Virgin Atlantic
I think you'll find that the new Virgin domestic will operate alongside longhaul in T3 ,where a new domestic arrivals area is being created for them allowing the connections to work easily.
Virgin atlantic seem to think otherwise...
Manchester operating terminals
London/Manchester service - Upper Class extras
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: scotland
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T1 is due for demolition once T2 opens, I believe T2 is going to have the ability to handle domestic where as T3 does not have that facility, hence the connection from T1 to T3. Is T4 capable of domestic and international ?
Last edited by goldeneye; 13th Dec 2012 at 17:00.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Glasgow
Age: 43
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VS have confirmed that they will not be moving there long haul ops to T2, Domestic ops will move to T2 in 2014 and they are discussing options with BAA to build some facility at T3 for domestic ops. DL and VS have also confirmed that they are looking at ways to consolidate their ops in T3 once the JV approved.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Northern Territory Australia
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"A generation ago you could connect from EVERYTHING to EVERYTHING at Heathrow"
You still can if the carriers have interline agreements.
Carriers haven't "thrown this seamless transition away". Many pax now book their flights themselves - usually on a point to point (PTP) basis using the cheapest fare for each carrier and often the shortest (sometimes under the MCT)connection time - I mean who wants to stay at LHR longer than necessary (or any airport for that matter). So with separate tickets comes separate contracts and no permission to interline (through-check) baggage.
Through fares are still quoted and bags may be through checked based on interline agreements in accordance with the IATA Resolution 780e.
I suspect that there will be some moves to accommodate VS/DL which has the whole of the south wing checkin area at T3. SQ recently "borrowed" space there from VS. Star Alliance has been accommodated.
LHR transfer baggage mishandling has significantly reduced with the advent of inter-terminal baggage tracking and the BRS. It is true that the more times you handle a bag the more likely it is to be mishandled but VS has an excellent record of safe delivery on the right flight/right day.
You still can if the carriers have interline agreements.
Carriers haven't "thrown this seamless transition away". Many pax now book their flights themselves - usually on a point to point (PTP) basis using the cheapest fare for each carrier and often the shortest (sometimes under the MCT)connection time - I mean who wants to stay at LHR longer than necessary (or any airport for that matter). So with separate tickets comes separate contracts and no permission to interline (through-check) baggage.
Through fares are still quoted and bags may be through checked based on interline agreements in accordance with the IATA Resolution 780e.
I suspect that there will be some moves to accommodate VS/DL which has the whole of the south wing checkin area at T3. SQ recently "borrowed" space there from VS. Star Alliance has been accommodated.
LHR transfer baggage mishandling has significantly reduced with the advent of inter-terminal baggage tracking and the BRS. It is true that the more times you handle a bag the more likely it is to be mishandled but VS has an excellent record of safe delivery on the right flight/right day.
If I were Delta I would want Virgin in Skyteam with me. And Skyteam are firmly based in T4.
Last edited by WHBM; 13th Dec 2012 at 18:39.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: "T1 is due for demolition once T2 opens, I believe T2 is going to have the ability to handle domestic where as T3 does not have that facility, hence the connection from T1 to T3. Is T4 capable of domestic and international ?"
AFAIK, plse correct if it is wrong: (1) VS domestic will be in LHR-1 where there is an underused domestic pier; (2) when LHR-1 is demolished this will shift to LHR-2 where there will be a domestic arrivals area (as in LHR-5); (3) VS will move its entire LHR operation to LHR-2 taking the space originally earmarked for BD.
LHR-1 to LHR-3 is an easy transfer, whether on the airside bus or landslide via the tunnels that link the terminals and the bus/rail/tube stations.
Will BA move its LHR-1 operation to LHR-2 as well?
LHR-3 and LHR-4 do not have domestic arrival areas.
AFAIK, plse correct if it is wrong: (1) VS domestic will be in LHR-1 where there is an underused domestic pier; (2) when LHR-1 is demolished this will shift to LHR-2 where there will be a domestic arrivals area (as in LHR-5); (3) VS will move its entire LHR operation to LHR-2 taking the space originally earmarked for BD.
LHR-1 to LHR-3 is an easy transfer, whether on the airside bus or landslide via the tunnels that link the terminals and the bus/rail/tube stations.
Will BA move its LHR-1 operation to LHR-2 as well?
LHR-3 and LHR-4 do not have domestic arrival areas.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will BA move its LHR-1 operation to LHR-2 as well?
I see a lot of discussion about how good the Delta onward connections will be for Virgin pax going onward in the USA.
However, the current Virgin routes, and the Delta network in the USA, do not mesh together well at all. The main hubs for Delta are (in rough order) Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake. Virgin serves none of these.
Virgin's principal operations are to JFK, Los Angeles, etc. Although Delta are a major player at JFK, they do not have a lot of domestic connectivity there, most are low frequency and/or to other major places already served directly from London by one or the other of the two carriers. If you have ever actually tried to make a connection at JFK, it's probably the worst gateway for that in the USA. Delta's main domestic hub in the New York area is now La Guardia, which they have built up substantially in recent years.
Los Angeles is in a far corner of the USA and offers few onward connecting possibilities.
I certainly don't see Delta handing any market share from London to Atlanta or Detroit etc over to Virgin; these are some of their most profitable routes.
However, the current Virgin routes, and the Delta network in the USA, do not mesh together well at all. The main hubs for Delta are (in rough order) Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake. Virgin serves none of these.
