GATWICK

[yotty]

Then a new runway and terminal gets built!

[LNIDA]

Well judging by the early success that Norwegian are enjoying from OSL & ARN with their long haul flights despite ongoing problems with the Dreamliner I suspect that at some stage next year NAS LH will base units in LGW and of course unlike other LoCo airline they do connect with their other flights via hubs.

Norwegian is much closer to a legacy carrier then other product offering from EZY & FR and the recent raft of route announcements from Scandinavia give an insight to what LGW might expect next year

The load factor on many routes from LGW have been very impressive for Norwegian who are still relatively unknown in the UK market and a warm UK Summer will not have helped, I guess the big problem for NAS at LGW will be lack of slots at sensible times, but the prospect of long haul flights is a lever that EZY don't have right now.

LGW will prove to have been a very smart move for NAS the question is who are they taking business off, I think this winter it will Monarch in the Canary who suffer, but a lot of leakage from LHR on the Scandi routes 4 times daily to OSL now, not bad for LGW

[Skipness One Echo]

I doubt they'll succeed but they'll probably have a go. I think we covered a dozen reasons why LON-US would be a very difficult nut to crack but given they're paying peanuts to their staff to fly their new B787s I suspect they'll manage a profit if they do. It's not even the same company, it's a "subsidiary" with foreign low paid crew.

It was a four class BA B772, anticipating your next question, will they try a fourth time with a three class B772 or an ex LHR B788? Probably....

[cornishsimon]

I was just curious as to the offering.

But answer me something skipness, why the hostility ? Is it intended or just the way you come across ?

What makes your opinion right and anyone who doesn't agree with you wrong ?


cs

[Skipness One Echo]

But answer me something skipness, why the hostility ? Is it intended or just the way you come across ?
Ahhh sorry I see what you mean, I wasn't getting at you, I was getting at BA. They will try again, give them a few years until the burning pain subsides and someone internally will make a business case as to why LGW-JFK will work. The thing I find really frustrating about Gatwick is people often just don't understand why some things will work and others simply won't.

I used to be a LGW fanboy for BA, loved the hub without the hubbub, tis a mere shadow if it's former (loss making!!) self.
What makes your opinion right and anyone who doesn't agree with you wrong ?
It's relatively straightforward to segment what offerings have historically failed at LGW or worked way better at LHR. So when someone says LGW-abc will work well, it's important to point to what happened last time someone had a crack at it. If nothing has changed in the market, only a numpty should expect a different result. GIP have spent a FORTUNE on Gatwick and yet the demographic and yields remain stubbornly where they've traditionally been. Anybody who genuinely believes long haul growth at Gatters is coming has had theit eyes shut for the last thirty years. The recent roll call is hardly triumphant, Korean and Air China both lasted under one year, Vietnam is still waiting on a LHR opportunity. If it ain't sun or a beach and an outbound white skinned demographic, it won't work at Gatwick. OK that's harsh but seriously, nothings changed, they've even lost what UK connectivity they had left to allow EZY and DY to add more holiday flights. All it needs is the ex LHR BA A319s that are coming (no promised new aircraft remember, they never issued the promised RFP), to change the last four letters of the titles and call it British Airtours. Might as well, and I don't mean that in a bad way.
LGW's future is bright Orange.

[cornishsimon]

Yes the future at LGW is bright orange, sadly.

However the noises coming from BA @ LGW are promising, im hearing suggestions that BA are moving at least 1 A321 to LGW, as well as more A320s and several more A319s.

Yes these will replace the 734s but replacing a 734 with an A321 is quite some replacement.

They are also moving 1 extra 4 class 772 over to Gatwick to increase rotations on existing sunshine routes.

As for NYC ex LGW, never say never. I don't see BA trying it in the next couple of years but eventually as you say they will.

Whats the difference, well BA have significantly reduced costs at Gatters, they could also fly the correct aircraft to NYC, and I do say NYC, that does not have to be JFK, BA do have a decent presence at EWR.

The only people that will know the numbers are those who work for BA, they will know how many people connect LGW-LHR and onward from LHR, with extra flights going to JER when BE pull out I expect the cross London connections to increase, and I suspect that sooner or later BA along with the AA JV will add a flight ex LGW into an AA hub, be that JFK, DFW etc.

Running split operations between LHR & LGW has proven a positive move for LAS as each airport targets a different market, too many people were trying to fly BA and they didn't want to use extra slots on the route so it was perfect for LGW. The same could happen with other routes if extra rotations are needed.

Who knows, but one thing I do know is that BA LGW seems to be on the up, long might it continue, it will be interesting to see the route and fleet make up at LGW for summer 14.



cs

[canberra97]

Cornishman

Skipness always answers like that, very very hostile when ever Gatwick is concerned sure he does make some really valid points at times and I do agree with alot of what he says but generally he does have a point in making HIS point and does not really want to consider other peoples views, you must have read his posts on the forums on Airliners.net they are very similar to those on here regarding LGW.

I put it down to him being Scottish and I have been to 92 countries worldwide but I have never been to Scotland as I assume they are all like him a 'wee' bit arrogant in the way they come across!

Dont worry though I am sure the hostility against LGW will continue in some way as he often says he does like LGW but kicks it down when ever he gets the chance.

I am a big fan of LGW and I have been since I first visited the airport in 1978 and I like to follow the airport and it's development but it frustrates me when I read the negative posts.

Oh I have been wanting to say that for so long so thanks Cornishman for allowing me too get it off my chest

[Skipness One Echo]

Not kicking Gatwick, kicking those blind to learning how things work and seeing long haul, it's always long haul, through rose tinted specs. I'll be willin to bet that BA at LGW will be Vueling in five years. BA's LGW cost base was always low, when they got Dan Air they paid their pilots a pittance. There's no costs left to cut now. They've been cutting costs since 1993 and still not fixed it yet.
Gatwick's amazing, Thomson, easyJet, monarch, Norwegain all doin well on short haul. It does have flaws though, Ryanair can't really make it work and flybe were pretty much forced out. My gripe is that too many get hung up on long haul, particularly BA and the iconic New York route. Concentrate on the 95% good rather than the 5% "glamour". Heavens even Lufthansa axed FRA for the winter on launch, Gatwick has particular strengths but also particular weaknesses. They're worth understanding rather than dreaming of a future long haul hub. Adam Thomson could have told you that.
Btw canberra97 if you think I am wrong, best try some numbers, facts or figures, it beats racial stereotyping most days to be fair.

[wallp]

Well I really do hope that Norwegian have a crack at long haul from Gatwick. As has been pointed out already, they can offer connectivity with their short haul network & hopefully the efficiencies of the B788 will increase the chances of profitability & success.

The BA split operation to LAS is an interesting one. It seems to work well. Hopefully in time, we'll see more rotations on this route from LGW. If it can work on this route, perhaps it could on others? My earlier post suggested MIA & I had this sort of split operation in mind as something that might be possible for this and/or other destinations.

Also, Emirates' Dubai route works from LGW alongside their LHR operation. Is that not something others can learn from or are the dynamics of that route unique to them?

[LN-KGL]

Yesterday's truth isn't necessarily a truth for the future. Countless times the British aviation industry have been left behind due to being too preservative.

[Skipness One Echo]

Emirates are pretty unique, Qatar and Etihad moved out of LGW completely. LHR-LAS is connection heavy so LGW-LAS takes the overflow. I did try and explain why Miami is different. It's a fair point about trying new things, Norwegian won't be that new, it'll be muscling in on Thomson, Thomas Cook and following low cost leisure like Freddie Laker. Actually Miami might work, I'd be surprised it was from a legacy network like BA. A non daily leisure flight focussing on P2P might be an option but there's a heavy BA/AA presence on the LHR route.

[davidjohnson6]

It's worth noting that Emirates fly London-Dubai 8 times per day. That's an extraordinarily high number of flights / seats when so many people are flying to Dubai just to connect to somewhere else.
NY is more of a destination in its own right - many more people on that route want to go to NY rather than connect onto another destination. It should also be noted that London-NY links 2 of the world's largest commercial and financial centres - the number of bankers, lawyers and directors of large companies with hefty expense accounts is quite extraordinary

[LNIDA]

Skip

you makes some interesting points about the demographic and there is some truth in that!

I also agree that it will never be a major international hub with LHR around the conner and a single runway, but there is long haul opportunities and the owners have done sone excellent work since the acquired it, whilst many will see it as just more shops, the whole approach to security is a lesson to many airports on how it should be done, with staff that are 99.9% of the time civil,friendly even!

uk border agency is still a bottleneck when arriving although that area is being increased in size at present, in a nut shell it is far better than STN MAN EMA from a customer experience

Flybe are leaving because they need the £20m from Easy more than they need LGW

[Bagmanlgw]

The rumour mill seems to be in full swing with news of another load of new routes for DY ex LGW to AGA , RAK , VIE , SZG , BGO

Also increase in frequencies to AGP , TFS and ALC

Anybody have any concrete info if this is actually true and if there are any others still to come

[LGS6753]

Skipness has presented a well-argued case.

I think he may have overlooked Gatwick's best chance for new trans-atlantic services. If NAS want to operate ex-UK long-haul, they will be able to make serious money operating from Gatwick, especially to NYC.

NAS want to be as low-cost as practical (hence the different ownership and company domicile operating the 787s). That will rule out Heathrow, so they would be serious about making Gatwick work. They are looking for a decent catchment area in terms of population, affluence and propensity to travel, and Gatwick has supported trans-atlantic services before. They will be able to fill their aircraft in single-class configuration at decent yields with no competition.

Any legacy carrier will only join the fight as a spoiler, or as a result of lack of LHR slots. Any US airline not currently operating into London would sensibly choose Gatwick, but would be on the lookout for LHR slots if they became available.

If NAS started such services, on a daily frequency, I think they could 'own' the route quickly, deterring others from competing. They would be operating economical and modern aircraft on a low-cost model, offering good customer service, from an increasingly recognized and respected brand. They wouldn't be comparing LGW-NYC with LHR-NYC, but with other long-haul services on thinner routes. The operation could offer them some serious returns.

[davidjohnson6]

Could I ever so gently draw your attention to how American Airlines reacted when various minor carriers opened Luton / Stansted routes to NY about 8 years ago ?

[LN-KGL]

I don't think American Airlines will be able to react the same way this time. First there is the chapter 11 thing and then there is the U.S. Justice Department antitrust concerns over the merger with US Airways.

[Skipness One Echo]

If Norwegian start LGW-NYC, I have little doubt BA would respond. They let easyJet in on short haul and look what happened, I believe they would defend their core territory. Are Norwegain even looking at this? Surely a leisure / sun route would make way more sense?

[racedo]

The rumour mill seems to be in full swing with news of another load of new routes for DY ex LGW to AGA , RAK , VIE , SZG , BGO


Seems like Norwegian and U2 are set for a bit of a skirmish at LGW............will get the popcorn and a comfy seat for that one.

[tubby linton]

At least the easy crews make an attempt at flying a CDA ,the Norwegians don't seem to have a clue.

[LNIDA]

Firstly the long haul product isn't single class, it's got a posh bit up front.

Route wise no secret that frequency will increase on med route from April 2014 for new routes you like me will have to await until they're are announced.

I don't think Easy will worry too much, Norwegian are a much bigger threat to Monarch in the short term, Monarch is perceived to be a quality product some what above the likes of Easyjet, the reality is one of lack lustre staff, delays and nothing special on board, Norwegian is increasingly seen like a breath of fresh air in the LoCo market.

This is no Aer Lingus flash in the pan

[macuser]

Agreed, just look at the LGW Dep board from time to time and MON seem to have terrible delays

[racedo]

I don't think Easy will worry too much, Norwegian are a much bigger threat to Monarch in the short term, Monarch is perceived to be a quality product some what above the likes of Easyjet, the reality is one of lack lustre staff, delays and nothing special on board, Norwegian is increasingly seen like a breath of fresh air in the LoCo market.


Think Easy will be keeping an eye.......

[j636]

Think Easy will be keeping an eye.......

Indeed and it will be a very close eye on DY, Carolyn Mc Call has already stated that EZY will defend their patch at LGW.

I don't think Easy will worry too much, Norwegian are a much bigger threat to Monarch in the short term, Monarch is perceived to be a quality product some what above the likes of Easyjet, the reality is one of lack lustre staff, delays and nothing special on board, Norwegian is increasingly seen like a breath of fresh air in the LoCo market.

I do think MOM will be more exposed to DY but as I said above EZY won't let it go.

[canberra97]

Skipness I do not think your wrong as you make some valid points which I totally agree with but the thing is you answer ALL your posts in a totally ARROGANT manner, its as if your making a statement full stop and what ever you state is true, alot of of it is but to be honest I find you arrogant thats why, not just on here but on other aviation forums, when ever I see your name I think what the hell is he going to preach now!

[cornishsimon]

If Norwegian start LGW-NYC, I have little doubt BA would respond



Likewise I agree.

