would have been outcry from residential areas, but surely with thought to the future it would have made more sense to build it then, rather than have a mostly useless runway now.
Also how often is 26R/8L used?
Also how often is 26R/8L used?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway 08L/26R is a non-instrument runway and will only be used when Runway 08R/26L is temporarily non-operational by reason of
maintenance or accident. Additionally, during months where planned maintenance does not take place, Runway 08L/26R will be in use on the
first Tuesday morning of each month from 0100 to 0400 (Winter) and 0001 to 0300 (Summer) for lighting checks, subject to weather and
confirmation on ATIS.
d. Use of Runway 08L/26R
Runway 08L/26R cannot be used simultaneously with Runway 08R/26L because of insufficient separation between the two. For this reason
also, extensive safeguarding procedures are required (see d ii) before Runway 08L/26R can be activated and the runway is not available on
request by pilots.
Lighting for the closed runway and parallel taxiway will not be visible on approach.
e. Restriction of Operation
i. During Runway 08L/26R operations, delays may occur to aircraft taxiing on the aerodrome due to the following:
1. The parallel taxiway is limited to use by aircraft of wingspan 30 m or below during actual take-offs or landings on Runway 08L/26R
2. Additional restrictions when the Ground Movement Radar (GMR) is not available
ii. When Runway 08L/26R is being brought into planned use the aerodrome will be closed for a period of up to 15 minutes to allow the
necessary safeguarding procedures to be implemented. The same will apply when Runway 08R/26L is brought back into use. In an
emergency situation, implementation of the change to Runway 08L/26R can be expected to take substantially longer.
In case you were wondering if Gatwick 08L/26R is ever used - FSopen Forum
maintenance or accident. Additionally, during months where planned maintenance does not take place, Runway 08L/26R will be in use on the
first Tuesday morning of each month from 0100 to 0400 (Winter) and 0001 to 0300 (Summer) for lighting checks, subject to weather and
confirmation on ATIS.
d. Use of Runway 08L/26R
Runway 08L/26R cannot be used simultaneously with Runway 08R/26L because of insufficient separation between the two. For this reason
also, extensive safeguarding procedures are required (see d ii) before Runway 08L/26R can be activated and the runway is not available on
request by pilots.
Lighting for the closed runway and parallel taxiway will not be visible on approach.
e. Restriction of Operation
i. During Runway 08L/26R operations, delays may occur to aircraft taxiing on the aerodrome due to the following:
1. The parallel taxiway is limited to use by aircraft of wingspan 30 m or below during actual take-offs or landings on Runway 08L/26R
2. Additional restrictions when the Ground Movement Radar (GMR) is not available
ii. When Runway 08L/26R is being brought into planned use the aerodrome will be closed for a period of up to 15 minutes to allow the
necessary safeguarding procedures to be implemented. The same will apply when Runway 08R/26L is brought back into use. In an
emergency situation, implementation of the change to Runway 08L/26R can be expected to take substantially longer.
In case you were wondering if Gatwick 08L/26R is ever used - FSopen Forum