Thomson Airways
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lichfield
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BHX-BGI
LAX_LHR wrote
Did you mean that Birmingham isn't listed as a 787 destination?
Birmingham certainly does have a Thomson holidays 767-300 service to BGI from 23/12/13-13/4/14 ex BHX each Sunday.
Thomson also operate a BGI flight from Birmingham on a Friday during the Northern winter on behalf of P&O cruises again with a 767-300. So Birmingham does have two flights to BGI in the winter of 2013/4. There are however no 787 flights listed from Birmingham until at least May 2014.
Daza
BHX is not a listed destination in either summer 2013 or winter 13/14, so Im going to say either a mistake or the travel agent has inadvertently booked your friends to fly from EMA/MAN or LGW?
Birmingham certainly does have a Thomson holidays 767-300 service to BGI from 23/12/13-13/4/14 ex BHX each Sunday.
Thomson also operate a BGI flight from Birmingham on a Friday during the Northern winter on behalf of P&O cruises again with a 767-300. So Birmingham does have two flights to BGI in the winter of 2013/4. There are however no 787 flights listed from Birmingham until at least May 2014.
Daza
Last edited by Daza; 3rd Feb 2013 at 10:14.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did you mean that Birmingham isn't listed as a 787 destination?
Birmingham certainly does have a Thomson holidays 767-300 service to BGI from 23/12/13-13/4/14 ex BHX each Sunday.
Birmingham certainly does have a Thomson holidays 767-300 service to BGI from 23/12/13-13/4/14 ex BHX each Sunday.
Im fully aware BHX has B767 long haul flights.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lichfield
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BHX-BGI
You didn't make it at all clear in your reply! You said that "Birmingham isnt listed as a destination in Summer 2013 or Winter 2014".
Just thought I would make it clear.
Just thought I would make it clear.
Last edited by Daza; 3rd Feb 2013 at 10:30.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lichfield
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read the whole thing it appeared to me that you were saying Birmingham didnt have a flight to BGI. I was just clarifying the situation no need to be so aggressive about it! 
Last edited by Daza; 3rd Feb 2013 at 10:32.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: London
Posts: 2,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read the whole thing it appeared to me that you were saying Birmingham didnt have a flight to BGI
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Lichfield
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was nothing personal!!!!!!
If you dont like people adding to or questioning anything that you post then maybe a public forum isnt for you? You are being too sensitive.
I hope the family manage to sort their issue with which aircraft operates the route.
Daza
If you dont like people adding to or questioning anything that you post then maybe a public forum isnt for you? You are being too sensitive.
I hope the family manage to sort their issue with which aircraft operates the route.
Daza
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 1,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the 'Dreamliner' about to become a 'Nightmareliner' for Thomson ?
Thomson must have invested a huge amount of money in the B787 to date. Quite apart any money already paid up-front, Thomson have invested heavily in the promotion of the aircraft and should the grounding delay delivery for a significant period of time, the overall cost may well be huge.
It has already been mentioned that flights operated by the Dreamliner carry an additional cost. I remember Thomson stating last year that all Dreamliner operated routes would carry a £50 per person surcharge per return flight. Should this be the case, and if this surcharge is refundable should the Dreamliner not operate the planned schedules, that amounts to almost £15,000 lost revenue per return flight.
Now add into the equation the difficulties involved in introducing a new aircraft into the fleet at a date later than planned. Crew training may have to be conducted during the height of the summer season, when spare crews I would imagine are few and far between. Leases on existing aircraft may have to be extended and possibly routes subbed to other operators.
I sincerely hope that a safe solution to the problems is found without a prolonged delay and that there will be very little lack of passenger confidence in the aircraft. However, should the delay run 'into a few months' it may be prudent for Thomson not to take delivery for a further 12 months soley on the grounds of logistics.
Thomson must have invested a huge amount of money in the B787 to date. Quite apart any money already paid up-front, Thomson have invested heavily in the promotion of the aircraft and should the grounding delay delivery for a significant period of time, the overall cost may well be huge.
It has already been mentioned that flights operated by the Dreamliner carry an additional cost. I remember Thomson stating last year that all Dreamliner operated routes would carry a £50 per person surcharge per return flight. Should this be the case, and if this surcharge is refundable should the Dreamliner not operate the planned schedules, that amounts to almost £15,000 lost revenue per return flight.
Now add into the equation the difficulties involved in introducing a new aircraft into the fleet at a date later than planned. Crew training may have to be conducted during the height of the summer season, when spare crews I would imagine are few and far between. Leases on existing aircraft may have to be extended and possibly routes subbed to other operators.
I sincerely hope that a safe solution to the problems is found without a prolonged delay and that there will be very little lack of passenger confidence in the aircraft. However, should the delay run 'into a few months' it may be prudent for Thomson not to take delivery for a further 12 months soley on the grounds of logistics.
Just had a look at the Thomson Dreamliner website, and can't work out how they get away with charging extra - Concorde it ain't!
As regards late deliveries, I'd expect the contract to include penalty clauses - with the degree of novelty in the construction of the 787 these should be quite extensive.
As regards late deliveries, I'd expect the contract to include penalty clauses - with the degree of novelty in the construction of the 787 these should be quite extensive.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: derbyshire
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought that Thomson would be charging less for the Dream/Nightmareliner because it is so fuel efficient.
Looks quite smart though.
Looks quite smart though.
Last edited by VC10man; 4th Feb 2013 at 15:06.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 1,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As regards late deliveries, I'd expect the contract to include penalty clauses - with the degree of novelty in the construction of the 787 these should be quite extensive.
Interestingly, a board member at Boeing said recently that the grounding of the Dreamliner would make 'Little or no impact' on Boeing finances. Work that one out if you can.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London
Age: 39
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TSR2 - crew training is well underway and courses going on up until the end of April. I am not sure if you are a pilot, so whether you will know or not, but this will give crew recency to fly on it until for 6 months. So assuming the planes pitch up before August-October there wont be an issue with crew training?
Also I don't understand what the big anti dreamliner stance is all about generally.... the A380 had major problems when it was launched? People now enjoy flying on that!
Also I don't understand what the big anti dreamliner stance is all about generally.... the A380 had major problems when it was launched? People now enjoy flying on that!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 1,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
benji
Thank you for the information on crew training and no, I'm not a pilot .. just a potential pax.
Having followed the thread on R&N on the grounding of the B787 since the event took place, I must admit that I have severe reservations on the safety of this aircraft per current design, as I am sure that the FAA must have had good reasons for their drastic action.
You are quite right in saying that all new aircraft have their teething troubles in one way or another, but none to my knowledge have been quite so serious as a potential airbourne fire.
Long term I am sure that the B787 will become a huge success, but from what little information has been released to date, it does appear that Boeing are floundering in the search for the actual cause of what is a potentially serious problem.
I sincerely hope that Thomson takes delivery of the B787 within the timescales of crew training you describe but I guess all will be revealed in due course.
Having followed the thread on R&N on the grounding of the B787 since the event took place, I must admit that I have severe reservations on the safety of this aircraft per current design, as I am sure that the FAA must have had good reasons for their drastic action.
You are quite right in saying that all new aircraft have their teething troubles in one way or another, but none to my knowledge have been quite so serious as a potential airbourne fire.
Long term I am sure that the B787 will become a huge success, but from what little information has been released to date, it does appear that Boeing are floundering in the search for the actual cause of what is a potentially serious problem.
I sincerely hope that Thomson takes delivery of the B787 within the timescales of crew training you describe but I guess all will be revealed in due course.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-TUIB now joins G-TUIA on the flightline in Seattle in full livery
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8086/8...8063a35f_o.jpg
G-TUIC has been rolled out and is also on the flightline but is yet to be painted.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8086/8...8063a35f_o.jpg
G-TUIC has been rolled out and is also on the flightline but is yet to be painted.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: derby
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing has sent out letters to air carriers expecting delivery of its Dreamliner plane in the next three months revealing its "deep regrets" of possible delays.
Boeing said: “We have informed our customers expecting 787 deliveries in the near term that those aircraft either have been or are at risk of being delayed.
"We are staying in close communication with our customers as we work towards an approved means of compliance with the FAA Airworthiness Directive and develop a plan for resumption of 787 deliveries.
"But we do not discuss specifics about individual airline deliveries in the media."
It added: "Boeing deeply regrets the impact that recent events have had on the schedules of our customers and their passengers."
Thomson Airways is one of those carriers which was expected imminent delivery of the composite-construction plane.
It earlier confirmed to Sky that a delivery date for the 787 was now uncertain.
The Dreamliner was grounded globally on January 16 after the aircraft was hit by battery fires and other technical issues.
"Thomson Airways has not yet been given a new delivery date for its first 787 Dreamliner by Boeing," the travel company said in a statement.
"Our priority is to ensure our customers go on their holidays and we are, therefore, putting contingency plans in place including using alternative aircraft for our long-haul flights to Mexico and Florida if delivery is delayed beyond the end of March.
The airline added: "Boeing is doing everything it can to resolve the situation. We appreciate that there are many customers who are looking forward to flying on the Dreamliner but unfortunately these circumstances are out of our control.
"Once we have finalised our contingency plans we will contact customers whose flights may be affected."
Boeing said: “We have informed our customers expecting 787 deliveries in the near term that those aircraft either have been or are at risk of being delayed.
"We are staying in close communication with our customers as we work towards an approved means of compliance with the FAA Airworthiness Directive and develop a plan for resumption of 787 deliveries.
"But we do not discuss specifics about individual airline deliveries in the media."
It added: "Boeing deeply regrets the impact that recent events have had on the schedules of our customers and their passengers."
Thomson Airways is one of those carriers which was expected imminent delivery of the composite-construction plane.
It earlier confirmed to Sky that a delivery date for the 787 was now uncertain.
The Dreamliner was grounded globally on January 16 after the aircraft was hit by battery fires and other technical issues.
"Thomson Airways has not yet been given a new delivery date for its first 787 Dreamliner by Boeing," the travel company said in a statement.
"Our priority is to ensure our customers go on their holidays and we are, therefore, putting contingency plans in place including using alternative aircraft for our long-haul flights to Mexico and Florida if delivery is delayed beyond the end of March.
The airline added: "Boeing is doing everything it can to resolve the situation. We appreciate that there are many customers who are looking forward to flying on the Dreamliner but unfortunately these circumstances are out of our control.
"Once we have finalised our contingency plans we will contact customers whose flights may be affected."
.