Norwegian would no doubt win on price, BA would win on connectivity especially if it went into JFK as customers would have the ability to book onward connections on the AA network.

Would AA not also share half the profit or loss on the route if it came under the AA/BA transatlantic tie up ?


cs

[Keyvon]

Italian low-cost carrier Air One is set to make a return to LGW with a couple of new routes to Sicily: Catania and Palermo will be both served thrice weekly, starting from March/April 2014.

[Skipness One Echo]

Would AA not also share half the profit or loss on the route if it came under the AA/BA transatlantic tie up ?
They would under the JV I believe. However I see no reason to think BA would stay if DY gave up. LGW-JFK has a troubled history, Laker were killed by BA's predatory pricing, BCAL lacked enough business travellers, Virgin moved all New York to Heathrow once they saw the comparable numbers for each. BA went from a BCAL B747, down to a DC10, futher down to a B767 then canned it as it was the worst performing (allegedly) London-New York rotation. It did not impress when they brought it back on the B777. Delta tried it for a time as well but in the end all commercial pressures moved everything to LHR.
If BA play a spoiler to DY, there's no business case for staying if Norwegian give up. The yield is undoubtedly much higher flying the same people and aeroplane out of Terminal 5. Commercially that's what's always made sense.

Of course Norwegian haven't even announced it yet. Isn't it wierd how an airport is seen as somehow failing if it lacks a New York route?
but to be honest I find you arrogant thats why, not just on here but on other aviation forums, when ever I see your name I think what the hell is he going to preach now!
I'm sorry you feel that way, I had the greatest of respect at school for no nonsense teachers who spelled it out as it was, no sugar coating and didn't suffer fools. It rubbed off. If you raise an opinion I disagree with I will try and shoot you down but I always try and show past analogies, parallels or similarities, never racial stereotyping and seldom playing the man and not the ball.

[LadyL2013]

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered but when the second runway was built, I don't understand why at the time they didn't build it south of the main runway. Yes, I imagine there would have been outcry from residential areas, but surely with thought to the future it would have made more sense to build it then, rather than have a mostly useless runway now.

Also how often is 26R/8L used?

[planenut321]

Runway 08L/26R is a non-instrument runway and will only be used when Runway 08R/26L is temporarily non-operational by reason of
maintenance or accident. Additionally, during months where planned maintenance does not take place, Runway 08L/26R will be in use on the
first Tuesday morning of each month from 0100 to 0400 (Winter) and 0001 to 0300 (Summer) for lighting checks, subject to weather and
confirmation on ATIS.
d. Use of Runway 08L/26R
Runway 08L/26R cannot be used simultaneously with Runway 08R/26L because of insufficient separation between the two. For this reason
also, extensive safeguarding procedures are required (see d ii) before Runway 08L/26R can be activated and the runway is not available on
request by pilots.
Lighting for the closed runway and parallel taxiway will not be visible on approach.
e. Restriction of Operation
i. During Runway 08L/26R operations, delays may occur to aircraft taxiing on the aerodrome due to the following:
1. The parallel taxiway is limited to use by aircraft of wingspan 30 m or below during actual take-offs or landings on Runway 08L/26R
2. Additional restrictions when the Ground Movement Radar (GMR) is not available
ii. When Runway 08L/26R is being brought into planned use the aerodrome will be closed for a period of up to 15 minutes to allow the
necessary safeguarding procedures to be implemented. The same will apply when Runway 08R/26L is brought back into use. In an
emergency situation, implementation of the change to Runway 08L/26R can be expected to take substantially longer.



In case you were wondering if Gatwick 08L/26R is ever used - FSopen Forum (http://www.fsopen.co.uk/forum/posts/listposts.php?threadid=363)

[Skipness One Echo]

There was a large maintenance facility for Laker, Dan Air, Big Airways and others, now only a reduced BA remains, then a main road and a town alas. Costly.

[DaveReidUK]

but surely with thought to the future it would have made more sense to build it then, rather than have a mostly useless runway nowRunway 08L/26R was built in the 1980s, for the reasons described above.

At that time, there was already a planning agreement in place (dating from 1979) that no second (i.e. simultaneously usable) runway would be built before 2019.

[LAX_LHR]

Air One to launch LGW-CTA/PMO for S14.

Both flights will be 3 weekly.

[Jetblast79]

The rumour mill seems to be in full swing with news of another load of new routes for DY ex LGW to AGA , RAK , VIE , SZG , BGO

Also increase in frequencies to AGP , TFS and ALC

Anybody have any concrete info if this is actually true and if there are any others still to come

According to slots requested seems that LGW-AGP goes daily.

Norwegian estudia desembarcar en el mercado doméstico español | aeroestads (http://aeroestads.org/2013/09/10/norwegian-estudia-desembarcar-en-el-mercado-domestico-espanol/)

[LAX_LHR]

Philippines Airlines have applied to serve LHR instead of the expected LGW.

[LNIDA]

It was always the plan to increase the frequency of med flights once the airline was a little better known in the UK market.

Norwegain are a sort of hybrid low cost airline more akin to a legacy airline but without the structural cost that all legacy airlines find difficult to shift, they do handle freight, carry pets, connecting flights you can book on one ticket say Bergen to JFK this applies to much of their European network, if something is badly delayed well they take the hit and pick up hotel and re booking cost, but they are very punctual and having brand new kit helps.

I really don't get this long haul low cost won't work argument, in reality what the difference between say a Tromso flight to Las Palmas at around 7 hours on a 738 and an 8 hour trip on a dream liner? It might not work for say FR (8 hours of scratch card sales) but Norwegian are a very different airline, far closers to say Swiss than FR the 787 is two cabin so the increased yield opportunities are there for sure

I understand that most of summer 2014 program will be on sale by month end. It's going to be busy in Gatters next year

[Skipness One Echo]

I really don't get this long haul low cost won't work argument, in reality what the difference between say a Tromso flight to Las Palmas at around 7 hours on a 738 and an 8 hour trip on a dream liner?
The legacies can match you on price on long haul, they cannot to the same extent on short haul. Long haul locos like Laker, PeopleExpress and Zoom are worth bearing in mindm they all over reached and went bust by trying to do long haul loco against the big boys. If they have enough people paying several grand up front, the seats down the back can be sold, and indeed are sold, relatively inexpensively. Tromso-Las Palmas is not a cut throat gold plated mature market with the world's most powerful players out to kill you. London-NYC pretty much is. Ask Richard Branson, or the founders of Silverjet and Eos, ask why American's STN-JFK stopped mid high summer season just after Maxjet and Eos went under. Having said that, I am pretty sure there are other less legacy routes they could make a mint on long haul from LGW and maybe MAN.

[LNIDA]

for years we all had Nokia's and thought them the pinnacle and then Apple came along into a market that was new and turned it on its head by offering what people want, even if they didn't know they wanted it?

My point is that whilst history is a very good pointer to the future, it can also blind you to the future, EOS & Maxjet had no customer base and little capital, they did not have the best currently available aircraft in terms of fuel cost and tried to ape the big boys with chauffeur pick ups and all that, Laker was probably ahead of his time and the competition authorities didn't really exist back then.

[Skipness One Echo]

All very true but abstract though. What would Norwegian bring to the table that's revolutionary like Apple? 787? No, they're going to be very common. Customer service? Only whilst the company is smallish, big expansion and a willingness to pay staff peanuts won't help. Low fares? Still widely available as BA/AA v VS v United is not the cartel of days past. Frequency? No. Market presence? Zero

Am not being contrary for sheer bloody mindedness, I'm just wondering what differential you see them having in a Steve Jobs like manner. I see them as a succesful niche in the TOM/TCX/VS/BA leisure market, others see them as more legacy.

The main one seems to be cost where they use the Ryanair model of making sure they don't employ "expensive" experienced, local flight deck crew. Even the long haul operation is a hived off shell company. Much cheapness?

[LN-KGL]

Skipness One Echo, you seems to misinformed about the requirements set for the Norwegian Long Haul pilots. One of the requirements for applying for piloting their B787 you need to have a passport from one of the European Economic Area countries (EU - Croatia + Iceland + Lichetenstein + Norway). I guess one more country will be added to that list with the opening of the US base(s). Further back in the aircraft (in the cabin), you will find Scandinavian pursers and CAs from countries like Thailand.

But I'll admit, it's their ticket prices that shows the real difference between old and new. Below is a table showing prices for a return ticket in economy class between Oslo and San Francisco with Norwegian Long Haul compared with a range of other airlines with flights to Oslo. The comparison is for flights in July/August next year, outbound Wednesday and return flight on Monday. Norwegian is the only airline that offer direct flights from Oslo to San Francisco or more correct to Oakland Interntional Airport (OAK) on the East side of San Francisco Bay. The main reason for selecting OAK according to CEO Kjos the shorter queues to get through immigration at OAK compared with SFO. The driving distance to down town San Francisco is quite equal between the two airports (31 minutes to Marriott - Fischeman's Wharf from OAK, 24 minutes from SFO).

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23931688/Tabeller/NLH_vs_other_airlines.jpg

While were talking about minutes difference around San Francisco Bay, we count hours difference in flight travel time. To get the lowest priced tickets you have to stay at the transfer airport for long hours. United Airlines is the worst of all - and Newark Liberty International Airport isn't my favorite airport - and then also you have to fly single aisle both TATL and TransCon. The Norwegian Long Haul price include the Plus option: two meals, seat reservation and check in baggage.

[EI-BUD]

Skipness one echo ;

I wouldn't write DY off. In fact quite one up watch. I understand your point about not innovating in an Apple sort of way but from my perspective I don't see much in the way of innovation (outside of ac types) outside of airlines with deep pockets like Emirates, Qatar et al. Moreover, airlines are streamlining and perhaps could be innovating in terms of finding leans operating methods eg ezy turnarounds with no onboard head count. Saves 3 minutes on turn.

BA I believe are about to introduce across LHR and LCY operation fees for check in bags. The legacy carriers are responding to the impacts made by low cost airlines. Often seems that these types of moves fly in the face of this Apple approach you refer to.

Finally, I flew DY on 787, it was both my first trip on DY and 787. They introduced the 787 very well and the communication certainly enhanced my perception of DY brand. They are profitable and one to watch. They have huge growth plans and a large order book. EasyJet watch with anticipation as to their next steps at LGW and recognises they have lower costs than ezy, responding with only really a daily Bergen service. I'm not convinced at this early stage how that route is performing but late pricing can be low so one would wonder. LGW being full will be good cancellation for ezy but I think we will see a successful Long haul operation by DY...

[SWBKCB]

But this is the Gatwick thread, and the discussion is about long haul from Gatwick. Oslo-San Fransico is a rather niche operation and not really a comparable market - how about doing a LON-SFO table to provide a bit of balance?

[EI-BUD]

SWBKCB,

I think you are right but given that DY have been rumoured for TA ops at LGW or at least discussed on here means its not an unreasonable topic. Good idea about separate thread.

I meant to say I read about where EI and an Asian carrier (may have been JAL ANA or Cathay) who looked at Oakland v San Francisco. EIs analysis suggested the Airport there at Oakland wouldn't work, whereas on of the Asian airlines launched a service, mapping out specific reasons for the choice , EI said the proportion of connecting passenger could not be served via Oakland so clearly a major consideration and not as great a point to point route .. Totally off topic now. . Apologies. (Edit; can't seem to find what Asian airline this was so perhaps the service was discontinued)

[Artie Fufkin]

Suggesting Oakland is a better airport that San Fransisco is like saying Stansted would be a better airport to fly into than Heathrow; similar time to get into town, smaller immigration queues etc, but the market has spoken overwhelmingly on which one it wants to use.

There are other reasons than just cost to choose the Big Boys rather than Norwegian; do you really want to go on a Wednesday and return on a Monday? Or would you prefer the flexibility to fly any day of the week? If you want a fly drive holiday into San Fransisco and back from LA, can Norwegian offer this?

I like their optimism though. Always good to see confidence in their ability to pull off the last Holy Grail of aviation; Low Cost Long Haul. Personally, I give them 5 years. Over optimistic expansion plans into a mature market on short haul and a spanking from a set of aggressive competitors with deep pockets on long haul should do it.

[LN-KGL]

Let's forget about DLH to Oakland - San Francisco; that was only an illustration of what price level that can be expected compared if Norwegian starts long haul operation at LGW. We that have flown in and out of Gatwick with their 787 this summer know a bit more what expect (both Premium and Economy seating was tested).

