GATWICK
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a large maintenance facility for Laker, Dan Air, Big Airways and others, now only a reduced BA remains, then a main road and a town alas. Costly.
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
At that time, there was already a planning agreement in place (dating from 1979) that no second (i.e. simultaneously usable) runway would be built before 2019.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Spain
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bagmanlgw
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
Norwegian estudia desembarcar en el mercado doméstico español | aeroestads
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetblast
It was always the plan to increase the frequency of med flights once the airline was a little better known in the UK market.
Norwegain are a sort of hybrid low cost airline more akin to a legacy airline but without the structural cost that all legacy airlines find difficult to shift, they do handle freight, carry pets, connecting flights you can book on one ticket say Bergen to JFK this applies to much of their European network, if something is badly delayed well they take the hit and pick up hotel and re booking cost, but they are very punctual and having brand new kit helps.
I really don't get this long haul low cost won't work argument, in reality what the difference between say a Tromso flight to Las Palmas at around 7 hours on a 738 and an 8 hour trip on a dream liner? It might not work for say FR (8 hours of scratch card sales) but Norwegian are a very different airline, far closers to say Swiss than FR the 787 is two cabin so the increased yield opportunities are there for sure
I understand that most of summer 2014 program will be on sale by month end. It's going to be busy in Gatters next year
Norwegain are a sort of hybrid low cost airline more akin to a legacy airline but without the structural cost that all legacy airlines find difficult to shift, they do handle freight, carry pets, connecting flights you can book on one ticket say Bergen to JFK this applies to much of their European network, if something is badly delayed well they take the hit and pick up hotel and re booking cost, but they are very punctual and having brand new kit helps.
I really don't get this long haul low cost won't work argument, in reality what the difference between say a Tromso flight to Las Palmas at around 7 hours on a 738 and an 8 hour trip on a dream liner? It might not work for say FR (8 hours of scratch card sales) but Norwegian are a very different airline, far closers to say Swiss than FR the 787 is two cabin so the increased yield opportunities are there for sure
I understand that most of summer 2014 program will be on sale by month end. It's going to be busy in Gatters next year
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really don't get this long haul low cost won't work argument, in reality what the difference between say a Tromso flight to Las Palmas at around 7 hours on a 738 and an 8 hour trip on a dream liner?
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Skipness time will tell
for years we all had Nokia's and thought them the pinnacle and then Apple came along into a market that was new and turned it on its head by offering what people want, even if they didn't know they wanted it?
My point is that whilst history is a very good pointer to the future, it can also blind you to the future, EOS & Maxjet had no customer base and little capital, they did not have the best currently available aircraft in terms of fuel cost and tried to ape the big boys with chauffeur pick ups and all that, Laker was probably ahead of his time and the competition authorities didn't really exist back then.
My point is that whilst history is a very good pointer to the future, it can also blind you to the future, EOS & Maxjet had no customer base and little capital, they did not have the best currently available aircraft in terms of fuel cost and tried to ape the big boys with chauffeur pick ups and all that, Laker was probably ahead of his time and the competition authorities didn't really exist back then.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All very true but abstract though. What would Norwegian bring to the table that's revolutionary like Apple? 787? No, they're going to be very common. Customer service? Only whilst the company is smallish, big expansion and a willingness to pay staff peanuts won't help. Low fares? Still widely available as BA/AA v VS v United is not the cartel of days past. Frequency? No. Market presence? Zero
Am not being contrary for sheer bloody mindedness, I'm just wondering what differential you see them having in a Steve Jobs like manner. I see them as a succesful niche in the TOM/TCX/VS/BA leisure market, others see them as more legacy.
The main one seems to be cost where they use the Ryanair model of making sure they don't employ "expensive" experienced, local flight deck crew. Even the long haul operation is a hived off shell company. Much cheapness?
Am not being contrary for sheer bloody mindedness, I'm just wondering what differential you see them having in a Steve Jobs like manner. I see them as a succesful niche in the TOM/TCX/VS/BA leisure market, others see them as more legacy.
The main one seems to be cost where they use the Ryanair model of making sure they don't employ "expensive" experienced, local flight deck crew. Even the long haul operation is a hived off shell company. Much cheapness?
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 14th Sep 2013 at 09:36.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Oslo, Norway
Age: 63
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skipness One Echo, you seems to misinformed about the requirements set for the Norwegian Long Haul pilots. One of the requirements for applying for piloting their B787 you need to have a passport from one of the European Economic Area countries (EU - Croatia + Iceland + Lichetenstein + Norway). I guess one more country will be added to that list with the opening of the US base(s). Further back in the aircraft (in the cabin), you will find Scandinavian pursers and CAs from countries like Thailand.
