Belfast International-2
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Up There
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, wonder of wonders. Ryanair are switching BFS - London flts from Gatwick (where they have a network of four other routes, three of them in Ireland) to Stansted where they have network of 150 routes with connecting possibilities all over the place. Those who want to go to Gatwick can still do so on a very good easyJet schedule. The main Belfast - London volume flow will now move over to STN which is very well equipped to handle it, and has a regular train service into London, only marginally longer in journey time than Gatwick - Victoria. And the world will still go round. Problem?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Belfast
Age: 40
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that RYR are a raging capitalist organisation, the first place to point a finger would be at low yield. Planes can be full all day long but at £9.99 each way, if nobody purchases any extra’s they ain’t going to be making any money.
I also don’t believe they had any real intention of staying on the route. STN makes much more sense. In my opinion, the LGW thing was an attempt to piss off easyJet whilst also raising their profile again in NI.
Looks like the ability to book Gatwick has been removed now from the booking engine. It would appear that route is officially dead and the score is easyJet 1-0 Ryanair. It will be interesting to see if Ryanair continue to price dump on STN in order to squeeze easyJet.
I also don’t believe they had any real intention of staying on the route. STN makes much more sense. In my opinion, the LGW thing was an attempt to piss off easyJet whilst also raising their profile again in NI.
Looks like the ability to book Gatwick has been removed now from the booking engine. It would appear that route is officially dead and the score is easyJet 1-0 Ryanair. It will be interesting to see if Ryanair continue to price dump on STN in order to squeeze easyJet.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Up There
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep - that’s what happened when Virgin gave up flying Heathrow - Scotland and handed back remedy slots. But because of the EU rulings on IAG taking over BMI and then EI, IAG can’t use the remedy slots. That’s why flybe picked up LHR slots to Edinburgh and Aberdeen. Also more slots now sloshing around in Gatwick coz all MON slots freed up for re-distribution. Strange as it might seem the only logical airline to take up the Ex Ryanair Belfast Gatwick slots might be Norwegian..
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Ryanair's point of view, it makes a lot more sense to operate to STN than LGW given their size of operations at STN, and the move will give BFS a second 'hub' connection (after LGW with U2/DY) given that Ryanair will soon be rolling out single ticket connections via STN in the next year or so.
From the London business traveller's point of view, this is bad news, given that LHR, LGW and LCY are the preferred airports for these travellers. However, if the rumours about IAG regaining the LGW slots are true, we could see the resumption of BHD-LGW which would benefit the business community a lot more than Ryanair's BFS-LGW route.
From the budget/leisure traveller's point of view, Ryanair's move will initially provide more choice, but may well lead to easyJet increasing fares on BFS-LGW, especially if IAG don't resume their LGW flights. And of course, given that easyJet have only a small base at STN, they may scrap their BFS-STN route instead of fighting Ryanair, thus leading to a reduction in seats available between Belfast and London.
From the London business traveller's point of view, this is bad news, given that LHR, LGW and LCY are the preferred airports for these travellers. However, if the rumours about IAG regaining the LGW slots are true, we could see the resumption of BHD-LGW which would benefit the business community a lot more than Ryanair's BFS-LGW route.
From the budget/leisure traveller's point of view, Ryanair's move will initially provide more choice, but may well lead to easyJet increasing fares on BFS-LGW, especially if IAG don't resume their LGW flights. And of course, given that easyJet have only a small base at STN, they may scrap their BFS-STN route instead of fighting Ryanair, thus leading to a reduction in seats available between Belfast and London.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The way I see it is the move was 100% based on costs, yield never got off the ground in terms of BFS/LGW. They can now fly from STN at attract the majority of the same customers at a lower cost and similar fares.
It's still bad PR giving up such a high frequency route to one of your biggest rivals (almost unheard of). There will be a lot of happy people at Luton today, they have taken a hammering on LGW over the last year or two.
It's still bad PR giving up such a high frequency route to one of your biggest rivals (almost unheard of). There will be a lot of happy people at Luton today, they have taken a hammering on LGW over the last year or two.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know this is about Belfast, but there's no way Stansted is 'marginally longer' than the Gatwick options. Stansted Express is pathetic. I can't really say it's a loss to Belfast as easyJet have maintained a good BFS LGW timetable. I wonder how they will compete with FR to STN...
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have used a number of services to Gatwick and it varies.
Thameslink to London Bridge: 30 minutes+
Thameslink to Farringdon: 1 hour.
Thameslink to City Thameslink: 1 hour.
Thameslink to St Pancras: 65 minutes.
Southern to London Bridge: 70 minutes.
Gatwick Express: 30 minutes.
So aside from the Gatwick express, most services to Central London are in excess of 50 minutes, which is a longer journey than the Greater Anglia operated Stansted Express.
I don't think the Stansted Express is pathetic, it operates every 15 minutes and only takes 30-40 minutes. The service has wifi and is operated by class 379 trains which are under 7 years old, aside from the Thameslink class 700, the other operators use older trains. If you use Southern, you run the risk of having your service cancelled with their strikes, which btw are ongoing at the moment.
So, I think your issue is outright snobbery.
Thameslink to London Bridge: 30 minutes+
Thameslink to Farringdon: 1 hour.
Thameslink to City Thameslink: 1 hour.
Thameslink to St Pancras: 65 minutes.
Southern to London Bridge: 70 minutes.
Gatwick Express: 30 minutes.
So aside from the Gatwick express, most services to Central London are in excess of 50 minutes, which is a longer journey than the Greater Anglia operated Stansted Express.
I don't think the Stansted Express is pathetic, it operates every 15 minutes and only takes 30-40 minutes. The service has wifi and is operated by class 379 trains which are under 7 years old, aside from the Thameslink class 700, the other operators use older trains. If you use Southern, you run the risk of having your service cancelled with their strikes, which btw are ongoing at the moment.
So, I think your issue is outright snobbery.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyway, no need to argue when the facts are freely available.
Last edited by SealinkBF; 9th Nov 2017 at 03:51.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have used a number of services to Gatwick and it varies.
Thameslink to London Bridge: 30 minutes+
Thameslink to Farringdon: 1 hour.
Thameslink to City Thameslink: 1 hour.
Thameslink to St Pancras: 65 minutes.
Southern to London Bridge: 70 minutes.
Gatwick Express: 30 minutes.
So aside from the Gatwick express, most services to Central London are in excess of 50 minutes, which is a longer journey than the Greater Anglia operated Stansted Express.
I don't think the Stansted Express is pathetic, it operates every 15 minutes and only takes 30-40 minutes. The service has wifi and is operated by class 379 trains which are under 7 years old, aside from the Thameslink class 700, the other operators use older trains. If you use Southern, you run the risk of having your service cancelled with their strikes, which btw are ongoing at the moment.
So, I think your issue is outright snobbery.
Thameslink to London Bridge: 30 minutes+
Thameslink to Farringdon: 1 hour.
Thameslink to City Thameslink: 1 hour.
Thameslink to St Pancras: 65 minutes.
Southern to London Bridge: 70 minutes.
Gatwick Express: 30 minutes.
So aside from the Gatwick express, most services to Central London are in excess of 50 minutes, which is a longer journey than the Greater Anglia operated Stansted Express.
I don't think the Stansted Express is pathetic, it operates every 15 minutes and only takes 30-40 minutes. The service has wifi and is operated by class 379 trains which are under 7 years old, aside from the Thameslink class 700, the other operators use older trains. If you use Southern, you run the risk of having your service cancelled with their strikes, which btw are ongoing at the moment.
So, I think your issue is outright snobbery.
And I do think Stansted Airport is an awful airport. I am not a huge fan of any airport (well, apart from Inverness and London City maybe) but I actively avoid any flight that uses Stansted. It's just hassle from start to finish.
I use Gatwick regularly, you've taken the slow stopping trains as a measure of overall journey times.
Gatwick to London Bridge is 32 minutes, every 30 minutes.
Gatwick to London Victoria is 31 minutes on Southern and 33 minutes on Gatwick Express.
Gatwick Express should actually be replaced with more Southern trains, as it's a waste capacity.
This is seriously off topic now.
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Uk
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They have set rules when it suits. As far as I can see, a lot of "policy or rules" are made up on the hoof, an excuse to get out of a situation. The more I see the less confidence I have. I think a lot of what is done is just to be seen to be re-assuring the public. If scanners are that good, why random searches and full body scanners?
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Gateshead, UK
Age: 25
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah... What it must be like having the choice between 3 different London airports on 2 different LCC's. Not to mention the other 2 (completely different) London airports available down the road on 3 other carriers...
5 airlines to 5 London area airports and there is still room to complain about a relatively minor reshuffle. There's still a LGW service and there is no/negligible net loss. This without mentioning the fact that, in all likelihood, EZY/FR will both come out of this stronger by offering flights to their respective hubs, both of which will soon have connection opportunities.
Congratulations Belfast, this is one of the very few examples EVER of the market actually being in favour of the consumer. Normally in aviation, you would have expected to see FR dumping seats into LGW and EZY dumping seats into STN until one or both gave in and BFS was left worse off than it was before.
Sincerely, a begrudged geordie suffering at the hands of the BA monopoly, refusing to pay £350 to fly to London
5 airlines to 5 London area airports and there is still room to complain about a relatively minor reshuffle. There's still a LGW service and there is no/negligible net loss. This without mentioning the fact that, in all likelihood, EZY/FR will both come out of this stronger by offering flights to their respective hubs, both of which will soon have connection opportunities.
Congratulations Belfast, this is one of the very few examples EVER of the market actually being in favour of the consumer. Normally in aviation, you would have expected to see FR dumping seats into LGW and EZY dumping seats into STN until one or both gave in and BFS was left worse off than it was before.
Sincerely, a begrudged geordie suffering at the hands of the BA monopoly, refusing to pay £350 to fly to London
Sincerely, a begrudged geordie suffering at the hands of the BA monopoly, refusing to pay £350 to fly to London
As for BFS-STN. Is anyone actually surprised by this turn of events?
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts