Inkjet

You clearly have no idea what a Tail-take-off is. I won't enlighten you, but I can confirm that they work extremely well.

Sales and marketing now under new management
 

I've noticed that bmi have now split the sales and marketing manager position into two seperate roles and by the look of things its starting to pay off already. Things seem to be a bit different now with their last sale prices being remarkably lower than any other bmi sale in the past. The marketing campaign on the radio, media, outdoor advertising and social network sites seem to have really pushed their sales alot. According to inside sources they sold far more tickets in this last sale than in their supposedly big annual January sale. Theres also now on a 7 day Business class sale which started today :ok:

I believe the marketing manager has experience with Virgin Holidays and the sales one with British Airways which can have a good spin on bmi now that they are trying to position themselves back as a full service airline.

The sale is nice but they still can't get their act together in loading the fares onto the flipping website :mad:

No through fares from BHD or DUB loaded for instance.

People want to give them money and maintain loyalty but somebody is doing their damndest to thwart them

Maybe its time for new revenue management and e-commerce managers too ;)

Maybe one of the things that management of the BMI web site should do is recognise the fact that the prices on their web site are generally more expensive than that for the exact same BMI flights offered by expedia or last minute. They do tend to catch up but surely they must not get the custom when many users may only be aware of the website provided by BMI and not others that can offer the same significantly cheaper. Latest example for me booked during the week was LHR-EDI-LHR booked for MAY. Expedia 113 Pounds return FlyBMI 233 pounds return - noting that the BMI web site eventually reduced its price.....come on BMI use the head!

Nivsy

If this is not the right place to post this, I apologise.

Can someone please explain why BMI flights LHR - THR/OIIE stop in BAK/KBAK or TBS/UGTB on the way to THR and again on the way back to LHR, usually in PRG/LKPR.

I know that the Iranian authorities will not supply enough fuel to fly THR LHR, thus requiring a stop on this leg, but what I can't understand is why they stop on the way to THR, refuel, continue to THR, landing relatively heavy, and then have to refuel again on the way home.

Why not simply operate LHR -THR non stop and refuel on the way home? I tried to get an explanation from the (very kind and helpful) CC, who by the way suffered a lot of rudeness and almost abuse from pax on this route about the stops, but the explanations were not consistent.

"I know that the Iranian authorities will not supply enough fuel to fly THR LHR"

Thats why , in a nutshell, we need about 21000 kgs to fly THr - LHR non stop and the Iranians will only allow us to uplift around 12000 kgs , so we have no choice but go to Baku or Tblisi or Yerevan on the way LHR-THR inorder to " tanker fuel" into THR. So that the aircraft arrives in THR with around 11000 kgs

make sense ?

The reason for the tech stops THr -LHR is simply 21000 is max tank capacity and with strong westerly winds and a heavy pax load ( = lower Flight level = greater fuel burn ) it is on the limit of the range of the A321

Quite why the A330 doesnt get used , I do not understand :rolleyes:

Thank you, Barcli, that is absolutely clear.

As you say, seems odd that they don't use equipment with a longer range if THR LHR is on the limit for this a/c even if it departs with full tanks.

No problem Capetonian.

AFAIK The problem relates to a number of issues, not least the ongoing friction between Iran and the countries that oppose it's nuclear production plans, together with the embargo on Iran Air flights using aircraft that are deemed unsafe/below minimum safety procedures in their airspace, by a number of European countries.

In response Iran Air have used the Iranian Government to threaten to stop refuelling altogether to many of the European carriers. They have already restricted the amount of fuel required by airlines such as BMI to fly from IKA - LHR to about half that which is needed to fly the leg in one hit! Should the Iranians follow through with their threats to cut fuel to the European carriers altogether, they will do so without further warning whatsoever.

BMI's policy appears bizarre to many who do not know the full facts but is indeed extremely sensible and necessary. They stop in Tbilisi, Yerevan or Baku to uplift fuel before arriving in Iranian airspace, purely so that if they land at Tehran and find that the Iranian policy has changed to not allowing any fuel whatsoever, they will still have sufficient fuel remaining to be able to take the IKA - LHR passengers and depart to the nearest airport outside of Iran, refuel and continue to LHR. If they did not stop on the way in, there is the potential that there would not be enough fuel to be able to make it out of Iran and effectively the aircraft would be grounded until the Iranian policy changed. Recently the refuellers have reduced the amount of fuel they will provide further. Such that depending on the number of passengers (weight) and whether there is a headwind component on the route to LHR, they still can not get depart with enough fuel to fly to London without requiring a fuel stop somewhere enroute.

