British Airways - 2
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Warwickshire
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aeroflot cabin crew smiling? What has the world come to? 
BA's Club Europe is a tired old product compared to many others, it sure needs a revamp but in these trying times do they have the money to do it? Rather than continually cutting costs at the edges (no Campari, cheaper Champagne, reduced meal choices etc, all as quoted by others on this thread) I think they would be far better off offering a Euro Traveller Plus type cabin on short haul (in the style of World Traveler Plus which I think is a good product). This would be a far more realistic product offering on the Airbus and 737 where, lets face it, you are paying an inflated fare for a seat oh about an inch or two wider than in Euro Traveller (and is actually the same seat just pulled out a bit). This way, BA is still offering a two class service and pax who want 'more' or want to feel that bit special still do. At the right price it could even encourage more Euro Travellers to upgrade aswell. Time to move with the times BA!
BA's Club Europe is a tired old product compared to many others, it sure needs a revamp but in these trying times do they have the money to do it? Rather than continually cutting costs at the edges (no Campari, cheaper Champagne, reduced meal choices etc, all as quoted by others on this thread) I think they would be far better off offering a Euro Traveller Plus type cabin on short haul (in the style of World Traveler Plus which I think is a good product). This would be a far more realistic product offering on the Airbus and 737 where, lets face it, you are paying an inflated fare for a seat oh about an inch or two wider than in Euro Traveller (and is actually the same seat just pulled out a bit). This way, BA is still offering a two class service and pax who want 'more' or want to feel that bit special still do. At the right price it could even encourage more Euro Travellers to upgrade aswell. Time to move with the times BA!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: essex
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skipness One Echo
Difficult as it may be to stomach, the plain truth is that airport expansion is now being driven by airlines.
LH/AFKLM/BA all want their own hubs to be the best.
Why else is Willie Walsh demanding a third runway? Even if approval were given tomorrow, he knows it would be many years before capacity at LHR could increase significantly.
Plenty of time for the competition to steal a march on LHR.
Many years ago Foulness was the subject of an enquiry into London's new airport. This was abandonded on many grounds, some more spurious than others.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Given the current anti-noise lobby, Green Party objections, eco warriors etc., it doesn't sound such a bad idea now.
However, looking at the problem objectively, it would appear a third runway is too little, too late.
LH/AFKLM/BA all want their own hubs to be the best.
Why else is Willie Walsh demanding a third runway? Even if approval were given tomorrow, he knows it would be many years before capacity at LHR could increase significantly.
Plenty of time for the competition to steal a march on LHR.
Many years ago Foulness was the subject of an enquiry into London's new airport. This was abandonded on many grounds, some more spurious than others.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Given the current anti-noise lobby, Green Party objections, eco warriors etc., it doesn't sound such a bad idea now.
However, looking at the problem objectively, it would appear a third runway is too little, too late.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst we can argue over the quality of the CE offering, the fares have dropped an incredible amount over the last 5 years. Milan as an example early doors Monday, rush-hour return Friday is some £200 quid less now than 5 years ago - thats a 40% cut and no 5 across seating anymore either. No wonder the finances dont stack up as they used to.
The way the cabins have been allowed to deteriorate, particularly the washrooms left out of order, is extraordinarily inappropriate cost-cutting. I am long enough in the tooth to recall the last weeks of the BA One-Elevens out of Birmingham in the early 1990s, and I remember being surprised how the cabin interiors were immaculate and unblemished. The aircraft were sold on afterwards, but the current BA fleet that has been allowed to get into this condition is expected to be in mainline service for years to come.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so thats where the extra 777 will be coming from to do the MBJ and the PUJ! with so many flights from LHR to EWR/JFK im suprised LGW was every annouced in the first place
But just out of interested where has it been annonced, its not on BA website or the company intranet
But just out of interested where has it been annonced, its not on BA website or the company intranet
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 45
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So yet more lies coming out of Waterworld.
MAN-JFK axed as the aircraft was needed to operate a "more profitable" LGW-JFK service and then surprise surprise that is chopped inside six months.
BA senior management, what a bunch of
MAN-JFK axed as the aircraft was needed to operate a "more profitable" LGW-JFK service and then surprise surprise that is chopped inside six months.
BA senior management, what a bunch of
LGW-JFK was originally dreamed up when Silverjet and Eos were still flying and BA was losing a lot of premium traffic out of the Gatwick catchment area to Luton and Stansted. People were finding it easier to drive to LTN or STN rather than battle through LHR. Remove Silverjet and Eos and you've removed the need for the LGW-JFK to try to capture that traffic.
There are indeed strong rumours that EI is planning to go long-haul ex Gatwick this winter with A330s - rumours have included LAX and MIA but I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
And how long will Sharm el Sheikh last? In the absence of any other service than a charter 29-inch seat-pitch or easyJet operation, you can see why a BA service on the route might work. However the timings are absolutely terrible - night departure out of LGW to arrive in Sharm at 5.30am? Jeez....
There are indeed strong rumours that EI is planning to go long-haul ex Gatwick this winter with A330s - rumours have included LAX and MIA but I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
And how long will Sharm el Sheikh last? In the absence of any other service than a charter 29-inch seat-pitch or easyJet operation, you can see why a BA service on the route might work. However the timings are absolutely terrible - night departure out of LGW to arrive in Sharm at 5.30am? Jeez....
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will the planes fly under the 'Cityflyer' brand or will it be just BA?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's nothing to do with BA CityFlyer and nothing has ever been externally marketed on the aircraft at LCY as such. I think the only clue is the crew name badges and cabin announcements on the RJ fleet.
LGW crew are qualified on the mini Airbuses and cheaper than the more expensive crews at LHR.
LGW crew are qualified on the mini Airbuses and cheaper than the more expensive crews at LHR.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chester
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, such drivel. MAN still has a link to NYC, so why complain? Only difference is that Delta and Continental have feed from these cities. If the traffic had been so wonderful (yeilds wise, not just loads) and the route entirely self-sustainable, then why would BA get rid of it. Obviously BA should be kicking themselves that they don't have an armchair CEO such as you.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: All over the place
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The route did make good money. However, once it was crewed by LHR crew (different allowances structure and over night accommodation required in MAN), the powers that be decided that the a/c could make more money elsewhere.
It's a shame as many of us at LHR liked operating those flights, passengers were lovely. Shame for the passengers too, less choice for them now.
It's a shame as many of us at LHR liked operating those flights, passengers were lovely. Shame for the passengers too, less choice for them now.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be fair to them LGW-JFK was not a direct replacement of the MAN route as the 767 was dispatched to LHR and a 777 was brought across to fly the LGW route.
It is most likely that the LGW route was a slot filler but for BA, the 767 at LHR may have been the key as BA are currently downsizing a number of flights and it may have been more cost effective for the 767 on a route that the 777 from LHR.
Now you may be saying, send the 777 up to MAN and fly that until this winter but the same thing would have happened only 12 months later and with LGW having a 777 base it would have reduced costs as mentioned in the previous post.
Probably the most economical move for BA over a long period but has become pretty obvious that it was simply a slot filler ever since the LCY dream was thought up.
It is most likely that the LGW route was a slot filler but for BA, the 767 at LHR may have been the key as BA are currently downsizing a number of flights and it may have been more cost effective for the 767 on a route that the 777 from LHR.
Now you may be saying, send the 777 up to MAN and fly that until this winter but the same thing would have happened only 12 months later and with LGW having a 777 base it would have reduced costs as mentioned in the previous post.
Probably the most economical move for BA over a long period but has become pretty obvious that it was simply a slot filler ever since the LCY dream was thought up.