This decision perfectly illustrates the unrealistic calls by some in Guernsey for improved & more extensive air links. If a State owned monopoly, bailed out by the Guernsey taxpayer, cannot afford to operate a service to the nation's capital (which would apparently be so essential to the island's finance industry) , who can ? It also demonstrates that a runway extension is not going to achieve this either. All it would do is ensure that loss making services would be operated by larger a/c .....for a while !

A sensible comment kcockayne. A pity Guernsey's myopic politicians fail to grasp such reasoning.

Agressive hand luggage check at GCI
 

Just been through GCI departures where there are lot of unhappy passengers
Very grumpy check in staff not only strictly policing hand luggage at bag drop off but also at the entrance to departures
There was a farcical scene of the baggage size checker having to be turned upside down to try and free a bit if trapped luggage
Guernsey airport is not the laid back airport it once wasabd aurigny seems to have lost is famous customer facing abilities

The baggage situation is going to get even stricter in the coming weeks, I say no more....

Surely enforcing the hand luggage policy is simply about avoiding too much hand luggage entering the cabin, and is therefore in the interests of all passengers. It's the right thing to do to avoid baggage problems impacting on punctuality.

They won't extend the runway because that will enable Easyjet to come in and show the state monopoly how they should be doing things.

Easy fly to Jersey from London airports for around £80 return. Aurigny fly from Gatwick to Guernsey for around £280 return.

Competition is sorely needed on the Guernsey route.

If Aurigny could keep the single E195 busy and airborne for 8hrs a day 6 days a week with a 30/40 minute turn they too could charge less than £100 return... But I think we both know that is never gonna happen! Its not the length of the runway that determines GCI success or Aurigny its their utilisation, capacity versus demand and bums on seats, you need to be a very strong brand with amazing marketing and a top notch ease of booking in order to win the day now, plus its always helpful to fly in the right direction also.

"you need to be a very strong brand with amazing marketing and a top notch ease of booking in order to win the day now"

Easyjet..

yes easyjet but you need a min demand in order to make a service viable for them based on the capacity they offer, I'm pretty sure they don't view the CI as a target ripe for picking, I'm sure they have the whole of flybe / eastern route data to chew through first prior to taking any risk and the GCI/LGW route and thats even even after a r/w extn that everyone harps on about is more of an ATR route than 150+ seat route.
now if ezy ever bought a fleet of E190E2's then yes - they would put both flybe / Eastern and Aurigny out of business...

Or the Bombardier C Series, presumably these would work at GCI?

easyJet would not need to offer morning, noon and night, they'd offer once a day during some times of the year. IOM is a good example I think, but BA and BE held on.

A little bit more then....
Consider the baggage situation today at GCI. A much stricter approach with pax being advised how much (in £) extra baggage will cost them. This is only fair when terms and conditions have already been stated that "Free Baggage" is 20kgs. Trying to get 26kgs through aint gonna work!

Another complication arose with baggage when GR604 reached LGW. Cases stowed in the forward hold of G-NSEY could not be retrieved as the hold would not open. After unsuccessful attempts to open it, the capt. elected to get the a/c back to GCI for repair. The EMB195 seems to have had its fair share of tech delays or instances of damage at LGW recently. This accounts for GR605/6 being behind schedule.

What is it going to cost AUR getting cases delivered to disgruntled pax - some of whom had onward flights from LGW? None of this is going to return AUR to profitability.:bored:

Perhaps the 195 is still under some sort of warranty, so Embraer can be asked to pick up the tab?

I doubt that the warranty covers bottles of nail varnish falling out of passengers' luggage and getting stuck in the locking mechanism.

Yes I heard today that it was caused by a bottle of nail varnish - expensive

Baggage charges will kick in in the next month or so, followed by a 3 tier seat charge - Standard Seat, Extra Legroom Seat & Seats near to exits for a swift disembarkation on arrival.