FlyGlobespan - 2
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't really want to go on too much about TCX on a GSM thread, but I'd be amazed if either GSM or TCX offered 35 inch pitch in 'cattle' / 'Y'. You won't normally find many of the regular scheduled airlines operating across 'the pond' offering > 32 inches, i.e. BA, AA 31 inches.
I can't see that even with the intended 189 pax config. will result in a universal 35 inch pitch, more likely just in a smaller premium section & 31 inches in the remaining section.
Incidentally PTV systems in BA for example are mounted under the seats, and even on BA in 'Y' the seats and any comfort compromise is minimal, and still better than current IT offerings.
I can't see that even with the intended 189 pax config. will result in a universal 35 inch pitch, more likely just in a smaller premium section & 31 inches in the remaining section.
Incidentally PTV systems in BA for example are mounted under the seats, and even on BA in 'Y' the seats and any comfort compromise is minimal, and still better than current IT offerings.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: scotland
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
skyman771
TCX have operated Boeing 757-200 to eastern canada for the last few years with 187 seat in an all economy layout, all seats have a 35" seat pitch.
I believe that the GSM flights are going to be 3 class so i doubt they will have the 35" seat pitch in Y.
TCX have operated Boeing 757-200 to eastern canada for the last few years with 187 seat in an all economy layout, all seats have a 35" seat pitch.
I believe that the GSM flights are going to be 3 class so i doubt they will have the 35" seat pitch in Y.
Last edited by goldeneye; 11th Sep 2006 at 22:03.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Toronto's landing charges are known to be huge and IATA are forever moaning about them. If globespan can make a go of it GTAA will be shuddering as they are in the middle of enormous terminal construction and suffering reduced shop sales due to carry-on rules.
Hamilton's historic problem for a lot of routes is that once people get on the QEW to go there they might keep going to Buffalo, but that's not a problem on UK/Ireland routes. NW's rumoured TA 757s ex DTW would also be an issue for catchment in the area southwest of HAM.
Hamilton's historic problem for a lot of routes is that once people get on the QEW to go there they might keep going to Buffalo, but that's not a problem on UK/Ireland routes. NW's rumoured TA 757s ex DTW would also be an issue for catchment in the area southwest of HAM.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: scotland
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uk Website Updated
UK Site updated now for S07:
GLA-YHM - daily - B757-200
GLA-YVR - twice weekly - B767-300
GLA-YYC - weekly - B767-300
MAN-YVR - twice weekly - B767-300
MAN-YYC - weekly - B767-300
LGW-YVR - 3 weekly - B767-300
LGW-YYC - weekly - B767-300
All flights operated with GSM own A/c
GLA-YHM - daily - B757-200
GLA-YVR - twice weekly - B767-300
GLA-YYC - weekly - B767-300
MAN-YVR - twice weekly - B767-300
MAN-YYC - weekly - B767-300
LGW-YVR - 3 weekly - B767-300
LGW-YYC - weekly - B767-300
All flights operated with GSM own A/c
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a news item thats saying that FlyGlobespan is thinking af switching its yet-to-be-launched Liverpool to New York-Newark flight to serve New York JFK airport.
Must be a strong possibility if this has been made public.
Must be a strong possibility if this has been made public.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its a pity GSM doesnt start DUB-YYZ, or YVR! Theres a large amount of Irish in Vancouver, and a lot of tourists from Canada and Ireland visiting both sides! Maybe if we had open skies with Canada it would happen!!!!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Livingston and Edinburgh
Age: 86
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how true is this ,where has this been made public ?
I hope your wrong I've booked my US internal flights back to EWR to meet them.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the problem with that is...?
Just as PIK gave FR a deal to move from GLA to PIK.
Seems good business sense rather than conspiracy theories.
Tom Dalrymple seems to know what hes doing and know where the demand and facilities are with his massive long haul expansion from GLA.
Just as PIK gave FR a deal to move from GLA to PIK.
Seems good business sense rather than conspiracy theories.
Tom Dalrymple seems to know what hes doing and know where the demand and facilities are with his massive long haul expansion from GLA.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: a bouncy castle near PIK
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GW76 said-
"Just as PIK gave FR a deal to move from GLA to PIK"
If my old memory serves me correctly FR stopped using GLA around 1988 and started at PIK in May 94 hardly a "move".
Not only is this statement irrelevant to the thread but pretty much everything else as well
"Just as PIK gave FR a deal to move from GLA to PIK"
If my old memory serves me correctly FR stopped using GLA around 1988 and started at PIK in May 94 hardly a "move".
Not only is this statement irrelevant to the thread but pretty much everything else as well
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Voldermort
So irrelevant that youve continued to comment on it
The comparison between airlines choosing between GLA and PIK just as GSM did (thread about GSM incase youve missed it ) is entirely relevant. You are obviously missing the point.
Perhaps not a move from GLA , but certainly an informed choice between the two when Scottish ops were planned. It is a fact that PIK much cheaper landing fees.
So irrelevant that youve continued to comment on it
The comparison between airlines choosing between GLA and PIK just as GSM did (thread about GSM incase youve missed it ) is entirely relevant. You are obviously missing the point.
Perhaps not a move from GLA , but certainly an informed choice between the two when Scottish ops were planned. It is a fact that PIK much cheaper landing fees.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Blairgowrie,Scotland
Age: 75
Posts: 692
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the problem with that is...?
Just as PIK gave FR a deal to move from GLA to PIK.
Seems good business sense rather than conspiracy theories.
Tom Dalrymple seems to know what hes doing and know where the demand and facilities are with his massive long haul expansion from GLA.
Just as PIK gave FR a deal to move from GLA to PIK.
Seems good business sense rather than conspiracy theories.
Tom Dalrymple seems to know what hes doing and know where the demand and facilities are with his massive long haul expansion from GLA.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He said "The switch is under consideration. If they go ahead it is kind of neat that we would have JLA to JFK."
For the full article go to http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0...name_page.html