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

British Airways - 2

Old 18th Dec 2010, 17:53
  #1521 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 33
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Haha thanks for clearing that up, is there any particular reason why? more routes than the 737's can handle?
kdhurst380 is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2010, 18:46
  #1522 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Was busy, I've got a few pictures if anyone is interested...
OliWW is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2010, 09:57
  #1523 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
British Airways at Gatwick.

I know I have posted a very similar post to the one below on the Heathrow v Gatwick thread but on reflection I think it is better suited to this thread. I hope thats ok with the moderators.

Anyway here goes. I have been wondering if, in view of recent events at Heathrow, BA will consider having more services at Gatwick to counter any future difficulties.

For example on some long haul routes with more more than daily service it might be an idea to offer them from both airports. I am no expert but Gatwick like Heathrow does have good links to London. Also with Heathrow near capacity it may prove helpful. For example, I heard that BA would like an extra daily Hong Kong service. I feel that people on long haul flights are less worried about it being Gatwick or Heathrow as long as the airport is accessible(that includes feeder flights, which BA and Flybe could easily provide). I hope I don't sound naive suggesting this!!

From what I read those flights that BA have at Gatwick both short haul and long haul perform well. They should also be more prepared to compete with Easy. Many people I know say that are happy to pay alittle more for the BA product especially for special holiday trips as an example.

Its been good to see the recent long haul expansion and the increase in the number of short haul flights next summer overall from Gatwick. As someone said in a previous post there is a need for BA at Gatwick with Heathrow being so busy to maybe explore new routes and also ensure good coverage of existing ones. I still find it hard to believe that Paris and Brussels are not served directly from Gatwick. I realise that Eurostar is a serious competitor but people soon flood to the planes again when Euostar lets them down. Maybe a twice daily service by BA or Flybe to each city with an appropriate sized aircraft wouldn't be too risky. But hey what do I know!!

Maybe when they eventually update the Gatwick short haul fleet, with say a mix of E95/A319 or something similar, that could offer a viable and competitive network across Europe. On long haul the 777 Fleet seems to work well. As I said above many people I speak to want to use BA from Gatwick as well as Heathrow. Quite a few regulars to Paphos for example miss the service in the winter.

I don't really want to get involved in a which is better debate. Despite recent problems as a fairly regular Heathrow/Gatwick user I am fairly proud of both airports and what they try to do. I just wonder if BA is missing a trick by not spreading services between the two a little more.
I am no professiona lbut have been thinking about these issues quite a while and would like to see what others think who are more in the know.

As always comments welcome but please be gentle lol.

V.
vectisman is online now  
Old 23rd Dec 2010, 15:30
  #1524 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Totally agree with you vectisman. As the economy is improving(slowly) I think BA should certainly look at splitting some of their services as with ones such as New York they could easily add say 2xJFK and 1xEWR and still have more than enough frequency's for the typical Heathrow businessman who demands hourly flights to keep his/her meetings short and sweet!! Another area which LGW is open for expansion is mid-haul destinations specifically in the middle east as I doubt Easy's A320's can go too far beyond Jordan and Israel and the only current significant scheduled services are the Emirates and Qatar flights. I can't see the leisure focus going from LGW any time soon but defiantly think that more of BA's LHR routes can be split to increase the share of 'business' destinations.
adfly is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2010, 15:44
  #1525 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
For example on some long haul routes with more more than daily service it might be an idea to offer them from both airports. I am no expert but Gatwick like Heathrow does have good links to London.
If you use the search function you will see that the very real reasons why this has consistently failed in the past. All the eggs in one basket is hardly ideal but the market demands LHR not LGW, and has consistently done so for decades due to the critical mass of transfer passengers at LHR that LGW lacks. If you want to take a big government approach to roll the clock back thirty years to re-regulate air travel to that extent, you'd kill the golden goose. Yes it's been a c*** weekend for LHR but LGW was just as bad at the start of December.

It's been done to death a hundred times. London-New York is a goldmine yet LGW-JFK on BA lost money as they couldn't fill the front cabin to LHR levels.

Google BA's Gatwick "Hub Without The Hubbub" concept and read about the reasons that it was completely rolled back and closed down as it consistently lost money. What would be different now that LGW is even more competitive as Fortress Orange?
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 23rd Dec 2010, 16:29
  #1526 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 8,415
Received 65 Likes on 43 Posts
Having previously criticised BA's treatment of its domestic passengers when the going got tough, only fair to note that they are being creative this week and using widebodies and subbing in.
SWBKCB is online now  
Old 23rd Dec 2010, 16:41
  #1527 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Many thanks for the explanation you gave Skipness One Echo.


