LONDON CITY - 2

[virginblue]

So we're saying the ATR72 / DHC8-400 series is too big

For the IOM route I would say yes, the ATR72 is too big. Probably even a 50 seater outside peak hours. A DHC8-100/Saab 340 type would probably be the best fit it it allows to cover the foxed costs and still earn a profit at 35 seats.

As far as flybe is concerned I seem to remember that they are bit reluctant to use the beast for steep approaches.

[A Nonny Mouse]

Just out of interest,

How many passengers does an ATR72 take?

[Re-Heat]

any news on the NYC route- still going ahead??

Funded by Barclays Capital, so yes.

[WHBM]

Originally Posted by Re-Heat

Funded by Barclays Capital, so yes.

I wonder how many seats per day average and what sort of yield, also how many other agreements have been done on the route. BA do know what they're doing with corporate agreements (they wouldn't have even ordered the A318s without having such in place) but the yield they can strike must be well down on a couple of years ago.

[goofyprune]

LCY also investing into promoting the New York route
YouTube - Inside Luxury Travel at London City Airport and London Eastside

[iwhak]

Virginblue.......in your list of airlines operating out of IOM you fail to mention RE. You make wild claims that RE will not operate the route going forward. You do not even bother to make an effort to substantiate your wild claims with anything resembling a fact. Lest you forget BE pulled off IOM/LCY. Yes, this is a rumour network, but you're taking rumour to a different level! RE are doing a good job on LCY and it has been very well received on the island.

[FS01]

iwhak nobody is saying for sure that RE won't but as you have said this is a rumour site where these type of things are discussed.... You do seem rather sensitive on the subject.

[iwhak]

FS01.....not a bit sensitive, even a rumour must have some sort of basis, but judging by virginblue's negative LCY sentiment, and his previous position on RE in relation to slots and aircraft type, I am wondering why he is making further silly, potentially damaging statements, without foundation! As I stated previously RE have being delivering an excellent product on the island.

[liffy2A]

Very true, who's to say any operator will be round this time next year with the current market climate. I think Arann have a better chance than many with there PSO routes goverment funded.Having seen the statstics of RE on the IOM LCY route, They are running it very well with good on time performance. Load facor is not great but hey, The Manx goverment are looking after the empty seats. I honestly think there is more chance of VLM cutting the route and many others of there routes from LCY with the plans WX/AF have for them. (After all it was a slot take over). RE's 72 500's are configured with 72 seats. The aircraft is perfect for the route, It nearly weights the same as a F50 with the same fuel burn but has the luxury of having 22 more seats. The Flybe Q400 is alot quick but has a higer fuel burn the the ATR, which makes little difference flying Holds roHistorical On-time Performance Ratings Route: Isle Of Man to London This Route Time of Day
Date Range: March 01, 2009 to April 30, 2009 Flight Status

Airline(s): (RE) Aer Arann RE - Overall Rating

Departure Airport: (IOM) Ronaldsway Airport
Departures

Departure City: Isle Of Man, GB On-time Performance Scorecard


Arrival Airport: (LCY) London City Airport
Arrivals

Arrival City: London, EN, GB On-time Performance Scorecard


On-time Performance Ratings Click flight number for details about the rating Cancelled / Diverted > 4%

# Flights On-time Delay Cancelled Diverted
On-time Performance Rating Flight Carrier Operated Codeshare % Avg Max Flights Flights
Very Good (4.8) RE 805 Aer Arann 49 0 100% 4 10 0 0% 0 0%
(4.6) RE 807 Aer Arann 51 0 92% 12 59 1 1% 0 0%
Good (4.3) RE 801 Aer Arann 44 0 86% 12 37 0 0% 0 0%
Route On-time Performance Summary On-time Ratings SummaryHistorical Arrival On-time Performance of this Route
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-time 93%

Late 3%

Very Late 2%

Excessive 1%

Cancelled 1%

Diverted 0%


und London.

[Re-Heat]

I wonder how many seats per day average and what sort of yield, also how many other agreements have been done on the route. BA do know what they're doing with corporate agreements (they wouldn't have even ordered the A318s without having such in place) but the yield they can strike must be well down on a couple of years ago.

32 flat beds Club World only; 2 flights per day.

Consider the average Club World fare (even discounted for corporate schemes), 3 cabin crew, 2 flight crew and far, far less fuel (32 bags in hold)...probably highly profitable if it works out.

I would guess a 50% profit margin would not be out of the ordinary if it were full.

