GATWICK

[Fairdealfrank]

?????? 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


Actually had figured that much, just wondering which town, county, etc.., i.e. which part of the UK.

Don't particularly give a monkeys personally, just interested to know why it is such an issue for others!

Who is the PR man?

[Facelookbovvered]

I think the point that Skipness1E is making is that Norwegians attempt at long haul will fail, because no one has ever made it work from LGW especially JFK, it can only work if the can sell the seats cheap enough and in order to do that they have to reduce cost by not using Norwegian labour rates, well most of that is true, but Norwegian labour rates are amongst the highest in the world especially when you add government social taxes on top.

Their long haul operation is wholly owned by Norwegian and it appears to have set up business in Ireland, although it does not fly to or from there, however Norwegian do. The reasons for this appear to be a) to obtain a European AOC b) take advantage of the attractive corporate tax rates c) take advantage of the large pool of experience in aircraft finance in the ROP d) setting up an aircraft leasing company.

Non of this seems odd to me or wrong, unusual maybe, if they have satisfied the Irish authorities sufficiently for them to granted an AOC and they have, then what their future business plans are, are a matter for them!!

Personally I don't see much difference between flying to JFK than flying anywhere else, sure it's a bit further than Malaga, but the trend is for longer flights. It's just another flight?

Of course all the vested interest group will whinge an moan, but prices on trans Atlantic flights have gone up, load factor is up and that's down to reduced compertion due mainly to the like of Star alliance & one world, they are using their near monopoly position to maximise yield in order to cover their historic inefficiencies, they will try every means foul or fair to kill Norwegians plans dead, just as ** did with Laker and Virgin and SAS tried with Norwegian, these are the anti free market forces that keep air fare high and make it more expensive to fly than it need be.

Of course Skipness is correct when he says that this will lead to lower salaries over time, but that will happen anyway and trying to be king Kanut results only in wet feet and loss of face for the it will never work brigade.

I suspect it may well work and the rest of the industry may well think that too, given they way they are trying to kill it dead, the biggest threat to Norwegian is their own growth rate given the number of aircraft coming 200+ ?

But so far they seem to have had a positive effect on pricing, employ over a 1000 pilots have given the mass market free wifi and judging by the awards they have won a good on board service that is above the standard budget airline offering, if they tread on a few peoples toes so what?

One thing is for sure, very soon, within 12 months we will know if it is working and either Skipness1E echo will have benn proved to have far more business accumen than all the people in Oslo or he will look a prat! whether he comes from Scotland, Sheffield or Southend is irrelevant

Back to the thread

[racedo]

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


I think this an inappropriate personal dig that is NOT required.
It add nothing to your point of view rather it makes you look petty.

Frankly Skip and I rarely agree, he has however always put together a reasoned agruement without resorting to personal digs.
I have have numerous enough discussions with him over the years and find him and DJ probably among the best to get in a discussion with simply because of their knowledge and reasoned debate.

[davidjohnson6]

racedo - compliments will get you everywhere ! :)

[racedo]

racedo - compliments will get you everywhere ! :)

Knew soon as posted you would start getting big headed :E

[Skipness One Echo]

either Skipness1E echo will have benn proved to have far more business accumen than all the people in Oslo or he will look a prat!
Again you mean? They're smart peeps in Oslo, they'll make their money, my only gripe is that it's at the expense of people further down the food chain.
Let me be as clear as I may, my concern, such as it is, is not that Norwegian will fail, I rather suspect they won't. I rather think that now, they might succeed at Gatwick if they ruthlessly maintain their cost controls. I view this operation as something of a Trojan horse. The consumer wins as we have more choice at a lower price, on a new aircraft with a very good product and a young and efficient fleet.
The only thing I will say is, it sounds too good to be true, so what's the catch? It's the flag of convenience, using a well known soft touch regulatory body, having staff based outside the EU and rotating them through the EU, closing off the long haul operation from the rest of the company, whose growth is partially predicated on the assumption that the SAS group would fail. Take a step back, in recent years, Ryanair and some others have driven industry ts & cs into the mud. Each time we all get hacked off at rubbish service it's partly to do with the fact that talented and able people won't work in such a high pressure envirnonment for the wages offered. So the front line earns less and less so we can all fly for less and less and the only people who get very rich are the smart people who managed to get the rest to work for less and less in the first place! It doesn't have to be that cut throat as easyJet and some others have shown.

I'm no left wing type but for the love of sanity, this race to the bottom has to stop. btw anyone who knows me knows I am a prat anyway so it's quite likely NAS will succeed at least in the short term.

[The96er]

It doesn't have to be that cut throat as easyJet and some others have shown.


Easyjet are very much as guilty in terms of driving down the industry. Try speaking to their 3rd party suppliers, particularly their ground handlers who will tell you that Easyjet are the most cut throat out there.

[LNIDA]

The figure I heard was that Norwegian recruited around 230 or so ex Ryanair people last 12 months or so, in addition an awful lot of ex Spainair cabin crew, many who were told at 30 + they were past it by other airlines,they are very grateful for Norwegians entrance to the market and the civilised way in which they are treated, they are employed first and foremost for the safety of passenger, sale on board is a distant second, indeed on many short flights with Scandinavia. there are no sales on board.

So a lot of people have volunteered to join Norwegian to improve the quality of their lives, of course employing Thai cabin crew based in Bangkok will rankle and frankly I don't understand how that works with an Irish AOC and the right to work in Europe, if of course they are genuine slings of duty then fair enough, I think Norwegian have moved quickly to recruit American based cabin crew to deflect criticism from US groups.

My understanding is that they could just as easily use Spanish cabin crew and that the employee cost would be little different

Pilots I'm in the dark about, but if the American DOT refuse route licences I suspect that Norwegian will just restructure to meet what requirement the DOT require?

Facelookbovvered is not alone in concerns over the rate of expansion, when a crew base at LGW was announced more than a few within the company thought it was risky going up against easyJet, but I hear it has exceeded all expectation and the only regret that NAS have is not having ordered more aircraft for LGW.

Racedo knows only to well the stick that Ryanair were given over their expansion rate, yet it worked, at least financially despite many many who said it couldn't be done.

More routes to be announced shortly for LGW is the word for March and an increase in frequency for many current routes

[True Blue]

With the large number of new aircraft on order by the big ME3, will the other 2 at some point return to Lgw as they will need routes to put them on?

I also notice that Norwegian is very competitive on baggage charges, at least compared to Ezy and Fr and even on flights to N America.

TB

[True Blue]

Garuda flights appear to be off sale until the start of the W14 season. Is this correct, have they been postponed again?


TB

[BAladdy]

Garuda flights appear to be off sale until the start of the W14 season. Is this correct, have they been postponed again?


TB
GA have pushed the start date for the route back from 29MAY14 to the 08SEP14. Flights for travel on/after this date are now back on sale.

Garuda Indonesia Re-opens London Gatwick Reservation from Sep 2014 | Airline Route (http://airlineroute.net/2014/03/06/ga-lgw-s14update1/)

[wallp]

What's the reason for the latest delay I wonder?


It doesn't really bode well that they keep delaying the start of services

[racedo]

Friend was asking about the likelihood of a reintroduction of the LGW-MAN route by BA / Easyjet.

I suggested probably very very unlikely.

Anybody think differently ?

[davidjohnson6]

Perhaps tell friend that London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly takes less than 2h10 by train and goes every 20 minutes. Then ask friend whether he/she (and other people) would really pay for flights instead

[T250]

Perhaps tell friend that London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly takes less than 2h10 by train and goes every 20 minutes. Then ask friend whether he/she (and other people) would really pay for flights instead

This suggests more that flights from LHR-MAN are more redundant than flights LGW-MAN.

LHR is closer to both MAN and London Euston, so why fly? LGW is further than both MAN and London Euston...

[WHBM]

Perhaps tell friend that London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly takes less than 2h10 by train and goes every 20 minutes. Then ask friend whether he/she (and other people) would really pay for flights instead
That's all very interesting if you live in the Euston Road and are going to see someone in Piccadilly Gardens. Most pax between these two metropolitan areas are doing neither. If you live in Sussex it would probably take you longer to reach Euston station entrance than it would to get to Gatwick and fly to Manchester, certainly if you are beyond walking distance from a station and need to use your car to start the trip, and the same is true of much of London. Just like BA do services to some destinations from both Heathrow and Gatwick, there are separate catchment areas for the different airports/departure points around London, and for business travellers doing a day return trip, getting to Euston etc can be a gross inconvenience and time-waster.

[Logohu]

LHR is closer to both MAN and London Euston, so why fly?

Whilst the train and APD have impacted MAN-LHR numbers, the route still carries large numbers of connecting passengers which BA and VS need to feed their LHR hub. Many of these passengers would tend to go via competing Euro hubs if the BA and Little Red MAN-LHR flights didn't exist, rather than haul their luggage on the train to London Euston and then out again to LHR just to then connect to other overseas destinations.

Many of the sun and low cost routes out of LGW are now also available from MAN (and other regional centres), so the reason for BA and Virgin to provide a MAN-LGW feeder service as well as LHR is not as apparent. And as DJ says the train is now a frequent, cheaper and more convenient option for much of the MAN-LON point to point market.

[johnnychips]

MAN-LON point to point market.

I am surprised that there isn't a market for a sort of south-of-London, Brighton area service to Manchester from Gatwick as changing trains in London plus the Tube isn't exactly a wonderful journey. The catchment area seems quite large. However, absolutely non-sarcastically, I assume that the possible airlines have done their research and concluded it isn't there.

[gazza007]

I was a regular customer on MAN - LGW for many years. I have family in Kent and beyond and worked great. Even used for Central London as very rarely entered a stack etc. so much quicker on Gatŵick Express. Me and many others were sad to see the route go even the BA staff couldn't understand. I'm sure there is a requirement for the route but APD is killing the UK Market. Ireland is about to scrap it's APD ok not as high as UK but at least it's a move in the right direction.

[j636]

Biggest problem facing airlines is APD and particularly because it's charged in each direction where as in Ireland it was only departing flights.

The UK will never scrap it as it's a money maker and traffic to/from UK airports is increasing so they would be mad to scrap it, it will take a decline in traffic for it to be looked at but they should only charge it one way not both ways.

A high chance Scotland will see it scrapped weather it goes independent or powers will be moved from London. At some stage there will be a change in Northern Ireland on it but no a chance in England and Wales.

[Skipness One Echo]

MAN-LGW was always cheap and half empty the many times I flew it, it fed nothing at LGW and no one picked it up when it was dropped. Not likely to return.

In later years it seemed to serve as a cabin crew shuttle but the B737-400 was too big for the necessary frequency and Gatwick are Hell bent on driving out anything smaller than the B737 for their future long haul A380 hub aspirations. Ask flybe...

[racedo]

The UK will never scrap it as it's a money maker and traffic to/from UK airports is increasing so they would be mad to scrap it,

But anybody connecting at airports from abroad do not pay it.

[LN-KGL]

It all depend on the type of transfer we are talking about racedo; foreign passengers transferring international - domestic will certainly pay APD on the return flight.

[racedo]

It all depend on the type of transfer we are talking about racedo; foreign passengers transferring international - domestic will certainly pay APD on the return flight.

Yes but that will be small in comparison.

Billions spent on new runway so more international connecting passengers who pay nothing while those who live in the country will pay more......:ugh::ugh:

[Skipness One Echo]

It was those who live in the country that voted in generations of numpties who over spent, under delivered and didn't save money. We are in a bad place because of who we voted in, repeatedly.

We will have to pay more, our children may be poorer and there remains the possibility our grandkids will be on a sound footing financially if we take the pain. Or more likely there will be political cowardice and more fannying around at the edges, Cameron is already talking if tax cuts which we can ill afford as we are still borrwing money just to keep BAU. APD is a necessary evil, I think it ought to be axed, however that money absolutely needs to come from somewhere.

[Fairdealfrank]

We will have to pay more, our children may be poorer and there remains the possibility our grandkids will be on a sound footing financially if we take the pain. Or more likely there will be political cowardice and more fannying around at the edges, Cameron is already talking if tax cuts which we can ill afford as we are still borrwing money just to keep BAU. APD is a necessary evil, I think it ought to be axed, however that money absolutely needs to come from somewhere.


Yes it does, but from APD it is counter productive at the present levels. When it was introduced as one of Ken Clark's 22 "stealth tax" (along with insurance policy VAT, fuel bill VAT, etc.), it was levied at a much much lower rate.

The money needs to come from somewhere, duty on fixed-odds betting machines in bookmakers shops may be a suitable alternative for a start off. That would rake in billions.

[LN-KGL]

I think you need to read the quote first before I continue with a comment to racedo's latest.

Air Passenger Duty - Statement by David Scowsill, WTTC President & CEO
Air Passenger Duty (APD) is a tax imposed by the UK government on all passengers flying out of the UK. Although a number of countries impose a similar tax, the UK’s APD is substantially higher – with the current rates meaning that a family of four flying to Malaga will pay £52 extra on the price of their tickets. This rises to £260 for the same family to fly to Florida and £368 to fly to Australia.

Evidence from the airline industry and some long haul destinations suggests that APD is having a detrimental effect on Travel & Tourism around the world as well as the economy of the UK. In early 2012, WTTC undertook research to understand the economic impact of APD on the UK’s GDP and employment. The research indicated that the impact is significant and that removing Air Passenger Duty would result in an additional 91,000 British jobs being created and £4.2 billion added to the economy in 12 months.

The first line in the quote tell us quite clear the APD money goes to the UK government, and since the UK government doesn't own Heathrow the APD money will not end up there.

Now to my second point. Without a lot the feed in to LHR, a large part of the BA network would have been a money looser and had to be dropped. Less flights gives less pilots and cabin crew, but less flights would also mean less jobs in shops, restaurants, catering, ground handling and so on. I guess unemployment money is a rather heavy burden for the tax payers.

So to the last point - international - international transfer passengers don't pay anything is the allegation. Well, they do pay charges for using the airport and since they stay for a time at the airport they also buy something in the shops, eat in a restaurant/lounge, do their nails, have a drink in a bar and god knows what - they spend money and generate British jobs. All this generate income to the airport company and it's used to build a new runway. A new runway may lead to higher charges, but then again the transfer passengers have to pay their share too, not only "those who live in the country".

[racedo]

So to the last point - international - international transfer passengers don't pay anything is the allegation. Well, they do pay charges for using the airport and since they stay for a time at the airport they also buy something in the shops, eat in a restaurant/lounge, do their nails, have a drink in a bar and god knows what - they spend money and generate British jobs. All this generate income to the airport company and it's used to build a new runway. A new runway may lead to higher charges, but then again the transfer passengers have to pay their share too, not only "those who live in the country".

Yippee so the airport has a load of minimum wage jobs and we should all be grateful.

As for generating British jobs...........er think you may not know it but majority of new jobs are taken by immigrants while those on the dole happily sit and do nothing.

Transfer passengers will still pay bugger all and it will be the people originating in UK that pay more APD and charges to get less.

Why spend billions on a new runway on the basis that some people MAY spend a few pounds in retail at Heathrow.

[anothertyke]

I don't know who WTTC are and haven't read their report, but with all these dodgy employment and GDP sums you need to ask--- what is the net effect on jobs and GDP of abolishing one tax, APD in this case, and raising the same public revenue another way. You always get a big number if you don't fund the tax break, whatever it is.

On Racedo's point, the answer may be very different depending on whether the runway is being funded by air travellers or by taxpayers. That is not yet clear.

[DaveReidUK]

I don't know who WTTC areWTTC | Our Mission (http://www.wttc.org/our-mission/)

[Fairdealfrank]

It was those who live in the country that voted in generations of numpties who over spent, under delivered and didn't save money. We are in a bad place because of who we voted in, repeatedly.


Regretably you are correct, but many vote in the expectation that there will be a difference and we end up with the "same old". 1997 must be the finest, but by no means the only, example of this.

As they're all the same, turnouts are going down, people vote with their feet, or armchairs, it's the "none of the above" syndrome. Who can blame them, although a presence at a polling station and a very large proportion of blank or defaced ballot papers would make the case better.





On Racedo's point, the answer may be very different depending on whether the runway is being funded by air travellers or by taxpayers. That is not yet clear.


Most UK airports are privately owned, so Heathrow Ltd. will fund a new rwy, not the government. For the same reason, an estuary airport will never be built, it's a bad business case.



Air Passenger Duty - Statement by David Scowsill, WTTC President & CEO
Air Passenger Duty (APD) is a tax imposed by the UK government on all passengers flying out of the UK.


Not quite correct, APD is also imposed on people flying within the UK. It's effectively a departure tax.

[HeathrowAirport]

Really annoys me when people/residents do this - there's NO big change except modern/capable aircraft flying P-RNAV reducing the noise swathe inside the current noise preferential routings.

New Gatwick flightpath trials are 'destroying' Sussex village life (From The Argus) (http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/11038824.New_Gatwick_flightpath_trials_are__destroying__Suss ex_village_life/)

[DaveReidUK]

there's NO big change except modern/capable aircraft flying P-RNAV reducing the noise swathe inside the current noise preferential routings.I don't know where your information comes from, but according to NATS the ADNID trial SID diverges significantly from the current BOGNA SID. It certainly doesn't stay within the existing NPR swathe.

[Skipness One Echo]

Really annoys me when people/residents do this - there's NO big change except modern/capable aircraft flying P-RNAV reducing the noise swathe inside the current noise preferential routings.
When you said "no change" what you meant was "suddenly lots of noise in a previously quiet area"? If I intentionally move under s flight path then I have little right to complain, this is something quite different. It would be the equivalent of my local airport decising "hey let's just open from 1230 on a Saturday into Sunday after all!" and not tell anyone. Actually no, it's worse than that, pro aviation as I am, this one's not too bright a decision.

[118.70]

The "NATS Private" document at

http://www2.westsussex.gov.uk/ds/cttee/gat/gat300114key4.pdf

seems to show that the BOGNA SID has been shifted quite a bit to get to ADNID.

It doesn't seem appropriate to do this without some consultation - or has the "proportionate consultation" approved by CAA for trials been so minimal that no-one locally had heard of it ?

Francis Maude has got on the case :

Francis Maude: Noise misery foreshadows second runway - West Sussex County Times (http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/news/columnists/francis-maude-noise-misery-foreshadows-second-runway-1-5919207)

[118.70]

The "NATS Private" document at

http://www2.westsussex.gov.uk/ds/cttee/gat/gat300114key4.pdf

seems to show that the BOGNA SID has been shifted quite a bit to get to ADNID.

It doesn't seem appropriate to do this without some consultation - or has the "proportionate consultation" approved by CAA for trials been so minimal that no-one locally had heard of it ?

Francis Maude has got on the case :

Francis Maude: Noise misery foreshadows second runway - West Sussex County Times (http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/news/columnists/francis-maude-noise-misery-foreshadows-second-runway-1-5919207)

[True Blue]

Flynas now bookable on their site from Lgw to Jed. Seems to be 3 x weekly.

TB

[Fairdealfrank]

Apparently, Gatwick owners are offering to pay £1000/year to residents disturbed by noise if the airport expands.

£1000/year...anyone know for how many years? Can't be for ever, can it?

[DaveReidUK]

Can't be for ever, can it? No, only while they are still alive. :ugh:

[DaveReidUK]

£1000/year...anyone know for how many years?OK, joking aside, according to LGW's own figures just over 4,000 households could qualify for this scheme.

£4m pa for the foreseeable future would be a pretty good investment from Gatwick's point of view, if it smoothed the way towards getting their second runway.

[racedo]

OK, joking aside, according to LGW's own figures just over 4,000 households could qualify for this scheme.

£4m pa for the foreseeable future would be a pretty good investment from Gatwick's point of view, if it smoothed the way towards getting their second runway.

Friend who lives in one of the areas very close to Gatwick said that if they gave him £15k when it starts up he would be more than content and forget about the £1000.

Bet he is not the only one thinking like that.

[yotty]

racedo £15k isn't that much when you consider the possible reduction in house values from noise "blight".

[racedo]

racedo £15k isn't that much when you consider the possible reduction in house values from noise "blight".

Mate said next door sold, exact same house as his, not in as good condition and if he sold for that price it would "ONLY" have doubled in price in 12 years.

[adfly]

It is interesting to see how small the ZB and TCX long haul operations have become from LGW this summer, although I realise the former had cut down on long haul a few years back. For a typical week in June/July the schedules are like this:

ZB/MON -

SFB - 2 weekly
TAB - 1 weekly

TCX -

CUN - 2 weekly
HOG - 1 weekly

Admittedly there are a few more flights in the winter with TCX but just 3 weekly flights must be one of their smallest long haul schedules in a very long time from LGW. Their focus on MAN for long haul is quite clear, as there are ~17 weekly flights from there! Meanwhile MON/ZB only have 2 weekly flights to SFB from MAN.

To compare with the above this is Thomson's schedule ex. LGW for a similar week.

AUA - 1 weekly
CUN - 4 weekly
MBA - 1 weekly
MBJ - 2 weekly
MRU - 1 weekly
POP - 1 weekly
PUJ - 2 weekly
PVR - 1 weekly
SFB - 2 weekly

So it seems not all of the charters (yes I know ZB/MON have moved away from that model) have shrunk , although it is interesting to see how routes like SFB have suffered frequency wise against the competition - just 2 flights per week each from TOM/ZB while BA/VS offer 13 each!

[wallp]

Does anyone know how the new Norwegian long haul routes are selling, with just a few months until the first flights take to the air?

With a seemingly improving economic outlook, could BA eventually respond with some additional long haul capacity at LGW; I wondered if in time the 787 could join their LGW long haul fleet & potentially open up routes that might otherwise not work?

[adfly]

Norwegian - Judging by the fact that their fares are only a little below BA/Virgin currently I'd say they are probably selling well, although please do not quote me on this. I cannot see why they wouldn't be, as Norwegian offer a good product and price, and more importantly they have only launched the flights with quite low frequencies. This technique seems to have worked rather well on their med routes launched last year, so it would be nice to see lightening strike twice!

As for BA it was rumoured that the 12 787-10's on order were destined to replace the LGW based 772's. This would be an increase of ~2 aircraft compared to the current fleet, plus I'd imagine there might be a few more seats on each of these. What would happen with the 4 class routes I'm not sure, to have mixed configurations in a fleet of 12 seems a little impractical. I'd imagine the most likely solution would be to also have a couple of 4 class 789's for BGI/BDA and any other routes that may have some demand for first in the future.

[CabinCrewe]

cant see brand new BA 787s at LGW anytime soon -8 or -9's

[racedo]

Having seen the plans for new runway and terminal I am wondering what they will call the new terminal.

They already have North and South Terminals and as new will be South of South Terminal will it be known as the "Deep South Terminal" or the "Beautiful South Terminal" :E

[Hangar6]

I heard it's to be called laker terminal,

[davidjohnson6]

Brighton-Shoreham
:)

[Blink182]

Belgrano Terminal :eek:

[Fairdealfrank]

Having seen the plans for new runway and terminal I am wondering what they will call the new terminal.

They already have North and South Terminals and as new will be South of South Terminal will it be known as the "Deep South Terminal" or the "Beautiful South Terminal"


Perhaps best to use numbers: LGW-1, LGW-2 and LGW-3. A new midfield terminal would present an opportunity to demolish the existing east/south terminal and start over.

Never understood why the east terminal is called "south".

[compton3bravo]

How about historic Crawley International:8

[Heathrow Harry]

today's "Times" says that BA are to be evicted from the N terminal back to the South and EasyJet & Virgin will replace them

[Airbourne-Adamski]

http://www.standard.co.uk/business/business-news/easyjet-set-to-rule-the-north-terminal-after-gatwick-deal-9218900.html

[MKY661]

Would be Bizzare to EasyJet to kick out BA. Why don't they move Thomson Airways to the South Terminal instead? Or will it still be too Small for EasyJet :)

[racedo]

today's "Times" says that BA are to be evicted from the N terminal back to the South and EasyJet & Virgin will replace them

BA friends have always labelled Sarf Terminal as Charter and Low Cost Land, Chav city on occasions................being moved to there is going to hurt egos.

[wallp]

It does make sense to try and find a way to accommodate all easyJet flights in one terminal but the South Terminal has always had something of an image problem in comparison to the North so BA might not be too happy if they're forced to move?

[HeathrowAirport]

Apparently it's a done deal, all easyJet ops at LGW will be from North Terminal. I so wonder if BA have accepted the move to South Terminal. 😕

Seems such a shame considering the investment made to the new check in area!

[TartinTon]

I was under the impression that it would be impossible to fit all Easy ops into either terminal. For the passenger arriving by train the South terminal is actually much better.

[Surreyman]

"BA friends have always labelled Sarf Terminal as Charter and Low Cost Land, Chav city on occasions................being moved to there is going to hurt egos".

Historically that was true, sadly the North Terminal airside has gone downhill, whereas the South Terminal has massively improved both Landside and Airside.
As a passenger who uses the train to reach LGW, South wins hands down.
At least there will be an end to easy flights deplaning at the 'wrong terminal' with the passengers being bussed back to the correct terminal with all the discomfort and extra delay, this has happened to me a number of times and seriously Pxxxxd me off.
We have had charter flights at the North terminal for enough years that the 'executive club' image has long been dispelled since the days when it was prevalent in the early 1990s.

[macuser]

I have used both Terminals in the last few months. As it happens, South Terminal, now refurbished, boasts a large, and I mean large Harrods outlet etc and is generally super smart with quick security facilities to match. So, BA moving there is not necessarily bad news for their travelling pax?

[wallp]

I've not used South Terminal for a while so that's good to hear.

So will North Terminal be just for easyJet or will there be others; I presume Emirates will stay as A380 gates are there?

[racedo]

I have used both Terminals in the last few months. As it happens, South Terminal, now refurbished, boasts a large, and I mean large Harrods outlet etc and is generally super smart with quick security facilities to match. So, BA moving there is not necessarily bad news for their travelling pax?

Oh I don't disagree with that statement, it is those who have listened for years to some BA staff smugly slagging off South Terminal as Chav City.

[macuser]

I just feel a little sorry when I think back to a documentary on TV in the last 2-3 years when a particularly forthright BA (female) executive at LGW North was espying with glee her brand new dedicated BA check in area..... Ah well, times move on!

[Heathrow Harry]

the article said that Virgin might also be in N Terminal

[wallp]

I guess Virgin would need to move too. BA have sufficient long haul aircraft to mean that accommodating both in the same terminal would be nigh on impossible

[Skipness One Echo]

I guess Virgin would need to move too. BA have sufficient long haul aircraft to mean that accommodating both in the same terminal would be nigh on impossible
Eight BA B777s on the satellite and five VS on Pier 2, not impossible but busy even with EZY gone.

[adfly]

Plus a couple of Air Transat and the occasional ZB/TCX 330, not to mention fitting the shorthaul fleet for each in (although it would mostly be BA, ZB/TCX only really have 2 'waves' of departures).

[EI-BUD]

easyJet ops @ Gatwick will be consolidated at North Terminal. Will be complete within 2 years. Aligned with a new commercial agreement between LGW and easyJet - long term agreement. Agreed this week.

[Skipness One Echo]

not to mention fitting the shorthaul fleet for each in (although it would mostly be BA, ZB/TCX only really have 2 'waves' of departures).
A lot of traffic used to be bussed from the 130s and 140s, the based BA short haul fleet is pretty small with a good 1/3 based away over night and most of the over nighters would be gone before the bulk of the long haul BA B777s arrive. It's going to be 1988 again one more time :O)

[Seljuk22]

Based on flightradar24 A6-EDZ is flying towards LGW right now.

