I took an internal flight in India (Udaipur-Delhi) with IndiGo at the end of last month, a very slick/impressive operation I have to say.

Just by the by, African Safari go way back further than the 1990s. I recall them operating a Britannia with the zebra striped tail from LGW in the 1970s.

Emirates wants more Gatwick slots
 

Attended the hearing of the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) on Thursday (2 May 2024) re Gatwick's application to bring its current standby / emergency runway into routine use to voice my support as an interested party living on the airport's doorstep in Crawley and listened with great interest to what Richard Jewesbury, Emirates country manager for the UK (and the Republic of Ireland as well I believe) had to say. It was very encouraging to hear him say that Emirates really values its long-standing business relationship with Gatwick which started back in 1987 when it became the first airport in Europe to which Emirates flew, that Gatwick generates both very strong and profitable outbound and inbound traffic flows, that Emirates wants more Gatwick slots, that they think the airport's proposal re its standby runway is a very smart way of making the best use of its existing facilities and that therefore they fully support it.

Nice to see a highly regarded long-haul airline recognise the value of Gatwick as a distinct catchment in its own right rather than a temporary Heathrow overflow and to fully commit to the airport for the long term. (Emirates have replicated this thinking at Stansted as well b.t.w., where its president Tim Clark has gone on record during a recent aviation industry get-together, saying that there is room for a third daily Emirates service at Stansted.) This not only makes me think that Emirates is going to revisit its pre pandemic plan to add a fourth daily Gatwick-Dubai frequency sooner rather than later, but my hope is also that more long-haul airlines will eventually come round to Emirates' point of view re Gatwick's value as a destination / point-of-origin in its own right.

IMHO, in addition to Qatar Airways, Air India is one of the airlines best-placed - over the medium to long term - to adopt Emirates' thinking on Gatwick, provided that they succeed in making India a hub for global air travel (centred on Delhi, Mumbai and Bengaluru) and adopt the MEB3 super connector model so successfully pioneered by Emirates over the past 15 years or so. Given that Singapore Airlines is slated to own 25.1% of Air India upon completion of the integration of Air India, Air India Express and Vistara (the Indian FSC originally established as a JV between the Tata group, the Indian tea to steel conglomerate whose founding family were the original owners of Air India and re-aqcuired the airline from the Indian government two years ago, and Singapore Airlines), my hope is also that Air India and Singapore Airlines will eventually integrate their operations along the lines of Air France - KLM, with Singapore Airlines not only contributing its Changi hub as the combined Air India - Singapore Airlines' fourth global hub, but also adopting Emirates' thinking on Gatwick.

"Gatwick as a catchment area in it's own right". What he means is that Emirates, as a quite exceptional carrier, can succeed where others fail. They can succesfully serve London from LHR, LGW and STN whereas most airlines cannot and should not even try. You scoffed at Lufthansa attempting to do this and blamed the carrier when in fact, it's a function of the market. Same goes for Aer Lingus, although I was surprised myself at that one. Delta run LGW-JFK on decades old B767s and LHR-JFK on factory new A339s with Delta One. That's a good example of the "Gatwick catchment area" vs. LHR waiting room, it's a relatively inferior offering. The growth in long haul with the Chinese carriers and Ethiopian is great BUT would up sticks and move to LHR tomorrow if they could get slots. As would Air Mauritius if they can get more slots, they didn't sell their LHR slots and given their cash situation, that's interesting.

Dedicated LGW long haul is BA, Norse, TUI, Emirates, Qatar and Icelandair. The rest would move out entirely if the market allowed them LHR access. Air India at LGW is a country mile from their own catchment area in London.

One might argue over Icelandair as ‘dedicated LGW long haul’

LGW long-haul
 

Correct. If Icelandair at LGW is classed as "long-haul", then the same criteria should also apply to Turkish Airlines at LGW.