I suppose one frustration of mine is that BA sometimes appear to retreat too quickly from the Easyjet advance. By the way I have no problem with EasyJet expanding there!! They have certainly opened up a great variety of destinations from LGW. I have used them several times myself from Stansted and have always had pleasant trips.

I sometimes wonder if BA ever regret not acquiring GB Airways when it was first offered as it seems to be that the sale of that airline to Easyjet was the start of the latter's fast expansion at LGW.

I still feel that BA could do well attracting more of the point to point short to medium haul traffic at Gatwick. Ok EasyJet and others may offer lower headline fares, but not that many people get to travel at those. I suppose the trick is being able to convince people that paying a little more may be worth it if the product is differentiated enough, even in these difficult economic times. We hear alot about the free market and need for competition (which has certainly benefited the consumer in recent years) but I worry that airlines are not always competing as hard as they should.

I certainly would not be in favour of any return to over the top government regulation, especially the powers that be directing airlines where to fly from and how often. Interference like that killed off many of the great independents like BCAL, Dan Air and Laker. Airlines that put LGW on the map internationally back in the 1970s and 1980s.

I agree that the BA leisure focus appears to be a good one and needs to continue but maybe a little more balance would be achieveable even without the revered London -New York route!!!

V.
vectisman is online now  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 16:41
  #1528 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On BA and LGW, I agree there's not a chance of it operating a parallel hub. Long-haul appears to be doing well, though the new long-haul routes that have been the subject of much speculation have yet to materialise.

As far as short-haul is concerned, I wish BA could find a way to make it work. The Embraer fleet has worked extremely well for BA at LCY and perhaps it could work at LGW (with possible W routings for both LCY and LGW)?
LD12986 is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 18:04
  #1529 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Embraer fleet has worked extremely well for BA at LCY and perhaps it could work at LGW (with possible W routings for both LCY and LGW)?
I agree BUT I think they're not allowed to? I stand to be corrected but I think BA CitiFlyer are not permitted to fly from LHR or LGW under a union agreement, otherwise they could undercut mainline with their lower Ts and Cs. However the ERJ would be a good fit for LGW but therein lies the problem. Am I imagining that?
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 00:01
  #1530 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: cornwall, uk
Posts: 1,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i think its pretty certain that the 737's at LGW are here to stay for the time being, yes the fuel burn is higher when compared to newer birds but these aircraft had been paid off some time ago so the economics work out quite well for BA, and to be honest the birds with the 757 seating in them are actually doing quite well.

I think that if the unions would agree to it the E190's would work brilliantly from LGW in a W pattern and would be able to open up some long forgotton about LGW BA destinations, NQY, DUB, BFS, ABZ, NCL etc etc etc plus additional rotations to MAN, EDI, GLA etc.

what will be will be i guess, i love BA at LGW and im all for expansion of Long and Short haul at Gatwick, please willy back the boys and girls and send some birds over to start some new routes

cs
cornishsimon is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 12:26
  #1531 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
depends on any quiet handshakes he may have with jim french.

Personally I think the citifler will be up for grabs after the olympics
VIRGA is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 12:40
  #1532 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cornishsimon, dont forget Cork in that list of yours for the ERJ 190s!

Happy New Year!
Tom the Tenor is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 15:54
  #1533 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Personally I don't believe that BA wants to let BA Cityflyer go. It generates lots of premium full fare traffic. It also keeps people 'brand aware' in the heart of the City of London. Looking at recent answers by WW to questions put by airline analysts at a shareholders meeting he also indicated further expansion at City Airport to maybe free up some slots at Heathrow for more long haul work.

As far as E190s at Gatwick is concerned I appreciate the restrictions of the current agreement re the London City aircraft. However, does this prevent BA Gatwick from ordering E190 aircraft in their own right with more seats? The City E190s are limited i think to 98/99 seats. LGW aircraft would need more. Flybe operate their E195s with 118 seats but BA my use fewer to maintain decent seat pitch as a full service carrier. There is also the option of just using more A319/320 aircraft. If BA did use E190s at Gatwick it would still need some Airbus aircraft to operate some of the longer 'hotter' routes such as Paphos and Tunis.

On a slightly different note does anyone know how many more 747-400s BA may bring back to service in 2011 if traffic improvements continue. I believe the fleet will be back up to 51 by Summer 2011 leaving 6 more parked and stored. (2 Cardiff and 4 Victorville).

Thanks.
V.
vectisman is online now  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 16:18
  #1534 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Personally I don't believe that BA wants to let BA Cityflyer go. It generates lots of premium full fare traffic. It also keeps people 'brand aware' in the heart of the City of London. Looking at recent answers by WW to questions put by airline analysts at a shareholders meeting he also indicated further expansion at City Airport to maybe free up some slots at Heathrow for more long haul work.
Agreed. LCY is contributing to improved yields in short-haul. If some short-haul traffic can be moved from LHR to LCY to make way for more long-haul routes then that would be something of a "win-win" for the airline.
LD12986 is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 16:23
  #1535 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
depends on any quiet handshakes he may have with jim french.