[cornishsimon]

Now that's interesting !
Last minute aircraft sub or intended A380 rotation ?


cs

[Charley B]

Its the first day today of the evening flight( EK9/10) being operated by the A380:):)
the other 2 flights EK11/12 and EK15/16 are staying with a 777 for the time being
Cant wait to see that tonight:)

[racedo]

Reported landing time is now 19.41..............

[Charley B]

Thanks...as we have 8R at the mo...will watch it depart in the dark:)

[Flying.Penguin]

A historic day for EGKK and UEA.

[wallp]

A very significant day indeed for LGW, receiving its first scheduled A380 flight. Hopefully there'll be other A380 flights serving Gatwick in the years to come.

[vectisman]

Skipness


BA short haul fleet this summer will be vary from 22 to 25 units (Highest number July and August) Of these only 4 will stop away overnight. Maybe another 4 or so on average will be early hours arrivals.


V.

[LadyL2013]

Glad the A380 will be at LGW. Would love to see more heavies there just like old days!

[Charley B]

Same here....far too few nowadays sadly:(

[wallp]

I can recall days standing on the viewing deck looking out at the main pier & satellite of South Terminal full of heavies. Sad that those days are long gone.

Hopefully 2014 marks the beginning if a renaissance for the big jets at Gatwick.
First the Emirates A380 from today and soon the Norwegian 787's, let's hope there's more to follow.

There must be some long haul routes which could work from Gatwick, which might encourage other airlines or indeed existing operators to try?

[pc.]

As mentioned by Seljuk22 Emirates A380 UAE9/EK9 is on it's way.

I had planned to watch it come in from our local cinema's balcony. It has a lovely view of the approach into Gatwick's 26.
But Gatwick is on easterlies.
So looked forward to sitting in the back garden and watch it go by leaving Mayfield heading west at at 7000'.
But the cloud base has got lower and lower as the afternoon progressed.
Sometimes it clears away at evening sunset. Fingers crossed.

The good thing is there is always tomorrow and..... :)

PC

[Charley B]

PC
Thats what I have just said..I love Easterlies normally..but so wanted 26L arrival tonight..the cloud is low here 2.5 miles East of LGW but can see all departures clearly at the mo!
Heres hoping cloud stays the same..doesnt get worse...and it is looking like Easterlies all week from the Met office weather
Good luck with your sightings..we have FR24 if nothing else!!!

A great day for LGW and Emirates:)

[LadyL2013]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWw7SnjOGug

Those were the days!

[wallp]

Wow that brings back memories

[Skipness One Echo]

Vectisman are you sure only four of the BA fleet are off base for the night?? What are the four? GLA/EDI/?/?. It's been a looong time since BA had 20 out in the first wave, mainly as every time I have been flying at dawn o'clock they're kinda rare on the ground.

[dantheflyboy]

Not one comment on the departure of flybe from LGW after all those years of flights. I know many flybe staff very sad to be leaving lgw.

[Charley B]

I will miss Flybe as they were a great airline(think the NQY is still going to be here for a while tho)..it is a sad day as they have been here for a long while.shame that they had to go,I didnt realise it was today that they finished

[wallp]

Charley B did they have to go was it more down to their perilous state forcing them to sell the slots? I think it's a real shame that they couldn't continue at Gatwick.

I much prefer to see airports with as diverse a range of airlines as possible. Gatwick is sadly too orange these days for my liking and the departure of FlyBe has only served to escalate that.

[racedo]

I can recall days standing on the viewing deck looking out at the main pier & satellite of South Terminal full of heavies. Sad that those days are long gone.

As is the viewing deck :*

[vectisman]

Hi Skipness


Edinburgh, Glasgow, Jersey and Nice are away overnight. They tend to send between 12 and 16 out in their first wave. Other aircraft join flight programme during day so to speak. I think this happens as the increasing longer sector flights(Malta, Paphos, Larnaca, Tenerife, Arrecife etc...) mean they tend to need more aircraft available later in the day to operate the late afternoon evening flights to the destinations with multi frequency flights. At this time several aircraft will be away from base on the longer sectors until very late in the evening/early hours.


I hope that makes sense!!


V.

[vectisman]

Further to my last post I believe the scheduling keeps utilisation of aircraft at an economic level as well as using slots that may cost less than the prime time first and second wave ones that are now dominated by easyjet. BA has the Heathrow slots to take care of most of its 'business' passengers at those prime times.
BA concentrates Gatwick prime time slots for routes that need frequency and/or carry good club Europe loads.
Having said that places such as Paphos etc... do well in the premium cabin too. I am travelling there in May and there are 9 or 10 rows dedicated to Club Europe. Both cabins full each way too.




V.

[pc.]

Well just managed to see the A380 go past on it's way in about an hour late.

But now it is showing on flightradar24 as A6EDZ and parked up apparently on taxiway Uniform.
Still powered up as showing on FR24 but hasn't moved for over an hour.

PC

[True Blue]

See from the Lgw site, the EK is delayed until 9.00am tomorrrow morning. Unfortunate start.

Does Norwegian now have 5 based aircraft at Lgw? That's what their flight info from their site seems to suggest. And is there more to come?

TB

[Skipness One Echo]

BA concentrates Gatwick prime time slots for routes that need frequency and/or carry good club Europe loads.
Ah OK that makes (some) sense, although I they're hardly sweating the assets by working them hard in that scenario. If they are to compete with easyJet on any level, sedentary utilisation can't be a help. EZY have 59 departures before 9am, BA have 17. OUCH!
Thanks for that.
But now it is showing on flightradar24 as A6EDZ and parked up apparently on taxiway Uniform.
Did it ever park on 110 at all or are they bussing?

[vectisman]

Skip ness
I believe aircraft utilisation has improved over the past year.
True BA have far fewer departures but seem happy enough with recent yield. Hence the short and long haul expansion this year. I know nothing like the network reach as in the late 1990s/early 2000s but in terms of actual daily movements quite similar. Sadly I have been through timetables from that time and counted. I know I need to get out more!
I think we also need to remember that easyjet and others also tend to start flying earlier in the day. A few years ago very early morning deps were rare except amongst charter carriers.
When you look at the Gatwick arrival/departure boards you can easily see the easyjet waves. BA tend to be spread more evenly throughout the day.
Apparently BA did bid for the Flybe slots but didn't want them until 2015 so they went to easyjet. Willie Walsh did say at the capital markets day that BA would still be able to expand at Gatwick using other available slots. (And I suppose without having to pay £25 million which must help the bottom line!) I believe more destinations both winter and summer will be available from Winter 2014/2015 when the short haul fleet becomes all airbus.


V.

[Skipness One Echo]

One of the other things to come out of all of that was that demand for paid Club Europe out of Gatwick was poor, the cabin may be full but many are on redemptions, which is partly why the RFP for new short haul was quietly parked in favour of ten second hand A320s, some of which were ones Wizz Air no longer wanted ! My key point is they're leased (!) Long haul at ten frames is back at 2005 levels having swapped some US routes to LHR in return for more long haul holiday types, which is at least sustainable on it's own two feet.

[Charley B]

Wallp
think it was all to do with finances why Flybe ceased here..something about all size aircraft having to pay the same landing fees maybe?
Still a shame:(
LGW is very Orange these days!!

[Charley B]

Skipness
It did park on 110 last evening..but why it hasn't departed yet I am not too sure!!
ETD on EK website is 09.00

[pc.]

I have been told that UAE7001 A380 A6-EDT arrived at Gatwick this morning???

I wonder if that is to take the pax from last nights delayed UAE10 service?

No A380 contacts on twr yet.

PC

[wallp]

Not exactly the smooth start to A380 operations that either Emirates or Gatwick would've wanted. What caused the delay to last nights departure?

[Charley B]

pc
saying last call at the gate on LGW info boards. hopefully will depart soon.it does look like it arrived at 07.00..have just checked FR24...the other one must have gone tech?

[pc.]

Charley B... Yes it's been showing Last Call" for about an hour now!!!!
Sad I missed the other A380 arrival at 7am this morning.
Still no sign of anything on FR24.
Sad start for Gatwick's A380's.

Thanks for your pm.... I'll reply after all this A380 excitement gets sorted.

PC

[Charley B]

PC

its taxiing now:) just looked on FR24...only a few mins and you will see it!

[pc.]

Just watched her and wow. Emirates -UAE10D

It's on 120.525Mhz to Dover now 134.9Mhz

PC

[True Blue]

I see that Norwegian is to operate the 787 on 2 of the daily Stockholm flights from early May to the end of July. Must be doing well on the Stockholm route.


TB

[Need to Know Basis]

Most likely crew familarisation......although looking at their programme update issued 26th Mar there is no mention of a B787 ? All flights showing B738.

[Charley B]

I think it is that too...It was going to be done in Jan I read on the GAS website,but didn't happen as I think a couple of their 787s were tech?
Will be nice to see those:)

[wallp]

So with Emirates and their A380's, Norwegian and their 787's and Flynas and their A330's, there'll be a few new heavies to be seen at Gatwick in the months to come.


Are there any rumours on any other possible new long haul routes; wasn't there talk that Qatar might come back at some point with the 787? How about Etihad perhaps?


Other than Garuda, could there be any more Far East additions?