Making LGW work for FSCs
 

I stand by what I said in one of my earlier contributions re Lufthansa being largely to blame for not succeeding to make LGW-FRA work for them. Not only did LH not have to face any direct LCC competitor (discounting Ryanair's STN-HHN service as STN is completely outside the Gatwick catchment area - essentially all of Sussex and Kent, east Surrey, the parts of Hants adjoining West Sussex (essentially Portsmouth) and south London (essentially Croydon) and HHN is actually closer to Luxembourg than to Frankfurt), there is also no competition from Eurostar (which, even if there was, would be irrelevant for the Gatwick catchment since Eurostar ditched Ashford as an en route pick-up / drop-off point in favour of Ebbsfleet). Had LH chosen different departure and arrival times at LGW which would have enabled people at either end of the route to make a day-return trip to either Frankfurt or London and their respective surroundings, the outcome could have been different as this would have been of interest to higher yield business traffic, for both business travellers living in LGW's catchment and those headed for it. However, an 11:15 am LGW departure gets you into FRA around 2 pm local time, meaning you have to head back to FRA airport barely two hours after you reached! Even in the opposite direction, for FRA-based day trippers, a 10:30 am arrival into LGW and a 5:45 pm (or thereabouts) LGW departure time is too short for a day-return. This left LH only with connecting passengers, a generally lower yielding market (compared with P2P) on LGW-FRA, an extremely competitive market, where - as far as direct competition at LGW is concerned, LH faced stiff competition from EK, QR and TK, all of which arguably have a better hard and soft product than LH, especially at the back of the plane, with EK and TK also having higher frequencies ex-LGW than LH (3 flights per day and up to 4 flights per day, respectively, vs. only 2 flights per day). As well, the final destinations of most of the FSC one-stop connections for people flying out of or into LGW tend to be in Asia - especially the Indian subcontinent and the Far East - where (apart from TK in India itself), EK / QR / TK either fly to far more places or have many more flights than LH). Given these indisputable facts, what did LH expect? How could they even think that their LGW-FRA service would not end in failure?

Re Delta's old 767s on LGW-JFK vs. their state-of-the-art 339s (and 359s) at LHR (with superior on-board products). True. But DL also fly the same, decades-old, clapped-out 767s on many of their other European routes, incl. routes serving capital cities with only one airport. Even United fly decades-old, clapped-out 767s on many of their prime TATL routes serving LHR! While these may have better on-board products than those 767s DL use to serve LGW and other secondary, seasonal European routes, they're still old, obsolete aircraft nonetheless, a bit like putting lipstick on a pig to disguise the fact that it is a pig.

Lastly, re LGW being miles from Air India's [west] London catchment around LHR, you are mistaken if you think that Indians and people of Indian origin in the UK only live around LHR despite their heavy concentration in the area. In fact, many Indian care home and IT workers in the UK actually work and live in LGW's catchment as well; in the case of IT workers, many of these people are in Crawley itself and nearby Horsham, working for companies like Thales and Royal Sun Alliance, respectively, for example; in the case of care home workers, many of these people are scattered across the entire Gatwick Diamond business region stretching from Brighton in the south to Croydon in the north and also stretching from the Portsmouth area in the west to the Eastbourne area in the east along the South Coast. And this is before even factoring in the region's diaspora (those settled in the area served by LGW for several generations). What this means in the context of AI's current four LGW routes serving Ahmedabad, Amritsar, Goa and Kochi for example is that only as far as Amritsar in the northwestern Indian state of Punjab is concerned, almost all users actually live in LHR's catchment; re Ahmedabad, while there are many people in LHR's catchment who originally came to the UK from the western Indian state of Gujarat (or whose descendants had migrated from there to East Africa during the colonial era before coming to the UK as well), there are also many people from this region of India in LGW's catchnent; as far as Kochi in the southwestern Indian state of Kerala is concerned, many more people using this service actually work and live in LGW's catchment than LHR's catchment, with many among them being care home workers, so LGW - rather than LHR - being the ideal airport for this route in particular; Goa, by comparison, doesn't have a big diaspora, especially in the Southeast (there is a bigger Goan community in the Midlands), with AI's LGW-GOX route primarily used by price-sensitive Brits for whom the London area airport is not the main consideration. Even AI's originally planned but now postponed LGW-BLR route, while unlike the other, more leisure- / VFR-focused LGW routes being more business-focused, will be well patronised if served from LGW rather than LHR given the large number of IT workers in LGW's catchment, many of whom are from Bengaluru, India's primary IT capital, or are settled there. Therefore, if there is an airline ideally suited to follow in Emirates' footsteps, i.e., adopting the MEB3 super connector global hub-and-spoke business model, incl. serving multiple London area airports, Air India must surely be a prime candidate for this role.