[merlinxx]

EGLC

As in the past "Adapt & Prosper"

[Haven't a clue]

If (I say again if) RE did give up on LCY then maybe we'd get BE in the guise of Loganair and a Saab operating BHD-IOM-LCY-JER, just like they used to??

[firstchoice7e7]

Just had my Stockholm - LCY flight with SAS cancelled. They will no longer be operating this service (think from July)

[virginblue]

Virginblue.......in your list of airlines operating out of IOM you fail to mention RE. You make wild claims that RE will not operate the route going forward. You do not even bother to make an effort to substantiate your wild claims with anything resembling a fact. Lest you forget BE pulled off IOM/LCY. Yes, this is a rumour network, but you're taking rumour to a different level!

I suggest you check your facts before you start hurling abuse at others. I was not making "silly statements", but was merely referring to/quoting a discussion going on in the IOM thread. In that thread FS01 was reporting rumours that RE might pull off the route by the end of the year because it had better use for the slots at LCY. This is a rumour as wild or substantiated as most of the rumours on this, err, rumour network. If you would have taken a minute to read what I had written in the IOM thread you would have seen that I even doubted the slot theory. Quite honestly, if such a discussion of "what" and "ifs" somewhere on the internet has a damaging effect on an airline, how does it survive in the real world...

Btw, if you scroll back the LCY threads, you will see that I am one of the most loyal supporters of LCY. That does not mean that I turn a blind eye on worrying developments.

P.S.: And yes, of course I did not include include RE in the list of airlines operating from IOM that might be an alternative to RE if - repeat: if - RE should give up the route

[silverstreak]

This LCY-JFK via SNN malarchy...

Lets see how many times the 2 acft go tech. Then lets see how many diverts away from LCY take place. The 'city' isnt what it used to be - business traveller wise.

Upon speaking with crew who will be flying the acft/route they themselves admit it will be just a little challenging especially the inbound LCY sector. Coupled with the fact that the business traveller isnt using BA premium as much on any flight.

BA have already got themselves in hot water over OPENSKIES. Can wee Willie afford another 'offshoot' to fail? Think not...

[Skipness One Echo]

Lets see how many times the 2 acft go tech.

Well a brand new A318 shouldn't be AOG all that often.

Then lets see how many diverts away from LCY take place. The 'city' isnt what it used to be - business traveller wise.

True, however as for getting to New York they have two other London airports with New York flights with BA. In the grand scheme of things, that's quite useful.

Can wee Willie afford another 'offshoot' to fail? Think not...

Speak to "the crew who will be flying the acft/route" a little more closely and you'll know they're not an offshoot. It's being flown by British Airways. Mainline.

And people say I'M negative. Give it a chance. The Wharf is coming back to life again and the Government is already sending out feelers to sell the banks off again to the private sector.

[silverstreak]

Its not a case of being negative - hardly. The ECONOMY speaks for everything right now.

The fact that J Class pax book onto the LCY service - means thats where they want to go. Not LHR LGW or with another airline to London when the acft are tech or the limits are out for it to land in the city.

This is an 'off-shoot' in every sense. Strickly J Class only - a new concept for BA (as per OPENSKIES). Ok, mainline fltdeck will fly it and rumour has it Cityflyer Cabin Crew may be given the cabin, but Business Class only flights are not what BA is all about.

I have spoken to crews who will be flying it and 'prospective' passengers, who agree its a great idea, but demand and operating restrictions just make them a little cautious on the success.

Airbus crews cant wait for a thrilling ride in/out of the city.

[marlowe]

Silverstreak where have you heard about Cityflyer crew possibly being given the cabin? As far as they are concerned LGW crew are to operate the flight.

[Lord Bracken]

In the grand scheme of things the LCY-JFK flights provide a grand total of 64 Club seats each way, per day.

Compared to 5 x 747s (350 J seats) and 2 x 777s (96 J seats) from LGW/LHR to JFK each way, per day...so 446 seats and that doesn't include the EWR flights (another 144 J seats).

So the new LCY flights provide about a 10% increase in capacity...hardly an eye-watering increase. Admittedly it's not the best times economically to add capacity (most are reducing) but I imagine that the BarCap deal is the reason why BA are still going ahead.

[Skipness One Echo]

This is an 'off-shoot' in every sense. Strickly J Class only -

It's an offshoot in the same sense that Concorde was then, lacking some of the speed alas. Let's be honest, high quality service to premium passengers IS what BA are about as it's their primary revenue driver. As for crewing, CityFlyer aren't getting near it , as Marlowe says, it's being crewed from Gatwick.
I'd dial Galley FM down a tad.