[LN-KGL]

From 06MAY14 to 24JUL14, Norwegian plans to operate Boeing 787-8 aircraft on London Gatwick – Stockholm service. The Dreamliner is to operate this route twice a day, on weekdays only.DY2852 LGW0940 – 1300ARN 788 x67
DY2856 LGW1655 – 2020ARN 788 4
DY2856 LGW1700 – 2020ARN 788 x467
DY2849 ARN0705 – 0840LGW 788 x67
DY2853 ARN1415 – 1550LGW 788 x67


Here you have the dates and times from airlineroute.net


Tickets for the Dreamliner flights between ARN and LGW are now available on Norwegian's website.

[Skipness One Echo]

Are there any rumours on any other possible new long haul routes; wasn't there talk that Qatar might come back at some point with the 787? How about Etihad perhaps?
Qatar and Etihad consolidated and continue to grow agrresively at LHR, Garuda is a bit of a basket case with this on/off/maybe service frankly. I'm not sure the market is even close to being able to support what they're proposing.
Air China is coming back for the summer, although Korean is not.

[Heathrow Harry]

Garuda run reasonably full out of Amsterdam vai Abu Dahbi but Gatwick looks like a stretch TBH

Of course they are a sponsor of Liverpool FC so maybe John Lennon would be a better bet?

[rutankrd]

Of course they are a sponsor of Liverpool FC so maybe John Lennon would be a better bet?

Visited once last year I believe !

[LN-KGL]

Since it has not been commented here earlier, Gatwick ended up on the 6th place on Skytrax 2014 World's Most Improved Airports list under Passenger Terminal Expo in Barcelona last week.

Source: The World's Most Improved Airports | 2014 (http://www.worldairportawards.com/Awards_2014/most_improved_airport.htm)

[pc.]

Airbus A380 A6-EDZ that arrived yesterday as Gatwick's first scheduled A380 has finally departed today at 11:25pm BST.

It is showing as UAE7002 which is similar to the flight number used by the replacement aircraft (UAE7001) flown into Gatwick at 7am this morning.

I wonder what had happened to her?

PC

[Fairdealfrank]

Since it has not been commented here earlier, Gatwick ended up on the 6th place on Skytrax 2014 World's Most Improved Airports list under Passenger Terminal Expo in Barcelona last week.


Surprised that BOM is not on the list with a brand spanking new terminal just opened replacing the dump that was the old BOM-2.

Perhaps it's not all it's cracked up to be?

[wallp]

It's good that Gatwick's new owners appear to be having a very positive effect on the airport. Long may it continue.

[davidjohnson6]

It's good that Gatwick's new owners appear to be having a very positive effect on the airport

I think it's more a case of London's 6 airports each having different owners and having to compete actively against each other.

[wallp]

I'm sure that's true but it still requires the owners to make the right decisions & it sounds like Gatwick is on the right track which is great news.

I've long thought that Gatwick has much to offer but was held back during its BAA days, the poor cousin to Heathrow. Whilst it will continue to live in the shadow of Heathrow whilst many airlines decide Heathrow is the be all & end all for them, at least Gatwick now has its own, very positive & strong voice.

[Fairdealfrank]

I've long thought that Gatwick has much to offer but was held back during its BAA days, the poor cousin to Heathrow. Whilst it will continue to live in the shadow of Heathrow whilst many airlines decide Heathrow is the be all & end all for them, at least Gatwick now has its own, very positive & strong voice.


LHR is the "be all & end all" for carriers because (1) that's where the premium business wants to be; (2) its hub status provides a wealth of connections with through ticketing (as opposed to self-connect which is mainly the case at LGW); and (3) the clustering effect that carriers (as is the case with all businesses) want to be where their competitors are.

It is not a criticism of LGW, far from it. The two airports have different roles and perform them well. It is pointless for LGW to attempt to be a mini-LHR in an attempt to obtain permission for another rwy. A second rwy at LGW or not should be assessed on the airport's own merits of which there are plenty.

[True Blue]

Flynas started to Jeddah today. If the route was to be very successful, do they have a higher number of frequencies they can use or are they limited to 3 per week? Can they serve other cities in Saudia?

[racedo]

Saw A380 coming in this evening, impressive landing though seeing an EI A320 taking off before I had visions of a go round for Emirates.

[Seljuk22]

Obviously
London Gatwick Obviously for the UK's next runway (http://www.gatwickobviously.com/)

[adfly]

Does anybody have any idea how the Norwegian Long Haul routes are selling? Their fares seem to be roughly in line with BA/VS at least during the peak season and they are generally a little cheaper outside it, I would assume this to be an indication that they are doing quite well?

[fjencl]

Does anybody know how many based aircraft Aerlingus now have at LGW and what type are they.

Also what routes out of LGW do the based aircraft operate to.

I wasn't quite sure if they still have a base here or not !!!!

Thanks

[adfly]

I think they are down to just one A320 which over nights and operates the early morning DUB, NOC and a couple of other rotations to DUB. Not sure it is actually considered a base any more though.

[fjencl]

Thanks for the Info
:ok:

[Hangar6]

Thelingussource.com, good info on LGw activity

[Fovant]

I worked for Laker from 1972-77 and Christmas 72 for about 10 days there was thick fog all over the UK and near Europe (PAR/AMS, etc.). LGW opened on and off more times than LHR some days and you would be amazed at the line up of B747's from Pan Am, Qantas, SAA, TWA, BA, etc. diverted from LHR and everywhere. We'd just taken delivery of the first 2 DC10's and they were soon busy doing back to back subcharters for Air France ORY-FDF and ORY-PTP.

[interpreter]

Don't be so sure. Heathrow with an extended runway to twice its length is looking a much more attractive option. (as is the case in Madrid I believe)

All the infrastructure is there whereas at Gatwick transport would be a very real problem and already there are severe problems with the ADNID departure which changes the noise contours from extensions of the centreline to an additional finger to the southwest over the villages of Rusper and Warnham. Very hostile in those two places PLUS the government wants to push economic activity north of London and certainly not into the congested south where unemployment is at its lowest.

Add to that the " very odd" finances of the airport involving Cayman Island Companies , Channel Island companies, a Luxemburg entity and with all shares held by New York based
Finance operation, a Californian retirement fund, the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, a South Korean Pension Fund and an Australian pension fund and it looks like a Vince Cable "look see". I would not count on Gatwick at all - in fact I would probably rule it out.

[DaveReidUK]

Don't be so sure. Heathrow with an extended runway to twice its length is looking a much more attractive option.The Heathrow split-runway proposal is included in the options purely as a makeweight. Nobody takes it seriously, which leaves LHR3 and LGW2 as the only proposals that are likely to survive to the next stage.

(as is the case in Madrid I believe)I think you are mistaken.

[LN-KGL]

(as is the case in Madrid I believe)


MAD has four runways - two with 15/33 orientation and two with 18/36 orientation.


Regarding lengthening of LHR's northern runway westward: I guess the Queen would not mind ending up 2 miles closer to the end of the runway and with aircraft on approach over Windsor Castle 600 feet lower than today. The 1389 souls living in Rusper is definitely more important than the Queen.

[FRatSTN]

LN-KGL

MAD is 14/32 now but otherwise yes you are correct

[rutankrd]

The old intersecting Runway 18L/36R closed back in 2005 and is now part taxiway and mainly redundant concrete and a plant storage area.

Madrid might have 4 strips however the reality is only 3 can simultaneously and safely be used .

Departures off 32R are rare, avoided as they conflict with 36L.

Similar to Amsterdam the operational preferences are a single departure and 2 arrival strips with staggered spacings.

However none of that really relevant to a Gatwick thread !
The ATC also has to deal with the risk from conflicting traffic straight through the final stages of 32 approaches landing at Torrejon AB.

[Fairdealfrank]

Don't be so sure. Heathrow with an extended runway to twice its length is looking a much more attractive option. (as is the case in Madrid I believe)


The Heathrow split-runway proposal is included in the options purely as a makeweight. Nobody takes it seriously, which leaves LHR3 and LGW2 as the only proposals that are likely to survive to the next stage.


Technical and safety considerations aside, extending 09L/27R is a non-starter because to increase capacity, mixed mode would necessary on all rwys. This would be very hard/impossible to sell to the local residents.

The only one of the three proposals from Davies that will actually resolve the problem is the "northwest" rwy option.

A second rwy at LGW increases capacity there, but not where it's needed (i.e. at LHR) and does nothing to increase the UK's hub capacity.

As for a "makeweight", taking another look at the estaury option should also be in this category.

[Sky Wave]

Madrid might have 4 strips however the reality is only 3 can simultaneously and safely be used .


If in Northerly Config You Have simultaneous arrivals on 32L and 32R and simultaneous departures on 36L and 36R

That's 4 runways in use.

If Southerly you get simultaneous landings on 18L and 18R and simultaneous take offs on 14L and 14R

(4 Runways)

Never known anything take off on 32L/R unless 36L/R are closed.

SW

[adfly]

Shall we get back to talking about Gatwick here now?

Anybody know if BA have any new routes planned for the winter - FUE, LPA, AGA could help boost the year round capacity they have (the latter two are operated from LHR but at very low frequencies - 1/2 weekly).

TFS and ACE have apparently sold well so I guess they could see an increase this winter as it is usually the strongest time of year for the Canaries. Is SSH or HRG doable on the A320's or is the distance too close to being classed as 'long haul' by BA? I know the former has been tried before but a 777 with 40/48 CW seats and an overnighting crew was hardly ideal considering the competition there is on the route.