Flygatwick

I do appreciate your efforts, enthusiasm and input regarding London Gatwick Airport. You make some interesting points.

But if I could just make these polite remarks.

Your posts would be far easier to read and much more informative if your paragraphs weren't so long. Sentences lasting forever before a full stop. I give up reading the entirety of your posts as they come across as totally disconbobulated.

You have a lot of enthusiasm, which is obvious from your posts but please make them more reader friendly 😀

My comments to FlyGatwick.
1. LH - How many slots do you think are now available at LGW? None for a full day in Germany. Easyjet have tried all sorts of German cities, they do not make good money.
2. AI - How you been to Airports in India? They are nothing in comparison to ME3 carriers. Once India builds some new Airports, which they will do then they can look to some of those transit markets. I suspect if they get more slots at LHR, then they will transfer. The AI operation at LHR is well established and will always be the primary end game if slots become available. They are part of the Star Alliance so will want to be closer to UA, LH & TK at LHR.

LGW slot availability & state of Indian airports / AI's future at LGW
 

I agree with you on LGW slot availability and UK-Germany flights (with the exception of certain LCY flights) being traditionally low-yield and largely unprofitable in their own right. Nonetheless, LH should have known that with the slots they managed to get at LGW for their FRA flights, this was unlikely to be successful.

As far as the state of Indian airports vis-à-vis their counterparts in the Gulf is concerned, it depends to which airport you specifically refer. The standards vary widely. The one I have experienced at Bengaluru (Kempegowda Airport) - especially the new Terminal 2 - is world-class. In fact, in some aspects it's arguably ahead of DXB and not very far behind Singapore Changi. And then there is the brand-new airport at Navi Mumbai (New Bombay), which is set to open its doors later this year or early next. It'll be a two-runway airport from the start, and therefore will lend itself as a hub (unlike the current BOM airport, which like LGW is operated as a single-runway airport).

Air India's future at LGW will depend not only on LHR slot availability, but what their ultimate strategy pending a successful turnaround of the airline will be, i.e., whether they'll adopt the MEB3 global super connector business model. If that's the case, even though their main focus will always be on LHR, It'll actually make sense to link their Indian hubs to multiple London area airports, just like EK and QR do. The fact that AI are part of the Star Alliance should IMO not be an obstacle here. Further in this context, I actually disagree with you that being closer to its Star Alliance partners at LHR is an end for AI in itself, without taking into consideration whether the connections these partners can offer at LHR are actually sensible. If AI wants to enable its passengers to connect seamless to and from destinations in Germany to which it doesn't fly with its own metal, it will surely be far more efficient to do this via the LH hubs in FRA and MUC as connecting to / from Germany at LHR involves significant backtracking. And as far as facilitating TATL connections at LHR via AI's Star partners UA and AC is concerned, although these don't involve backtracking unlike in the case of Germany, encouraging AI passengers to transfer at LHR to / from UA and AC actually results in a revenue loss for AI's non-stop India-US and India-Canada flights, undermining the profitability of these ultra long-haul services - reportedly, AI's most profitable routes. This is therefore not in AI's interest (with the same applying to AI passengers changing at FRA or MUC onto LH / UA / AC TATL flights). Lastly, there is also the geopolitical factor impeding closer collaboration between AI and TK (apart from transferring between AI and TK flights at LHR involving even more backtracking than transferring between AI and LH flights at LHR, and TK's fast-growing IST hub being viewed with the same suspicion as EK's and QR's respective hubs at DXB and DOH by AI's top managenent). Turkey has traditionally been viewed in India as a friend of Pakistan, India's long-standing rival and foe. This is a widely held view amogst Indians, even at board level, and let's not forget in this context that AI's ultimate owners, the Tatas, are after all born and have lived in India for all of their lives despite their carefully crafted, highly polished cosmopolitan appearance. As well in this context, we need to remember that the current AI CEO, New Zealand national, ex-Scoot CEO Campbell Wilson, only got this role after his short-lived predecessor, a former TK CEO who is a Turkish national (and whose name I can't remember now) resigned in the face of strong public opposition in India to what was widely viewed as the appointment of a national of an unfriendly country, who had also gone on record previously as supporting his country's endorsement of the official Pakistani position on Kashmir, to the top job of a company many Indians regard as one of the jewels in their industrial crown.

