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

British Airways - 2

Old 7th Feb 2011, 21:37
  #1561 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 29
Posts: 22
Not when one of the primary reasons BA stops at SNN, is because there's no way with LCY's runway, that they could fly to JFK with enough fuel for the journey.

It just so happens that SNN is a very convenient stop with US pre-clearance. Primarily though, don't forget, it's a fuel stop.
kdhurst380 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2011, 21:47
  #1562 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: North West England
Posts: 71
KLM actually flies to many more UK regional airports from Amsterdam than BA does from Heathrow - some British Airways eh?

And before someone mentions that it would be unprofitable for them to serve more, I already know, it is just an observation!!
EuroWings is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2011, 22:47
  #1563 (permalink)  
PQC
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW England
Posts: 31
Heathrow Airways

But ask yourself the question, why can't they make money flying out of UK regional airports when plenty of others (KL, AF, LH, SK, BE, LS, FR, EZY, ZB, CO, EK, AA, DL, US, QR, EY, AY) so obviously can?

Yes, it is probably cheaper for BA fly everyone down to LHR than to operate direct routes. But how much traffic do BA lose to other airlines by not flying direct from UK airports to main destinations?

In the end, it is all probably all down to BA's significant cost base. Cabin crew on 35 - 40k plus bonuses and perks. They are having a laugh.

Frankly, I'd rather fly FR. At least you know that they are trying to rip you off from the start!
PQC is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2011, 23:42
  #1564 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,084
KLM actually flies to many more UK regional airports from Amsterdam than BA does from Heathrow - some British Airways eh?
Amsterdam has 6 runways, Heathrow has 2. If a 3rd runway is built in the next 10 years, you'll start seeing a lot more feeder flights from regional UK to Heathrow. Until then, forget about it
davidjohnson6 is online now  
Old 8th Feb 2011, 07:37
  #1565 (permalink)  

A Runyonesque Character
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 71
Posts: 1,209
I'm bemused that some people still haven't grasped the concept of hub and spoke. You fly from secondary points (yes - Manchester is a secondary point ...) to your own hub, not to your competitors'.

Except in the case of BA, as davidjohnson6 points out, their hub is so saturated that slots for regional UK services can be far more profitably employed elsewhere.
The SSK is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2011, 08:01
  #1566 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
I'm bemused that some people still haven't grasped the concept of hub and spoke. You fly from secondary points (yes - Manchester is a secondary point ...) to your own hub, not to your competitors'.
Where is that Facebook 'like' button on here?
MUFC_fan is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2011, 10:10
  #1567 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 39
Posts: 6,168
MRU moves to Gatwick and business models to suit....

The jungle drums are reporting that LHR-MRU is being trundled round the M25 to be a LGW route from November.

But ask yourself the question, why can't they make money flying out of UK regional airports when plenty of others (KL, AF, LH, SK, BE, LS, FR, EZY, ZB, CO, EK, AA, DL, US, QR, EY, AY) so obviously can?
KL, AF, LH, CO, EK,AA, DL,US,QR,EY and even AY feed their hubs from the spoke at the UK regional end into AMS, CDG, FRA/MUC/DUS, DXB, JFK/ORD.ATL/JFK, PHL,DOH, AUH and HEL respectively.
Even BA do exactly the same to LHR from ABZ/EDI/GLA/NCL/MAN feeding long haul and short haul connections.
However exclusive point to point from the UK is something none of the above airlines do, execpet perhaps LH. Point to polint is the market of EZY, LS and FR. For a legacy scheduled carrier to make the numbers add up they need to have interlining traffic and connections over a hub in addition to the point to point traffic.

They are two different business models, one is interconnecting offering connectrions, the othee exclusive point to point. We might one day see UK regional on BA to MAD but only to feed Iberia.
There are a few exceptions with LH but often these are not operated by mainline, but by a franchise or subsidiary.

Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 8th Feb 2011 at 10:20.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2011, 13:35
  #1568 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 303
If LHR-MRU is to move to LGW, and assuming it remains at the same 3pw frequency, does this mean that we are likely to see another route move to LGW?