Virgin's principal operations are to JFK, Los Angeles, etc. Although Delta are a major player at JFK, they do not have a lot of domestic connectivity there, most are low frequency and/or to other major places already served directly from London by one or the other of the two carriers. If you have ever actually tried to make a connection at JFK, it's probably the worst gateway for that in the USA. Delta's main domestic hub in the New York area is now La Guardia, which they have built up substantially in recent years.
Los Angeles is in a far corner of the USA and offers few onward connecting possibilities.
I certainly don't see Delta handing any market share from London to Atlanta or Detroit etc over to Virgin; these are some of their most profitable routes.
Paxing All Over The World
LAX is a good jump off for HNL but Delta use the 767 a great deal and it's always been one of my least favourite. I'll continue to make my own choice of who I travel with.
As to them joining the Team? Not for a goodly while, methinks.
As to them joining the Team? Not for a goodly while, methinks.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
understood that Avion Express were going to be operating for Virgin? They have been recruiting for LHR based crews for several weeks now with a start date of March 2013 which ties in with the Virgin timing for their domestic services.
Wonder who Avion Express are going to be operating for if its correct that EI are going to do all of the Virgin Domestic uk services then.........
Wonder who Avion Express are going to be operating for if its correct that EI are going to do all of the Virgin Domestic uk services then.........
Would it not be better to base the crews in London?
So lets say AF KLM was successful, would this be an opportunity for Cityjet to operate the domestic ex LHR and not EI as previous hinted? A return to Virgin Atlantic by Cityjet!!
May give a life line to Cityjet.? I am not so confident that AF KLM is the right partner 1. I sense that it will be similar scenario as LH + bmi, 2. Don't AF KLM have enough of their own worries to deal with now financially, rather than investing in VS.
May give a life line to Cityjet.? I am not so confident that AF KLM is the right partner 1. I sense that it will be similar scenario as LH + bmi, 2. Don't AF KLM have enough of their own worries to deal with now financially, rather than investing in VS.
On the other matter, AF/KL/DL is making a mistake in buying into an airline (a rather decent one) that a business model that no longer makes sense in the aviation market that has changed since its formation
If DL want more LHR slots/bigger share of TATL, they can get that and more by buying AA
I think it's unlikely that SRB will sell up VS completely. I'm still of the opinion a Middle East carrier (EY my best guess) will be a surprise buyer for SQ's stake. I may be wrong but I don't see AF/KLM coming in to this.
EY would make a disastrous mistake in investing in VS; I hope they look at the failure that was EK’s investment in SriLankan Airlines
I doubt it would be within 5 years, but unless SRB is prepared to buy BA from IAG (not very likely…) then it would be within 20 years (when SRB retires), because by then VS would have been squeezed by its rivals and like I have said before, their business plan is on the stubbornness and passions of SRB
The only way a deal with VS would work for DL is to basically transfer everything to Delta (LHR slots, 747-400s, A330-300s etc) and maybe DL could launch some UK-India routes in the process (they have a limited presence in India compared to United and that will get worse over time
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He's making a very good point. What would be the value to Delta of almost owning one of your competitors?
Think of the difference in the cultures between Delta, a *very* particular culture, certainly before taking over NWA and Virgin Atlantic. There are no fleet synergies worth mentioning. The temptation to reduce VS to a LGW based beach fleet and allow DL to take on AA/BA with a proper sized LHR operation would be an awesome prospect in ATL. Remember some 10/38 Virgin aircraft are on leisure routes from LGW and MAN / GLA, Delta could happily keep Virgin Atlantic going as a concern, possibly flying the ten A330s on these routes. The aging B744s and remaining A340s could be rolled over as more DL capacity is added into LHR. SRB's mantra of competition is maintained as DL and BA/AA are very much competitors in the same markets.
It's like BMI Baby. Why buy it to run it when you could do it better yourself, except in this case you need to buy it for the slots. Virgin have ~ 22 daily departures out of LHR, very tempting but not overwhelming for any operation to take over and run.
Tempting options would be replacing Virgin capacity to EWR and JFK to give a properly competitve offering on the very lucrative LHR-JFK, up against, again, AA/BA.
Think of the difference in the cultures between Delta, a *very* particular culture, certainly before taking over NWA and Virgin Atlantic. There are no fleet synergies worth mentioning. The temptation to reduce VS to a LGW based beach fleet and allow DL to take on AA/BA with a proper sized LHR operation would be an awesome prospect in ATL. Remember some 10/38 Virgin aircraft are on leisure routes from LGW and MAN / GLA, Delta could happily keep Virgin Atlantic going as a concern, possibly flying the ten A330s on these routes. The aging B744s and remaining A340s could be rolled over as more DL capacity is added into LHR. SRB's mantra of competition is maintained as DL and BA/AA are very much competitors in the same markets.
It's like BMI Baby. Why buy it to run it when you could do it better yourself, except in this case you need to buy it for the slots. Virgin have ~ 22 daily departures out of LHR, very tempting but not overwhelming for any operation to take over and run.
Tempting options would be replacing Virgin capacity to EWR and JFK to give a properly competitve offering on the very lucrative LHR-JFK, up against, again, AA/BA.