Air Peace 777-300 operating today's LGW-LOS flight
 

Happened to see Air Peace use one of its 777-300s (one of a pair of former Singapore Airlines examples) depart Gatwick today while I was waiting for my bus to take me into Crawley from the South Terminal local bus stop 11:40-ish as takeoffs at the time were in an easterly direction over the railway tracks.

As much as I dislike the antics of the Air Peace CEO / chairman / founder / owner, the airline's livery looks absolutely stunning, especially on the 777-300. IMHO, easily the best livery of any airline currently operating at Gatwick.

Lufthansa are pulling the Gatwick service. The last flight between Gatwick and Frankfurt will be on 30th June.

Norwegian launching a winter seasonal route to Rovaniemi, also served by easyJet. I recall Finnair had winter seasonal flights to Ivalo and Rovaniemi before COVID-19.

IIRC it’s a reinstatement of a previous route. I certainly remember flying with them LGW to RVN pre-COVID.

Seems a lot of capacity to RVN, what with easyJet, Ryanair and the numerous ‘charter’ flights thrown in as well. I guess they’ve got to fly those jets somewhere in winter and the winter sun destinations are probably maxed out as well

JetBlue LGW cut to summer seasonal service.
LHR routes still operate year round.
https://onemileatatime.com/news/jetb...lantic-flying/

I am not surprised by this announcement whatsoever. A decision I was half expecting, and it makes perfect sense for Jetblue to go seasonal at LGW and concentrate operations at LHR.

With competition from British Airways, Delta and Norse on the LGW to JFK route it makes me wonder whether STN would have been a better option for Jetblue.

I tend to agree and that someone needs to execute it again in the future. The A321neo long range variants help make these naturally thinner routes more economical. It's a shame Primera Air couldn't make it work, they had the right product but just tried to take on too much too soon.

When Cambridge South station opens for the biomedical campus that too should be a big draw for a direct US service again from STN, particularly Boston. There will also be a north/east London catchment for US flights which will favour a STN service. Emirates see this already with their Dubai connections. I think the main issue is most airlines perceive STN's customer experience exactly as it is and see the slots they get at congested airports as high value assets, so if they can get into LHR or LGW they will.

I've always thought LGW is too much the default for LHR overspill rather than it being a chosen alternative on a solid business case as such. Hopefully the future planned improvements at STN, and indeed LTN to some extent, will help put them on a more level playing field in providing some more healthy competition with LGW.

Is this the beginning of the end of JetBlue thanks to Carl Icahn?
 

Given JetBlue's recent change in ownership, i.e., the airline's acquisition by private equity with (in)famous Wall Street raider Carl Icahn of 1980s vintage now sitting on the airline's board (and probably breathing down Jetblue CEO Joanna Geraghty's neck), I can't help thinking that this is a replay of Icahn's TWA rule book.

Recalling what Icahn did to TWA, I wouldn't be surprised at all if making JetBlue's Gatwick routes and its second daily Paris CdG service (from / to JFK I presume) seasonal are just opening gambits for his end game, which would see JetBlue's Heathrow slots being sold for top dollar - just like he sold TWA's Heathrow slots to American 30-odd years ago, with JetBlue's remaining TATL service progressively run down and - depending on how the airline recovers from the costly fallout of its abandoned merger with ULCC Spirit, what will remain of it either being sold off to some one else or being shut down altogether.

On Thursday morning London Gatwick South Terminal was evacuated due to a fire alarm.

I won't go into the details as they are easily accessible elsewhere.

But one photo which got my attention is the one that I have attached.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....d282f1870.jpeg

It looks as if passengers were on the former viewing balcony. With the view of Pier 2 and the tails of the aircraft it certainly looks like it was taken from the former viewing balcony.

