NEWCASTLE - 4
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SWBKCB [QUOTE]It (BA) is considering adding to or increasing the size of the planes it flies on the six daily return flights between Newcastle and Heathrow."
Does this mean we could see a return of BA operating B757 or A321 on this route???
Does this mean we could see a return of BA operating B757 or A321 on this route???
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As the dust settles, & not one shred of independent evidence supporting this 'German speaking anonymous Emirates employee' then what we have is the classic growth in debate on various forums fueling what is actually still an unsupported rumour. I certainly would not put my money on this as yet as there is as far as I'm aware no independent evidence.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LS
Good news about Jet2 doing LGW - at least the route is safe and Jet2 are onto a winner for pax numbers etc! How will this affect aircraft for next summer? Will LS base an additional aircraft or reduce frequencies on other services?
Am still surprised EZY didn't jump on this one!
BE
In term of the proposed BE announcement does anyone know more in terms of destinations and frequencies?
Good news about Jet2 doing LGW - at least the route is safe and Jet2 are onto a winner for pax numbers etc! How will this affect aircraft for next summer? Will LS base an additional aircraft or reduce frequencies on other services?
Am still surprised EZY didn't jump on this one!
BE
In term of the proposed BE announcement does anyone know more in terms of destinations and frequencies?
Last edited by nclairportfan; 22nd Nov 2006 at 21:33.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet2
Great news regarding Jet2 to LGW, personally pleased its them and not the easy lot.
On the subject of loco operations from Newcastle its interesting to note that we have had a load of new routes from Jet2, one from Ryanair and the probably a few from FLYBE in 2006 and from easyjet a reduction of three routes (Berlin, Nice and Budapest). It seems strange that other low cost operators are expanding routes but easyjet are reducing the number of routes from NCL. Does anybody else have concerns that another EMA situation is on the cards where they did a similar thing then started to reduce the number of based aircraft.
On the whole EK debate still a bit doubtful on this one, I can't see where the passenger numbers are in the NE, particularly for the frequencies and aircraft type that have been mentioned.
With regards to New York, as its December next week and we have had no announcement about a service provider I think its safe to say that 2007 will be another year without a direct route from NCL to JFK/EWK. Newcastle airport management really need to get their act together on trying to get an airline in on this route.
On the subject of loco operations from Newcastle its interesting to note that we have had a load of new routes from Jet2, one from Ryanair and the probably a few from FLYBE in 2006 and from easyjet a reduction of three routes (Berlin, Nice and Budapest). It seems strange that other low cost operators are expanding routes but easyjet are reducing the number of routes from NCL. Does anybody else have concerns that another EMA situation is on the cards where they did a similar thing then started to reduce the number of based aircraft.
On the whole EK debate still a bit doubtful on this one, I can't see where the passenger numbers are in the NE, particularly for the frequencies and aircraft type that have been mentioned.
With regards to New York, as its December next week and we have had no announcement about a service provider I think its safe to say that 2007 will be another year without a direct route from NCL to JFK/EWK. Newcastle airport management really need to get their act together on trying to get an airline in on this route.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Here
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ncleflights
I dont think it is a case of the airport getting their 'act together', theyve sold the route really well. As stated many times previously AA's actions were a bit of a kick in the nuts for the airport because it would have made any other potential operator think 'hang on - why have they pulled the route when theyve been selling seats for a few months'. The obvious conclustion to draw is seats were not selling as well as promised, especially as AA are regulary flying 757s across the pond into Manchester. I can never understand why these flights have to be daily anyway, NY daily wont work same with EK (daily A330? believe it when i see it).
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: South Coast
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA Flights from NCL
The advanced bookings on AA flights from NCL came nowhere near what they required for the route to go ahead. Result, the flight was terminated before it started.
Continental may have been a better option, but I think not. Perhaps 3 or 4 days a week another option as Centrefix said, but the bottom line is Newcastle will not be able to generate enough of its own traffic for a daily flight to this destination, especially as it relies heavily on Scottish pax, who now have a lot of options for the USA, from both EDI and GLA.