Firstly however, the leisure fleet will consist of a dozen 747-400s once they are refurbished, the LHR will consist of the remaining 747s, A340s and A330s
If DL is going to buy VS (rather than AA), then the only way to make this work is take control and spilt the airline into 2 (Delta UK and Virgin Atlantic)
Delta UK would consist of the “old” VS’s LHR operations/slots/routes, the A330-300s, the A340-600s and the non-leisure 747-400s, it would be 51% owned by Air France-KLM (though letting DL manage things) and 49% owned by Delta
Delta UK's assets and staff will gradually be folded into Delta itself until its becomes an asset-less shell, when that happens Delta UK will shut down and its AOC handed back
The “new” Virgin Atlantic would consist of the leisure 747-400s and the LGW/MAN operations/slots/routes, it would be 51% owned by Virgin Holidays and 49% by Delta UK (which would later be transfered to Delta)
Seems Mr Walsh has touched a nerve! SRB wants to "bet a million pounds".
That sounds worrying desperate! He needs to rise above that sort of thing as ut sounds as though the good night doth protest too much. It's getting wierd......
That sounds worrying desperate! He needs to rise above that sort of thing as ut sounds as though the good night doth protest too much. It's getting wierd......
Why can’t he see that BA are by far the best partners for VS?
Why can’t he see the real enemy is not within the UK, but in Europe and the Middle East, along with the North Atlantic?
If he does not like BA competing with VS, then buy the airline of IAG (who could use the money to fix IB, along with preventing BA from being dragged down by the problems at IB)
Some possible reasons why Delta/AF-KLM might want to keep the VAA brand rather than just use slots (suppositions not facts):
- Brand loyalty - if brand ditched no guarantee pax will stay with Delta
- Higher yields route for route than Delta - use Delta leverage to reduce costs and therefore make VAA profitable
- Route rights to the East from LHR
- Airlines evolving into multi-brands like hotels - VAA brand could be rolled out elsewhere targetted at specifc demographic
- No deal with SRB without brand retention for at least five years (as per article)
The only reason airlines use several brands is that either they want to differentiate between their full-service and LCC ops (Qantas-Jetstar) or due to limitations such as bilaterals (Lufthansa-Swiss International-Austrian Airlines-Brussels Airlines) or in the case of Taiwan, political issues
Delta does to have to face any of those issues, it gave up on its LCC for a start (Song) and its base of operations is within one country, if they were interested in operating under different brand name then it would still be using the “Northwest Airlines” and “Pan American” brands
DL could use the VS brand east of LHR; trouble is that they already operate East of Europe under their own brand (AMS-BOM)
Somewhat lost in all the hoohaa, but Virgin have actually handed 3 of the remedy slot pairs back to BA.
The 3 MAN rotations are timetabled using existing Virgin slots that were leased out to other carriers.
6 EDI and 3 ABZ means 3 slots not taken up.
Now, i know they had to use them on limited routes and they didn't get Moscow rights and Cairo is f****d right now, Riyadh is not a good place to send an aircraft with Virgin emblazoned on it etc etc, but yet another example of a half hearted, half arsed effort from Virgin.
Gifted precious slots on a plate and hand a quarter of them back to the competition
The 3 MAN rotations are timetabled using existing Virgin slots that were leased out to other carriers.
6 EDI and 3 ABZ means 3 slots not taken up.
Now, i know they had to use them on limited routes and they didn't get Moscow rights and Cairo is f****d right now, Riyadh is not a good place to send an aircraft with Virgin emblazoned on it etc etc, but yet another example of a half hearted, half arsed effort from Virgin.
Gifted precious slots on a plate and hand a quarter of them back to the competition
Certainly help compete with BA’s 8 X Daily Service in terms of long haul connections
Or maybe launch LHR-GLA (if they so desperate to weaken the BA “monopoly” then you cannot find many better routes than that one)
Also is it not the case that VS is appealing the Moscow rights decision?
As for Riyadh, maybe they could paint a burka over the mascot and call themselves “Charisma Airlines” (after the record label that was bought by Virgin) in a similar way to Air Sinai, KLM Asia etc
Basilbrush - true to an extent. But if nobody else comes forward, back to BA the slots go. Now that another Carrier (Virgin) is starting Scottish to LHR, do you seriously think a third airline will come forward?
Moscow has been divvied our rights wise so can't see owt happening there.
Cairo is a basket case in waiting
Air France from Nice?........
I don't know about the rights on Riyadh, but unless Saudia are allowed more flights to UK, then thats a no go as well.
I'm pretty confident Virgin have just gifted these slots back to BA
Cairo is a basket case in waiting
Air France from Nice?........
I don't know about the rights on Riyadh, but unless Saudia are allowed more flights to UK, then thats a no go as well.
I'm pretty confident Virgin have just gifted these slots back to BA
Also is it not the case that VS is appealing the Moscow rights decision?
What does that UK-Saudi Bilateral sat about UK-Saudi Arabia rights?
Ain't that the truth! I do not travel so much these days but VS are still my preferred long haul carrier and if they went, I would have to reconsider all other carriers before choosing. However, I am not a typical pax as I am extremely picky about carrier and the specific aircraft and I willingly pay more to get my choice.
Having never travelled on Delta, I know little about them but one can say that there is no buzz of 'difference' or 'special' such as one hears about, say, Singapore or some of the new Middle East carriers.
I have travelled on United, North West (as they were) Eastern (as they were) and Continental (before Bethune and before it's sale) and recall most of the trips as being unmemorable and some downright horrible. One long haul on United in Y ensured that I did not repeat the mistake.
I have very deliberately never crossed the Pond on anything other than BA or VS and cannot imagine me deciding that Delta was the way to go without a lot of people I know telling me it was worth my money. Oh, and a Team with several carriers that are on my personal no-fly list?
I have travelled on United, North West (as they were) Eastern (as they were) and Continental (before Bethune and before it's sale) and recall most of the trips as being unmemorable and some downright horrible. One long haul on United in Y ensured that I did not repeat the mistake.
I have very deliberately never crossed the Pond on anything other than BA or VS and cannot imagine me deciding that Delta was the way to go without a lot of people I know telling me it was worth my money. Oh, and a Team with several carriers that are on my personal no-fly list?
Best Airlines in the world: Cathay Pacific Singapore Airlines and Emirates (in my opinion anyway)
Although BA, VS, TK and are few others are fairly good…
The remedy slots were for EDI, ABZ, MOW, CAI, RUH and NCE, and 7 of them were limited to EDI/ABZ. No remedy slots to MAN were available so VS would have had to use their own slots for MAN anyway.
So if VS had taken on the 3 additional slots you think they should have taken, they would have had to either start CAI/RUH/NCE or else increase frequency on EDI or ABZ beyond the existing levels (i.e. an additional aircraft). What do you suggest they should have done with these "slots on a plate"?
If you read the actual Commitments (link in my 10 Dec post above), you'll see (section 1.1.3 on p.173) that if VS operates EDI and ABZ for a year, it's entitled to apply for the remaining slots and use them for any European short-haul route. That seems a pretty reasonable deal to me.
If you want to have a pop at VS, fine, be my guest
, but maybe best to at least do so based on facts?
So if VS had taken on the 3 additional slots you think they should have taken, they would have had to either start CAI/RUH/NCE or else increase frequency on EDI or ABZ beyond the existing levels (i.e. an additional aircraft). What do you suggest they should have done with these "slots on a plate"?
If you read the actual Commitments (link in my 10 Dec post above), you'll see (section 1.1.3 on p.173) that if VS operates EDI and ABZ for a year, it's entitled to apply for the remaining slots and use them for any European short-haul route. That seems a pretty reasonable deal to me.
If you want to have a pop at VS, fine, be my guest
, but maybe best to at least do so based on facts? Of course there are better things they can do, but they would not like it…
Virgin Atlantic brand would be consigned to the history books if US giant Delta buys a 49pc stake
He suggested a £1m wager would not be fair as Sir Richard is a “billionaire banker”.
“I don’t think a million pounds would hurt him, I don’t have a million pounds so maybe a bet that would be as painful to him as it might be to me – so maybe something like a knee in the groin,” Mr Walsh said.
The IAG chief said he didn’t know Sir Richard very well but “on the limited occasions” he had met him he hasn’t seen anything that would “make me want to meet him again”.
He suggested a £1m wager would not be fair as Sir Richard is a “billionaire banker”.
“I don’t think a million pounds would hurt him, I don’t have a million pounds so maybe a bet that would be as painful to him as it might be to me – so maybe something like a knee in the groin,” Mr Walsh said.
The IAG chief said he didn’t know Sir Richard very well but “on the limited occasions” he had met him he hasn’t seen anything that would “make me want to meet him again”.
If Delta want to make the investment work, then WW might be right...
DL have just shot themselves in the foot by doing this, certainly I have little hope for this deal considering the terms, its LH-BD all over again…
On this time DL cannot sustain the losses due to the state of the US aviation market, unlike LH
And this is coming from someone who suggests that they should buy an airline which is currently in BK
Does Virgin Atlantic have any marketing deals with Virgin America? If so, how are these affected by this deal?
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing wrong with a bit of free publicity, Beardie has been doing it for years, but MOL has got much better at it.
I just yawned when he said he "could have sued". For what? WW made a prediction based on a perfectly reasonable assessment of the market. Nothing actionable at all, unless we really have descended into a sue everyone for everything mentality! At least our American cousins have the 1st Amendment for that!
And then I love it when the Bearded one complains that BA have the most slots at Heathrow, our biggest airport.
Well Euston is our most important long haul railway station, and guess who has ALL the daytime long haul slots?
Pop over to St Pancras for a "rival" service from East Midlands Trains, and guess which company is behind them AND Virgin Rail? Yup, Stagecoach on both counts!
Hate to say it, but Sir Beardie is no longer the shwashbuckling renegade I grew up admiring. Just a very tired gamekeeper.
I just yawned when he said he "could have sued". For what? WW made a prediction based on a perfectly reasonable assessment of the market. Nothing actionable at all, unless we really have descended into a sue everyone for everything mentality! At least our American cousins have the 1st Amendment for that!
And then I love it when the Bearded one complains that BA have the most slots at Heathrow, our biggest airport.
Well Euston is our most important long haul railway station, and guess who has ALL the daytime long haul slots?
Pop over to St Pancras for a "rival" service from East Midlands Trains, and guess which company is behind them AND Virgin Rail? Yup, Stagecoach on both counts!
Hate to say it, but Sir Beardie is no longer the shwashbuckling renegade I grew up admiring. Just a very tired gamekeeper.
Never trust a hippy...
So really all thats changed is Delta now has the 49% share Singapore had. Beardy always retains that crucial 51% holding. KLM/Air France buying the remaining 51% would now seem wide of the mark.
Like I said, DL can get what they want from AA, which in comparison is a rather better proposition
Not sure that I "very conveniently sidestepped" anything. 
I don't work for Virgin and have no reason to defend them. You're quite right that they had to show they were using the MAN slots before being able to apply for the other remedy slots (as a result, Aer Lingus (the former lessee of the slots) is facing some LHR schedule adjustments next summer).
FWIW, I am not at all convinced by the economics of the MAN service either - indeed, I'm not particularly convinced by EDI or ABZ, for that matter, but I see the play as being more of a long-term one: hang in there for three years and if it's not working, then switch the slots to other short-haul.
Is that a smart move? Well, let's say it seems a bit smarter now that DL with its deep pockets owns 49%, and will likely seem a bit smarter still if/when AF/KL takes a stake somewhere down the road.
Where do I see Virgin "rushing to serve", in your words? 3 daily NCE would be overkill and would lose them money (even if it earns them your respect
) But in a year or two I could imagine them using the slots for (for example) a VS/AF service to CDG, freeing up some of AF's LHR slots to enable some more Delta transatlantic services (with a bit of timing juggling, just as AF and KL made space in LHR for DL and their then-partner CO when OpenSkies came about).
I think AF/KL will come into this picture in a year or two (Delta's CEO used the word "accretive" in today's press conference when asked about this, i.e. AFKL and AZ can be added on to the bilateral DL/VS joint venture) and at that point the slot puzzle becomes easier to solve.
I understand that in your view it makes no business sense for VS to have incurred losses to be able to acquire slots, and then not to take up all the slots. I can question various aspects of VS strategy, but if they figured that the least loss-making thing they could do with those last 3 slots would lose them more than they'd ever get back in the future, I can't necessarily fault them for that specific decision
I don't work for Virgin and have no reason to defend them. You're quite right that they had to show they were using the MAN slots before being able to apply for the other remedy slots (as a result, Aer Lingus (the former lessee of the slots) is facing some LHR schedule adjustments next summer). FWIW, I am not at all convinced by the economics of the MAN service either - indeed, I'm not particularly convinced by EDI or ABZ, for that matter, but I see the play as being more of a long-term one: hang in there for three years and if it's not working, then switch the slots to other short-haul.
Is that a smart move? Well, let's say it seems a bit smarter now that DL with its deep pockets owns 49%, and will likely seem a bit smarter still if/when AF/KL takes a stake somewhere down the road.
Where do I see Virgin "rushing to serve", in your words? 3 daily NCE would be overkill and would lose them money (even if it earns them your respect
) But in a year or two I could imagine them using the slots for (for example) a VS/AF service to CDG, freeing up some of AF's LHR slots to enable some more Delta transatlantic services (with a bit of timing juggling, just as AF and KL made space in LHR for DL and their then-partner CO when OpenSkies came about). I think AF/KL will come into this picture in a year or two (Delta's CEO used the word "accretive" in today's press conference when asked about this, i.e. AFKL and AZ can be added on to the bilateral DL/VS joint venture) and at that point the slot puzzle becomes easier to solve.
I understand that in your view it makes no business sense for VS to have incurred losses to be able to acquire slots, and then not to take up all the slots. I can question various aspects of VS strategy, but if they figured that the least loss-making thing they could do with those last 3 slots would lose them more than they'd ever get back in the future, I can't necessarily fault them for that specific decision
AF-KL has problems of their own; the only thing that they should is buy enough shares for DL to take control of VS and thus be allowed to reorganise the airline to make it sustainable for the long term…
I don’t think LHR-MAN/EDI/ABZ has a future when all 3 cities are served in a better way (for AF/KL/DL) via AMS/CDG, not LHR
VS is only solution for its long term survival is to buy BA off IAG or do a deal with IAG that involves the gradual takeover of the airline, but securing its short term future
Lastly, CO got those slots (for a vast sum) on their own, not from other ST members
If I was running DL, I would either buy AA or transfer all of VS’s slots to DL for their own purposes
The biggest problem that VS are going to have on their domestic routes is that there is no way the product can be competitive with BA. The issue is frequency. They will be operating 3 pd on MAN (against BA with 11), 4 on EDI (against BA with 13) and 3 on ABZ (against BA with 11). Presumably their own priorities will be on their own connecting traffic and even for this they will have weak schedules. In terms of appeal to business traffic their offering is so bad that they are unlikely to be able to compete for any significant corportae traffic. Certain financial losses on a large scale would seem to be the inevitable result. I wish them luck but...
I recall back in the 1980s Dan-Air got licences on Heathrow to Manchester, which they operated 3 times daily against BA who had their hourly Shuttle.
No reservations needed on thr Dan-Air flights either because they typically had 25% loads, and sometimes less. That was with fully flexible tickets where you could readily transfer onto their flights if your company had issued you with a BA ticket.
I can't quite see either how the three flights will be "scheduled to connect" with Virgin's fair number of long-haul flights, when these are all somewhat evenly spread throughout the day.
No reservations needed on thr Dan-Air flights either because they typically had 25% loads, and sometimes less. That was with fully flexible tickets where you could readily transfer onto their flights if your company had issued you with a BA ticket.
I can't quite see either how the three flights will be "scheduled to connect" with Virgin's fair number of long-haul flights, when these are all somewhat evenly spread throughout the day.
The same went BCal and BMI, who like Dan-Air could not compete with BA for various reasons and its looks like VS will follow…
Yes and their biggest problem that killed the route was that their aircraft had to park on a remote stand at LHR and pax had a lengthy bus ride to the terminal. I hope VS will not be disadvantaged in the same way.
They have suggesting moving to the new T2, but not sure how they are going to manage that now that they hooked with Delta (who operate from T4)
Finally! Someone who realises why the flights are scheduled at certain times and why the shorthaul product is being established. This venture is 99.99% about feeder traffic to the long haul product. Of course VS will be delighted to carry pax between ABZ,MAN, EDI and LHR but the aim of the game is to feed their LH network.
In the future, as and when the Delta tie up gets approval, then someone from ABZ will be able to travel to anywhere in the USA via LHR and JFK without the need to reclaim baggage or check in at various airports - hopefully a seemless transition (especially using the clubhouse if applicable
).
In the future, as and when the Delta tie up gets approval, then someone from ABZ will be able to travel to anywhere in the USA via LHR and JFK without the need to reclaim baggage or check in at various airports - hopefully a seemless transition (especially using the clubhouse if applicable
).
The same goes for CDG with AF/KL
Or they can fly to with BA via LHR to a large number of destinations in America and Asia
You can see what Virgin have to deal with and why DL gains little out of all of this
I am always dismayed by these statements about the various airline tie-ups or launching additional flights from hubs, that refer to a "new" ability to make connections as if it was analogous to the Second Coming of Christ.
A generation ago you could connect from EVERYTHING to EVERYTHING at Heathrow, and indeed most other points, in this manner, courtesy of the standard IATA agreement of the time. It was the carriers themselves that threw this "seamless transition" away.
Furthermore you have been able to transfer from Aberdeen to "anywhere" (actually not) in the USA all along, courtesy of BA and their longstanding partner American through Heathrow, KLM and their longer-standing partner Northwest (now Delta) through Amsterdam, etc. All we have now is another me-too operation.
By the way, the last time I looked these new domestic flights were to be operated into T1, Virgin operate out of T3, and Delta operate out of T4. That is going to lead to goodness-knows how many misdirected pax and Seamlessly Lost connecting bags.
A generation ago you could connect from EVERYTHING to EVERYTHING at Heathrow, and indeed most other points, in this manner, courtesy of the standard IATA agreement of the time. It was the carriers themselves that threw this "seamless transition" away.
Furthermore you have been able to transfer from Aberdeen to "anywhere" (actually not) in the USA all along, courtesy of BA and their longstanding partner American through Heathrow, KLM and their longer-standing partner Northwest (now Delta) through Amsterdam, etc. All we have now is another me-too operation.
By the way, the last time I looked these new domestic flights were to be operated into T1, Virgin operate out of T3, and Delta operate out of T4. That is going to lead to goodness-knows how many misdirected pax and Seamlessly Lost connecting bags.
The DL/VS deal and the launch of their domestic routes has made the problem of terminal spaces worse, VS has stated it want to move into T2 now that BMI was bought by BA (who were going to be their main tenant along with their *A partners), but now they have no chance
Firstly, can space be made for VS at T4 (maybe move MH and other non-ST members out?) and for a CTA area (for domestic flights) or will HAH have to change their mind about who uses T2 and move ST members (along with VS) to T2 instead of *A members (who I guess will have to move to T4), which means some A380 gates will have to be built at that terminal
Really BAA/HAH needs to change its plans over its Terminals by (in my opinion):
Terminal 1: To be closed and replaced by an expanded Terminal 2
Terminal 2 (AKA Virgin Terminal): Will have to be expanded to cover both the “old” Terminal 2 and Terminal 1, will become home of Skyteam members, Virgin Atlantic and non-affiliated members (the latter will later move when Terminal 6 is built)
Terminal 3: To be closed and replaced by an expanded Terminal 5
Terminal 4 (AKA Star Terminal): Maybe some minor expansion (like additional A380 gates etc.), will become home to Star Alliance members, maybe further expansion when R3 is built
Terminal 5 (AKA British Airways Terminal): will face major expansion over the site of Terminal 3, will become home to BA (all operations at T1, T3 and T5), Aer Lingus (whose LHR ops might be bought by BA), other Oneworld members and further expansion due to R3 or moving LGW ops etc.
Terminal 6: To be built when R3 opens, will house non-affiliated members from Terminal 2
I think you'll find that the new Virgin domestic will operate alongside longhaul in T3 ,where a new domestic arrivals area is being created for them allowing the connections to work easily.
They really need to fix this soon (like asking for a CTA area at T3) to make their domestic flights work
I understand this is a tricky squaring of a circle though as without decent hijgh fares on P2P, a fraction of a long haul revenue leaves the short haul deeply in the red. This remains true of BA and more so of BMI in later years.
BMI did not have that advantage or at least did not get the chance to share it (from *A partners), that aided their demise and the absorption by BA
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: London
Age: 33
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are correct. BA not only have well over half the pax on Heathrow-Scotland P2P (which I derive from discussion with seatmates over the years), but also the "loss" caused by low attribution of through fares to the domestic sector, although appearing in the accountants books as such, will get nodded through by WW and the board who understand these things and the corporate benefit to long-haul. BMI's issue was that they had no long-haul out of Heathrow, and in latter years such traffic was just an accounting gift to their fellow Star Alliance partners. They got the long-haul benefit, while BMI took the connecting leg low revenue share losses.
Virgin already has a large share of the London-Manchester/Glasgow P2P markets, but it’s done by rail and if they get East Coast (they going for another attempt), they will have a large share of the London-Edinburgh/Aberdeen P2P markets
T1 is due for demolition once T2 opens, I believe T2 is going to have the ability to handle domestic where as T3 does not have that facility, hence the connection from T1 to T3. Is T4 capable of domestic and international ?
VS have confirmed that they will not be moving there long haul ops to T2, Domestic ops will move to T2 in 2014 and they are discussing options with BAA to build some facility at T3 for domestic ops. DL and VS have also confirmed that they are looking at ways to consolidate their ops in T3 once the JV approved.
DL cannot really move into T3, HAH/BAA designated T4 for ST, T3 is O/A380 territory and if there is spare space, BA will call first dibs (they really want to use as little terminals as possible), they would really like a CTA area at T3, of course what they really like is a bigger T5…
"A generation ago you could connect from EVERYTHING to EVERYTHING at Heathrow"
You still can if the carriers have interline agreements.
Carriers haven't "thrown this seamless transition away". Many pax now book their flights themselves - usually on a point to point (PTP) basis using the cheapest fare for each carrier and often the shortest (sometimes under the MCT)connection time - I mean who wants to stay at LHR longer than necessary (or any airport for that matter). So with separate tickets comes separate contracts and no permission to interline (through-check) baggage.
Through fares are still quoted and bags may be through checked based on interline agreements in accordance with the IATA Resolution 780e.
I suspect that there will be some moves to accommodate VS/DL which has the whole of the south wing checkin area at T3. SQ recently "borrowed" space there from VS. Star Alliance has been accommodated.
LHR transfer baggage mishandling has significantly reduced with the advent of inter-terminal baggage tracking and the BRS. It is true that the more times you handle a bag the more likely it is to be mishandled but VS has an excellent record of safe delivery on the right flight/right day.
You still can if the carriers have interline agreements.
Carriers haven't "thrown this seamless transition away". Many pax now book their flights themselves - usually on a point to point (PTP) basis using the cheapest fare for each carrier and often the shortest (sometimes under the MCT)connection time - I mean who wants to stay at LHR longer than necessary (or any airport for that matter). So with separate tickets comes separate contracts and no permission to interline (through-check) baggage.
Through fares are still quoted and bags may be through checked based on interline agreements in accordance with the IATA Resolution 780e.
I suspect that there will be some moves to accommodate VS/DL which has the whole of the south wing checkin area at T3. SQ recently "borrowed" space there from VS. Star Alliance has been accommodated.
LHR transfer baggage mishandling has significantly reduced with the advent of inter-terminal baggage tracking and the BRS. It is true that the more times you handle a bag the more likely it is to be mishandled but VS has an excellent record of safe delivery on the right flight/right day.
AFAIK, plse correct if it is wrong: (1) VS domestic will be in LHR-1 where there is an underused domestic pier; (2) when LHR-1 is demolished this will shift to LHR-2 where there will be a domestic arrivals area (as in LHR-5); (3) VS will move its entire LHR operation to LHR-2 taking the space originally earmarked for BD.
LHR-1 to LHR-3 is an easy transfer, whether on the airside bus or landslide via the tunnels that link the terminals and the bus/rail/tube stations.
Will BA move its LHR-1 operation to LHR-2 as well?
LHR-3 and LHR-4 do not have domestic arrival areas.
LHR-1 to LHR-3 is an easy transfer, whether on the airside bus or landslide via the tunnels that link the terminals and the bus/rail/tube stations.
Will BA move its LHR-1 operation to LHR-2 as well?
LHR-3 and LHR-4 do not have domestic arrival areas.
What BA really want is a bigger T5 containing all their operations, until then I would say the second best option would be either consolidating at T3 + T5 (which would require a CTA area at T3) or T2 + T5 (this means that BA get to use t of the newest and best terminals at LHR)
When T1 closes, the T1 operation moves to T3 as the STAR airlines will be moving to T2. What happens to BHD/DUB/LBA remains to be seen, as they need a domestic or CTA facility which will only be available for the T5 routes.
I see a lot of discussion about how good the Delta onward connections will be for Virgin pax going onward in the USA.
However, the current Virgin routes, and the Delta network in the USA, do not mesh together well at all. The main hubs for Delta are (in rough order) Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake. Virgin serves none of these.
Virgin's principal operations are to JFK, Los Angeles, etc. Although Delta are a major player at JFK, they do not have a lot of domestic connectivity there, most are low frequency and/or to other major places already served directly from London by one or the other of the two carriers. If you have ever actually tried to make a connection at JFK, it's probably the worst gateway for that in the USA. Delta's main domestic hub in the New York area is now La Guardia, which they have built up substantially in recent years.
Los Angeles is in a far corner of the USA and offers few onward connecting possibilities.
I certainly don't see Delta handing any market share from London to Atlanta or Detroit etc over to Virgin; these are some of their most profitable routes.
However, the current Virgin routes, and the Delta network in the USA, do not mesh together well at all. The main hubs for Delta are (in rough order) Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis, and Salt Lake. Virgin serves none of these.
Virgin's principal operations are to JFK, Los Angeles, etc. Although Delta are a major player at JFK, they do not have a lot of domestic connectivity there, most are low frequency and/or to other major places already served directly from London by one or the other of the two carriers. If you have ever actually tried to make a connection at JFK, it's probably the worst gateway for that in the USA. Delta's main domestic hub in the New York area is now La Guardia, which they have built up substantially in recent years.
Los Angeles is in a far corner of the USA and offers few onward connecting possibilities.
I certainly don't see Delta handing any market share from London to Atlanta or Detroit etc over to Virgin; these are some of their most profitable routes.
In other words, merging with AA and AS would be perfect for DL and would give them a leading route network; certainly dealing with AAs problems is better than dealing with VS as a junior partner as they try to compete with BA, LH-LX-OX-SN, AF-KL, EK and QR while SRB still in charge
As for DL's split ops in NYC, could they do a slot swap with JetBlue (they get DL's LGA slots and DL gets JB's slots at JFK)
What this will mean is that DL/AA's NYC hub is located at JFK, JetBlue's NYC ops would be at LGA and United remains at EWR
To be honest however VS is a rather good airline, the problem is that they have to share their local market with BA…
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: "VS is only solution for its long term survival is to buy BA off IAG or do a deal with IAG that involves the gradual takeover of the airline, but securing its short term future"
You keep banging on about this, but you fail to explain WHY (1) IAG would sell BA (to anyone) leaving themselves with loss-making IB, and (2) how you think VS could possibly afford it, bearing in mind they could not afford to buy BD. These need answering to retain any credibility on your "VS buy BA" point.
Quote: "If I was running DL, I would either buy AA or transfer all of VS’s slots to DL for their own purposes"
Owning 49% of VS does not give any rights or opportunities to transfer VS slots to DL. It's a similar position to SQ, take 49% of the profits, if/when there are any.
Not convinced that AF-KL are in a position to buyout Branson as they have to sort out the "basket case" (too harsh?) that is AF. Equally not convinced that Branson is likely to sell.
Quote: "What BA really want is a bigger T5 containing all their operations, until then I would say the second best option would be either consolidating at T3 + T5 (which would require a CTA area at T3) or T2 + T5 (this means that BA get to use t of the newest and best terminals at LHR)"
No it doesn't, it needs the underground shuttle link to be extended from LHR-5 and its satelites to LHR-3 and the new LHR-1/2 and all its satelites. Obviously this would be a long term arrangement once the expansion issue is sorted out. A common travel area arrivals section at LHR-3 would be unnecessary duplication.
Quote: "The only real benefit for DL is a bigger share on the LON-NYC market, but if really wants that, then they should buy AA (which would give then a even bigger share) and they will also get a bigger NYC share and a much bigger Latin American share"
Cheaper to buy slots rather than half an airline if increasing New York capacity is the aim. It's already a saturated route, is it 27 flights/day? Is there room for more capacity?
Quote: "If he can do deals with an Ultra Christian-Homophobic-Scottish Nationalist-Free Marketer-Future Scottish Transport Secretary, then SRB can do deals with an airline that is no longer using illegal means to destory VS and is not the real enemy (they are located in Mainland Europe and the Middle East)"
Can we be a little less judgemental please and just name names!
You keep banging on about this, but you fail to explain WHY (1) IAG would sell BA (to anyone) leaving themselves with loss-making IB, and (2) how you think VS could possibly afford it, bearing in mind they could not afford to buy BD. These need answering to retain any credibility on your "VS buy BA" point.
Quote: "If I was running DL, I would either buy AA or transfer all of VS’s slots to DL for their own purposes"
Owning 49% of VS does not give any rights or opportunities to transfer VS slots to DL. It's a similar position to SQ, take 49% of the profits, if/when there are any.
Not convinced that AF-KL are in a position to buyout Branson as they have to sort out the "basket case" (too harsh?) that is AF. Equally not convinced that Branson is likely to sell.
Quote: "What BA really want is a bigger T5 containing all their operations, until then I would say the second best option would be either consolidating at T3 + T5 (which would require a CTA area at T3) or T2 + T5 (this means that BA get to use t of the newest and best terminals at LHR)"
No it doesn't, it needs the underground shuttle link to be extended from LHR-5 and its satelites to LHR-3 and the new LHR-1/2 and all its satelites. Obviously this would be a long term arrangement once the expansion issue is sorted out. A common travel area arrivals section at LHR-3 would be unnecessary duplication.
Quote: "The only real benefit for DL is a bigger share on the LON-NYC market, but if really wants that, then they should buy AA (which would give then a even bigger share) and they will also get a bigger NYC share and a much bigger Latin American share"
Cheaper to buy slots rather than half an airline if increasing New York capacity is the aim. It's already a saturated route, is it 27 flights/day? Is there room for more capacity?
Quote: "If he can do deals with an Ultra Christian-Homophobic-Scottish Nationalist-Free Marketer-Future Scottish Transport Secretary, then SRB can do deals with an airline that is no longer using illegal means to destory VS and is not the real enemy (they are located in Mainland Europe and the Middle East)"
Can we be a little less judgemental please and just name names!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Virgin LHR-MAN
Presumably this new domestic route is to compete with the fast and direct train service between the 2 cities(from london Euston)......good thinking but hang on, isnt the train service operated by err, virgin??!!
Did they instigate this route when they thought they had lost their west coast rail franchise to the first group? In the shambles that followed they have held onto the franchise for 2 more years at least.
So is it just me who is wondering why virgin want to compete with themselves??
Did they instigate this route when they thought they had lost their west coast rail franchise to the first group? In the shambles that followed they have held onto the franchise for 2 more years at least.
So is it just me who is wondering why virgin want to compete with themselves??
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are now parts of pprune that I just don't want to read anymore. Where runways will go in the UK and other airline/airport/routes topics used to be interesting. It's not a discussion anymore. It's just reading one ppruner's comments all of the time!
I've had enough, which for me, is a real shame.
Airlift
Posted from Pprune.org App for Android
I've had enough, which for me, is a real shame.
Airlift
Posted from Pprune.org App for Android
"VS is only solution for its long term survival is to buy BA off IAG or do a deal with IAG that involves the gradual takeover of the airline, but securing its short term future"
Crikey!
Crikey!