But I'll admit, it's their ticket prices that shows the real difference between old and new. Below is a table showing prices for a return ticket in economy class between Oslo and San Francisco with Norwegian Long Haul compared with a range of other airlines with flights to Oslo. The comparison is for flights in July/August next year, outbound Wednesday and return flight on Monday. Norwegian is the only airline that offer direct flights from Oslo to San Francisco or more correct to Oakland Interntional Airport (OAK) on the East side of San Francisco Bay. The main reason for selecting OAK according to CEO Kjos the shorter queues to get through immigration at OAK compared with SFO. The driving distance to down town San Francisco is quite equal between the two airports (31 minutes to Marriott - Fischeman's Wharf from OAK, 24 minutes from SFO).
While were talking about minutes difference around San Francisco Bay, we count hours difference in flight travel time. To get the lowest priced tickets you have to stay at the transfer airport for long hours. United Airlines is the worst of all - and Newark Liberty International Airport isn't my favorite airport - and then also you have to fly single aisle both TATL and TransCon. The Norwegian Long Haul price include the Plus option: two meals, seat reservation and check in baggage.
But I'll admit, it's their ticket prices that shows the real difference between old and new. Below is a table showing prices for a return ticket in economy class between Oslo and San Francisco with Norwegian Long Haul compared with a range of other airlines with flights to Oslo. The comparison is for flights in July/August next year, outbound Wednesday and return flight on Monday. Norwegian is the only airline that offer direct flights from Oslo to San Francisco or more correct to Oakland Interntional Airport (OAK) on the East side of San Francisco Bay. The main reason for selecting OAK according to CEO Kjos the shorter queues to get through immigration at OAK compared with SFO. The driving distance to down town San Francisco is quite equal between the two airports (31 minutes to Marriott - Fischeman's Wharf from OAK, 24 minutes from SFO).
While were talking about minutes difference around San Francisco Bay, we count hours difference in flight travel time. To get the lowest priced tickets you have to stay at the transfer airport for long hours. United Airlines is the worst of all - and Newark Liberty International Airport isn't my favorite airport - and then also you have to fly single aisle both TATL and TransCon. The Norwegian Long Haul price include the Plus option: two meals, seat reservation and check in baggage.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2,782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skipness one echo ;
I wouldn't write DY off. In fact quite one up watch. I understand your point about not innovating in an Apple sort of way but from my perspective I don't see much in the way of innovation (outside of ac types) outside of airlines with deep pockets like Emirates, Qatar et al. Moreover, airlines are streamlining and perhaps could be innovating in terms of finding leans operating methods eg ezy turnarounds with no onboard head count. Saves 3 minutes on turn.
BA I believe are about to introduce across LHR and LCY operation fees for check in bags. The legacy carriers are responding to the impacts made by low cost airlines. Often seems that these types of moves fly in the face of this Apple approach you refer to.
Finally, I flew DY on 787, it was both my first trip on DY and 787. They introduced the 787 very well and the communication certainly enhanced my perception of DY brand. They are profitable and one to watch. They have huge growth plans and a large order book. EasyJet watch with anticipation as to their next steps at LGW and recognises they have lower costs than ezy, responding with only really a daily Bergen service. I'm not convinced at this early stage how that route is performing but late pricing can be low so one would wonder. LGW being full will be good cancellation for ezy but I think we will see a successful Long haul operation by DY...
I wouldn't write DY off. In fact quite one up watch. I understand your point about not innovating in an Apple sort of way but from my perspective I don't see much in the way of innovation (outside of ac types) outside of airlines with deep pockets like Emirates, Qatar et al. Moreover, airlines are streamlining and perhaps could be innovating in terms of finding leans operating methods eg ezy turnarounds with no onboard head count. Saves 3 minutes on turn.
BA I believe are about to introduce across LHR and LCY operation fees for check in bags. The legacy carriers are responding to the impacts made by low cost airlines. Often seems that these types of moves fly in the face of this Apple approach you refer to.
Finally, I flew DY on 787, it was both my first trip on DY and 787. They introduced the 787 very well and the communication certainly enhanced my perception of DY brand. They are profitable and one to watch. They have huge growth plans and a large order book. EasyJet watch with anticipation as to their next steps at LGW and recognises they have lower costs than ezy, responding with only really a daily Bergen service. I'm not convinced at this early stage how that route is performing but late pricing can be low so one would wonder. LGW being full will be good cancellation for ezy but I think we will see a successful Long haul operation by DY...