If by any chance there was actually a fire I'm surprised that the passengers and I'm assuming staff as well would be directed to the roof of the building.

The other thing that got my attention was the view from the former viewing balcony. It doesn't look too unchanged from when it was previously open to the public. It's a shame that the former viewing balcony couldn't reopen.

I was always under the impression that the view was mostly obscured with all the construction since it was closed but obviously not going by the photo. If indeed it was taken on the former viewing balcony.

I agree with you my friend- hardly surprising, although at the same time, I'm gutted as well. At least they haven't cut LGW completely though. I too agree that they should have taken a look at STN - which could have made more sense for them (in addition to LHR). STN currently has no scheduled services to the US, the most recent of which ceased in October 2018 when Primera Air went bust. Perhaps they may take a look at STN ops when more A321-NEO deliveries start arriving?

We are now almost halfway through the year, and LGW has had several airline successes so far. I for one am very excited to see the inaugural SQ service to Singapore next month. Although Lufthansa are leaving (2nd time now) and Aer Lingus are no longer serving LGW. I wonder who we can expect next, both on the short and long haul front? :)

JetBlue did actually have STN slots I believe prior to Covid. The rest is history.

LH leaving LGW 2nd or 4th time?
 

From memory, Lufthansa's presence as a regular scheduled carrier at Gatwick goes back all the way to the early-1980s, when they'd launched a twice-daily LGW-FRA 737-200 Adv service which competed against BCal's thrice-daily LGW-FRA One-Eleven 500 service. This first instance of LH serving LGW-FRA on a regularly scheduled basis lasted for a couple of years, possibly even continuing for a year or two after BA had taken over BCal.

The second instance of LH having a regular scheduled presence at LGW came in the early-1990s, when they launched a twice-daily LGW-TXL service which competed against Dan-Air's up to twice daily LGW-TXL service (initially operated with One-Elevens- both the 200 and 500 series Monday to Saturday and a 146-300 on Sundays, with the One-Eleven 200 / 500 eventually replaced with 146-100s Monday to Friday), Saturday remaining a One-Eleven (500) and Sunday becoming a 737-200 Adv). This route then transferred to LHR before being axed by LH because a majority of the transfer passengers using it changed at LHR onto long-haul BA services, meaning this constituted a revenue loss for LH and the Star Alliance to the rival oneworld alliance. Besides, given the generally low yields and comparatively high costs of operating UK-Germany scheduled air services, it is fair to assume that this route was a net loss-maker in its own right.

The third instance of a regular scheduled LH LGW presence came in 2011, when the airline resumed a short-lived, twice-daily LGW-FRA 737-300 service.

The fourth instance of a regular scheduled LH LGW presence began late last year, with the airline restarting again a twice-daily LGW-FRA service with suboptimal slot times almost identical ro those 12-13 years ago to be concluded at the end of next month.

So, four (unsuccessful) attempts altogether.

Flygatwick

Absolutely spot on and it brought back some memories.

I was thinking of responding as I can remember seeing Lufthansa at LGW during the 80s. I wasn't sure if it was 3 or 4 times for Lufthansa at LGW, so I decided not to post.

As I recall, Deutsch BA also competed on that route.

Deutsch BA as far as I'm aware never served Frankfurt from LGW.

Deutsch BA served Berlin TXL, Bremen, Hamburg and Munich to LGW.

During the same period as Deutsch BA we're operating flights to LGW from four German destinations BA in one way or another we're still serving Frankfurt.

Apart from the fact it was Deutsche BA (with an “e” on the end), you’re correct. They never flew FRA-LGW which was a BA/EOG route.

Apropos nothing in particular I remember travelling on the LH FRALGW service in the 80s. Also onboard was a group of freight agents who had been on an LH “educational” which had clearly included copious lubrication. When we were taxing in at LGW the CA gave the standard LH farewell PA which ended “thank you for flying Lufthansa and auf wiedersehen” to which the freight agents, with one voice, loudly responded “pet”.
May mean nothing to our younger ppruners.

Many thanks for mentioning the fact that I had missed the "e" on Deutsche. I rely to much on spell checking and totally overlooked the fact that I had ommited the "e".