Personally I think the citifler will be up for grabs after the olympics
Based on what? The business models are entirely different. One is regional focussed with a million charges to add before you get to the fare to be paid. The other is London based premium business focussed with compliementary refreshments and no charge for basic hold baggage. Apples and pears.
If you think flybe pitching up would be welcomed by the BA Exec Club on the Wharf then I think you'll be disappointed. Mind you Lufthansa and Swiss WOULD be pleased and CityJet may yet survive!

Now IF BA could find a way for CFE to expand out of LCY within the UK that would be an opportunity to grow the BA brand and presence at a labour costs that would allow them to make money.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 20:24
  #1536 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Now IF BA could find a way for CFE to expand out of LCY within the UK that would be an opportunity to grow the BA brand and presence at a labour costs that would allow them to make money.
Remembering that Cityflyer was born out of BAConnect, I don't think that this would work. If it had, why on earth did BA not simply try to re-equip BACON with a new fleet to resolve the historic issues? Flying ERJ's instead of Avro's won't make the difference on it's own.

If BA tried to move back into the regions then I think they'd struggle to find a niche, their product (whilst better than most) would be at a price point too high to remain sustainable. The likes of Flybe have expanded at the expense of BA simply because they had the right product for the market at the time. I'm sure that things might change in the future but personally, the only way I see BA being a part of the UK regions will be by codeshare with the likes of Flybe, or by obtaining a majority stake in Flybe. I'd guess that the former is more likely than the latter!
JobsaGoodun is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 20:31
  #1537 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Remembering that Cityflyer was born out of BAConnect, I don't think that this would work. If it had, why on earth did BA not simply try to re-equip BACON with a new fleet to resolve the historic issues? Flying ERJ's instead of Avro's won't make the difference on it's own
I believe it was tied up with getting rid of all BA ground staff within the regions cutting the costs of handling at a stroke. Also the BA internal accounting was a nightmare, this is a company that used to pack them in BFS-LHR and still lost money due to having so many connections with the revenue allocated to long haul and not short haul. When British Regional came in house to become part of BA, the entire Jetstream 41 operation went from profit to loss over the weekend of the buy out due to different procedures of revenue sharing and accounting.

Cutting all that **** out of the operation and having a stand alone point to point operation at LCY with paid for aircraft allowed the chance to make enough money to generate a business case for investment in the new ERJ.

BA had shovelled money into the regions with no payback for decades, LCY has come good in a little under three years.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 9th Jan 2011, 12:15
  #1538 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Any British Airways news?

Just wondering if anyone has any news of potential route or fleet developments at British Airways for 2011 in addition to those already posted.
Would also be grateful if anyone has any more information re the remaining parked/stored 747s.
Anyone got any comments on the December traffic statistics?
I am just a little surprised that one of the UK's major airlines has such a quiet thread!

Thanks.
V.

Last edited by vectisman; 9th Jan 2011 at 12:16. Reason: Spelling
vectisman is online now  
Old 9th Jan 2011, 12:29
  #1539 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry forgot to mention that I had read on another forum about the possibility of some of the 767s, particularly the Long haul ones, having a major refurbishment owing to the late delivery of the 787s. Apparently this may be part of Boeing's compensation package to BA for late delivery of the 787s.
Any view on this?
Thanks.
V.
vectisman is online now  
Old 9th Jan 2011, 14:37
  #1540 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just wondering if anyone has any news of potential route or fleet developments at British Airways for 2011 in addition to those already posted.
Would also be grateful if anyone has any more information re the remaining parked/stored 747s.
Anyone got any comments on the December traffic statistics?
I am just a little surprised that one of the UK's major airlines has such a quiet thread!
There has been a lot of speculation about new long-haul routes from LGW, such as FLL and routes to the Far East. However, there haven't been any announcements after CUN was launched. BA has just announced a new Head of LGW, so it seems that LGW may be set for growth.

There has been some speculation that BA could return to KUL (from LHR).

December traffic stats were not surprising given the snow disruption.

Haven't heard anything about more 747s being returned to service.

Sorry forgot to mention that I had read on another forum about the possibility of some of the 767s, particularly the Long haul ones, having a major refurbishment owing to the late delivery of the 787s. Apparently this may be part of Boeing's compensation package to BA for late delivery of the 787s.
There have been many rumours about this, but nothing has been announced. A refurbishment of this nature would be announced by the airline to The City.
LD12986 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.