Last edited by EI-BUD; 15th Sep 2013 at 07:00.
But this is the Gatwick thread, and the discussion is about long haul from Gatwick. Oslo-San Fransico is a rather niche operation and not really a comparable market - how about doing a LON-SFO table to provide a bit of balance?
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 2,782
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SWBKCB,
I think you are right but given that DY have been rumoured for TA ops at LGW or at least discussed on here means its not an unreasonable topic. Good idea about separate thread.
I meant to say I read about where EI and an Asian carrier (may have been JAL ANA or Cathay) who looked at Oakland v San Francisco. EIs analysis suggested the Airport there at Oakland wouldn't work, whereas on of the Asian airlines launched a service, mapping out specific reasons for the choice , EI said the proportion of connecting passenger could not be served via Oakland so clearly a major consideration and not as great a point to point route .. Totally off topic now. . Apologies. (Edit; can't seem to find what Asian airline this was so perhaps the service was discontinued)
I think you are right but given that DY have been rumoured for TA ops at LGW or at least discussed on here means its not an unreasonable topic. Good idea about separate thread.
I meant to say I read about where EI and an Asian carrier (may have been JAL ANA or Cathay) who looked at Oakland v San Francisco. EIs analysis suggested the Airport there at Oakland wouldn't work, whereas on of the Asian airlines launched a service, mapping out specific reasons for the choice , EI said the proportion of connecting passenger could not be served via Oakland so clearly a major consideration and not as great a point to point route .. Totally off topic now. . Apologies. (Edit; can't seem to find what Asian airline this was so perhaps the service was discontinued)
Last edited by EI-BUD; 15th Sep 2013 at 07:11.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Polymer Records
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Suggesting Oakland is a better airport that San Fransisco is like saying Stansted would be a better airport to fly into than Heathrow; similar time to get into town, smaller immigration queues etc, but the market has spoken overwhelmingly on which one it wants to use.
There are other reasons than just cost to choose the Big Boys rather than Norwegian; do you really want to go on a Wednesday and return on a Monday? Or would you prefer the flexibility to fly any day of the week? If you want a fly drive holiday into San Fransisco and back from LA, can Norwegian offer this?
I like their optimism though. Always good to see confidence in their ability to pull off the last Holy Grail of aviation; Low Cost Long Haul. Personally, I give them 5 years. Over optimistic expansion plans into a mature market on short haul and a spanking from a set of aggressive competitors with deep pockets on long haul should do it.
There are other reasons than just cost to choose the Big Boys rather than Norwegian; do you really want to go on a Wednesday and return on a Monday? Or would you prefer the flexibility to fly any day of the week? If you want a fly drive holiday into San Fransisco and back from LA, can Norwegian offer this?
I like their optimism though. Always good to see confidence in their ability to pull off the last Holy Grail of aviation; Low Cost Long Haul. Personally, I give them 5 years. Over optimistic expansion plans into a mature market on short haul and a spanking from a set of aggressive competitors with deep pockets on long haul should do it.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Oslo, Norway
Age: 63
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's forget about DLH to Oakland - San Francisco; that was only an illustration of what price level that can be expected compared if Norwegian starts long haul operation at LGW. We that have flown in and out of Gatwick with their 787 this summer know a bit more what expect (both Premium and Economy seating was tested).
In seat 4A (Premium) ready for pushback at LGW
Since UK CAA hasn't released the Provisional Report for August yet, let's look at what happened in July between LGW and the Nordic countries. EasyJet and Norwegian has only two common Nordic destinations from Gatwick, BGO and CPH. If we include these with the rest of DY destinations, the number of passengers grew 49.5% from July last year a growth of 72,145 passenger which equals to 34.9% of the total growth at Gatwick this month. If we exclude the two destinations shared with U2, DY had a growth of 70.8% to the 11 Nordic destinations they are the only operator to. Passenger wise this equals to 27.2% of the total growth at LGW.
Norwegian time at LGW South Terminal
If we continue to look at the changes between Heahtrow and Gatwick to the Nordic countries, there is a clear shift in ratio between the two airports. In July 2012 the number of passengers to the Nordic countries from Gatwick was 43.5% of the number of passengers at Heahtrow. This July the same ratio was 65.0%. The passenger numbers to Heahtrow didn't decline, but grew with 5.9% (0.5 percentage points higher that LGW total). It will be interesting to see if this exceptional growth continue, but we have to wait for the provisional report from CAA this coming week to get answers on that. I have seen indications that it continues from Norway.
In seat 4A (Premium) ready for pushback at LGW
Since UK CAA hasn't released the Provisional Report for August yet, let's look at what happened in July between LGW and the Nordic countries. EasyJet and Norwegian has only two common Nordic destinations from Gatwick, BGO and CPH. If we include these with the rest of DY destinations, the number of passengers grew 49.5% from July last year a growth of 72,145 passenger which equals to 34.9% of the total growth at Gatwick this month. If we exclude the two destinations shared with U2, DY had a growth of 70.8% to the 11 Nordic destinations they are the only operator to. Passenger wise this equals to 27.2% of the total growth at LGW.
Norwegian time at LGW South Terminal
If we continue to look at the changes between Heahtrow and Gatwick to the Nordic countries, there is a clear shift in ratio between the two airports. In July 2012 the number of passengers to the Nordic countries from Gatwick was 43.5% of the number of passengers at Heahtrow. This July the same ratio was 65.0%. The passenger numbers to Heahtrow didn't decline, but grew with 5.9% (0.5 percentage points higher that LGW total). It will be interesting to see if this exceptional growth continue, but we have to wait for the provisional report from CAA this coming week to get answers on that. I have seen indications that it continues from Norway.
Last edited by LN-KGL; 15th Sep 2013 at 16:17.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Oslo, Norway
Age: 63
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The first flights from OSL to LGW started in late 2007. At that time STN was their choice (first flight to STN was in Spring 2003 - their first international destination after they converted to 737), but the move to LGW for all OSL flight was completed on 29 March 2009. One year later the move to LGW for all DY was completed. Below is a list of when destinations were introduced.
2007: OSL, ARN
2008: SVG, HEL
2009: BGO, TOS*, CPH, AAL
2010: TRD, RYG**, GOT
2011: AES
2012: TRF
* Stopped around one year after introduction, resumed 2012
** Operation moved to TRF
2007: OSL, ARN
2008: SVG, HEL
2009: BGO, TOS*, CPH, AAL
2010: TRD, RYG**, GOT
2011: AES
2012: TRF
* Stopped around one year after introduction, resumed 2012
** Operation moved to TRF
Last edited by LN-KGL; 15th Sep 2013 at 18:02.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: London
Posts: 837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Norwegian
Is it just transatlantic routes that are predicted for any Norwegian Gatwick long haul operation? Beyond NY, what other US routes might be tried & could any long haul extend to Asia too; could somewhere like Bangkok figure in their plans?
Last edited by wallp; 15th Sep 2013 at 19:15.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Oslo, Norway
Age: 63
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing 787-8 for Norwegian Long Haul:
LN102 - EI-LNA - delivered 28 June 2013 - leased from ILFC
LN112 - EI-LNB - delivered 23 August 2013 - leased from ILFC
LN136 - EI-LNC - to be delivered November 2013
LN153 - EI-LND - to be delivered January 2014 - leased from ILFC
LN165 - EI-LNE - to be delivered March 2014
LN178 - EI-LNF - to be delivered May 2014 - leased from ILFC
LNxxx - EI-LNG - to be delivered Late Summer/Early Autumn 2014
LNxxx - EI-LNH - to be delivered Early 2015
The use of the first six are now settled and all will fly to the three Scandinavian Capital airports ARN, CPH and OSL. Around Christmas the use of the 7th will be announced. The use of last of this lot will most probably be announced in Spring/Early Summer 2014.
LN102 - EI-LNA - delivered 28 June 2013 - leased from ILFC
LN112 - EI-LNB - delivered 23 August 2013 - leased from ILFC
LN136 - EI-LNC - to be delivered November 2013
LN153 - EI-LND - to be delivered January 2014 - leased from ILFC
LN165 - EI-LNE - to be delivered March 2014
LN178 - EI-LNF - to be delivered May 2014 - leased from ILFC
LNxxx - EI-LNG - to be delivered Late Summer/Early Autumn 2014
LNxxx - EI-LNH - to be delivered Early 2015
The use of the first six are now settled and all will fly to the three Scandinavian Capital airports ARN, CPH and OSL. Around Christmas the use of the 7th will be announced. The use of last of this lot will most probably be announced in Spring/Early Summer 2014.