Danke schon Flightrider :ok:

Bitte sehr.

Gatwick-Germany seems to be an airline graveyard. easyJet couldn't make the likes of DUS and CGN work over time, BA and DBA pulled off, and now Lufthansa depart LGW-FRA. I could keep going back in time to RFG, NFD and others. Only Berlin, Munich and a Hamburg service (a skeleton of its former self now easyJet has no HAM base) seem to survive. It's a real anomaly that Gatwick just does not seem able to sustain services to Germany.

I agree with you regarding the situation with flights between LGW and Germany and you make some good comments.

We can add at least another two other German airlines that previously operated to LGW.

The former Air Berlin operated between Hannover and Nuremburg to LGW. These two destinations we're transferred from STN to LGW with both routes starting on 07 February 2010. I don't think that neither lasted a year at LGW and we're subsequently transferred back to STN.

The former Aerolloyd commenced a scheduled service between Frankfurt and LGW in 1988. Aerolloyd was taken over in 1992 and all scheduled flights would cease with the airline concentrating on its IT charter flights instead. The airline ceased operations in 2003.

Between us I think we have covered all of the names of all the German airlines that have previously served Germany to LGW on a scheduled basis.

AEROLLOYD
AIR BERLIN
LUFTHANSA
NFD
RFG

Be interesting to know if we have missed any 😉

Perhaps a combination of both economic and practical reasons? It seems to me there have historically been strong business/industrial links with Germany around east and north outer London, Essex, Suffolk and Cambridge that perhaps isn’t so much the case south of London. And, geographically LGW is furthest meaning longer block times, greater fuel burn etc with no particular benefit to airlines or their passengers over other London airports. Little surprise therefore the routes LGW does have are the ones with greater leisure potential so perhaps more of a local market to complement inbound and general London demand. LTN is similar.

In contrast, the German market from Stansted has always been strong. Earlier and long-standing Air UK routes included Düsseldorf and Frankfurt, it had a significant Air Berlin operation (in fact the two short-lived LGW routes cited above transferred back again), it was one of Germanwing’s original destinations, and Ryanair serves a number of cities. Where airlines or routes have ended it has tended to be due to competition.

Danke Flightrider Mein Fehler für Deutsche.

DBA LGW-FRA
 

I actually do recall Deutsche BA briefly operating LGW-FRA for BA (EOG) mid-ninety-ish, for one operating season I believe.

Most of UK-Germany is an airline graveyard
 

I actually disagree with the assertion that regular UK-Germany scheduled air services from Stabsted are more sustaibable than from Gatwick per se because of closer geographic proximity and historical links, shorter block times etc. In fact, most of the UK-Germany scheduled air services market has historically been an airline graveyard.

Some of the airlines mentioned, which supposedly were more successful flying to Germany from Stansted than from Gatwick, such as Aero Lloyd, Air Berlin, Air UK, Deutsche BA, Eurowings and German Wings either struggled to be profitable most of the time of their existence, or were basket cases which were never profitable to begin with and quickly went bust, not helped by their poorly performing Stansted-Germany routes. The only airline which actually managed to make Stansted-Germany profitable is Ryanair. And even Ryanair managed to do so consistently only on routes serving what could best be described as tertiary airports, like Hahn, Memmingen and Weeze for example, at the German end, where Ryanair gets actually paid to fly there. (The other reason for Ryanair being more successful on UK-Germany routes than its competitors - incl. Easyjet- is because of their significantly lower operating costs as a ULCC.)

The reason airlines like BA (and BCal before them) operated regular scheduled Gatwick-Germany services at all was to feed their long-haul flights from the airport. The same of course applies to both BA and Lufthansa doing Heathrow-Germany, with none of these routes - incl. the prime LHR-FRA route - making any money in their own right.

The only exceptions where UK-Germany scheduled air services seem to be profitable in their own right on a P2P basis are:

1. LCY-Germany - especially LCY-FRA, where airlines can still charge a sufficient premium for the convenience of using LCY, in terms of the time it takes to pass through the airport compared with any other London area airport and its unmatched proximity to the City.

2. LGW / LTN / STN - BER due to Berlin being the only place in Germany to regularly feature in the top 5-10 "must-see" top tourist attraction bucket list of international (i.e , non-German) travellers. Unfortunately, its attraction has diminished since the German government decided to introduce new "green" aviation taxes following the end off the pandemic.

FlyLGW,

Not sure where the "UK/Germany" reference comes from. You appear to believe the UK is London!

I used to use STN/NUE on Air Berlin regularly and it was very well loaded. It is true that since the capital moved to Berlin UK tourism is very much a "one trick pony", much as London is as far as most Germans get in UK. LGW just doesn't have to pull that LHR has for the paying business traffic and LH can just find more profitable things to do with their resources. Apart from connecting and business traffic, LHR acts as the gateway for the Germany/London leisure market.

That Brits can't see beyond Berlin for their holiday is great; it means I can go almost anywhere and hardly hear an English voice, and don't encounter the dregs of our society bladdered on stag dos!

The military also played a huge part in UK-Germany traffic. R&R and friends and family.

Some limited military traffic remains - indeed want to go back far enough Britannia acquired two 737- 200s with main deck cargo doors specifically for supporting that traffic

Now as to the graveyard - ATNOTTs quite agree with you - it most certainly isn’t into the regions particularly the Midlands and North West where auto industries and construction associated industries can and do maintain healthy loads to Düsseldorf, Hamburg and Stuttgart with a host of SME contractors in both directions (historically me included)

Düsseldorf isn’t just Germany either , need to the get to Venlo, Röemond indeed anywhere east of Tilburg its better than Amsterdam by a country mile , and that area houses many of the major building external envelope manufacturers (Novoferm and Kone for instance ) additionally to the automotive industries and not a few agricultural businesses as well.

The levels of trade related businesses are phenomenal !

This is a quite different cohort in the real economy not banking and service industries.

Düsseldorf must be among the longest consistently operated routes from both Manchester and Birmingham .

Now where does Gatwick sit in relation to those real economy industries - Not all well to be honest .

No heavy industries in Sussex and few in Kent ( mines long gone ). As for Surrey stock brokers and Heathrow users

I saw this in an IAG press release. Have they started and how do they avoid humans and large chuncks of aircraft?
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....30b96a335f.jpg

CityFlyer Express operated LGW - DUS/CGN/BRE IN THE 1990s. They were all profitable, especially DUS. There was not a lot of BA feed on them. It was predominantly point to point pax.

Full aircraft loads don't always equate to profitable loads
 

Never confuse a full flight with a profitable flight unless you have seen evidence of these flights actually being profitable as well.

I still remember Pan Am's flights from Heathrow to the States in the 1980s being so heavily overbooked that they spent a fortune paying passengers to agree to be bumped off their flights, losing billions in the process.

And as far as Air Berlin is concerned, for most of the airline's post German reunification's existence as a German company, they were losing money big time as the airline struggled to find a profitable USP in the German and global aviation market. In this context, it should be noted that the vast majority of its scheduled routes - incl. UK-Germany services - never turned a profit. The only time Air Berlin was consistently profitable was pre German reunification, when it was legally a US charter airline based in what was then the former political exclave of West Berlin's Tegel Airport (now defunct) as only US, UK and French airlines were permitted to fly from and to Cold War era West Berlin.

I do however agree that CityFlyer Express was a rare exception among Gatwick-based full-service scheduled airlines, which managed to be consistently profitable on nearly all its short-haul scheduled routes from the airport, incl. those serving various destinations in Germany. It's a real shame that BA decided to close down what was effectively its only profitable, non-leisure focused short-haul operation at Gatwick following its takeover of CityFlyer Express. Contrast this with Lufthansa's wholly unprofitable Eurowings short-haul subsidiary, which is being (mis)used by its parent to keep highly sought-after slots warm at Heathrow for strategic purposes (i.e., to prevent rivals like BA, Virgin and the MEB3 - first and foremost, Emirates - the airline Lufthansa loves to hate and blame for its largely self-inflicted woes - from buying the slots utilised for these loss-making Eurowings services, which don't even feed into the Lufthansa hubs in Frankfurt and Munich).