Continental may have been a better option, but I think not. Perhaps 3 or 4 days a week another option as Centrefix said, but the bottom line is Newcastle will not be able to generate enough of its own traffic for a daily flight to this destination, especially as it relies heavily on Scottish pax, who now have a lot of options for the USA, from both EDI and GLA.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Got to agree with CentreFix25, though AA were never too forthright as to the reason, it is quite possible that pax uptake was a major influence which also goes someway to explain the lack of interest from other US carriers, who doubtless keep a close eye on the actions of their competitors and are also influenced by such actions. IF the finger is to be pointed at management it's hardly for their efforts in attempting to attact carriers / routes, however possibly questions should be aimed more in the direction of the development strategy of the whole airport infrastrcuture.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne UK
Age: 67
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has been suggested that the NCL-LGW route made a loss, the question must be why? The same argument was used when BA ditched Bristol Birmingham, Belfast, Aberdeen, Southampton, Plymouth, Paris, having agressively taken acquired these routes, and taken over or merged Dan, Brymon, Citiflyer, and driven competitors like Gill out of the market. Since losing all these routes, Easy, Eastern, BE, etc seem to have made them pay and increased the frequency, and passenger loads and even punctuality. Why is it that these carriers can make it pay when BA cannot?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: the lonely desert
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the reason BA could not make money on them was that they operate on a higher cost base than the carriers which currently operate the routes, i.e the small independant airlines and the locos. Also BA's (nee Brymons) old routes to BRS and ABZ did make money but I think it was the bigger picture as to why they closed regional ops from NCL. It is a shame that the only flag carrier operated route is that to LHR, but atleast other airlines generally take over abandoned services. As regards to bigger aircraft on the LHR run, what else could they use apart from 757/767 equipment, as are A321 a/c not based at T4?
I agree on the NYC front. Whilst it is a shame that there is no link as yet, I do believe it will not happen in 2007. The AA situation will have put potential operators off and the airport have a hard task to attract an alternative operator. The airport have done an excellent job at attracting airlines and new routes, so I don't think they can be blamed for no NYC route. Incidentally, NCL seemed to be very popular at Routes2006 conference in DXB, yet nothing seems to have materialised from it?
NCL has a fairly good mix of routes, though the number of loco operators seems to be higher than full service scheduled operators, in terms of number of flights offered. Good or bad thing - I suppose advantages and disadvantages to both.
Full Service - BA, KLM, Air France, Lufthansa, SN Brussels, Eastern, Aer Lingus, Wideroe.
Loco - Jet2, Easyjet, Ryanair, Flybe, HapagLLoyd
I agree on the NYC front. Whilst it is a shame that there is no link as yet, I do believe it will not happen in 2007. The AA situation will have put potential operators off and the airport have a hard task to attract an alternative operator. The airport have done an excellent job at attracting airlines and new routes, so I don't think they can be blamed for no NYC route. Incidentally, NCL seemed to be very popular at Routes2006 conference in DXB, yet nothing seems to have materialised from it?
NCL has a fairly good mix of routes, though the number of loco operators seems to be higher than full service scheduled operators, in terms of number of flights offered. Good or bad thing - I suppose advantages and disadvantages to both.
Full Service - BA, KLM, Air France, Lufthansa, SN Brussels, Eastern, Aer Lingus, Wideroe.
Loco - Jet2, Easyjet, Ryanair, Flybe, HapagLLoyd
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lhr-ncl
I realise slots may be the problem, but from a passener point of view the LHR route would benefit from better timings and an extra daily rotation rather than larger aircraft on the route.
When they had 7 daily rotations last summer and winter the timings were much more convenient for business and leisure passengers. It was also much better for connections at LHR. Since it has reverted to 6 obviously the passenger nos have dropped quite a bit. so the demand is there in numbers, dont know about the yields though.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: uk
Age: 37
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes. I think it still happens very occasionally.
I realise slots may be the problem, but from a passener point of view the LHR route would benefit from better timings and an extra daily rotation rather than larger aircraft on the route.
When they had 7 daily rotations last summer and winter the timings were much more convenient for business and leisure passengers. It was also much better for connections at LHR. Since it has reverted to 6 obviously the passenger nos have dropped quite a bit. so the demand is there in numbers, dont know about the yields though.
