Newcastle-9
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tyne and Wear
Age: 35
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great news passenger numbers have increased again, though the Heathrow figures are concerning to me, they keep showing a decline and more BA flights are being operated but the 319 now and the 5 daily flights seem to be being extended for longer periods of time than it being 6 daily.
On a separate note, do you think that Jet2 will self handle under the wing at Newcastle? They do so at East Midlands and the base isn't much bigger than the one in Newcastle. Since aviator pulled out of Newcastle it means Swissport now has a monopoly at Newcastle so can charge what prices they want which may stifle growth going forward. Unless an airline self handles themselves.
On a separate note, do you think that Jet2 will self handle under the wing at Newcastle? They do so at East Midlands and the base isn't much bigger than the one in Newcastle. Since aviator pulled out of Newcastle it means Swissport now has a monopoly at Newcastle so can charge what prices they want which may stifle growth going forward. Unless an airline self handles themselves.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect LHR will continue to decline - it's mainly an inter-connection market I suspect as anyone with any business in C London/Canary Wharf will use the train
If the UK economy continues to stagnate numbers are likely to continue falling..............
If the UK economy continues to stagnate numbers are likely to continue falling..............
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Gateshead, UK
Age: 25
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still think they'd do better running 3/4 daily to LHR and 2/3 daily into LCY. I'd have thought they'd jump at the chance to use some LHR slots on more lucrative routes. At the minute we have:
NCL-LHR
BA1321, 07:35 Mon-Sun (08:05 Sat)
BA1325, 09:35 Mon-Sun
BA1327, 12:05 Mon-Sun
BA1333, 14:40 Mon-Sun (14:20 Tue, 15:50 Sat)
BA1335, 17:10 Mon-Sun (17:30 Mon, 16:25 Sat)
BA1337, 19:40 Mon-Sun (ex Sat) Night stops
I'd suggest scrapping BA1327 and BA1335, leaving *roughly; 7, 9, 2 and 7 o'clock departures and adding something like:
LCY 07:00 - 08:15 NCL 09:00 - 10:15 LCY
LCY 16:00 - 17:15 NCL 18:00 - 19:15 LCY
LCY 19:00 - 20:15 NCL *07:00 - 08:15 LCY
NCL-LHR
BA1321, 07:35 Mon-Sun (08:05 Sat)
BA1325, 09:35 Mon-Sun
BA1327, 12:05 Mon-Sun
BA1333, 14:40 Mon-Sun (14:20 Tue, 15:50 Sat)
BA1335, 17:10 Mon-Sun (17:30 Mon, 16:25 Sat)
BA1337, 19:40 Mon-Sun (ex Sat) Night stops
I'd suggest scrapping BA1327 and BA1335, leaving *roughly; 7, 9, 2 and 7 o'clock departures and adding something like:
LCY 07:00 - 08:15 NCL 09:00 - 10:15 LCY
LCY 16:00 - 17:15 NCL 18:00 - 19:15 LCY
LCY 19:00 - 20:15 NCL *07:00 - 08:15 LCY
I still think they'd do better running 3/4 daily to LHR and 2/3 daily into LCY. I'd have thought they'd jump at the chance to use some LHR slots on more lucrative routes. At the minute we have:
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Gateshead, UK
Age: 25
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know that we've lost 400,000, largely O&D passengers to London since 2007. I also know that London City is under 15 minutes from Canary Wharf on the DLR, you can double that (and a bit more) from Kings Cross and it takes longer to get to Canary Wharf from Heathrow than it does to fly from Newcastle. There is also the fact that having flights into London City would give BA a competitive advantage over Virgin with the business community
Another thing I know is that Newcastle is right on the awkward threshold that still makes the train really competitive, whereas the plane has the edge from Edinburgh/Glasgow due to distance and the time taken.
The bits I don't know are where they would get the slots or spare aircraft. But I'll hazard a guess that when the upgrades are finished at LCY things will look a little more flexible. And i'm sure Eastern would always be happy to lease in another aircraft to BA if they wanted/needed it
Another thing I know is that Newcastle is right on the awkward threshold that still makes the train really competitive, whereas the plane has the edge from Edinburgh/Glasgow due to distance and the time taken.
The bits I don't know are where they would get the slots or spare aircraft. But I'll hazard a guess that when the upgrades are finished at LCY things will look a little more flexible. And i'm sure Eastern would always be happy to lease in another aircraft to BA if they wanted/needed it
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Teesside, UK
Age: 33
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have to say I've used BA quite a few times in the last year and have always been surprised at the amount of London-Newcastle traffic on that route. Certainly not majority connecting as I expected.
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Gateshead, UK
Age: 25
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SWBKCB, I suspect BA probably do know that, just as much as I suspect you're quite deliberately trying to be awkward
Heathrow Harry, they're all pretty small, BACF's largest aircraft doesn't even have 100 seats. So realistically we're talking about having to fill half of what currently goes into Heathrow. I really can't see any issue in filling a few Embraers especially if Heathrow rotations were swapped for City rotations.
I can understand the scepticism. London is, after all a very niche, exotic destination and London City airport... Don't get me started, big inconvenient mess of a place in such an inconvenient location I can't even understand why they built it there in the first place!
It's not bloody Timbuktu!
Heathrow Harry, they're all pretty small, BACF's largest aircraft doesn't even have 100 seats. So realistically we're talking about having to fill half of what currently goes into Heathrow. I really can't see any issue in filling a few Embraers especially if Heathrow rotations were swapped for City rotations.
I can understand the scepticism. London is, after all a very niche, exotic destination and London City airport... Don't get me started, big inconvenient mess of a place in such an inconvenient location I can't even understand why they built it there in the first place!
It's not bloody Timbuktu!
Last edited by EK77WNCL; 12th Nov 2017 at 18:29. Reason: Didn't read well
SWBKCB, I suspect BA probably do know that, just as much as I suspect you're quite deliberately trying to be awkward
I still think they'd do better running 3/4 daily to LHR and 2/3 daily into LCY
If the business case is so good - Virgin Money have a big office in Gosforth....
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Durham
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel LHR figures have reduced simply due to lower capacity offered on this route. Many services in 2007 were operated via 757 a/c, and I remember the odd 767 substituted occasionally- LCY is a different model with premium fares for business customers heading to the "City"
CDG in my opinion is also restricted by AF capacity offered on this route, Fares for point to point are high, if leisure customers were to consider, for example w/e breaks to Paris or short breaks to Disneyland.
EZY I'm sure could add extra capacity without effecting AF connecting business model too much - Same may apply to AMS vs. KLM., although wouldn't want to see legacy airlines diminished.
SAS (Braathens) to Oslo, Stavanger and Bergen were also daily 737 routes in the day - not sure of the volumes. too
CDG in my opinion is also restricted by AF capacity offered on this route, Fares for point to point are high, if leisure customers were to consider, for example w/e breaks to Paris or short breaks to Disneyland.
EZY I'm sure could add extra capacity without effecting AF connecting business model too much - Same may apply to AMS vs. KLM., although wouldn't want to see legacy airlines diminished.
SAS (Braathens) to Oslo, Stavanger and Bergen were also daily 737 routes in the day - not sure of the volumes. too
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Gateshead, UK
Age: 25
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do apologise if you think I'm being arrogant, it wasn't my intention.
GrahamK, Eastern actually operated a 4 daily service with a wet leased Dornier 328. They were brand new to London City, charge extortionate fares and were pushed out of LCY by the increasing costs for smaller aircraft, which has subsequently pushed out almost all of the smaller aircraft that used to operate from there. It was a very expensive setup from the start and it would have required a lot of people paying the high fares to keep it going.
In the case of Newcastle, you're more likely to fill 98 seats on an E190 at £60-120 than 30-odd seats on a Dornier at £300+ and probably make a bigger profit
VentureGo, I agree, KLM didn't reduce service when EZY came on and EZY/AF survived nicely together for years. Your comment about leisure, interestingly, when I've looked LCY can sometimes be the cheaper option. Huge amounts of capacity have been lost on the London route and I really do wish we had a second option, even if it was another BA flight to a different airport
GrahamK, Eastern actually operated a 4 daily service with a wet leased Dornier 328. They were brand new to London City, charge extortionate fares and were pushed out of LCY by the increasing costs for smaller aircraft, which has subsequently pushed out almost all of the smaller aircraft that used to operate from there. It was a very expensive setup from the start and it would have required a lot of people paying the high fares to keep it going.
In the case of Newcastle, you're more likely to fill 98 seats on an E190 at £60-120 than 30-odd seats on a Dornier at £300+ and probably make a bigger profit
VentureGo, I agree, KLM didn't reduce service when EZY came on and EZY/AF survived nicely together for years. Your comment about leisure, interestingly, when I've looked LCY can sometimes be the cheaper option. Huge amounts of capacity have been lost on the London route and I really do wish we had a second option, even if it was another BA flight to a different airport
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don’t understand why it is being suggested to reduce frequency on Newcastle’s busiest route. LHR. (At least I think it is)
I think the numbers hold up well despite a drop in Sept. Yes there are more 319 aircraft being used. However during the winter schedule I think you will see more 320/321 aircraft being used. In addition capacity has been reduced slightly on all types with Club Europe now on that route.
Load factors remain very high.
Frequency is an important factor on this route for connections
I’m sure scrapping the 1327 and the 1335 and the inbounds would be most unwelcome.
Incidentally BA used to operate to both LGW and LHR once upon a time with A320 family and 737 aircraft up to 11 a day from NCL. Of course times have changed today.
A service to LCY would be welcome but not to the detriment of LHR.
I think the numbers hold up well despite a drop in Sept. Yes there are more 319 aircraft being used. However during the winter schedule I think you will see more 320/321 aircraft being used. In addition capacity has been reduced slightly on all types with Club Europe now on that route.
Load factors remain very high.
Frequency is an important factor on this route for connections
I’m sure scrapping the 1327 and the 1335 and the inbounds would be most unwelcome.
Incidentally BA used to operate to both LGW and LHR once upon a time with A320 family and 737 aircraft up to 11 a day from NCL. Of course times have changed today.
A service to LCY would be welcome but not to the detriment of LHR.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Durham
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EK77WNCL - BA to LCY if business case stands up - Although for added volume to LONDON Low Cost operators to LGW or secondly STN may be better option for fares to compete with rail. Connections to London are frequent and reasonable from LGW via Southern or Thameslink and quicker than Tube from LHR.
London City will always be premium price due to operators and nature of that market
London City will always be premium price due to operators and nature of that market
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Gateshead, UK
Age: 25
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If BA could hold up 5/6 daily LHR as well as a LCY service, that would be fantastic. Point to point traffic on LHR might drop, but the service could draw some passengers from ground transportation.
In an ideal world I think we would have British Airways to LHR and LCY as well as either Ryanair to Stansted or easyJet to Gatwick
Alas, consolidation is the name of the game! Keep what we've got and make money on it.
In an ideal world I think we would have British Airways to LHR and LCY as well as either Ryanair to Stansted or easyJet to Gatwick
Alas, consolidation is the name of the game! Keep what we've got and make money on it.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2007 v 2017 on LHR route... a lot of traffic going into LHR was onward connections. Emirates came in 2007 and took a large portion of connecting traffic for middle east, far east & downunder so that maybe part of the reason for a reduction in numbers...