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23931688/Tours/Virgins_and_more_2013/Premium_beinplass.jpg
In seat 4A (Premium) ready for pushback at LGW

Since UK CAA hasn't released the Provisional Report for August yet, let's look at what happened in July between LGW and the Nordic countries. EasyJet and Norwegian has only two common Nordic destinations from Gatwick, BGO and CPH. If we include these with the rest of DY destinations, the number of passengers grew 49.5% from July last year a growth of 72,145 passenger which equals to 34.9% of the total growth at Gatwick this month. If we exclude the two destinations shared with U2, DY had a growth of 70.8% to the 11 Nordic destinations they are the only operator to. Passenger wise this equals to 27.2% of the total growth at LGW.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/23931688/Tours/Virgins_and_more_2013/DY_flights.jpg
Norwegian time at LGW South Terminal

If we continue to look at the changes between Heahtrow and Gatwick to the Nordic countries, there is a clear shift in ratio between the two airports. In July 2012 the number of passengers to the Nordic countries from Gatwick was 43.5% of the number of passengers at Heahtrow. This July the same ratio was 65.0%. The passenger numbers to Heahtrow didn't decline, but grew with 5.9% (0.5 percentage points higher that LGW total). It will be interesting to see if this exceptional growth continue, but we have to wait for the provisional report from CAA this coming week to get answers on that. I have seen indications that it continues from Norway.

[mickyman]

LN-KGL

How long have all these Nordic destination been served by Norwegian from Gatwick ?

MM

[LN-KGL]

The first flights from OSL to LGW started in late 2007. At that time STN was their choice (first flight to STN was in Spring 2003 - their first international destination after they converted to 737), but the move to LGW for all OSL flight was completed on 29 March 2009. One year later the move to LGW for all DY was completed. Below is a list of when destinations were introduced.

2007: OSL, ARN

2008: SVG, HEL

2009: BGO, TOS*, CPH, AAL

2010: TRD, RYG**, GOT

2011: AES

2012: TRF

* Stopped around one year after introduction, resumed 2012
** Operation moved to TRF

[wallp]

Is it just transatlantic routes that are predicted for any Norwegian Gatwick long haul operation? Beyond NY, what other US routes might be tried & could any long haul extend to Asia too; could somewhere like Bangkok figure in their plans?

[mickyman]

LN-KGL

Thanks for the information.

MM

[LN-KGL]

Boeing 787-8 for Norwegian Long Haul:

LN102 - EI-LNA - delivered 28 June 2013 - leased from ILFC
LN112 - EI-LNB - delivered 23 August 2013 - leased from ILFC
LN136 - EI-LNC - to be delivered November 2013
LN153 - EI-LND - to be delivered January 2014 - leased from ILFC
LN165 - EI-LNE - to be delivered March 2014
LN178 - EI-LNF - to be delivered May 2014 - leased from ILFC
LNxxx - EI-LNG - to be delivered Late Summer/Early Autumn 2014
LNxxx - EI-LNH - to be delivered Early 2015

The use of the first six are now settled and all will fly to the three Scandinavian Capital airports ARN, CPH and OSL. Around Christmas the use of the 7th will be announced. The use of last of this lot will most probably be announced in Spring/Early Summer 2014.

[Skipness One Echo]

Why are they registered in Ireland and not Norway? * cough
It does look like an excellent product I do agree.

[Hangar6]

Looking at IAA aircraft register it is amazing how many aircraft operating for airlines all over the globe are leased ex ROI , the lessor must determine what register has to be used mind you got to have something to do with tax , plus in the event of bankruptcy eg AZ the planes must be more accessible if reg outside Italy ? Maybe?

[BasilBush]

Gecas, the world's biggest lessor, has a large presence in Shannon. Irish corporate tax laws/rates are a major factor.

[Jack1985]

Norwegian registered the aircraft in Ireland, because of Norwegian taxes and work laws - It allowed them to hire Thai crew for the Bangkok routes amongst others.

[Letsflycwl]

I have to congratulate British Airways at LGW ad having just returned to the UK on a flight with them from Larnaca.

The price of the return ticket was far more cheaper than Easyjet and Monarch and the charter airlines.

The flight was on an A319 and could not fault BA at all, they were brilliant from check in to arrival.

The A319 was an ex BMI aircraft which lacked entertainment but after my recent BA experience will now only use them for future trips.....well done BA !! 😃😃

[zerotohero]

Heard that Gatwick closed for an inbound emergency last night around 10pm local time and all inbound traffic were told by ATC to slow to minimum clean speed

Cant find any further details on line

[SA242]

Heard it last night on the way into LHR. Pressurisation problem, uneventful landing.

[DaveReidUK]

Interview with Stuart Wingate in Saturday's FT in which he argues that, if the Airports Commission comes down in favour of a second runway at Gatwick (and assuming that the government agrees), there is a "fighting chance" that one of the alliances will move its operations from Heathrow to Gatwick.

This despite Star Alliance, Skyteam and (needless to say) OneWorld all telling the FT last month that they want to stay at Heathrow, and Wingate's assertion that he "is not planning to turn Gatwick into a fully-fledged hub like Heathrow - where there are significant numbers of passengers who transfer from short-haul aircraft on to long-range passenger jets".

Hard to see any of the alliances being able to resist that proposition, then. :ugh:

[nigel osborne]

DavidReid uk.

Yes agree STN MAN or BHX could also make similar claims of..give us another runway and we think we might persuade an Alliance to come to us.

Unless one has already stipulated they may switch which as David said is unlikely it really holds no weight at all from any of them.

Be interesting to see in December which of all the proposals to the Airport Commission go through to the expected last 5 to be considered, although you would expect Gatwicks would be one.

Nigel

[Skipness One Echo]

there is a "fighting chance" that one of the alliances will move its operations from Heathrow to Gatwick.
With critical mass at LHR, there is no chance one of the two non-BA alliances would leap into starting from square one in Surrey. STAR have a brand new, custom built and exclusive Terminal at LHR and Skyteam have use of a refurbished T4. I would therefore categorically rule out STAR, BA would shoot it's own b***s off if Oneworld was decamped to Gatters and somehow I don't see Delta moving to Gatwick having just bought a JV with VS on LHR routes. Unless BA are prepared to bribe Oneworld partners to leave, I don't see it, and good luck getting Cathay or QANTAS / (Emirates) to move (!)

It's not a fighting chance, it's just the cheerleading boss of LGW in which GIP have pumped billions of pounds and gone and lost several of their "new" long haul customers that were supposed to be the future of the new Gatwick. I imagine he's now under some serious pressure which would explain what can only be described as some form of hallucination....

Again, before anyone yells about how I am anti Gatwick, I'm not, I just get genuinely upset when hopes are continually raised in a manner in which they cannot be met. That's my gripe.

[vespasia]

no chance one of the two non-BA alliances would leap into starting from square one in Surrey

You might be thought less anti-Gatwick if you got the county right:*

[DaveReidUK]

You might be thought less anti-Gatwick if you got the county rightSOE's geography might be shaky, but his analysis is spot-on. :O

You don't have to be "anti-Gatwick" to recognise that the chances of any of the alliances moving their UK hub from Heathrow to Gatwick, even with two runways, are zero, nada, nil.

Stuart Wingate is flying a kite, which he's perfectly entitled to do on behalf of his shareholders, but he knows as well as anyone else that it's nonsense.

[c52]

I would have thought that if alliance 1 offered alliance 2 enough dollars for its LHR slots, a deal would be done. And the going rate for slots scarcely compares with the cost of the extra aircraft you'd need to use them. (Last deal was reported as $2.5m for five flights a week for PAL, IIRC).

Otherwise, an airline such as BA might find itself unable to grow except by using larger aircraft, and companies don't like being unable to grow.

[Omnipresent]

There's not a chance of it happening.

BA tried a hub at Gatwick years ago ("The hub without the hubbub") and it failed.

Airline alliances are very fractious at the best of times. All three have their own tensions and issues. The idea that all member airlines of one alliance could agree to do something so strategically significant as divesting of their LHR slots and decamp to LGW with no going back is fanciful.

I'm not sure if competition law would come into play as alliances have limited anti-trust immunity regarding co-ordination of routes etc.

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote: "Interview with Stuart Wingate in Saturday's FT in which he argues that, if the Airports Commission comes down in favour of a second runway at Gatwick (and assuming that the government agrees), there is a "fighting chance" that one of the alliances will move its operations from Heathrow to Gatwick."

Forget it! It's all been done before.

Back in the day government policy dictated that a private longhaul UK carrier had to be based at LGW while state-owned BOAC and BEA (later BA) remained at based LHR. The government even took routes off BEA and BOAC and handed them over to LGW based carriers (no open skies or deregulation in those days!). The result: the private carriers went bust.

It didn't work then (when everything was heavily regulated) with BUA, BCAL, etc., and won't work now with one of the alliances, even with another rwy at LGW.

[anothertyke]

So let's suppose for the sake of argument the answer is a second runway at Gatwick. Never mind what the question was!

Roll the film ten years forward. Air traffic growth 3% per annum, so traffic up 40% on today. Big increases in slot values at LHR, the price of not doing R3, converting to a fare premium of say £50 per one way AND a 30 min ATC penalty at LHR relative to LGW. What's going to happen?

1. Some of the minnows at LHR will take the money and run. Some of the destinations on the board at LHR are the consequence of history not economics.

2. LGW will develop as a weak hub, like MAN. If United, AA, USAir, Delta, SQ etc are willing to serve MAN from their hubs, sooner or later they will serve LGW. Maybe they will choose to do it, maybe someone else will have a go and that will trigger market reactions.

Change will happen short of the big boys upping sticks from one of the top airports in the world. But life will move on, not stay the same.

[DaveReidUK]

LGW will develop as a weak hub, like MANAt Manchester, 3% of traffic is connecting. That doesn't satisfy any definition of a hub, "weak" or otherwise.

[cornishsimon]

Confirmed on local radio today that U2 will not operate LGW-NQY.


cs

[getonittt]

So let's suppose for the sake of argument the answer is a second runway at Gatwick. Never mind what the question was!

Roll the film ten years forward

And then there were 100 easyjet aircraft based ....

[anothertyke]

Happy to call it whatever you like-- long distance spoke maybe, not a very elegant phrase. But in terms of connectivity to rest of world MAN is clearly in a higher class than anywhere in UK apart from LHR.

[LNIDA]

spoke hub mini hub call it what you like but my gut instinct is that Norwegian will try the LGW - US market within 12 months, if they can get the right deal from LGW, as for easy jet with 100 aircraft i'm not really sure that there are that many airports you could fly to from LGW to keep a 100 jets on 4 - 6 rotations a day??

[Fairdealfrank]

Quote: “So let's suppose for the sake of argument the answer is a second runway at Gatwick. Never mind what the question was!
Roll the film ten years forward. Air traffic growth 3% per annum, so traffic up 40% on today. Big increases in slot values at LHR, the price of not doing R3, converting to a fare premium of say £50 per one way AND a 30 min ATC penalty at LHR relative to LGW. What's going to happen?”

Is a second rwy at LGW really likely to happen without a third at LHR? If so it would be a suicide note to rival Michael Foot’s 1983 Labour party manifesto.

Quote: “1. Some of the minnows at LHR will take the money and run. Some of the destinations on the board at LHR are the consequence of history not economics.”

Run where? AMS? If the “minnows” can’t make LHR work with its large amount of premium business and wealth of connections, they’re hardly going to make it at LGW!

Examples, please, of destinations that are still there because of "history not economics".

Quote: “2. LGW will develop as a weak hub, like MAN. If United, AA, USAir, Delta, SQ etc are willing to serve MAN from their hubs, sooner or later they will serve LGW. Maybe they will choose to do it, maybe someone else will have a go and that will trigger market reactions.”

Why would they go to LGW just because they go to MAN? EY used to, not any more.

Apart from UK carriers such as BA, VS, ZB, BY, etc., (mostly on point to point leisure routes), carriers doing longhaul at Gatwick don’t last in the long term.

Let's be realistic and accept that, as far as longhaul is concerned, LGW is the waiting room and/or overflow for LHR.

[j636]

Fairdealfrank
Here is a tip for you, if you want to quote text on the second row when you are replaying the fifteenth icon from left to right is a quote button and just past the text in.

copied text

Might make things easier for you!

[FRatSTN]

Looking a hell of a lot closer into the future. Any new ideas about tomorrow when the CAA make their final proposals on charges at Heathrow and Gatwick for the next 5 years?

No doubt both LHR and LGW are not going to be happy because they won't be allowed to charge nearly as much as they would like to, especially LHR.

I don't want to sound daft, but is it wise really for LGW to want to significantly increase charges anyway?

And what about STN? Deferred to next week I believe.

[Keyvon]

Monarch has just announced three brand new routes out of Gatwick: Agadir (Morocco), Enfidha (Tunisia), Hurghada (Egypt - Red Sea) and Nice. Due to start summer 2014.

[cornishsimon]

There will be a new BA route announced any day also


cs

[LAX_LHR]

BA is daily Malta for Summer 2014

[anothertyke]

1. If R3 was ruled out by the politicians, I should have thought some version of the 2 plus 2 plus 2 model is favourite. We shall see.

2. If R3 was ruled out, slot prices will increase exponentially at Heathrow. In that situation, carriers will reappraise the value to them relative to the value of trading. That's happened in the past, and there's further scope for it to happen in the future. Might be minnows, might be switches of long haul bucket and spade out of Heathrow by the big boys.

3. Possibly I agree that in the scenario I outlined, Gatwick is the overflow. All I'm saying is that sooner or later market processes will kick in. If capacity rationing drives ticket prices up at Heathrow, traffic will spread out more than otherwise would happen. LNIDA's comment about NAS suggests just one way the process might begin. Again we shall see.

[Skipness One Echo]

Is there any long haul bucket and spade at LHR? The "minnows" are often less than commercial and often driven by national pride, they're not first up to move.

Is Malta a "new" route? Wasn't it just suspended recently?

The pedant in me is screaming at the misuse of the word "exponentially". There's not exactly a massive list of airlines I can see making a go of LHR who are not existing operators IMHO.

[VickersVicount]

MLA was last operated by BA in 2009

[Fairdealfrank]

Fairdealfrank
Here is a tip for you, if you want to quote text on the second row when you are replaying the fifteenth icon from left to right is a quote button and just past the text in.


Many thanks for the advice, j636, got it to work at last!!




reply to frank
1. If R3 was ruled out by the politicians, I should have thought some version of the 2 plus 2 plus 2 model is favourite. We shall see.

2. If R3 was ruled out, slot prices will increase exponentially at Heathrow. In that situation, carriers will reappraise the value to them relative to the value of trading. That's happened in the past, and there's further scope for it to happen in the future. Might be minnows, might be switches of long haul bucket and spade out of Heathrow by the big boys.

3. Possibly I agree that in the scenario I outlined, Gatwick is the overflow. All I'm saying is that sooner or later market processes will kick in. If capacity rationing drives ticket prices up at Heathrow, traffic will spread out more than otherwise would happen. LNIDA's comment about NAS suggests just one way the process might begin. Again we shall see.

1. The Airports Commission is supposed to be neutral and should therefore give due consideration to the best remedy to the lack of hub capacity in the UK. Time will tell, we should have some idea by the end of the year.

The "2 plus 2 plus 2 model" would be a disaster, as would a four-rwy STN or a vanity project in the Thames. For the last two, think YMQ!

2. In the event of slot prices rising, it will effect new entrants and existing carriers who wish to increase their LHR offerings.

Those in the first category may well end up avoiding the UK if they can't get the required slots at an acceptable price. Some have tried LGW as an alternative and, in the majority of cases, it hasn't been successful.

Those in the second category will be stuck, but again, apart from the hub carriers BA and VS, it is unlikely they would want the expense of a dual operation for one city.

3. Speculation about a DY LGW-JFK service is irrelevant in this case: DY has never attempted to obtain LHR slots.

As mentioned many times before, movement tends to be from LGW to LHR, not the other way around.

If the status quo at LHR doesn't change (i.e. no third rwy and capacity rationing remaining as it is now) why would this pattern of carrier movement change?

[anothertyke]

Apols Skipness, exponential= cringeworthy.

Bucket and spade-- I was thinking for example Montego Bay. Maybe meant rattle your jewellery.

My answer to Frank's last question is --- if the market is substantially larger in ten years time then in the scenario under discussion, what he calls the waiting room at LGW will be filling up. That does presume plane size growth at LHR doesn't keep pace with demand growth though!

[Fairdealfrank]

My answer to Frank's last question is --- if the market is substantially larger in ten years time then in the scenario under discussion, what he calls the waiting room at LGW will be filling up. That does presume plane size growth at LHR doesn't keep pace with demand growth though!

anothertyke, your original scenario was for no third rwy at LHR and a second at LGW, so under your circumstances, the "waiting room" won't fill up, as it would have been substantially enlarged.

Obviously, your original scenario "2+2" or, indeed, the "2+2+2" idea will not resolve the problem of insufficient hub capacity at LHR. In the long term, "4-2-1" or "4-2-2" will be necessary.

[Sean Dillon]

Gambia Bird starting LGW-ACC and LGW-FNA from November. Both 3 times a week, operated on a wet leased B757.

[LNIDA]

At least the Davis commission recognise what is blindingly obvious to all, that the SE of England needs more runway capacity sooner rather than later, I think the most likely out come will be a second runway at LGW and a 3rd at LHR.

The BAA submission from LHR looks to be a very grown up piece of work and talks openly about a 4th runway.

I think Boris Island is dead in the water, its too far East, too expensive and too late.

There can only be one hub in the UK and there only 3 choices LHR STN LBI (London Boris Isle) changing hub status means closing LHR.

LGW will never be a hub airport although it may do very well of the new breed of Low cost operators going long haul, if and its a big if Norwegians foray into long haul works others are bound to follow. Of course a 3rd runway at LHR would likely mean BA moving more long haul kit away from LGW

[LGS6753]

From Airline Route update:

ADRIA Resumes London Gatwick Service from mid-May 2014

ADRIA Airways in Summer 2014 season resumes service to London Gatwick, after near 3 years suspension. The Star Alliance member will operate 2 weekly Ljubljana – London Gatwick flights on board Airbus A319, from 17MAY14 to 18OCT14.

JP450 LJU1925 – 2040LGW 319 36
JP451 LGW2120 – 0025+1LJU 319 36

[bunatern]

one from the rumour mill today norweigan will annouce long haul flights for s14 tomorrow time will tell.

[LNIDA]

Also lots of other route news due in the next 24 hours or so for both UK & Spain

[cornishsimon]

That's interesting LNIDA

Any hints ? UK ?????

Which airlines ?


cs

[LN-KGL]

Well, to name the airline is simple - it has to be Norwegian Air Shuttle with LNIDA contributing. I have heard rumours of more 738 to be based at LGW - six is the number that pops up. Up in North West there is also rumours that local cabin crews has been recruited and they are to be based there. I suspect there will be more visits from the Spanish bases to the UK, and I don't think LGW will be the only UK airport with visits from that direction.

[cornishsimon]

I read the comments to suggest LGW-Spain and UK Domestic ?



cs

[LN-KGL]

The first one is safe bet cornishsimon, but the second one is misfire. Spain to (an)other UK airport(s) is on the other hand a safer bet.

[fa2fi]

NCL would be sweet if they did domestic. It looks like the much rumoured airline that was to fly this route isn't going to. But I'd be very surprised if they did UK domestic.

[OwnNav]

I see BAW1 diverted to LGW just now, due fog.

[Bagmanlgw]

Norweigan will also , I am informed be flying to some of the Greek isles as well

[Skipness One Echo]

But I'd be very surprised if they did UK domestic.
Not likely on the B737-800, BA used the B733 / B735 much of the time and flybe were on the DHC8-Q400. Maybe if APD was axed and they went for promotional volume, the Irish just dropped their travel tax. Gideon Osbourne, are ya listening?

[LNIDA]

Cornishman

Not suggesting domestic flights for NAS in UK but Spain to/from elsewhere in the UK is when not if

[cornishsimon]

So nothing announced ?


cs

[BAladdy]

Norwegian announcement re longhaul flights is due tomorrow

[MKY661]

Power Failiure at the airport occurred today due to heavy rain. :(

[pabely]

Norwegian - do they have any working 787's?

[aeulad]

Norwegian

Apparently;

LAX from 2 July
JFK from 3 July
FLL from 4 July

Kind regards

aeulad

[BAladdy]

Norwegian

Apparently;

LAX from 2 July
JFK from 3 July
FLL from 4 July

Kind regards

aeulad
According to a post on Airlineroute.net. "Operational schedule is now appearing in the GDS under Flight Information (FLIFO) section although it’s being remarked as “ENTIRE FLT- H/ SEGMENT NOT TO BE DISPLAYED”. This remark will be displayed until the airline officially opens reservation, as early as Thursday morning (17OCT13)". Schedule is showing as follows.

Fort Lauderdale

DY7045 LGW1555 – 2100FLL 787 15
DY7046 FLL2230 – 1155+1LGW 787 15

Los Angeles

DY7095 LGW1345 – 1705LAX 787 7
DY7095 LGW1535 – 1855LAX 787 3

DY7095 LAX1905 – 1335+1LGW 787 7
DY7096 LAX2030 – 1500+1LGW 787 3

New York (JFK)

DY7015 LGW1710 – 2000JFK 787 246
DY7016 JFK2130 – 0900+1LGW 787 246

Norwegian to Launch London Gatwick Long-Haul Service in Summer 2014 | Airline Route ? Worldwide Airline Route Updates (http://airlineroute.net/2013/10/17/dy-lgw787-s14/)

Looks as if the aircraft will be LGW based.

Norwegian - do they have any working 787's?

The 787 that was grounded (EI-LNB) - Returned to service on Tuesday. According to acars EI-LNA has been operating normally

[cornishsimon]

Do we expect to see BA/VS launch anything to compete ?


cs

[Bagmanlgw]

I take it they also intend to announce the new short haul expansion from LGW today as well ?

And hopefully put it all on their website for sale

[IrishFlyer2013]

DY are starting LGW- Santorini, Corfu, Sicily and Budapest during Summer 2014 as well as the new long haul flights to LAX, JFK & FLL.

They are also increasing frequency on flights from Gatwick to Malaga, Ibiza, Split, Dubrovnik, Majorca, Faro, Tenerife, Copenhagen and Barcelona.

Gatwick Media Centre - News - First European Low Cost Carrier operating long haul services from London Gatwick to North America shows the future pattern of aviation (http://www.mediacentre.gatwickairport.com/News/First-European-Low-Cost-Carrier-operating-long-haul-services-from-London-Gatwick-to-North-America-sh-84a.aspx)

[BAladdy]

BA have over the last 3 months made a number of changes to there LGW S14 long and short haul schedules. Below is a complete list of the changes compared to the S13 Schedule.

Further changes are likely over the coming weeks

Shorthaul

NEW for S14

MLA - Flights will operate daily from 30th March 2014. BA suspended this route back in 2009

Frequency Increases

CTA - Increases from daily to 8 x weekly from 27th April 2014
DBV - Increases from Daily to 8 x weekly
FAO - Increases from 8 x weekly to 2 x daily
JER - Flights will increase to operate up to 6 x daily. Flights op up to 5 x daily S13.
LCA - Increases from 3 to 5 x weekly .
RAK - 2 extra flights a week operate through S14.
NAP - Increases from 2 x daily to 17 x weekly
PFO - Increases from 4 to 5 x weekly
SZG - Increases from 4 to 5 x weekly

Route Suspended

TUN - Flight suspended from start of W13 schedule. Will continue to be suspended for S14.

Longhaul

Frequency Increases

ANU - Increase from 5 to 6 x weekly.
GND - Increases from weekly to 2 x weekly
MCO - Increases from to 10 x weekly
PUJ - Increases from 2 to 3 x weekly
KIN - Increases from 3 to 4 x weekly
UVF - Increases from 6 x weekly to Daily.

Days of Operation Changes

CUN - S14 will operate days 1,3 and 6. S13 flights op days 2,4 and 7
LAS - S14 will operate days 2,4 and 7. S13 flights op days 1,4 and 6
TAB - S14 will operate day 4. S13 flight op day 5

[WHBM]

There have been plenty of low cost carriers on the Transatlantic before. Affinity charters. Laker. PeoplExpress. And more. None of these have succeeded long term. They may get loads in the summer but just do not get the revenue to sustain a daily operation during the winter. They do not have the business contacts, corporate agreements, or the premium traffic. They are also pretty light on freight loads. The economy fares charged nowadays are difficult to beat by a significant margin. In more recent times, US travellers in particular seem quite averse to travelling other than with their favourite network carrier with its frequent flyer miles. Virgin only managed to scrape through by changing pretty rapidly from an LCC to a mainstream carrier.

[wallp]

I for one hope Norwegian make a success of these long haul routes. It won't be easy but with their expanding European network feeding these flights, attractive fares & the cost efficient B787, surely they have a fighting chance?

[True Blue]

All Vueling routes from Lhr are off sale after March 14. Could they be about to move all to Lgw?

[cornishsimon]

How many LHR slots do they use daily ? What could IAG be about to do with them?

[racedo]

All Vueling routes from Lhr are off sale after March 14. Could they be about to move all to Lgw?

Looks like LGW could be a bloodbath next year on pricing with IAG using Vueling to go after Easyjet passengers.

[davidjohnson6]

How many LHR slots do they [Vueling] use daily ? What could IAG be about to do with them?Arrival and depature slot times currently used at Heathrow for each of Vueling's routes
Bilbao arr 1650 dep 1735 - daily
A Coruna - arr 1610 dep 1715 - daily
Florence - arr 1540 dep 1635 - daily
Palma de Mallorca - arr 1030 dep 1140 - 5x (?) weekly

I'm sure IAG can find a good use for almost 4 daily slot pairs with a bit of careful tweaking of other flights

[cornishsimon]

Almost sounds like a new domestic or shorthaul euro route !

[DaveReidUK]

Arrival and departure slot times currently used at Heathrow for each of Vueling's routes
Bilbao arr 1650 dep 1735 - daily
A Coruna - arr 1610 dep 1715 - daily
Florence - arr 1540 dep 1635 - daily
Palma de Mallorca - arr 1030 dep 1140 - 5x (?) weeklyAll four routes, including PMI, are served daily at the moment.

[wallp]

They're all routes that could easily operate successfully from LGW. Given the Norwegian & easyJet expansions there it might be a good opportunity for IAG to boost their LGW operation. These would be nice additions to their LGW base. I hope it happens

[davidjohnson6]

All Vueling routes from Lhr are off sale after March 14. Could they be about to move all to Lgw?

TrueBlue - are you sure Vueling's last current sale date for Heathrow flights is March 14 and not March 29 ? Vueling website seems quite happy to quote me a price for Saturday 29 March which happens to be the last day of the winter season.

I'm wondering if there is the simple possibility that S14 have not yet been fully released and we're reading too much into the situation at the moment

[True Blue]

I was referring to March 2014

[davidjohnson6]

Whoops - my mistake then...

[True Blue]

On a rolling 12 month period, to Sept 13, Lgw is within 100k pax of its previous all time high, calender year 2007. Wonder if they could exceed that in 2013?

TB

[racedo]

On a rolling 12 month period, to Sept 13, Lgw is within 100k pax of its previous all time high, calender year 2007. Wonder if they could exceed that in 2013?


Assumming no snow until 2014 then its a probable, add in couple of days closure due to snow then unlikely.

[wallp]

The Gatwick press release about the Norwegian long haul launch calls it a "game changer" & states "it points to a future where more & more long haul routes will be served by Gatwick"

A very confident & upbeat view which I hope comes to fruition. Given the long haul routes routes which have started & stopped in recent times - Seoul, Kuala Lumpar etc, I wonder where all this long haul growth is going to come from - what are the airlines & routes that are likely to deliver this growth beyond those already announced?

[compton3bravo]

It is called spin dear boy - spin! Gatwick will always be a ´´waiting room´´ for Heathrow on long haul except for some ´´bucket and spade´´ destinations and so called low cost - remember Air Asia, Oasis etc.

[Fairdealfrank]

Didn't the boss of LGW threaten to resign if his airport is not on the shortlist for expansion............

It is a pity that this probably won't become another "hat-eating" episode (similar to the "AI at BHX won't happen" issue).

[lozza86]

Norweigan have announced new route to Tel Aviv from LGW commencing on 01 April 2014


DY494 LGW0600 – 1300TLV 73H 247
DY495 TLV1400 – 1705LGW 73H 247

Additionally, EasyJet just announced new route to Paris (CDG)

Flights get under way at the end of March 2014.

Flights will depart London Gatwick at 1445 and 1700, arriving into CDG at 1700 and 2020 respectively. They will return from Paris CDG at 0710 and 1745, arriving at 0720 and 1755.*

[Fairdealfrank]

So who said that the Channel Tunnel and high speed rail would eliminate the need for short haul?

Clearly this new route illustrates well that this is not the case for HS1 and would not be for HS2.

It increases choice and opportunity: air, train or ferries for Europe, Ireland and Northern Ireland, air, train or road for the rest of the UK, which is obviously beneficial for pax. It's not "either/or/or" it's "all".

However, the other side of the coin is that any concept of a Shoreham (ESH)-Pontoise (POX) route is probably now history.

[wallp]

Great news that CDG is back on the map from LGW. Bit surprised that there's no morning departure from LGW though, perhaps to be added later?

Still, it's a great addition to their LGW schedule

[davidjohnson6]

As all are aware, Gatwick is now pretty much full with slots having a clear monetary value on a use-it-or-lose-it basis
It's possible that I'm being overly cynical, but for routes like LGW-NCL and/or LGW-CDG, I'm wondering if Easyjet are effectively using these routes partly as slot warmers, simply because they either haven't got enough spare aircraft or can't figure out anything better to do with them ?

[racedo]

It's possible that I'm being overly cynical, but for routes like LGW-NCL and/or LGW-CDG, I'm wondering if Easyjet are effectively using these routes partly as slot warmers,

Not unreasonable but will be interesting to see how the LGW-CDG route operates.......

[DaveReidUK]

As all are aware, Gatwick is now pretty much fullWell Gatwick themselves don't seem to be aware of that:

"At Gatwick we have around 25% spare capacity and can therefore continue to provide the connectivity to growth markets which London and the UK needs."

Gatwick Media Centre - Statements (http://www.mediacentre.gatwickairport.com/content/default.aspx?NewsAreaId=40&Status=Archive)

[racedo]

So who said that the Channel Tunnel and high speed rail would eliminate the need for short haul?

Clearly this new route illustrates well that this is not the case for HS1 and would not be for HS2.

Lets see the numbers after 6 months first..............it really will be interesting to see load factors.

Eurostar is a good option but also have friends who drive simply because the cost for 4 for a weekend more than balances out the costs involved..............they say door to door in getting to St Pancras and Paris is within 90 minutes.

[Charley B]

Does anyone know if MAN route is in the pipeline for any airline...know of a few business people who hate having to go to LHR to fly up there(and do not want to use the train!!)

[LN-KGL]

These business people aren't very business like I would say. Did a brenchmarking this summer between Manchester and London, and the train travel took around 1 hour 40 minutes less than with the plane. The trip north was from London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly with Virgin Trains in First - travel time 2 hours 8 minutes. The trip south again was from Manchester Piccadilly to Manchester Airport with Trans Pen in First, MAN-LHR with Little Red (to keep it in the family) and the Heatrow Express in First from Heathrow to Paddington. At Paddington the watch stopped at 3 hours 47 minutes. The trip was done with no checked in luggage - only an iPad to stay online and a small Canon to document the trip. If the trip had started at Gatwick the difference between the options would had been even larger. I haven't said a thing about the stress level difference (the safety check at MAN T3 was awful) and price tag difference, but I can tell you the train won it hands down on all accounts. Oh, I didn't mention Virgin Trains served a wonderful full English breaky free of charge.

[Skipness One Echo]

The Heathrow route exists to feed BA long haul, a large proportion are connecting, and for this it's a right and proper way to go, connecting MAN with BA's worldwide network just as EK,QR,EY,KL,LH, AF all do in a similar vein. P2P fares are painfully high on many flights, in comparson with LGW-MAN which was a large majority of P2P where fares were pretty dirt cheap, even for BA.

Now there is a market for business travel between the Gatwick region and Manchester on P2P and less so on connections, but the high costs of doing business at LGW preclude a "right" sized aircraft from operating. The B737-400 was, in my experience way too big. The market is smaller than it used to be as BA no longer hub but it does clearly exist as transiting trains via London can be a major faff. The problem is tapping it at a profitable level.

[Charley B]

S1E
very well stated..very true
Needs a Dash 8/146 size aircraft and all seats business class maybe....but the airport landing fees etc...probably wont happen:(

[LN-KGL]

BA isn't alone on LHR-MAN or for that sake LHR-EDI og LHR-ABZ anymore - Virgin Atlantic Little Red also fly these three routes. Both BA and VS use these domestic routes primarily to feed their international flights out of LHR, but Charley B clearly asked about a few local business people that want to fly from LGW to MAN. The six first months of S12 the average daily passenger number between LGW and MAN was 512 and that equaled to 3.5 filled BA B734. Of the airlines flying today at LGW, here is a list of how many filled aircraft that equals to
B738 186 seats - 2.75 - 2 daily cabin factor 68.8%
A320 183 seats - 2.80 - 2 daily cabin factor 68.9%
A319 156 seats - 3.28 - 2 daily cabin factor 82.1%
E195 118 seats - 4.34 - 3 daily cabin factor 72.3%
E175 88 seats - 5.82 - 3 daily cabin factor 97.0%

Clearly the two last isn't an option since flybe will abandon LGW. Had easyJet seen a business case in flying between MAN and LGW they would started it already in April. The same can be said about the first option on the list above, but since they have the largest capacity aircraft of them all; it would be even more unlikely than easyJet jumping in. Oh, didn't I give the name of the third airline - it was of course Norwegian.

A big share of the 512 daily passengers would last year transfer at LGW. With BA out of the picture, the true O&D traffic between the two airports would have been much lower, and Charley B may know a very large share of these few. These days UK domestic flights with jets between airports that are less than 210 miles apart is unsustainable. With that I mean, it will take less time with existing ground transport compared with flying the same distance. The sole reason for why BA is flying MAN-LHR and LBA-LHR and VS is flying MAN-LHR is to create enough feed for their international flights out of LHR.

[Skipness One Echo]

A big share of the 512 daily passengers would last year transfer at LGW.
Can you link to some numbers? BA de-hubbed and only the first wave fed long haul. Past lunchtime, who are you feeding?
The sole reason for why BA is flying MAN-LHR and LBA-LHR
This is a fundamental error. You are presenting the extreme end of the argument. It is a primary driver of the route, however it is not and cannot be the sole rationale, as without the balance of P2P you bleed red ink very badly. LBA-LHR will only ever be worth the candle if they get an early LBA-LHR slot for those willing to pay a premium for flying into London for early business, otherwise short haul gets the scraps from the table of the revenue from the long haul ticket. This is why Little Red will probably fail, sadly the balance isn't there between P2P and long haul as the VS long haul operation isn't big enough to justify a level of frequency approaching BA to be competitive on point to point. This is why the VS Aberdeen operation is flying fresh air up and down Britain daily.
it was of course Norwegian.Your employer? :)

[DaveReidUK]

These days UK domestic flights with jets between airports that are less than 210 miles apart is unsustainable. With that I mean, it will take less time with existing ground transport compared with flying the same distance.Tell that to anyone who lives in Belfast and they will disagree.

[LN-KGL]

Your employer?

Far from it. I'm employed within the pharmaceutical industry and our business covers all the world's continents except Africa, Australia/Oceania and Antarctica. The only thing Norwegian Air Shuttle and I have in common is that I have flown with them a few times the last 12 months. It can be added that within the same time frame I have also flown with British Airways, Darwin, flybe, KLM, LAN Airlines, Lufthansa, SAS, Sky Airline, Swiss, Virgin Atlantic Little Red and Widerøe.

Tell that to anyone who lives in Belfast and they will disagree.

Darn, I should have said Great Britain instead of UK and with that problem solved. Of course this was only if you have terra firma all the way between the two airports.

[Fairdealfrank]

These business people aren't very business like I would say. Did a brenchmarking this summer between Manchester and London, and the train travel took around 1 hour 40 minutes less than with the plane. The trip north was from London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly with Virgin Trains in First - travel time 2 hours 8 minutes. The trip south again was from Manchester Piccadilly to Manchester Airport with Trans Pen in First, MAN-LHR with Little Red (to keep it in the family) and the Heatrow Express in First from Heathrow to Paddington. At Paddington the watch stopped at 3 hours 47 minutes. The trip was done with no checked in luggage - only an iPad to stay online and a small Canon to document the trip. If the trip had started at Gatwick the difference between the options would had been even larger. I haven't said a thing about the stress level difference (the safety check at MAN T3 was awful) and price tag difference, but I can tell you the train won it hands down on all accounts. Oh, I didn't mention Virgin Trains served a wonderful full English breaky free of charge.



2 hours 8 minutes is a reasonable time for Manchester-London city centre-city centre journey (makes one wonder if £50 billion to cut less than an hour off the journey time is a good use of public money). For this kind of journey clearly the train is the best option.

But don't forget the onward travel times to/from London-Euston. A final destination does not have to be very far from the centre of London to add a couple of hours to the journey.

For those heading west of London, a Ringway-Heathrow flight can often be the most convenient option. It's good to have the choice.

[Skipness One Echo]

Can someone advise for whom the last BA hangar at Gatters was built for? Is it ex Laker or BCAL?

[Fenders]

That will be hangar 6 which was the old Laker Airways engineering facility.
When Laker ceased trading around 1983??, BCAL took over the premises. BCAL was then absorbed by BA who have used the hangar since then.
It is one of only 2 hangars that remain at Gatwick. All the others have been demolished.
I seem to recall very a long time ago hangar 4 had caught fire. I don't remember the cause of the fire or when it happened.

[True Blue]

Garuda flights now on sale on their main site to Lgw.

TB

[canberra97]

Fenders

LAKER went bustin May 1982.

[IB4138]

2 hours 8 minutes is a reasonable time for Manchester-London city centre-city centre journey (makes one wonder if £50 billion to cut less than an hour off the journey time is a good use of public money). For this kind of journey clearly the train is the best option.

The money being expended makes perfect sense, as it took me in excess of 6 hours from London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly (centre to centre) a few weeks back, when the West Coast line was closed by a person under at Harrow. There is no adequate alternative, as other routes north from London are already fully subscribed to.

[True Blue]

Norwegian starting Madrid from June 2014, once daily.

Is that about 35 routes they are now flying from Lgw?

TB

[LN-KGL]

The MAD 1x daily starts on 2 June True Blue, and the flights are flown from the new Norwegian MAD base.

[Boeing737-8]

Gatwick-Oran airport 5th January 2014 easyjet

[WHBM]

These business people aren't very business like I would say. Did a benchmarking this summer between Manchester and London, and the train travel took around 1 hour 40 minutes less than with the plane. The trip north was from London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly with Virgin Trains in First - travel time 2 hours 8 minutes. The trip south again was from Manchester Piccadilly to Manchester Airport ..... MAN-LHR ..... Heathrow Express in First from Heathrow to Paddington. At Paddington the watch stopped at 3 hours 47 minutes.
That's a ridiculous comparison because you have compared just the timetable time of the train with an actual overall elapsed time centre to centre when going by plane. So unless your house is on the platform at Euston and your business trip was going to give a sales demonstration of new bufferstops to the stationmaster at Manchester, which all seems somewhat unlikely, it's not a relevant test at all.

There are both businesses and homes in the Thames Valley for many travellers on the MAN-LHR flights, for whom getting to/from Euston is a real inconvenience, and can more than double the trip time. Just to make those in the outer periphery of London find the train useless, in recent years they have given up stopping the trains at Watford Junction, which used to have quite a number of day-return business travellers.

Meanwhile if you live around Manchester you can always drive in and park in one of those ill-lit car parks near Manchester Piccadilly, but the chances of your car being fully in one piece when you return are somewhat less than at Ringway.

[davidjohnson6]

Gatwick-Oran airport 5th January 2014 easyjet
Boeing737-8 - forgive me if I seem a little sceptical, but do you have a source or some other good reason to believe Easyjet will fly to Oran from 5th January 2014 ?

[CaptainDoony]

Wikipedia, that trusted source says so...

[EK77WNCL]

Oran? Hmm, I hope so, leaves scope for a flight to Algiers in the future which I would find extremely useful needing to visit.

Would have thought maybe Algiers first, but... This could be interesting after Ryanair's intentions to fly to further cities in Morocco along with Algeria, Libya and Egypt. Could EZY be getting in early? I hope so.

[LGS6753]

From Travel Mole:

Air China to resume flights from Gatwick (http://www.travelmole.com/news_feature.php?c=setreg&region=2&m_id=s~T_mdT_Y!&w_id=9454&news_id=2009006)

[yotty]

BA Shorthaul fleet at LGW to become all A319/20 by Summer 2015.

[The Flying Cokeman]

Tomorrow's news from easyJet regarding LGW:

"(...)
The new slots have been used for services to cities popular with business travellers. In total easyJet will launch four new routes:

Jersey – 3 daily
Paris CDG – 2 daily
Brussels – 2 daily
Newcastle – 2 daily
Strasbourg – 4 weekly

The airline will also increase services to a number of destinations:

Inverness – from 1 to 2 daily
Isle of Man – from 1 to 2 daily
Bordeaux – from 1 to 2 daily
Amsterdam – from 6 to 7 daily
Geneva – from 6 to 7 daily."

[True Blue]

So is Ezy starting Brussels from Lgw?

TB

edit- it's on sale on the site from 30 March 14.

[wallp]

Good to see that Air China are returning next year. Are there plans for Korean to return at some point or have they given Gatwick up totally?

[True Blue]

I believe it has gone for good.


Lgw has had quite a few new names added to the destination list over the past year.


TB

[True Blue]

So is Norwegian not going for TLV after all?

TB

[LNIDA]

Norwegian has signed a seven year partnership contract with London Gatwick. Norwegian is one of the fastest growing airlines at Gatwick and plans to open several new routes here in the future, including long-haul routes.

The partnership connects Norwegian and London Gatwick even closer together, for example in relations to route development and marketing.

Norwegian Air Shuttle ASA, commercially branded “Norwegian”, is a low-cost airline listed on the Oslo Stock Exchange. Norwegian is the second largest airline in Scandinavia and third largest low cost carrier in Europe. More than 20 million passengers fly on its network per year. The company has 275 undelivered aircraft on firm order. Norwegian was voted Europe’s best low-cost carrier of the year by the renowned SkyTrax World Airline Awards. Norwegian offers better leg room than most competitors, in-flight WiFi, world-class punctuality and a fleet of 80 aircraft with an average age of only 4.6 years.

I hear that this allows for 2 based 787's and at least 16 narrow body (738/320) aircraft...quite where the space or slots will come from???

[davidjohnson6]

Govt announced plans to spend £50m on the train station at Gatwick.
Yes, the station could do with some money being spent on it, but £50m sounds like quite a lot. Anyone have more info ?

[cornishsimon]

How much did they rekon a second runway would cost ?



cs

[Wycombe]

These are Govt infrastructure annoucements today, so a pretty safe bet there will be absolutely nothing on airports ;-)

They have lots of long grass to kick things into, of course.

[Jes]

The work at Gatwick railway station is being done now. Another case of restating to impress the gullible.

[racedo]

Govt announced plans to spend £50m on the train station at Gatwick.
Yes, the station could do with some money being spent on it, but £50m sounds like quite a lot. Anyone have more info ?

Additional 2 platforms have been worked on all year so unless they plan even more then not sure where the £50 million is going to be spent.

[The Flying Cokeman]

easyJet to announce new route to Tel aviv tomorrow starting spring 2014.

[Airlift21]

It's the same announcement as last year (or maybe earlier this year), when £53m was also quoted, along with increasing the number of platforms at the station.

There's a bit of info about it all on the Gatwick Airport website. Here's some.....

The Government’s funding commitment follows a letter from the Independent Chair of the Airports Commission Sir Howard Davies to the Chancellor, which recognises Gatwick’s success in increasing the number of long haul destinations served, and includes a series of recommendations on improving surface access to enable passengers to more effectively access new and existing routes.

..... and the rest

Gatwick Media Centre (http://www.mediacentre.gatwickairport.com/)

Apparently, Gatwick's recent growth has been recognised. I may be reading between the lines, but I'm starting to think that the airport may actually make it to the shortlist when the Davies Commission eventually reports.

Airlift

[bunatern]

turkish airlines adding a third daily IST flight from the start of S14 that will take them up to four daily with the daily SAW flight.

[True Blue]

Yes the extra TK flight now on sale. Wonder if they will add a late night departure like they have at Lhr in due course?


TB

[118.70]

Doesn't Sir Howard's letter to the Chancellor say that the current plans aren't good enough at Gatwick and more should be done so that passengers can easily transfer luggage onto trains that can cope with the luggage :

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/263208/surface-access-letter.pdf

Must say I've always found it a bit of a rigmarole myself and luggage trolleys should be able to go to the platform.......

[118.70]

And the Chancellor's Autumn Statement Documentation includes :


2.200 Improving transport links to Gatwick Airport – The government will, in response to
recommendations made by the independent Airports Commission, take forward a package of
measures to improve surface access to Gatwick Airport, comprising:
•• £50 million towards the cost of full redevelopment of the railway station, subject to agreeing
satisfactory contributions from Gatwick Airport
•• accelerating the Network Rail study into improvements to the Brighton Mainline
•• a pilot of smart ticketing on Gatwick to London rail links, subject to ongoing commercial
negotiations
•• work to explore the feasibility of improving road access to Gatwick on the M23, M25 and
local roads
2.201 Improving transport links to other airports – The government will, in response to
recommendations made by the independent Airports Commission, take forward 2 feasibility
studies into transport links to airports, including:
•• a study into southern rail access to Heathrow, to complete in 2015
•• widening the scope of the current East Anglian Mainline study to include exploring options
for improving access to Stansted

[LAX_LHR]

Easyjet launching a 3 weekly LGW-TLV flight from 1st April 2014.

[DaveReidUK]

Must say I've always found it a bit of a rigmarole myself and luggage trolleys should be able to go to the platform....... I think there is a general presumption against allowing luggage trolleys on station platforms, on safety grounds - it's mentioned here in connection with the Edinburgh Airport Rail Link:

Q Will there be luggage trolleys available at the airport station?

A Yes. However it will be necessary for conventional safety reasons to prevent airport baggage trolleys from reaching the station platform

EARL Project Questions and Answers (http://www.earlproject.com/qanda.php)

[Boeing737-8]

Tel aviv is a bit of a shock as a lot of flights already:
LHR-TLV BA LY
BA 3 flights a day
LY 2/3 flights a day
LTN-TLV EZY LY
EZY 2 daily
LY. 22 weekly

[True Blue]

So is Ezy going on the Tlv route the reason Norwegian hasn't announced it? Or are they waiting to see what Ezy are doing in terms of times etc before making their plans public?


TB

[racedo]

So is Ezy going on the Tlv route the reason Norwegian hasn't announced it?

Is TLV open skies with Airlines or is Norwegian prevented because it is not an EU airline ?

[EISNN]

Is TLV open skies with Airlines or is Norwegian prevented because it is not an EU airline ?

Norway along with Iceland and Liechtenstein are members of the the European Free Trade Association and the European Economic Area. It in turn allows the EFTA-EEA states to participate in the EU's Internal Market without being members of the EU. They adopt almost all EU legislation related to the single market including borders (Norway is in Schengen) except laws on agriculture and fisheries.

So the answer is that Norwegian is not prevented from flying from any EU/EEA airport to TLV.

[racedo]

So the answer is that Norwegian is not prevented from flying from any EU/EEA airport to TLV.

Thanks for that.

Advertisement (http://www.haaretz.com/travel-in-israel/.premium-1.556683)

Did some digging and Norwegian fly to Sweden so no reason why UK-TLV not applicable it appears at first glance.

[IB4138]

£50 million towards the cost of full redevelopment of the railway station, subject to agreeing
satisfactory contributions from Gatwick Airport
•• accelerating the Network Rail study into improvements to the Brighton Mainline
•• a pilot of smart ticketing on Gatwick to London rail links, subject to ongoing commercial
negotiations

More electical fires reported on Gatwick Express class 442 units involving their traction equipment. Last three, reported elsewhere, to have occured on 28th November, 3nd December and today. The latter being on a unit on an empty coaching stock move. These units, introduced in 1988 are simply clapped out and not fit for purpose. They give visitors to the Uk a bad first impression. They are far inferior and less accessable, certainly for the infirm and more aged, to the 2000 lntroduced, purpose built, class 460 units for Gatwick Express, that Network Rail in their wisdom allowed Southern, the now franchise owner of Gatwick Express, to replace them with between 2010 and 2012.

Any negotiations have to start with providing modern suitable trains.That is where to start.

[ELondonPax]

" class 460 units for Gatwick Express, that Network Rail in their wisdom allowed Southern"
That fiasco has nothing to do with Network Rail. Aim your fire at Dept for Transport.

[IB4138]

Doesn't matter who is responsible.....it's still a disgrace which needs attention .

[DaveReidUK]

According to the FT:

"Gatwick’s chairman Sir Roy McNulty expressed doubt that the airport would be willing to build a second runway if it was given permission to do so at the same time as Heathrow was allowed to construct a third runway."

No surprises there, then.

[davidjohnson6]

Dave - to play devil's advocate, no new runway would be operational before 2020. Assuming an average of modest growth over the years. LHR has lower frequency larger aircraft where a less constrained airport might see higher frequency smaller aircraft on some routes. Furthermore, operating at 99% capacity every day indicates non-sustainability.

So why not 2 runways at the same time ?

[Jes]

6 years is a bit optimistic.

I was wrong about the £50m extra for Gatwick station. Here is the official story:

Background and context
In November 2012, the Prime Minister asked Sir Howard Davies to chair an Independent Commission to examine the scale and timing of any requirement for additional capacity to maintain the UK’s position as Europe’s most important aviation hub. The Commission will produce its final recommendations in the summer of 2015.
The Commission was also tasked with identifying and evaluating how any need for additional capacity should be met in the short, medium and long term. As part of this work, the Commission have been examining the case for improving surface access to our existing airports. Sir Howard Davies wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 26 November setting out the Commission’s recommendations for improving airport surface access.
The package of measures covers all of Sir Howard and the Commission’s recommendations, although there are understandable differences in tone.
The Commission rightly indentifies surface transport as a factor that affects airline route decisions. This package of measures is designed to make other London airports, particularly Gatwick, more attractive to long haul operators. This is important in securing vital connections to emerging markets as Heathrow is and will remain full and as such operators are unlikely to be able to secure slots there. By enhancing the attractiveness of other London airports, we will also increase the attractiveness of the London market to these carriers and increase the likelihood they will serve London.

What the package includes
Gatwick
Gatwick Airport Station to be fully redeveloped by constructing a new station building and transport interchange south of the present building by 2020 for airport passengers and regional transport users. This station and interchange will be compatible with the long term growth plans developed by Gatwick Airport for the next two decades, subject to the findings of the Airport Commission. It will also support railway demand growth forecast for the wider region over the period.

The new building enables full realisation of the extra track and platform capacity provided at Gatwick by an earlier £50m scheme co-funded by the Government through Network Rail (£42m) and Gatwick Airport (£8m) between 2011 and 2013. It both meets airport growth requirements and stimulates investment in the wider 'Gatwick Diamond' cluster of industries around the airport.

The Government will contribute £50m of capital funding at this stage towards a scheme capped at £180m cost. The full scheme and third party contributions will be defined by December 2014, when funding will be reviewed. Station over-track construction may be timed in parallel with Brighton Main Line resignalling work planned for 2018-19 to reduce cost and disruption.

As the Commission identifies we fully expect Gatwick airport to contribute to this project and will also work with Network Rail to reduce the projects costs. Any gap would however require additional funding to be made available by HMT.

The Government accepts there is scope to enhance the rolling stock used on Gatwick Express services to better meet the needs of airport users. The tender documentation for the future TSGN rail franchise makes clear that evaluation credit is available for bidders who offer high-quality proposals to do that. It is, however, important to recognise the importance of these services to commuters as well as airport users.

The Commission has suggested that further improvements at Gatwick and on the Brighton Main Line be studied. The Government will ensure these are included in the remit of the ongoing Network Rail Sussex and Wessex Route Studies. These had been due to report in Spring 2015, but the Government will accelerate the pace of elements of the studies so that the findings of the study relevant to Gatwick can be taken into account as soon as possible.
Likewise the Government will carry out the Commissions’ suggested studies into Gatwick road access by ensuring that they are considered as part of the Highways Agency’s London Orbital/M23 ongoing Route Based Strategy work.

[nigel osborne]

davfdjohnson6

I think the issue is that another runway at LHR would probably result in the full fare airlines at LGW simply diving into new slots at LHR.

This much reduces the chance of many future full fare airlines probably wanting to go to LGW. If they can get into LHR and connect with their alliance partners and more lucrative, and higher business passenger numbers.

That would leave LGW with a very expensive 2nd runway and only low costers using it,who although have been very vocal in supporting a 2nd runway, have also said they will not pay for it.

So wheres the business case ?

Nigel

[DaveReidUK]

I think the issue is that another runway at LHR would probably result in the full fare airlines at LGW simply diving into new slots at LHR.That's certainly how I read the LGW chairman's comments - it's in Gatwick's interest that LHR should remain capacity-constrained.

[LNIDA]

UK media are reporting that its likely that Boris Island won't make the shortlist.

[racedo]

Tis a pity as Boris Island Airport or BOJ for short would have been interesting

[davidjohnson6]

Flights fromLondon Boris Johnson to Bourgas in Bulgaria might get a little confusing

[racedo]

Flights fromLondon Boris Johnson to Bourgas in Bulgaria might get a little confusing

Ok make it BJOB then:E

[vctenderness]

That's a bit of a mouthful!

[1DC]

Surely Boris's place would suffer too many fog delays. The Thames was often a foggy place when i sailed in there..

[racedo]

Surely Boris's place would suffer too many fog delays. The Thames was often a foggy place when i sailed in there..

Plan was to pipe in hot air from Bojo to keep fog away.

[cornishsimon]

Gatwicks taken delivery of first of new A320s that will replace the 734s for
British Airways, ex LHR G-TTOB and G-TTOE



There are several more 319s still to move over plus the 10 A320 airframes that are coming from somewhere, if that is true.

[JonnyH]

North Terminal was an absolute mare for passengers today. Flooded, power cut and a landslide on the Gatwick Express (supposedly!)

Not a good day for some of LGW's passengers with quite a few North Terminal cancellations.

[_IRL_Flyer]

Emirates will use an A380 on EK09/10 from the 30 March 2014.

[Capetonian]

Airport capacity: London versus the rest of Europe - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/10521439/Airport-capacity-London-versus-the-rest-of-Europe.html)

Some interesting statistics and comments here.

[RedhillPhil]

North Terminal was an absolute mare for passengers today. Flooded, power cut and a landslide on the Gatwick Express (supposedly!)

Not a good day for some of LGW's passengers with quite a few North Terminal cancellations.



Not on the Gatwick Express service, affecting the Gatwick Express service. Wasn't supposedly either. Somewhere around Purley there was a bank slip onto the line caused by a burst water main. Gatwick express kept on running but at reduced frequency due to only two out of four running lines available. South of Gatwick Balcombe tunnel was flooded.

[Charley B]

Great news about the A380:)
Sure it wont be long before all the EK flights to LGW are those(hopefully!!)

[cornishsimon]

Think the Ek A380 to LGW was only a matter of time !
But still good news for LGW.

[Skipness One Echo]

Interesting it's the evening departure, LHR and MAN had the afternoon departure first, thought the EK015/016 was the stronger performer. The evening flight was an A332 long after the others were B777s.

GIP have spent a fortune on tarting up the teminals, (the most luxurious public toilets I have ever used in Gatwick South) yet seem to have mucked up on some basics regarding standby generators? Heads should roll!

[Charley B]

Thats does seem a strange one...I thought it would arrive on the EK15/16 flight flight at lunch time too...maybe it is that evening flight that is the busiest now???

[Navpi]

Oh dear some shocking pictures from the Daily Mail this morning !

I would have thought somebody would have mentioned "the weather" but shots of The Police manning the information desks and 1 toilet does seem poor !

Shame of 'Third World' Gatwick: U.S. owners face probe after airport leaves thousands stranded in squalor | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2529289/Shame-Third-World-Gatwick-U-S-owners-face-probe-airport-leaves-thousands-stranded-squalor.html)

[racedo]

Power plants have been at Gatwick for years so not fault of GIP.
Friends live in area and they said flooding in area was unprecedented with many roads being under 3-4 feet of water.

I know a pub where I have frequently spent summer evening with friends or waiting for friends coming in, Ye Olde 6 Bells in now closed with expectation of maybe being open by midsummer caused yet again by flooding.

Worst prob at LGW at moment is lack of a train service for over a week.

They could have brought trains to Horley and transferred from there instead of East Grinstead.

[pc.]

Thanks for the info _IRL_Flyer :)

From Bloomberg By Andrea Rothman Dec 26, 2013 9:42 AM GMT

"Emirates plans to begin flying regular A380 service to London’s Gatwick airport, becoming the first operator to serve London’s second airport with the Airbus SAS double-decker jet.

Emirates from March 30 will replace the current Boeing 777-300ER planes on one of its three daily services into the airport, the airline said in an e-mailed statement.

The A380s flying there will be fitted with 490 seats, 399 in economy class, 76 lie-flat seats in business class, and 14 first-class private suites, the airline said".

[bunatern]

vuelings daily LHR florence flight moving to LGW from start of S14.

[True Blue]

Air Algerie returning to Lgw from the start of April, 2 weekly to Algiers.

TB

[Out Of Trim]

New A320s for BA at LGW..

I don't think so.

These are old Ex GB Airways aircraft transferred to easyJet and then onto BA


:bored:

[cornishsimon]

who said anything about new A320s for BA at LGW ?

The suggestion is that several A320s from LHR are moving to LGW and then 10 leased A320s are coming new to BA but not new.

The leased airframes are still not confirmed by BA or identified as far as im aware.


cs

[davidjohnson6]

I note that Germania operates scheduled from Gatwick to both Erfurt and Pristina. I can understand a rationale for Gatwick-Pristina but Gatwick-Erfurt seems like quite a random route commercially. Yes Weimar is big on high culture and history but it's unlikely to make the 'must see' list for Brits. Had thought Leipzig was the main regional airport with existing Stansted-Leipzig route on Ryanair and also the main population centre.

Anyone know why Gatwick-Erfurt was chosen or the target customer base ?

[Seljuk22]

Tourism/shopping. Flights are Friday and Monday with launch at the end of Novemebr (start of the christmas shopping time) so Germans/Britains can spend a weekend abroad.

Seems like ST is quite confident with the route as we will see it in the summer as well.

[racedo]

Seems like Gatwick owners are offering shopping vouchers to people who had issues in Gatwick with flights cancelled on Christmas Eve.

[CabinCrewe]

...to be spent only in LGW duty free now doubt !! :)

[CabinCrewe]

Im sure Britannia used to operate to Erfurt in the 1980's

[dmkc]

quoted as 'High Street Vouchers' so presuming use out with LGW

£100 per pax which I suppose is something...

[True Blue]

So at 35.433m pax for 2013, is this the highest number for passengers ever achieved by Gatwick?

[ericlday]

According to your best friend Google - yes

[bunatern]

Flynas reportedly looking at april 2014 launch for its long haul flights to LGW and MAN aswell as CDG with A330s.

[wallp]

Is there much of a market for flights from Gatwick to Saudia Arabia?

[davidjohnson6]

EU citizens wanting to visit Saudi Arabia need a visa.
While tourist visas technically exist, they are extremely difficult to obtain - makes applying for a Russian visa quite routine in comparison.

Those travelling from the EU for work tend to have an employer who will pay the higher price for a traditional network / legacy airline.

[Capetonian]

I am a little intrigued at something I noticed the other day at North Terminal. It may be that I've simply not noticed this before as I normally go directly to airside without hanging around landside.

I took the Mrs. to the airport for an 1800 flight and as we arrived very early, and she was already checked in and had no hold luggage, we sat and had a cup of tea. All flights showed on the departures board as 'check in at area ..whatever'. I was expecting that at some point they would change to 'Go to Gate XX' but none did and at about 1720 I thought she should go through although it still showed 'check in'.

My question is, do they only show the gates on the airside departure boards, and if so, why?

[Skipness One Echo]

Yes gates are only shown airside.
Also be thankful you didn't try landside at the South Terminal, where unique amongst modern airports, there are no Flight Information screens landside save for one hidden in a coffee shop on the first floor. The shiny new screens direct you to check in with big friendly airline logos then you are, presumably left with no option but to head for the shopping.

Unless they're hidden, but the one in Costa is now the only one I can ever find.
What did you think of the many, many buckets to catch the rain water?

[racedo]

Unless they're hidden, but the one in Costa is now the only one I can ever find.
What did you think of the many, many buckets to catch the rain water?

Mate works there and while annoyed at the buckets he says given the phenomenal amount of rain its not a shock.
He says that cycling through a river sounds fun the first time but he has done it least 6 times since before Christmas and expects a few more times, he says car park beside South Terminal is pretty much permanently coned off at moment because its flooded so many times.
Can't fault the airport as many places are finding the sheer amount of rain is making seemingly waterproof roofs losing the proof bit.

[Fairdealfrank]

My question is, do they only show the gates on the airside departure boards, and if so, why?


Yes, would say it's to encourage pax to clear security and visit the shops in the sterile area for longer. The gates are not displayed on boards in the sterile area immediately, there's usually a "gate opens at xx:xx" display to encourage pax (punters?) to stay in the sterile area longer and visit the shops.

Suspect airport management would say it's to even the flow and avoid crowding at pinch points.

You pay your money (literally) and take your choice.

It's not just at LGW.

[LadyL2013]

Your first paragraph is exactly what it is. They by obligation should have one before departures so they stick it somewhere quite out of the way. Also notice how in recent years there are less and less shops and eateries before security? Same thing. If pasengers spend longer in the departure lounge, they buy more stuff.

Obviously not going to reveal my source but I would say they were an extremely reliable one.

[racedo]

Also notice how in recent years there are less and less shops and eateries before security? Same thing. If pasengers spend longer in the departure lounge, they buy more stuff.

Er no

The whole point of removal of retail units pre security had to do with a realisation that a significant % of the trade in these stores were people who had no flights.
Adding people whose destination was the airport solely for shopping was seen as counter productive in they used up car parking spaces and generally made terminals busier than they needed to be.
Retailers found the business marginal hence why there was a significant turnover of retailers.
Elimination of this business allowed a significant increase in the space available for security control which caters to the people who really need to use the airport.

[Skipness One Echo]

There was actually a mall called The Gatwick Village.

It was handy, but it died out when passenger baggage became a real at security. There's more screening so there was a drive to reduce the amount f baggage presented.
Our major airports are behaving in a way contrary to our struggling regionals who really ought to be doing exactly that, increase land-side footfall by any means necessary.

[macuser]

I think The Gatwick Village was situated where security is now placed at Gatwick South.

[RexBanner]

Is there any upgrade work scheduled to be done to the North Terminal at all? Travelling through the South Terminal is (in my humble opinion) a real pleasure nowadays, there's an open bright and airy feel to it. The North Terminal really suffers by comparison (although still a million miles in advance of Luton admittedly). Apologies if this has already been asked.

[racedo]

I think The Gatwick Village was situated where security is now placed at Gatwick South.

Correct it was and over the years going into Gatwick I can say that the retail units never really struggled with crush of customers into the shops.