On the longhaul front there has been rumours of SXM being added as a tag on.

[Skipness One Echo]

Is SSH or HRG doable on the A320's or is the distance too close to being classed as 'long haul' by BA?
SSH was operated for BA by GB Airways, I think HRG was as well, both on the A320* series.

[intortola]

SXM would be great for those of us that live in this part of the world, SXM. Would allow me to avoid LIAT and Antigua!

[adfly]

I was thinking more in terms of crews, would they be alright using short haul crews who don't overnight when BA also operate some shorter routes (TLV, CAI) where crew do overnight.

[davidjohnson6]

Germania flew Gatwick-Erfurt and Gatwick-Pristina during winter 2013-2014 and continue to do so for summer 2014. Frequencies are 2 round trips per week on each route with an aircraft of about 150 seats. It seems these 2 routes will not be flown in winter 2014-15

Can anyone confirm whether the routes are being dropped, just going summer seasonal, or will actually be flown over the next winter once scheduling has been sorted out ? If Germania are leaving, will another carrier pick up the slots which are at off-peak times ?

I know these were not exactly the routes with the highest of frequencies and load factors were not exactly brilliant, but it's rarely a good thing for an airport to lose a carrier and a couple of destinations completely and increase dependency on the already dominant carriers, particularly at off peak slot times

[Wycombe]

SSH was operated for BA by GB Airways

It was also operated for a while (1 winter season I think) on the 777 to a rather strange schedule, the details of which I can't remember.

It definately happened though, as I happened to be in SSH when it started.

[Skipness One Echo]

The B777 was too much aeroplane by far, yields were poor. The schedule was late night departure as BA2055 and back about 2pm next afternoon as BA2055, thrice weekly winter 2009 to winter 2010 inclusive.

[macuser]

I think easyJet do SSH there and back with the same crew on A320.

Hence the share price......

[wallp]

I see Thomas Cook are starting New York & Miami flights from Manchester next year. Could this lead to something similar from Gatwick also in the future?

[adfly]

I'm doubtful, TCX have scaled back long haul at LGW recently in favour of MAN, this summer they have just 3 weekly flights, 2 to Cancun and 1 to Holguin! Norwegian will serve JFK, FLL and LAX from July though so you could argue that Gatwick will have something similar (minus the package holidays, unless TOM decides to start selling seats on Norwegian's long haul flights as well).

[interpreter]

I suggest this is read by all who are so convinced about the 2nd runway

http://www.aef.org.uk/uploads/Who_would_pay_for_a_new_runway_1_2_3.pdf

GIP have admitted it is just a financial exercise and they will sell but to whom? Gatwick is owned by a Cayman Island Company (see the Airport Owners register)

2nd runway Never. Watch this space.

[DaveReidUK]

So are you suggesting that selling your house with planning permission for that two-storey extension isn't going to make any difference to the price you can get for it? :ugh:

[Airlift21]

Just a financial exercise? I suppose the 2 billion+ investment since 2010 and continuing almost until the end of the decade, is also just a financial exercise.

Using that logic, every company in the world must just be performing financial exercises. It's not enough to just read snippets of business news and draw your conclusions. You need to understand and analyse what's being reported and then draw your conclusions (or predictions).... cue Skipness the analyst.

.... and guess what, that's called business. Buying/selling/negotiating never stops. Watch this space!

[LGWAlan]

And said report is written by one of the most vociferous anti-LGW 2nd runway campaigners there is - who just happens to also live in Charlwood.

Each to their own, but as far as I'm concerned, I hope it is at LGW.

[yotty]

DaveReidUK. There is no point in building an extension to your house if you could get an equivalent house round the M25 which would be more cost effective. :)

[DaveReidUK]

DaveReidUK. There is no point in building an extension to your house if you could get an equivalent house round the M25 which would be more cost effective.

OK, I'm with you now - GIP are going to sell Gatwick and buy Heathrow.

Must admit I'd missed that news.

[yotty]

Dave you are putting words into my mouth, I never said GAL would buy HAL. Just that it's not worth investing in LGW when an investment in LHR would be more cost effective.

[Airlift21]

More cost effective? I thought LGW put a price tag of approx GBP 8 billion on a new runway. LHR's price tag is considerably more. Granted LHR is where hub capacity is needed, but to say it's more cost effective is possibly a bit of a stretch.

... I think Dave was being sarcastic re: GIP selling LGW and buying LHR.

[wallp]

I see Thomas Cook have answered my question on here from a few days ago about the possibility of new long haul routes at LGW by announcing routes to the US from STN. With easyJet's dominance at LGW continuing to increase, I wonder if this move by Thomas Cook might be the beginning of a gradual transfer of operations away from LGW to STN where they will come under the MAG owned operation as they do at MAN and have more scope to grow operations than perhaps they do at LGW?

[pamann]

I remember a time when Airtours in it's early days only flew from Manchester and Stansted, being their only London or indeed southern departure point. I think it was with the formation of AIH that they opened up at Gatters. Now I know that it's just a brand that's now owned by the Thomas Cook group, but what comes around goes around?

[adfly]

TCX are still quite strong on routes to places like Egypt, Turkey, Tunisia and to a lesser extent the Greek Isles, Balearics and Canaries from LGW so I wouldn't expect any of those to move anytime soon. However the shorter Spanish/Portugese/Italian routes might get duplicated or shuffled across Larnden to STN if it works for them and they can get a good deal with MAG.

[FRatSTN]

TCX are still quite strong on routes to places like Egypt, Turkey, Tunisia and to a lesser extent the Greek Isles, Balearics and Canaries from LGW so I wouldn't expect any of those to move anytime soon. However the shorter Spanish/Portugese/Italian routes might get duplicated or shuffled across Larnden to STN if it works for them and they can get a good deal with MAG.

I'm not so sure. Interestingly from Stansted, Thomas Cook are quite strong on the Canaries, Balearics and particularly Greek destinations. Tunisia much less so and noticeably nothing to Cyprus or Egypt. Turkey is the exception as it's significant at both airports.

If anything I'd expect to see something like Cyprus or Egypt from Stansted rather than more Spanish type routes. As Dalaman and Enfidha are the only short/mid-haul routes so far to see increases from Stansted in 2015, that kind of backs that up.

[adfly]

My post probably wasn't 100% clear but I was mostly talking about what routes LGW could potentially lose if TCX were to focus more of their London operation on STN. So yes I would expect to see Cyprus/Egypt and increases on the popular routes from STN but I very much doubt this would be at much expense to LGW as that is what seems to do best from there.

I know this is a little off topic now but if TCX are committed to growing at STN then I would expect to see them base at least one aircraft there year round as currently they have nothing from November to the following April/May each year.

[FRatSTN]

Think its just December till mid Feb where there are no aircraft. There is now a small operation through the other winter months, eg. Nov and mid Feb till April.

[interpreter]

The new owners indicated they will consider selling pretty soon after the second runway is built. It is all hidden behind a screen of Guernsey, Cayman and Luxembourg companies with the major shareholder in New York and then a Californian Pension fund, a south Korean Pension fund, the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority and an Australian growth fund plus back to back loans, financial derivatives, interest rate swaps and 12% coupon bonds. Not an offshore financial exercise? Give me a break!

[Airlift21]

I see that LGW has recorded over 36 million pax on the moving annual total May '13 - April '14 and a 15% increase this month compared to April last year. Obviously we have to take into account the late Easter this year, but it's heading in the right direction and the best year-on-year growth since November 2011.

[racedo]

Air


What were Pax numbers for March-April 2013 and 2014 as that is a better bet.

[Airlift21]

This March there were 2.71 million pax compared to 2.58 million in March 2013. Easter fell in March last year as opposed to April 2014 and they recorded a 5.1% increase on top of that, so both months are well up on 2013.

It may be best to look at it is over the next few months and into Winter 2014 and to see if the growth sustains itself or drops back to the usual 3 to 4 %.... which is still not bad.

[davidjohnson6]

How much of the April growth in passenger numbers is likely to be caused by Flybe's 78-seat slots being replaced with Easyjet's 156-seat slots ?
As a back-of-the-envelope calculation I'd guess a growth of maybe 60,000 or 70,000 passengers for April, but would be interested if someone can give a better estimate

[anna_list]

Hi,

The ACL Start of Season Report (http://http://www.acl-uk.org/reportsStatistics.aspx?id=98&subjectId=27) shows that seats are expected to be up by 8% compared to last Summer, so the increases are likely to continue, but not always this large.

The number of scheduled movements is up by 4%, with 21 extra movements per day in the runway capacity profile. Gatwick is planning a record number of busy hours this Summer: 3 hours per day have been scheduled with 55 movements.

The biggest increases in services are from Easyjet (taking over the FlyBe slots), Norwegian and British Airways, but there are many other airlines also offering more seats, including Emirates, Vueling, Meridiana and Turkish.

It looks as though a number of the larger UK airports (including London City, Luton, Stansted, Manchester) will see some pretty decent increases this Summer. Some airports will finally start breaking the records that were set in 2007/8, at long last...

[PASOP1]

Hi,

I dont know if I'm in the correct place for this so please redirect me if needs be, I'm desperately trying to find out how many private aircraft movements there were at LGW during 2013?