> there have been some reasonably significant (for BA) changes to the Caribbean network recently ex-LGW, so lets assume they've done all they are going to do with that for the time being
> due to schedules patterns, it normally makes more sense to put eastbound long haul flights onto same aircraft and likewise with westbound
> general logic would say that given current circumstances etc, BA would ditch the LGW-SSH and put the LGW-MLE and prospective LGW-MRU onto the same aircraft, but problem is that the MRU total rotation time is approx 26 hours, so won't really fit together with the MLE anyway without significant surgery

My guesses:
1. MRU doesn't move at all
2. MRU does move, SSH is dumped and frequencies on both MRU and MLE are doctored to somehow fit on one aircraft
3. SSH/MLE doesn't change at all; MRU moves and there is one additional (new?) LGW long haul route to come to "fit" with the MRU (most likely an eastbound route)
globetrotter79 is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2011, 13:50
  #1569 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 39
Posts: 6,168
I doubt LGW-SSH will survive into the summer to be honest, it was always the weakest of the B777 routes and Sharm el-Shark coupled with revolutionaries in Tahir Sq won't be improving yield or bookings.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2011, 14:18
  #1570 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 2,069
I doubt LGW-SSH will survive into the summer to be honest, it was always the weakest of the B777 routes and Sharm el-Shark coupled with revolutionaries in Tahir Sq won't be improving yield or bookings.
I agree. It is a route that surely they can't maximise revenue on with the likes of easyJet on the same route. I understand BA offer higher classes in service but surely compared to a Caribbean route which can cost a Y passenger eye watering money; SSH just isn't anywhere near entering a similar league?

Plus the problems with Egypt won't help...
MUFC_fan is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2011, 16:46
  #1571 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
BA has confirmed MRU is moving to LGW for the winter season.
LD12986 is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2011, 12:31
  #1572 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Planet Beaujolais
Posts: 262
Was told recently that the SSH could go to A321, just as GB used to operate with crews doing complete rotations.
Blink182 is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2011, 19:58
  #1573 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
I see from elsewhere that 14 of the 21 of the 767s are to get a "refresh" starting later this year, with the remaining 7 being retired.

Does anyone have any further information. Is it only the long-haul 767s that are being refreshed?
LD12986 is offline  
Old 12th Feb 2011, 23:44
  #1574 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Dublin
Posts: 3
I heard they are looking into sending the refreshed 767 longhaul configuration to LGW to operate the FLL, PLS, NAS and GCM.
ba_hostess is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2011, 13:00
  #1575 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockport
Posts: 16
Ba Hostess

I think you will find that BA do not operate directly to FLL or PLS and NAS and GCM are operated out of LHR.
The information I have from my partner who is EF crew is that the 767's are being refurbished in order to provide better competition to the other carriers who operate on the same routes on which the BA 767 is currently used.
Redcap49 is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2011, 17:16
  #1576 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 39
Posts: 6,168
I think you will find that BA do not operate directly to FLL or PLS and NAS and GCM are operated out of LHR
Almost right. LHR B767-300s operate :
BA253 LHR-NAS-PLS once weekly
BA253 LHR-NAS-GCM four weekly

So no FLL currently but PLS is still operated.
Skipness One Echo is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2011, 18:15
  #1577 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Regarding 767s making their way to LGW, the plan was that 14 would be refurbished (I understand its 7 of long-haul and 7 short-haul) with 7 being retired eventually.

BA still needs 767s for East Coast and Africa routes at LHR, and the cargo-heavy/busy LHR short-hauls.

Is BA really going to send 767s to LGW? What about crew training, ground support etc? Is the cost worth it?
LD12986 is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2011, 20:54
  #1578 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Dublin
Posts: 3
Yes I know BA does not operate direct flights to FLL, hence the introduction of this new route sooner or later. As for 767 coming to LGW, it was mentioned by a manager.
The runway in FLL is not long enough to accomodate the 777 so will be operated initially on the 767 until the runway is extended over a 5 year period currently in process with the FAA.

LGW being the new premium leisure hub, NAS, PLS and GCM will eventually move to LGW and will be operated on the 767.

As for crew training, it has been mentioned that crew operating the LCY-JFK on the airbus will not be trained on it, leaving the crew with 777 and 737 licences to be trained on the 767.

Watch this space, like Silla said, big changes coming to LGW.
ba_hostess is offline  
Old 13th Feb 2011, 22:02
  #1579 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London, England
Age: 52
Posts: 134
ba_hostess,

although not a pilot, Fort Lauderdale has a 9000ft runway; Montego Bay has a 8700ft runway and we operate a B777 from there with a full passenger load.

So I presume FLL could handle a fully loaded B777.

However I would love to see what you are proposing happen.

YD
yellowdog is offline  
Old 14th Feb 2011, 11:57
  #1580 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 6,485
Originally Posted by LD12986 View Post
Is it only the long-haul 767s that are being refreshed?
Surely it was only a few years ago that the "long haul" configured 767s were comprehensively rebuilt, in the "Dusk" programme, with new interiors, while the short haul fleet (which does places like Moscow and Larnaca, not so short) were left untouched, and have since degenerated further into an ever shabbier state.

So can it be that the long hauls are going to be made over for a second time, while the short-hauls, with their forever-broken seats and IFE remain untouched ? Surely not.
WHBM is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.