Many of the other European carriers apply the same "fuel tankering" policy as BMI, however as other European carriers are using longer ranged aircraft than BMI's aircraft, they can uplift the fuel at the original departure airfield and still land with sufficient fuel remaining in tanks to be able to fly depart again, without relying on the Iranians to supply fuel.

I'm told by the Iranian groundstaff that Lufthansa have not had this draconian policy applied against them because they have some sort of agreement with Iran Air whereby Lufthansa are assisting Iran Air in some other way and are therefore not being fuel rationed in Tehran.

It sounds crazy but it's the only thing that can be done, when you have a dictator and a hard line government anti any country that does not see things Iran's way.

I trust this briefly explains the reasons?

Unfortunately, some of the cabin crew do not know the full facts and the remainder that do, often don't get given the full opportunity to explain the reasons to passengers before being interupted by travellers who aren't that informed with the political situation or the knowledge of how airlines operate.

Well done Barcli, I took too long on the phone between starting and finishing the reply ;)

BTW it's now down to 10,000kg max uplift from IKA and due to the max landing weight together with regularly hitting the capped pax figure outbound LHR, the remaining fuel in IKA is often 9,000kgs if lucky :eek:

Maybe when BD gets the second A330 back in service THR will be a route it is used on. I'm not hugely familiar with the THR route, but is the TBS stop purely a tech one, or do some pax on the flight fly LHR-TBS?
Out of interest, could the A330 fly LHR-THR non-stop, with enough fuel to get out of Iran, if needs be, wining any upload in THR?

Thank you both for the speed and quality of your responses.

To any of you who work for BMI, may I just add that I was impressed with the quality of the service and the announcements from both the flight deck and the cabin crew, who kept the pax fully informed at all times. The CC also put up with harassment and rudeness from the (mostly Iranian) pax on both flights. I am not saying Iranians are generally rude, in fact quite the opposite, but on these flights many of them appeared to be blaming the airline and its staff for the inconvenience of the extra stops.

Would it not be a good idea to hand passengers a printed explanation in Engish and Farsi (without going into the politics too much!) when they check in, or board, of the reasons why a stop is/may be required in order to save the CC from being subjected to this on every rotation?

Brian

yes
no
yes
:O

bmybaby81, you are indeed correct. I believe someone has now joined them from British Airways. Incidentially they are actually massively undercutting all BA fares in their business sale.

For the first time they now have the right product, good marketing and good team in place. The turnaround machine has started!

"Maybe when BD gets the second A330 back in service THR will be a route it is used on."

Unlikely. My understanding is that the Iranian authorities will not allow a bigger aircraft to be used on this route. However, if the UK were to reciprocate and only allow Iran Air to use narrowbodies to London, who knows.

Have yet to tech stop coming back from Tehran but I reckon my next one will. The BD932 looks like it's lobbed into Prague this morning....

Someone needs to kick revenue management and IT then. Recent posts on these FF threads would suggest that there are a number of potential customers being foiled at the booking stage:

Rant: Crazy Inventory Management LHR-DUB/BHD - Page 4 - FlyerTalk Forums

Rant: I want to give BD some money, but I cant... - FlyerTalk Forums

So, Bmi are massivly undercutting BA fares in their latest sale?

How many destinations do BA and BMI actually compete where BD have a business class?

bmi's A330 routes are now confirmed as being ALA, FNA & FRU...

Schedule (Commencing Sat 25th June)...

ALA/FRU
BD991 LHR1450 ALA0320 - ALA0410 FRU0505 14
BD991 LHR1325 ALA0155 - ALA0250 FRU0345 6

BD992 FRU0725 ALA0815 - ALA0905 LHR1200 25
BD992 FRU0535 ALA0620 - ALA0710 LHR1010 7

FNA
BD967 LHR1430 - FNA2020 3
BD967 LHR1340 - FNA1930 5
BD967 LHR1315 - FNA1905 7

BD968 FNA2345 - LHR0720 37
BD968 FNA2225 - LHR0600 5


Flights will be operated on A330 G-WWBM (C36 Y196), with Tuesdays being a down day for MX...

Good news for FNA. IIRC, the lease with TK means G-WWBM is due back this month, so time for both A332 to get the brown cow treatment inside?

This aircraft is due in MAN from IST at 2200z on Thursday 31st March to have the funky red decals peeled off.