I realise slots may be the problem, but from a passener point of view the LHR route would benefit from better timings and an extra daily rotation rather than larger aircraft on the route.
When they had 7 daily rotations last summer and winter the timings were much more convenient for business and leisure passengers. It was also much better for connections at LHR. Since it has reverted to 6 obviously the passenger nos have dropped quite a bit. so the demand is there in numbers, dont know about the yields though.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: the lonely desert
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see Jet2 have retimed MJV flights and now a/c starts in NCL. Still a very confusing programme, together with AMS, BGO and TFS still not on sale.
Flyjets EC will operate TFS tomorrow as well, then 757 takes over again for good, as by the FJE thread the 767 is going for refit and EA is to do longhaul, so must leave NCL with EB.
Flyjets EC will operate TFS tomorrow as well, then 757 takes over again for good, as by the FJE thread the 767 is going for refit and EA is to do longhaul, so must leave NCL with EB.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: England
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
have a rough copy of the programme for ncl, a bit mixed up at mo with the 757 doing the daily murcia at 1255, and a 757 down to do a few PMIs a week at 1015ish, and a AGP during the week. so dont know whats going on there as only 1 757 planned. noticed the mjv also gone to 7 weekly as it was only 6 weekly
737 number 3 is a bit quiet at mo so maybe pmi and agp are going to go on that, cant see where tfs fits in just yet
also jet2 booking system states that NCL LGW to be op by a 146-300, it was doing the LGWs in man this summer. So what we having? 3x 737 1x146 1x757?
737 number 3 is a bit quiet at mo so maybe pmi and agp are going to go on that, cant see where tfs fits in just yet
also jet2 booking system states that NCL LGW to be op by a 146-300, it was doing the LGWs in man this summer. So what we having? 3x 737 1x146 1x757?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NCL
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More Heathrow capacity?
I think you may be getting too hopeful with more LHR capacity. My theory is using A320 instead of A319 on services giving 24 more seats. Operationally this is really easy to do. We will know more when post IATA conference Summer schedule is released in December.
757s haven't been scheduled regularly from LHR for a while. Once LHR T5 opens, the 757s will be based over at T3 for flights to Spain and Italy. Before T5 there may be a chance, but remember the LHR gate at NCL with the airbridge cannot accomodate a 757 since the stands were remarked. It would need to use the current "LGW" gate which isn't ideal. The reason for very rare BA767 visits is that they are a common crew fleet with 757. So if 757 crews are rostered on a NCL and the 757 goes tech, it is possible the only spare may be a 767. Sometimes this happens on the day and very rarely is planned earlier due to maintenance schedules.
Regarding A321, they are based at T4 and may be a possibility to NCL once T5 opens. The visits last year we due to maintenance. All BA Airbuses have heavy maintence as GLA. So once in a while they need to get from LHR. One way to do this was to schedule them on Domestic flights which ended in GLA to get them there and started in GLA to get them back to LHR. As it happened the aircraft worked a full day of domestic services as part of this clever positioning which resulted in visits to both MAN and NCL. This was planned well in advance, and isn't this winter...
CB
757s haven't been scheduled regularly from LHR for a while. Once LHR T5 opens, the 757s will be based over at T3 for flights to Spain and Italy. Before T5 there may be a chance, but remember the LHR gate at NCL with the airbridge cannot accomodate a 757 since the stands were remarked. It would need to use the current "LGW" gate which isn't ideal. The reason for very rare BA767 visits is that they are a common crew fleet with 757. So if 757 crews are rostered on a NCL and the 757 goes tech, it is possible the only spare may be a 767. Sometimes this happens on the day and very rarely is planned earlier due to maintenance schedules.
Regarding A321, they are based at T4 and may be a possibility to NCL once T5 opens. The visits last year we due to maintenance. All BA Airbuses have heavy maintence as GLA. So once in a while they need to get from LHR. One way to do this was to schedule them on Domestic flights which ended in GLA to get them there and started in GLA to get them back to LHR. As it happened the aircraft worked a full day of domestic services as part of this clever positioning which resulted in visits to both MAN and NCL. This was planned well in advance, and isn't this winter...
CB
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Newcastle
Age: 37
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts