Heathrow-3
Join Date: Mar 2023
Location: London
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The funny thing is Gatwick's longhaul network this summer is pretty good. British Airways, Norse, Air India, Qatar Airways, Emirates, Air China, Jetblue, Delta, Bamboo Airways, Air Transat, Westjet and Saudia all offering flights. In the next two weeks we shall see Delta and Lufthansa commence flights here. Air Algerie asked for Gatwick slots for this summer and didn't get any, Scandinavian the same. ITA airways hold slots at Stansted for this summer so another interesting one.
I completely understand what you are saying though and I think we are seeing a little bit of that already. Sky Express have moved and Air Mauritius are following later in the year.
I completely understand what you are saying though and I think we are seeing a little bit of that already. Sky Express have moved and Air Mauritius are following later in the year.
When I fly, three things usually matter - preferring nonstop over one-stop, schedule and price - similiar to a lot of people I imagine.
I live in London and am increasingly finding that for travel within Europe, Heathrow is becoming far less relevant - it seems that if you're not travelling long-haul, the like of LGW, STN and LTN are London's primary airports. Yes, I imagine LHR's fees are a factor in this.
I'm wondering if some of the European shorthaul network carriers may eventually decide the prestige of the LHR name just isn't worth it any more given the costs of being at LHR
Do the following really need to remain solely at LHR ? Could they decide to move elsewhere ?
Air Algerie - Algiers
Air Serbia - Belgrade
Bulgaria Air - Sofia
Croatia Airlines - Zagreb + Split
Tarom - Bucharest
Tunisair - Tunis
I'm wondering also if ITA, KLM or SAS are really benefitting from their Heathrow focus to their hubs, or whether it's time to move some of their less connection-heavy flights out to other London airports. Emirates can make LGW and STN work... so why not KLM ? I'm wondering also if Eurowings might want to look at LGW or STN - Lufthansa are opening a Gatwick-Frankfurt route this month
I'm sure the FF crowd will harrumph and moan (they always do about anything)... but an airline should be focussing on profit.
I know the received wisdom that moving from LHR to LGW never works well... but at some point, an airline has to question received wisdom.
Any thoughts ?
I live in London and am increasingly finding that for travel within Europe, Heathrow is becoming far less relevant - it seems that if you're not travelling long-haul, the like of LGW, STN and LTN are London's primary airports. Yes, I imagine LHR's fees are a factor in this.
I'm wondering if some of the European shorthaul network carriers may eventually decide the prestige of the LHR name just isn't worth it any more given the costs of being at LHR
Do the following really need to remain solely at LHR ? Could they decide to move elsewhere ?
Air Algerie - Algiers
Air Serbia - Belgrade
Bulgaria Air - Sofia
Croatia Airlines - Zagreb + Split
Tarom - Bucharest
Tunisair - Tunis
I'm wondering also if ITA, KLM or SAS are really benefitting from their Heathrow focus to their hubs, or whether it's time to move some of their less connection-heavy flights out to other London airports. Emirates can make LGW and STN work... so why not KLM ? I'm wondering also if Eurowings might want to look at LGW or STN - Lufthansa are opening a Gatwick-Frankfurt route this month
I'm sure the FF crowd will harrumph and moan (they always do about anything)... but an airline should be focussing on profit.
I know the received wisdom that moving from LHR to LGW never works well... but at some point, an airline has to question received wisdom.
Any thoughts ?
I think it's been mentioned before that EK can make things work that others wouldn't even consider (A380 to GLA, B.777W to NCL any one?), so their success at STN and LGW might not be a good indicator - they've also got quite a presence at LHR.
Emirates are quite exceptional, literally exceptional at what they do and so are not a good guide for the rest in this case.
Modern alliance connectivity is important to legacy carriers which is why Lufthansa and United are co-located in T2 and why AF/KL tried to stay in T3.
T2 = mostly STAR ALLIANCE
T3 = mostly OneWorld
T4 = alliance overflow and others.
LGW has always relatively poorer here and quite how long Saudia will be at Gatters is an interesting point around "prestige" as it might actually matter here.
Air Mauritius is skint and needs to cut costs or die, ignore the fluff about needing more slots at LHR.
Not sure why Lufthansa are trying Gatters yet again as Germany has never done all that well out of West Sussex as BA kept finding out, but easyJet somehow make work.
So for me it's all about feed and connectivity, the same rationale BA use to try and understand what can be shifted to LGW without losing too much yield. Delta moved the last ATL to LHR and found greater use of connections than was available at Gatters, conversely with the USD exchange rate, this is a great time for US travellers to visit Britain and so chucking an (ancient but paid off) B767-300ER into the LGW market is intended to be complimentary as in a strong year it won't cannibalise JFK-LHR, same with BA who offer a less premium B777 on the route with no First. LGW and LHR are commonly different offerings in the London market. What well works at one might fail at the other. SkyExpress for example may do better at LGW at the loco end without Aegean in direct competition with a higher frequency.
Modern alliance connectivity is important to legacy carriers which is why Lufthansa and United are co-located in T2 and why AF/KL tried to stay in T3.
T2 = mostly STAR ALLIANCE
T3 = mostly OneWorld
T4 = alliance overflow and others.
LGW has always relatively poorer here and quite how long Saudia will be at Gatters is an interesting point around "prestige" as it might actually matter here.
Air Mauritius is skint and needs to cut costs or die, ignore the fluff about needing more slots at LHR.
Not sure why Lufthansa are trying Gatters yet again as Germany has never done all that well out of West Sussex as BA kept finding out, but easyJet somehow make work.
So for me it's all about feed and connectivity, the same rationale BA use to try and understand what can be shifted to LGW without losing too much yield. Delta moved the last ATL to LHR and found greater use of connections than was available at Gatters, conversely with the USD exchange rate, this is a great time for US travellers to visit Britain and so chucking an (ancient but paid off) B767-300ER into the LGW market is intended to be complimentary as in a strong year it won't cannibalise JFK-LHR, same with BA who offer a less premium B777 on the route with no First. LGW and LHR are commonly different offerings in the London market. What well works at one might fail at the other. SkyExpress for example may do better at LGW at the loco end without Aegean in direct competition with a higher frequency.
With four different terminals scattered across half of W London and arranged to suit the convenience of the airlines I think "connectivity" is a bit of a myth at LHR
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As long as people overseas associate Heathrow as the main airport in London, it’ll continue to be the airport of choice for their airlines.
Which airport you use as a resident of the SE of England depends where you live, but Heathrow will always be the first airport the majority of overseas tourists think of and search for - just like JFK, SFO and LAX.
Which airport you use as a resident of the SE of England depends where you live, but Heathrow will always be the first airport the majority of overseas tourists think of and search for - just like JFK, SFO and LAX.
For BA this model breaks as they're too big for one terminal but the point remains that the % of connections over LHR is way higher than other London airports because protected same ticket connections are sold between airlines, usually in the same terminal, whereas locos generally don't do this due to the cost burden. (some small exceptions apply. LGW no longer even offers airside flight connections and STN never has (I think? ISTBC).
One of the arguments AGAINST runway 3 is that so many people are only connecting.....
But I don't care about airline alliances - I don't want to have to spend 30-60 minutes changing terminals to suit their corporate model
They're not split up to suit the airlines corporate models, they're co-located in the main order to allow easier connections and passenger's lives simpler. There are exceptions but to suggest the set up is done to inconvenience the passenger isn't true.
Emirates are heavily involved in maritime staff movements (world wide), cruise passengers (they own a major travel company in the UK specifically for cruises, east bound only) and travel marketing in the Asian countries to the various UK destinations. They use ELR to fly direct to the US, therefore LHR is not a hub, as it was in the past.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Age: 63
Posts: 1,158
Received 31 Likes
on
16 Posts
I am outside the SE in the North of the UK or in Munich for work. The importance to me and many other people in the none SE of LHR / Gatwick is negligible. The use of BA has ceased many years ago which you can see in the decline in the number of shuttle flights and passenger numbers. If going East you change at DXB / SIN/ HK - maybe. In Europe Amsterdam/ Frankfurt/ Munich / Paris or direct flights it has ceased to be relevant and you can also see a corresponding drop in BA numbers in people from areas outside the SE.
My regular shuttle flights into and from Munich and Frankfurt are nearly always full and that includes Business Class. The last time I was on a BA morning shuttle it was only half full and that was over 10 years ago. I don’t think there is a prayer that LHR will get another runway and the flight of people to other carriers from BA continues.
Incidentally you still get fed in Business Class with LH a procedure which has died a death on BA short haul I am informed by Mrs Mac who still has use them. However she is with her CEO next week outbound from Manchester with LH and that policy of BA is up for discussion after another BA luggage incident.
Cheers
Mr Mac
My regular shuttle flights into and from Munich and Frankfurt are nearly always full and that includes Business Class. The last time I was on a BA morning shuttle it was only half full and that was over 10 years ago. I don’t think there is a prayer that LHR will get another runway and the flight of people to other carriers from BA continues.
Incidentally you still get fed in Business Class with LH a procedure which has died a death on BA short haul I am informed by Mrs Mac who still has use them. However she is with her CEO next week outbound from Manchester with LH and that policy of BA is up for discussion after another BA luggage incident.
Cheers
Mr Mac
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am outside the SE in the North of the UK or in Munich for work. The importance to me and many other people in the none SE of LHR / Gatwick is negligible. The use of BA has ceased many years ago which you can see in the decline in the number of shuttle flights and passenger numbers. If going East you change at DXB / SIN/ HK - maybe. In Europe Amsterdam/ Frankfurt/ Munich / Paris or direct flights it has ceased to be relevant and you can also see a corresponding drop in BA numbers in people from areas outside the SE.
My regular shuttle flights into and from Munich and Frankfurt are nearly always full and that includes Business Class. The last time I was on a BA morning shuttle it was only half full and that was over 10 years ago. I don’t think there is a prayer that LHR will get another runway and the flight of people to other carriers from BA continues.
Incidentally you still get fed in Business Class with LH a procedure which has died a death on BA short haul I am informed by Mrs Mac who still has use them. However she is with her CEO next week outbound from Manchester with LH and that policy of BA is up for discussion after another BA luggage incident.
Cheers
Mr Mac
My regular shuttle flights into and from Munich and Frankfurt are nearly always full and that includes Business Class. The last time I was on a BA morning shuttle it was only half full and that was over 10 years ago. I don’t think there is a prayer that LHR will get another runway and the flight of people to other carriers from BA continues.
Incidentally you still get fed in Business Class with LH a procedure which has died a death on BA short haul I am informed by Mrs Mac who still has use them. However she is with her CEO next week outbound from Manchester with LH and that policy of BA is up for discussion after another BA luggage incident.
Cheers
Mr Mac
Emirates are heavily involved in maritime staff movements (world wide), cruise passengers (they own a major travel company in the UK specifically for cruises, east bound only) and travel marketing in the Asian countries to the various UK destinations. They use ELR to fly direct to the US, therefore LHR is not a hub, as it was in the past.
I'm with Mr Mac places that have decent connections to other airports see a lot of traffic bypassing London. BA domestic is a London only operation.
Sorry that's flat out false and wholly wrong. Regional airports have had AMS connections for years, this is nothing new. How do think BA fill all of those many US flights? WITH FEED!
You're saying that 100% of the BA domestic flights are London bound only and that none are connecting to that big old long haul operation on a protected connection? SERIOUSLY?
This is why INV places high value on LHR flight, inbound traffic and connections. Same reason Loganair are looking to move LDY from STN to LHR, to be able to connect to long haul and the world.
Stop making **** up. By all means go with AF/KL/LH if the deal works but please stay in the real world.
You're saying that 100% of the BA domestic flights are London bound only and that none are connecting to that big old long haul operation on a protected connection? SERIOUSLY?
This is why INV places high value on LHR flight, inbound traffic and connections. Same reason Loganair are looking to move LDY from STN to LHR, to be able to connect to long haul and the world.
Stop making **** up. By all means go with AF/KL/LH if the deal works but please stay in the real world.
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: London
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although ironically Emirates have never been bigger at LHR offering 6 x A380s per day. LHR is clearly still a hub and the only one in the UK. What you mean is that fewer customers heading from East Asia will change at LHR and use BA which is true. But let's not pretend LHR isn't a hub, that's not true.
Also influential in the movement of tech kids from the sub continent to California for the likes of Microsoft, Infosys and such
Does Akshata Murthy (Sunak) own shares in the travel businesses for these migrants per chance Whopping trade discounts personal points and dividends every which way
Last edited by Rutan16; 5th Apr 2023 at 17:03.
Sorry that's flat out false and wholly wrong. Regional airports have had AMS connections for years, this is nothing new. How do think BA fill all of those many US flights? WITH FEED!
You're saying that 100% of the BA domestic flights are London bound only and that none are connecting to that big old long haul operation on a protected connection? SERIOUSLY?
This is why INV places high value on LHR flight, inbound traffic and connections. Same reason Loganair are looking to move LDY from STN to LHR, to be able to connect to long haul and the world.
Stop making **** up. By all means go with AF/KL/LH if the deal works but please stay in the real world.
You're saying that 100% of the BA domestic flights are London bound only and that none are connecting to that big old long haul operation on a protected connection? SERIOUSLY?
This is why INV places high value on LHR flight, inbound traffic and connections. Same reason Loganair are looking to move LDY from STN to LHR, to be able to connect to long haul and the world.
Stop making **** up. By all means go with AF/KL/LH if the deal works but please stay in the real world.
It's natural to support LHR but for most of my life it's not been an attractive airport to fly through for many reasons. It was the Economist that said ""London Heathrow Airport - the three most depressing words in the English language"
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Age: 63
Posts: 1,158
Received 31 Likes
on
16 Posts
I have many problems with BA's short haul operation but there are a few points here that just aren't right. You do get fed in BA business class and I'd argue the food is a step up (although not a huge one) from what LH offers. Loadings obviously vary and I would agree that Newcastle and Manchester have suffered but given the addition of Belfast, BA probably hasn't declined that much in domestic operations in the post-bmi period overall. I've been on plenty of 100% full shuttle flights recently.
If you are using Manchester as your start of your BA journey getting bags in or outbound can be problematic as well as being the first shuttle cancelled on in or out. Funnily enough if on LH for example they will work around or hotel at their cost. BA in bound from for me from South America ( to avoid confusion) my shuttle was delayed for operational reasons , 5 hr coach journey on a Friday night after a flight from BA . Bags arrived 24 hrs later. My wife who is a regular BA ( Gold describes BA Europe as a joke). We both have lots of miles with Star Alliance and One World so often fly cheaply but she prefers LH over BA for professionalism of CC and flying sandwiches as she describes them.
Kind regards
Mr Mac
