Wikiposts
Search
Airlines, Airports & Routes Topics about airports, routes and airline business.

GATWICK

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 15th Sep 2013, 23:02
  #1801 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why are they registered in Ireland and not Norway? * cough
It does look like an excellent product I do agree.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2013, 09:07
  #1802 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: dublin
Age: 64
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EI register

Looking at IAA aircraft register it is amazing how many aircraft operating for airlines all over the globe are leased ex ROI , the lessor must determine what register has to be used mind you got to have something to do with tax , plus in the event of bankruptcy eg AZ the planes must be more accessible if reg outside Italy ? Maybe?
Hangar6 is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2013, 09:13
  #1803 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: MAN
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Gecas, the world's biggest lessor, has a large presence in Shannon. Irish corporate tax laws/rates are a major factor.
BasilBush is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2013, 13:38
  #1804 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Norwegian registered the aircraft in Ireland, because of Norwegian taxes and work laws - It allowed them to hire Thai crew for the Bangkok routes amongst others.
Jack1985 is offline  
Old 18th Sep 2013, 21:30
  #1805 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have to congratulate British Airways at LGW ad having just returned to the UK on a flight with them from Larnaca.

The price of the return ticket was far more cheaper than Easyjet and Monarch and the charter airlines.

The flight was on an A319 and could not fault BA at all, they were brilliant from check in to arrival.

The A319 was an ex BMI aircraft which lacked entertainment but after my recent BA experience will now only use them for future trips.....well done BA !! 😃😃
Letsflycwl is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2013, 10:09
  #1806 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Where the company needs me not where I want to be!
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Gatwick closed for emergency 19/09/13

Heard that Gatwick closed for an inbound emergency last night around 10pm local time and all inbound traffic were told by ATC to slow to minimum clean speed

Cant find any further details on line
zerotohero is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2013, 10:59
  #1807 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Heard it last night on the way into LHR. Pressurisation problem, uneventful landing.
SA242 is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2013, 14:57
  #1808 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,822
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
Interview with Stuart Wingate in Saturday's FT in which he argues that, if the Airports Commission comes down in favour of a second runway at Gatwick (and assuming that the government agrees), there is a "fighting chance" that one of the alliances will move its operations from Heathrow to Gatwick.

This despite Star Alliance, Skyteam and (needless to say) OneWorld all telling the FT last month that they want to stay at Heathrow, and Wingate's assertion that he "is not planning to turn Gatwick into a fully-fledged hub like Heathrow - where there are significant numbers of passengers who transfer from short-haul aircraft on to long-range passenger jets".

Hard to see any of the alliances being able to resist that proposition, then.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2013, 15:56
  #1809 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: solihull West Midlands
Posts: 967
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DavidReid uk.

Yes agree STN MAN or BHX could also make similar claims of..give us another runway and we think we might persuade an Alliance to come to us.

Unless one has already stipulated they may switch which as David said is unlikely it really holds no weight at all from any of them.

Be interesting to see in December which of all the proposals to the Airport Commission go through to the expected last 5 to be considered, although you would expect Gatwicks would be one.

Nigel
nigel osborne is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2013, 17:49
  #1810 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
there is a "fighting chance" that one of the alliances will move its operations from Heathrow to Gatwick.
With critical mass at LHR, there is no chance one of the two non-BA alliances would leap into starting from square one in Surrey. STAR have a brand new, custom built and exclusive Terminal at LHR and Skyteam have use of a refurbished T4. I would therefore categorically rule out STAR, BA would shoot it's own b***s off if Oneworld was decamped to Gatters and somehow I don't see Delta moving to Gatwick having just bought a JV with VS on LHR routes. Unless BA are prepared to bribe Oneworld partners to leave, I don't see it, and good luck getting Cathay or QANTAS / (Emirates) to move (!)

It's not a fighting chance, it's just the cheerleading boss of LGW in which GIP have pumped billions of pounds and gone and lost several of their "new" long haul customers that were supposed to be the future of the new Gatwick. I imagine he's now under some serious pressure which would explain what can only be described as some form of hallucination....

Again, before anyone yells about how I am anti Gatwick, I'm not, I just get genuinely upset when hopes are continually raised in a manner in which they cannot be met. That's my gripe.

Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 23rd Sep 2013 at 17:53.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 28th Sep 2013, 09:20
  #1811 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: southeast england
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
no chance one of the two non-BA alliances would leap into starting from square one in Surrey
You might be thought less anti-Gatwick if you got the county right
vespasia is offline  
Old 28th Sep 2013, 10:13
  #1812 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,822
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
You might be thought less anti-Gatwick if you got the county right
SOE's geography might be shaky, but his analysis is spot-on.

You don't have to be "anti-Gatwick" to recognise that the chances of any of the alliances moving their UK hub from Heathrow to Gatwick, even with two runways, are zero, nada, nil.

Stuart Wingate is flying a kite, which he's perfectly entitled to do on behalf of his shareholders, but he knows as well as anyone else that it's nonsense.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 28th Sep 2013, 18:26
  #1813 (permalink)  
c52
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Surrey
Posts: 2,262
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would have thought that if alliance 1 offered alliance 2 enough dollars for its LHR slots, a deal would be done. And the going rate for slots scarcely compares with the cost of the extra aircraft you'd need to use them. (Last deal was reported as $2.5m for five flights a week for PAL, IIRC).

Otherwise, an airline such as BA might find itself unable to grow except by using larger aircraft, and companies don't like being unable to grow.
c52 is offline  
Old 28th Sep 2013, 23:14
  #1814 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There's not a chance of it happening.

BA tried a hub at Gatwick years ago ("The hub without the hubbub") and it failed.

Airline alliances are very fractious at the best of times. All three have their own tensions and issues. The idea that all member airlines of one alliance could agree to do something so strategically significant as divesting of their LHR slots and decamp to LGW with no going back is fanciful.

I'm not sure if competition law would come into play as alliances have limited anti-trust immunity regarding co-ordination of routes etc.
Omnipresent is offline  
Old 29th Sep 2013, 22:08
  #1815 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
LGW hub

Quote: "Interview with Stuart Wingate in Saturday's FT in which he argues that, if the Airports Commission comes down in favour of a second runway at Gatwick (and assuming that the government agrees), there is a "fighting chance" that one of the alliances will move its operations from Heathrow to Gatwick."

Forget it! It's all been done before.

Back in the day government policy dictated that a private longhaul UK carrier had to be based at LGW while state-owned BOAC and BEA (later BA) remained at based LHR. The government even took routes off BEA and BOAC and handed them over to LGW based carriers (no open skies or deregulation in those days!). The result: the private carriers went bust.

It didn't work then (when everything was heavily regulated) with BUA, BCAL, etc., and won't work now with one of the alliances, even with another rwy at LGW.

Last edited by Fairdealfrank; 29th Sep 2013 at 22:15.
Fairdealfrank is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2013, 07:37
  #1816 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: leeds
Age: 77
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
so what could happen at LGW

So let's suppose for the sake of argument the answer is a second runway at Gatwick. Never mind what the question was!

Roll the film ten years forward. Air traffic growth 3% per annum, so traffic up 40% on today. Big increases in slot values at LHR, the price of not doing R3, converting to a fare premium of say £50 per one way AND a 30 min ATC penalty at LHR relative to LGW. What's going to happen?

1. Some of the minnows at LHR will take the money and run. Some of the destinations on the board at LHR are the consequence of history not economics.

2. LGW will develop as a weak hub, like MAN. If United, AA, USAir, Delta, SQ etc are willing to serve MAN from their hubs, sooner or later they will serve LGW. Maybe they will choose to do it, maybe someone else will have a go and that will trigger market reactions.

Change will happen short of the big boys upping sticks from one of the top airports in the world. But life will move on, not stay the same.
anothertyke is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2013, 08:01
  #1817 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,822
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
LGW will develop as a weak hub, like MAN
At Manchester, 3% of traffic is connecting. That doesn't satisfy any definition of a hub, "weak" or otherwise.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2013, 11:04
  #1818 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: cornwall, uk
Posts: 1,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Confirmed on local radio today that U2 will not operate LGW-NQY.


cs
cornishsimon is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2013, 11:27
  #1819 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: u.k.
Age: 56
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So let's suppose for the sake of argument the answer is a second runway at Gatwick. Never mind what the question was!

Roll the film ten years forward
And then there were 100 easyjet aircraft based ....
getonittt is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2013, 16:01
  #1820 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: leeds
Age: 77
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@ Dave Reid

Happy to call it whatever you like-- long distance spoke maybe, not a very elegant phrase. But in terms of connectivity to rest of world MAN is clearly in a higher class than anywhere in UK apart from LHR.
anothertyke is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.