[Bearpit]

Norwegian seem to be expanding all over the place at present. Does anyone know how many aircraft are due in Gatwick this summer?

[LNIDA]

based aircraft is only part of the story, but i think there are four based aircraft, as in they night stop there.

Norwegian now have a 10% share of passenger numbers at LGW

[adfly]

For this coming summer I think it will be 6x 738's and 1x 788. I would also think it will be likely that Norwegian will launch LGW-BKK for W14, especially considering the CEO's comments about London being where they would like to grow longhaul as 'everybody wants to visit London'.

[LN-KGL]

I think we need a small correction to both the two last replies.

Norwegian’s market shares for international passengers at LGW in 2013 were:

Quarter 2013 | Share of international passengers | Passenger growth
1st | 6% | +21,000 passengers
2nd | 7% | +176,000 passengers
3rd | 6% | +243,000 passengers
4th | 10% | +221,000 passengers

In the third quarter this year LGW had 921,786 domestic passengers and rest (6.9 million) were international passengers. From this then around 690,000 of the passengers either were arriving to - or departing from LGW on board a Norwegian aircraft. We can also calculate Norwegian’s Q4 growth at LGW to be around 47%. 13% of Norwegian’s passengers during Q4 had one end of a flight at LGW.

Now let’s move to the Dreamliner flights starting in July from LGW. Gatwick will not be a Dreamliner base (BKK, FLL and JFK will for now be their crew bases), but Norwegian Air International will offer transfer tickets via LGW – in other words there will be a small hub operation at LGW.

Here is the timetable for the Dreamliner operation at LGW from July:

Weekday | Inbound from | Outbound to | Time on ground
Monday | LAX 13:35 | FLL 15:55 | 02:20
Tuesday | FLL 11:55 | JFK 17:10 | 05:15
Wednesday | JFK 09:00 | LAX 15:35 | 06:35
Thursday | LAX 15:00 | JFK 17:10 | 02:10
Friday | JFK 09:00 | FLL 15:55 | 06:55
Saturday | FLL 11:55 | JFK 17:10 | 05:15
Sunday | JFK 09:00 | LAX 13:45 | 04:45

At most outbound destinations from LGW, this Dreamliner will not be the only Norwegian Dreamliner arriving around the same time and a swap will be possible.

[fjencl]

Anybody know what routes the small planet A320 is operating out of LGW this year, and for what travel companies.

Just wondered.

Thanks

[wallp]

LN-KGL an interesting post. There does seem to be quite a lot of time on the ground for the Dreamliner at Gatwick. I wonder if that might change should another plane be added in due course, giving greater operational flexibility?

Does anyone know how the Norwegian US routes are selling & whether it's likely that these routes could see improved frequencies in time?

[LNIDA]

Sale in accordance to plan is what the company line is, as you would expect !but as LN-KGL says transfer passengers are adding to the sales volumes and you have to look at the flights from the US back to OSL,CPH,ARN as well as LGW to see the bigger picture, if your catching a connecting flight, it makes no difference whether you do that at LGW or OSL if its on Norwegians network

For example you can fly between JFK & NCE every day of the week from July, leaving JFK at 21:30 and arrive at NCE at 14:35 (+1) with a 2:35 stop in London on the days there are no London flights you will go by way other the other hubs

Norwegian don't just point to point and thats the point, visit their website and click on flights, select any of the US points and look at all flights.

There are 75 destinations from JFK alone and all flights are on Norwegian flights

You need to think of Norwegian as a low cost schedule airline rather than a LoCo or Ultra LoCo...it is only then that you see what LGW will become

[Skipness One Echo]

You need to think of Norwegian as a low cost schedule airline rather than a LoCo or Ultra LoCo...it is only then that you see what LGW will become
I think many of us have seen this before, and if you really want to advertise your employer's routes and offerings, can you please just buy and advert and pay the money to PPRuNe?
Transfer passengers need overheads, it seems to me, Norwegian is heading for all the overheads of a legacy, but just paying thier employees peanuts to keep the cost base down. Shiny new 737s, 787s, super duper cheapo fares and connections. Of course, there is no catch and this is the Holy Grail.
Where are the flight deck crew based again? Is it still Bangkok? Hell of a commute to be fresh to fly....

[LNIDA]

I have edited the alleged advertising so just calm down !!

Many poster have alluded to your aggressive/arrogant respond to the views of others, you have previously put this down to a trait picked up from your school teachers, other's have blamed your geographical birth place, not my place to comment....

LGW is an international airport, it simply does not matter where the airlines come from, its all about route choice and pricing and a level of service that people find acceptable, be that BA, Emirates, Virgin or indeed Norwegian, in a few months, subject to the not insignificant issue of DOT route licences, then DY will commence transatlantic services from LGW using multinational crew including American, Thai, European nationals, Norwegian will succeed or fail on the strength of it product and pricing, it does have a premium class, they will carry belly cargo, they will carry transfer passengers, in fact they have been doing all of this for over 6 months now from their Scandinavian bases, LGW is no different, there is a huge market, an already satisfied customer base and growing brand awareness.

Looking back on what has and hasn't worked in the past is as you rightly say very important and you clearly have vast knowledge in this area, far, far more than I and i repeat that, but I think your own view blinds you at time's, its like blinkers in that you see Legacy =BA or low-cost = easyJet, my observation is that the market place has become much more fragmented over the past 24 months, but it was you who said back in May 2013 words to the effect of "let's revisit this in 12 months time" and that time is soon upon us, BA haven't launched a spoiler thus far and there is no indication that they will, these route will grow the market and if successful they will not be last.

Peanuts ??? lost me there I'm afraid

[Skipness One Echo]

other's have blamed your geographical birth place,
Are you seriously using my ethnic background in an argument? There's a word for that sort of silliness.
LGW is an international airport, it simply does not matter where the airlines come from, its all about route choice and pricing and a level of service that people find acceptable,
Raise your game, that's not sensible. Gatwick has a particular demographic of which you can push the boundaries, however if you step outside that, you will fail. I point you in the direction of every single previous operator of LGW-NYC, a route both Adam Thomson and SRB both admitted was only sustainable from LHR. The key point here is that to be competitive on some routes out of LGW on long haul you, er your employer is going to need Ryanair levels of a cost base as LGW is price led in a lot of markets. By all means have great fares, but you're going to struggle to make any money.
Peanuts ??? lost me there I'm afraid
It's an English expression, it means if you pay peanuts, well let's just say you won't be employing the highest calibre of people will you? *THIS* is they key difference Norwegian is bringing. Thomson and BA both fly the B787, however the crewing is a little more traditional. Norwegian may do well as will the consumer but my key point here is that at some point, this bending rules and getting around regulations by off-shoring is rightly going to bite them.

May I request you remove the remark on my background, we play the ball and not the man, where I was born has nothing to do with this and you really ought to know better than to mention it at all.

It just seems that you have one message on here which is how great Norwegain Air Shuttle is and to be honest, having watched what they're up to, they're doing exactly what Ryanair do, forcing down wages by off shoring in a rather extreme way. btw you didn't answer me, are they crewing Gatwick long haul from Bangkok? I understand they're Thai and American being regulated by Ireland and flying out of London.
You need to think of Norwegian as a low cost schedule airline rather than a LoCo
LoCo is a low cost scheduled airline, unless easyJet are terribly confused about their own business model.

[davidjohnson6]

this bending rules and getting around regulations by off-shoring is rightly going to bite them

Skipness - why do you make this assertion ?
The normal approach taken in offshoring, is to try to offshore more and more of your staff until customers start protesting in a big way, at which point you put out a press release saying "We're listening to the customer and lessons are being learned". You then move a few critical functions back onshore while moving other bits that you hadn't yet thought of offshore.

I don't like offshoring, but in many cases it's difficult to argue with the economic logic.

[Skipness One Echo]

I don't like offshoring, but in many cases it's difficult to argue with the economic logic.
It's not all about economics, unless you strike a balance you end up with some people getting much richer and the rest being left behind. Think of Mrs Thatcher's reforms which rightly cast aside old industry but neglected to do anything about the decimated communities left behind. They remain endemically damaged with young people with no experience of the job market whilst we import young enthusiastic foreigners and still pay for the original workforce to remain idle generation after generation. This is what IDS is struggling valiantly to fix.
In terms of aviation, Norwegian have set up a separate AOC for long haul, based it on paper in Ireland, crewed it with Thai and US nationals, lots of non EU flight deck and are looking to build a base out of London (still in the EU, for now. My key point is that these super fares are coming at the expense of downward pressure on terms and conditions of staff currently working in the industry and a worrying loosening of regulatory oversight. Someone will do very well out of this of course, some people will get a cheap flight, at the price of someone else's worth in the job market. Globalisation needs some balance and a degree of regulation

[davidjohnson6]

Skipness - I agree with offshoring leading to a hollowing out of the middle classes and all the social ills that it causes, but to keep the discussion roughly on topic, why will Norwegian using cheap Thai labour cause problems to *Norwegian* later ? If there's a really abysmal reaction by passengers, then Norwegian can think about improved training, but Ryanair seem to do OK with their cheap eastern / southern Europe cabin crew.

There's an endless pool of cheap labour who can speak basic English out there in the world - increased availability of cheap labour lowers Norwegians's costs and helps improve their profits. What happens to the overall attractiveness of being cabin crew as a career to the average UK school leaver is not really Norwegian's problem - or at least that's the way Norwegian senior management are likely to see it !

[Skipness One Echo]

Nothing, it will make some people very rich as the business grows. It does have an downward impact om EU based staff's terms and conditions, and I understand the Flight Deck are also partly based in Thailand. Much cheapness down the front end is not what's needed when things, as they inevitably will do one day, go wrong.

[LNIDA]

I have made no comment about about your background or birth place, i know nothing of you I was simply referring to the many previous post where others refer to your aggressive and often arrogant response to people who's views differ to that of yours that is a product of your birth place

Here is another English word "chip on shoulder" doesn't apply to you though, you're too balanced for that

Back to thread now please.

I think Norwegian have made a good job of what they have done so far at LGW

With regards to low wages for cabin crew, how much do Virgin cabin crew earn, when compared to BA?

Your suggestion that Norwegian employes monkeys is ridiculous, you may think they are mugs, but having met quite a few they seem descent sorts of chaps

I understand that JFK will be a crew base.

Lets leave it there shall we please :ok:

[crewmeal]

Looks like a new player in the ball game

Ryanair to offer flights to New York for £8 (or £145 after hidden charges) | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2569065/Ryanair-plans-offer-flights-New-York-just-8-145-time-youve-paid-hidden-charges.html)

Believe it when it happens, though me thinks not from LGW.

[Fairdealfrank]

Skipness - I agree with offshoring leading to a hollowing out of the middle classes and all the social ills that it causes, but to keep the discussion roughly on topic, why will Norwegian using cheap Thai labour cause problems to *Norwegian* later ? If there's a really abysmal reaction by passengers, then Norwegian can think about improved training, but Ryanair seem to do OK with their cheap eastern / southern Europe cabin crew.


A very important point that, davidjohnson6, the "hollowing out of the middle classes", is a more significant comment than perhaps intended.

A country with a shrinking middle class, or a "squeezed middle" to use politicians' jargon, is a country in decline. It is no so-incidence that the up-and-coming countries that we need to trade with have rapidly growing middle classes.

The middle classes have the discretionary expenditure, so an industry such as aviation, particularly the no-frills sector, depends to a large
extent on a prosperous middle class. The poor can't afford to fly, the rich get about in business/private jets.


By the way, Skipness One Echo, apologies for being nosey, but where were you born?

[davidjohnson6]

Can we move general discussion of offshoring of labour (ie not specific to Gatwick) to a different thread please ? It's certainly worthy of discussion - but a thread about Gatwick is not the place for that discussion

[LN-KGL]

I agree davidjohnson6, espesially as long as it's few facts in what we read. To round this off, here are a couple links for the fact finders:
Pilot Job: B787 Non Type Rated Captain Norwegian B787 Captains Norwegian Long Haul A/S - Rishworth Aviation (http://www.rishworthaviation.com/Opportunity/1040/b787-non-type-rated-captain-norwegian.aspx)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrLUzeyxhkc

[Skipness One Echo]

Actually let's not "leave it there." Are you able to justify accusing my racial or ethnic background in any way shape or form to having a "chip on my shoulder"?
Why mention this? What's it relevant to? Grow up and leave the mud slinging in the playground.
Why has Norwegian Air Shuttle created a shell company registered in Ireland? How many UK based pilots have been hired?
Why does an Irish registered EU based company have it's base in NEW YORK?
Is a Thai cabin crew base driving down ts and cs for EU based crew?

Go on, have a a go at answering.
By the way, Skipness One Echo, apologies for being nosey, but where were you born?
?????? You should know better, I am British through and through, however LN-KGL seems to think we're arrogant and chippy. Not good marketing for a PR man tbh:)