View Full Version : Swiss to replace Concorde?
Strong rumours abound that a certain Swiss VIP operator is applying for LHR slots to operate the Barbados route that BA's Concorde has obviously stepped down from.
Understand that the application goes in today?
Is BA taking this invasion lying down?
Anyone else heard anything more concrete?
rupetime
24th Oct 2003, 18:15
Any UK operator can stop this as its a Fifth Freedom operation, I think its highly likely someone will indeed put a stop to it, Mr Branson?
HZ123
24th Oct 2003, 21:32
I hardly see BA breaking into a sweat over a once a week replacement flight operated in the winter only. Swiss would seem to have a significant number of problems without getting involved in any further follies.
leonbrumsack
25th Oct 2003, 00:06
I don't think Swiss is the airline being talked of. Would it by any chance happen to be PrivatAir and their shiney BBJs?
Nightrider
25th Oct 2003, 01:31
Now that explains why I was asked if available on short notice to operate the BBJ...why not:E :} :cool:
Heavy
26th Oct 2003, 18:02
Rumour is hot over here too - would make a lot of sense with their VVIP background.
Slot allocation is done in SIN next month - anyone know more?
Hand Solo
27th Oct 2003, 06:57
In so much as a slot can 'belong' to an airline, then the slot still belongs to BA. It relates to the aircraft movements at LHR, not BGI (which is hardly slot constrained). Given that BAs board have stated that acquring slots at LHR is a strategic objective, it is highly unlikely that they would relinquish that particular slot simply because of the retirement of Concorde. The winter schedule starts today and I suspect there will be an additional service already scheduled to utilise that slot.
Thunderball
27th Oct 2003, 21:24
With respect, folks, discussion about slots is academic. Rupetime has made the decisive point here. A Swiss airline operating from the UK to Barbados is fifth freedom (or seventh freedom if you are a real stickler - assuming they're not operating from Switzerland to the UK first) - and that just won't happen. A wet lease to a UK carrier is something else, but then again this is open to challenge if it goes beyond (say) six months.