And G-FLBB is following 'TA inbound to Exeter. Are the lessor's reclaiming their assets?

G-JECY also en-route to Oslo

I am only guessing. But it seems like lessors want their airframes back ASAP, so they can try and find new operators to minimise loss.

Dont blame them! I wonder how much they were owed by Flybe v2.

Don’t think anyone would touch a Flybe v3 with a very long barge pole.

They want them back so they are not running up parking charges at other airports. I doubt there is a huge rush for tech prone Q400s.

So not seized by the airports in lieu of fees
like last time?

Suggests that they weren't initially free to leave - the fact that a number are moving today maybe it's been sorted.

Who would want them

"Ex FB2" - thats going to pack in the buyers................. :yuk:

Almost. Only an airline with an active AOC can hold slots - this is mainly because the retention of those slots is linked to the operation of them and only an airline can achieve that.

The status of an AOC rests with the CAA and revocation is not automatic just because an airline enters Administration, if it were, it would dramatically reduce the ability of the Administrators to save the business as a key asset (slots) would be lost back to the pool. At the moment, Flybe's AOC is suspended (not revoked) and therefore it can legitimately continue to hold the slots allocated to it. I'd imagine that the application of a temporary licence (if awarded) might act as some form of insurance policy for the Adminstrators, extending the time available to sell/restructure the business whilst de-risking the potential impact of revocation of the suspended AOC. Whilst it's possible that the DfT could intervene given their oversight of the CAA, I think it unlikely as it would undermine the authority of the CAA to decide on such matters and would risk politicising the situation.

If existing EU law became UK law during Brexit (which I believe was the case in respect of airport slots), then the rules regarding the control of slots are unchanged with ACL acting in line with other EU slot coordinators. Further, the remedy agreements governing LHR slots also remain in place, therefore if Flybe's AOC were to be revoked, I think it likely that all except the LHR slots would return to the pool for reallocation. The LHR slots would return to BA (as ultimate owner) to uphold their availability to any subsequent remedy application. BA would need to utilise the slots in the interim to protect the historic precedence should any other airline want access to these slots in future.

I think it highly unlikely that any other operator could secure use of these slots unless they;

(a) rescued the current Flybe business from Administration, thereby gaining the AOC and access to the current unencumbered slots, or
(b) submitted a new remedy application for use of the slots, however any application would be restricted to the specific destinations included in the original remedy which, after operating for at least 6 consecutive IATA seasons could then be swapped to an alternative EU destination subject to a successful grandfathering application to the EU.

Talks to find a buyer have been called off by administrators:

https://news.sky.com/story/flybe-fac...stall-12811660

So do the Heathrow slots now revert back to BA or go to the pool?

https://www.interpathadvisory.com/me...imited-update/

now official. It’s really all over even though staff on Facebook groups seem to think doing the same thing three times might give a different result.

.
 

Not all staff

They’ll go back to BA so that the remedy that BA are legally obliged to provide, can be exercised by another carrier in future.

Twitter

The slots have gone back to BA

Such a mess that this has to happen. BA should be able to use them. Atleast we'd actually get some benefit from them... not a single airline for the past 10 years has managed to make these "remedy slots" work. Surely this needs to be looked into now.

A cynic would be of the opinion that it has been a complete success from BA's perspective and would support an investigation into the process that allowed a messy hodgepodge of destinations be allowed to be served which have little congruence as a network from the perspective of a newcomer to LHR.

It's strange that no other airline has used the chance to use the slots as a feeder for their own global network
All they would need to do is get another airline to use smaller aircraft on their behalf and brand it as their own with a quirky nameThen eventually try to get the slots changed over to their mainline fleet to fly to America etc

​​​​

Like, say, Virgin?:}​​​​​​​

Is it strange? Isn't the conclusion that actually there is no profitable use for those slots in their Remedy guise, the market has moved on? The question is---what is the process by which the Remedy restrictions might be reassessed and lifted? Does BA have to use them or lose them in the intervening period? Is LHR to LBA about to make a reappearance for example?

Just musing, would it make sense to use some of those slot pairs for the PSO routes (Newquay?) in exchange for releasing the restrictions on the others? Maybe there is scope for a deal. After all, we are talking about a potentially valuable asset here.

BA will have to use the slots in the intervening period to retain historic rights, but that won't be an issue. I imagine that as they only need to hit 80% utilisation, they could easily cancel a handful of slots on some current planned services and then backfill these operations by retiming the returned remedy slots. They could add new services but I wouldn't expect to see LBA added given the lack of previous success.

I don't disagree that the remedy needs to be looked at. The charging structure at LHR has effectively made operating anything smaller than a 737/320 commercially unviable, unless you can find a niche, high yielding route not currently served (unlikely). Therefore, there will always be very limited interest in these remedy slots and that's only gotten worse as the charging structure has changed.