Would anyone here happen to have an an accurate idea.

Thanks.

PASOP1

[Airlift21]

Probably correct DJ6. I don't have the figures to hand, but I'd probably guess the increase on Flybe's pax figures by U2 to be about the 60k mark. Overall there's a recorded increase of about 400k for April 2014. Norweigan will have quite a few more pax on their routes also. Emirates have also increased seats by approx 30% with one of the daily 77W replaced with an A380.... I think, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, bucking the trend, is the fact that LGW has said that all business models have experienced increased loads, including even charter flights and North Atlantic. European scheduled has increased by over 20%. Cargo is still slightly down though.

Interestingly, as Anna_list mentioned, the airport has scheduled 55 movements an hour for 3 hours per day during the summer. It'll probably turn into a record breaking year for LGW and a few other UK airports.

Good to see that Stansted is bouncing back too, as they were hit very hard during the recession. That's certainly NOT due to stealing routes/flights from LGW or any other airport, as some might suggest. It's due to getting more flights and routes in their own right. Good for them....

[strawberry Ribena]

Anyone know the purpose of these flights? Seen it a few times on the arrival screens, just curious.

[Heathrow Harry]

Air Caraibes Atlantique



tied in with LIAT so maybe some charters to/from the West Indies

[LNIDA]

I see DY have added Berlin & Warsaw to their LGW route portfolio from the autumn and are increasing CPH to 5 day.

They are now quoting a 10% market share at LGW for the 1st 1/4 & 375 flights a week on 33 routes.

I bet there will be a huge sigh of relief IF the DoT grant US traffic rights

There must be a plan B in place? if the DoT say no? Virgin to the rescue?

[True Blue]

Has the Norwegian routes to the states been taken off sale? All other destinations working normally on the site, but when you try one of the routes to the states, all of them come back with an error message.

TB

[Airlift21]

T.B
I just tried to book a dummy flight from Gatwick to Fort Lauderdale for Oct 2014 and it worked fine.

[Airlift21]

EasyJet today confirmed it would move to Heathrow if it got a third runway. Says it all really. Gatwick's biggest airline giving the airport a thumbs down. Makes me think that their prior commitment to a long term future at LGW meant absolutely nothing. Good job they didn't sign anything legal....
... actually, I misread the Evening Standard article. It says "move into" and not "to". Still, it's not a good quote if you're a Gatwick runway campaigner, Mr Wingate.

[davidjohnson6]

Airlift - did Easyjet give a binding committment to flying on a definitive date ? Press reports indicate a committment to *considering* flying at Heathrow if R3 is built - which will not be ready for commercial use for at least 10 years. In any case, Easyjet was quite a different beast 10 years and its commercial focus will likely change further between now and 2024.

Every airline currently at Gatwick will consider moving operations to Heathrow while R3 is built - Easyjet aren't saying anything remotely surprising.

[EI-BUD]

So if easyJet move to Heathrow, Ryanair may move to Gatwick, and the laws of supply and demand kick in, musical chairs... The impacts if 3rd runway will no doubt create a vacuum and for the airlines looking for lower costs they may be in for a bonanza, except those moving to LHR of course. But of course we will be waiting a long time for r3 and an awful lot could could change before that... In this volatile industry...

[Airlift21]

Easyjet aren't saying anything remotely surprising

You're right, they're not and I don't think this is the first time they've said it.

In any case, Easyjet was quite a different beast 10 years and its commercial focus will likely change further between now and 2024.

Totally agree. Also, a lot can happen in 10 years. In fact, it was 11 years ago when everyone thought it was Stansted that was getting another runway. 11 years on and we're really no closer to a decision about where the latest strip of tarmac should go.

The Davies Commission may recommend a location, but it still depends on whether the government takes any notice of it. Also depends on which party will actually be in government. We may end up with Boris Island after all.... :ugh:

[Habana2118]

So When EZY moves it's full operation into North Term along with VS and BA moves to South anyone know what the plans are for TOM which have a sizeable operation out of North term currently? Staying put or off back to South with BA?

[Fairdealfrank]

EasyJet today confirmed it would move to Heathrow if it got a third runway. Says it all really. Gatwick's biggest airline giving the airport a thumbs down. Makes me think that their prior commitment to a long term future at LGW meant absolutely nothing. Good job they didn't sign anything legal....
... actually, I misread the Evening Standard article. It says "move into" and not "to". Still, it's not a good quote if you're a Gatwick runway campaigner, Mr Wingate.
No great surprise there.

In the unlikely event of LHR expansion, many carriers will be moving accross from LGW to LHR, particularly overseas longhaul carriers (the waiting room) and possibly BA (longhaul but not necessarily shorthaul) and VS. BD (regional), BE and others may also move accross to LHR, possibly doing feeder flights on thinner routes.

In the case of U2, it would probably be its more business-orientated routes that would shift to LHR, and possibly domestic trunk routes (to take on BA and VS). Suspect that much of U2, (bucket-and-spade and other leisure routes) would stay at LGW (why have the expense of moving what does not need move).

Look on the bright side: serious LHR expansion also solves LGW's looming capacity crunch.


So if easyJet move to Heathrow, Ryanair may move to Gatwick, and the laws of supply and demand kick in, musical chairs... The impacts if 3rd runway will no doubt create a vacuum and for the airlines looking for lower costs they may be in for a bonanza, except those moving to LHR of course. But of course we will be waiting a long time for r3 and an awful lot could could change before that... In this volatile industry...
Indeed. LGW is unlikely to become a backwater airport with a 3/4 rwy LHR in the same way as ORY didn't when 4 rwy CDG opened in 1974. There are bigger implications for LTN and STN.

[LNIDA]

Not convinced that LGW would suffer that much, yes of course the mainly long haul routes of carriers that don't have access to LHR now would be ripe for migration and some short haul routes that are business centric might move, but for many LGW is very accessible and the access cost to airlines will likely remain below that of an expanded LHR.

Easy are very unlikely to move their entire operation to LHR but a base for their business routes would be logical

[anothertyke]

Agree--- main London base for EZY at Gatwick with a smaller premium operation at Heathrow could make sense. As well as LNIDA's correct points, I don't see EZY getting enough slots at Heathrow to move the entire operation. There is a massive difference between 'move into' and 'move to'.

[Heathrow Harry]

the Business comment in today's "Times" reckons that mid east airlines will have so many flights into regional European airports by 2020 onwards that the need for a Big Hub at LHR will be unnecessary & unworkable - they reckon a second Gatwick runway will happen but not a third one at LHR

[LN-KGL]

EasyJet today flies from four London airports. The only airport I see the word "move" can be used is at STN - in the the sense of "move from". For the three other airports the proper word would be "add" - as in add frequencies or add destinations. An opening at LHR the proper word again will be "add" - as in add service. I do think U2 flights in to LHR may "steal" passengers from their LTN and BRS operation more than from LGW, but the real losers will be the legacy carriers that have put all their eggs in to one London basket - at LHR.

[LN-KGL]

Re. the Times Business comment
But LHR has never been a proper international hub for eastbound flights beyond Europe. It is easy to see if you compare the number BA and VS destinations/frequencies to the Far East with the number of westbound flights/destinations (USA and Canada). All MEB3 have their hubs in the Middle East and no European of sound mind will fly to the Middle East to catch a flight to the US. What about 5th freedom flights then? For now Emirates has only had one 5th freedom route from Europe to the US (DXB-MXP-JFK), but in April an Italian court ruled this service "violates international aviation laws". Etihad has tried a different approach with buying shares in the four European carriers Air Berlin, Darwin Airline, Air Serbia and Aer Lingus, but we haven't seen anything else than some of them feeding Etihad at some their European destinations. Again we are talking eastbound flights, not westbound.

I think the European legacy carriers will have more problems if or when the big LCCs and charter converts starts for real with flights over the Atlantic. Since many of these are represented at LGW, and not at LHR, I may agree with the Times saying a second runway at LGW will come anyway - the only difference is that the reasoning is different. The Times is too business oriented, the real growth to 2020 and beyond you will find in the leisure market, not in the business community that have stacked up with telepresence systems and their managers find better food in their local restaurant with a star or two in the Michelin Guide than on board a plane.

[Skipness One Echo]

Thing is, as Laker, Branson, People Express et al found out, you fly long haul, your loco model does not adapt to medium term survival. Any carrier that has lasted has either been a historical flag carrier or a newbie with a low cost base and a premium offering down the front. That ends up not being too different from the legacy flag carriers.
Ryanair and easyJet don't fly long haul with good reason, however you really mean Norwegian. This is the reason they're involved in ball busting cost control and having staff based anywhere but the Nordics for the new pretend it's a standalone long haul operation. I am not sure what you mean by "start for real", the first year of B787 ops has been a challenge and the schedule is that of a charter outfit. Growth may well be in leisure but if they're going to go after price conscious and low yield, then you are going to need a MASSIVELY low cost base.

[LNIDA]

From an historical point of view you are of course correct and one should always consider history before re inventing the wheel

Norwegian are guilty of being naive in thinking that the B787 would be just like another B738 out of the box, fuel it up and off you go and had this company been a stand alone company it would have been bust by now, even as part of the Norwegian group it has negatively impacted the bottom line, attracted a lot of bad press and diverted management resource away from the bread and butter operation.

Will it work? well it appears to be doing so in Scandinavia despite the bad press, the UK market hasn't had anything like the press coverage on Norwegian that it has in it traditional home market.

The first long haul flight from LGW is on the 2nd of July to LAX, with JFK on the 3rd and FLL on the 4th and they now have 6 B787 in service with only !! 5 needed every day.

I'm told they don't need actually need the DoT approval to start these services and can operate up to 2016?? the DoT would have to find that they are not a European airline for the purposes of open skies, an Irish AOC says they are....

Personally i don't think they'll have any problem filling the aircraft, making money will be a bigger challenge of course.

Lets revisit this in a months time:ok:

[Skipness One Echo]

Loved the way you advertised the schedule in your last post, almost as if you were on the payroll :) I have no doubt they will fill the seats on summer, less so in winter. The UK has had cut throat competition for years on the pond, not so in the Nordics. The current operation is only likely to be of interest to leisure travellers, the only thing we disagree on here, is that losing lower yield economy might not be the threat to BA and VS you are suggesting.

[nigel osborne]

Fairdealfrank.


Hmm Easy Jet to LHR... pigs flying more likely. As ever Easy Jet will want to operate from airports for a very very cheap deal.

Doubt if LHR will let them land for next to nothing, the costs to pay for a 3rd runway will probably go up not down.

Nigel

[LN-KGL]

Do I need to remind you about what is flying over Battersea Power Plant Nigel?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/nowplaying/Pink_Floyd_Animals.jpg
Ryanair did earlier these cheap deals with airports and named the airports with city names that were very misleading.

As LNIDA showed Skipness One Echo, to use the word start is correct since this is a Gatwick thread. Another start will be the scheduled Thomas Cook flights to the JFK and MIA next year - one of the charter converts I referred to. BTW, German Condor has flown such flights for years now (to SEA and LAS from FRA).

Now back to Ryanair and their possible flights across the Atlantic. Mr. O'Leary has earlier this year again mentioned 10€ flights to BOS and JFK. Already today is Ryanair flying leg lengths of over 2,300 nautical miles (like NYO-TFS). A flight DUBlin to BOSton is only 300 nautical miles longer than today's Skavsta (NYO) and TeneriFe South, but this is far from the longest scheduled B738 flight performed by one of the European LCCs. Norwegian's 2,776 nautical miles long OSL-DXB is the longest - and even BOS-MAN would have been 35 nautical miles shorter than OSL-DXB. I don't think MOL will use their regular B738s on flight across the pond, but he did blame Mr. Kjos for buying all the Dreamliners available the next 3-4 years. To me this is a clear indication he and Ryanair is seriously considering flying TATL.

[Skipness One Echo]

You're right, he's been saying it for ten years. Wonder why he hasn't done it?
Thomas Cook flying to MIA and JFK is interesting in that the leisure operators want a piece of that pie, JFK from London already has massive capacity dumping in economy but MAN has potential for what is a leisure and charter like operation. Imagine being with FR for seven hours, all that yellow for so long, people endlessly selling to you, no recline on a night flight. People would pay a few quid more to avoid that....

[LNIDA]

I'm not repeat not advertising routes or schedules just pointing out that something very important in LGW history indeed UK aviation history is just over 3 weeks away FFS

Perhaps you'd be more positive if the one off Gumball flights had landed at LGW instead of PIK

This a LGW thread (the clue is in the title) i doubt Norwegian give a toss about your or my views, but an additional dreamliner a day into LGW is news, all the more so given that it is a different business model.

I won't mention the prices, but they are along way from being cheap $99 fairs

[Logohu]

something very important in LGW history indeed UK aviation history is just over 3 weeks away

Important for LGW ? Yes. Without doubt an interesting and important addition to their route portfolio.

But important in the history of UK aviation ? Hardly. The UK/North Atlantic has seen many new players over the years. Some made quite a success of it for a while. Many then disappeared. A very few actually survived and made it long term. Right now the phrase "small fish, big pond" comes to mind. And the pond in this case is full of rather large sharks, who will be watching with interest for any sign of invading their territory.

I wish NO every success, but maybe we should wait a few years before nominating them for a place in UK aviation history.

[Facelookbovvered]

Thing is if Norge make a go of it how long before the likes of easyJet Ryanair & South West enter the fray?

I think the segmentation if thats the right word is now so blurred, easy jet are a million miles away from their roots, pay for bags at BA LGW who'd have thought it?

Then you have the 73Max with an 8+ hour range, the world is changing fast

[LN-KGL]

I tend to agree with you Longhu, we have wait years to see if this is important for the UK aviation history. What we will see from July though is a new price range on tickets across the Atlantic. As an example if you fly out on the first Norwegian flight to LAX and return four days later you will pay £300 less than on BA flights in Economy on the exact same dates (with the Norwegian the Plus package is included in the price). With BA you will fly with their new A380 and of course Norwegian fly the smaller B787, but both carriers rely on British engineering for their jet engines.

[Skipness One Echo]

The reason Ryanair and easyJet haven't tried it is that it adds substantial costs to the business. I suspect easyJet is now at the limit of what they can do as a loco without their cost base markedly rising. If your B73H does six legs per day you have six loads of passengers to sell to, one or two legs long haul with passengers asleep does not drive the same revenue. Norwegian can sell £300 less than BA to LA on selected days in summer is fine if you want to fly from your local at LGW direct to LAX, and it will do well if the start up calamity with the B787 doesn't go on and on. Laker used to serve this same market with DC10s up to 1981, LGW-JFK, MIA, LAX once they had the Series 30, via Bangor on the Series 10. If they do well enough, I have little doubt BA might shuffle another B777 to Gatters and try and spoil things, for everyone I might add.

[anothertyke]

And fuel cost proportion rises with distance so cost advantage of locos narrows.

And I wonder how well the Skavsta, Beauvais, Hahn strategy would work for the very locos on the other side of the pond. Stansted to New York (Providence)? You probably need to be landing at hubs with a decent range of onward connections.

Then there's the frequent flyer points, the fare and purpose mix and the fares down the back of the big boys' planes.

Quite a few barriers to be overcome. Extremely interesting to see how Norwegian gets on.

[Capetonian]

I am flying on EZY out of LGW (N) tomorrow. I had a text this morning from EZY suggesting I get to the baggage drop '2 - 2 1/2 hours before departure time in order to avoid congestion'.

There is a message on EZY website :
Due to congestion at London Gatwick this weekend we request that you arrive at the check-in and bag drop area no more than 2.5 hours before your flight is due to depart. If you arrive before this time you will not be permitted to join the queue to drop off your bag. We would appreciate your patience and assistance, this will help to reduce congestion in the terminal and will make your experience easier. Does anyone know what is going on? Nothing on their website to indicate a problem, it's not school holidays/bank holiday/halfterm or anything.

[davidjohnson6]

It possibly means - please do not turn up 4 hours early because we don't want you and your bags clogging up the little space there is in the terminal and you'll get bored of shopping after 2 hours.

[strawberry Ribena]

Rightly said!

[CabinCrewe]

If there is confusion on here as to what it means, gawd help the oblivious travelling punter. Theyll pay no heid and it will be queues galore... That sort of text just induced queue panic

[Capetonian]

The point is that the text from EZY is going to induce people to turn up earlier than they normally would as they will panic, whereas the one on the website clearly says 'do not arrive more than 2.5 hours ahead.' A rather confusing set of messages.

My question as to what is happening to have triggered these messages remains unanswered, but it would seem that they are expecting some sort of abnormal situation.

[Charley B]

Wonder if EZY were sending texts out to pax well in advance of the French ATC strikes that are due soon..next week will be fun here NOT!!

[Capetonian]

LGW TN was bedlam when I arrived at about 1400 local, never seen it so busy, not quite queues out of the doors but right across the terminal.

easyJet+ card was a real bonus, only queued for 10 minutes for bagdrop, and security was well managed too.

[StevieW]

Landing on 08L this evening, was this scheduled?

[Charley B]

Work in progress at the moment between 23.00 and 05.00 GMT..definately used Northern runway late last night

[PAXboy]

On Tuesday evening we were back through the North with EZY. The French ATC delay was three hours but the Priority Pass lounge at IOM was a nice place to be!

We arrived at a bussing luggage point (belts 11 + 12, I think) and the bags from a BA EDI were there but no pax.

The belt was full of the EDI bags circulating and when the IOM bags arrived, the very smart system would not eject them on to the carousel as it was full ... after watching the belt do a full circuit with no bags being take off, I started hauling the bags closer together. The auto system had very neatly spaced the bags out and as each went past me, I pushed them closer together to create gaps. I found that the system liked to have at least a metre of space before it would deposit another bag!

It took about seven minutes of hard work until our bag arrived! Fortunately, the IOM pax were all on hand and started collecting immediately to ease the congestion and then the EDI pax arrived. There were no staff there as it was a bad day and we were so late.

[Blink182]

There have been some awful problems in Pax and aircraft handling lately. A particular company have not covered themselves in Glory to say the least.:ugh:

[PAXboy]

Well, it was an interesting exercise - literally :) but I was rather 'warm' by the end of it and my companion was nagging me about possibly hurting my back. I had to explain to her that we could have waited another 15 minutes for our case and we were already 3hrs later!

[sxflyer]

I was on the Air One to Catania last week, I think Blink's comments are true.

Aircraft was on stand on time, we boarded on time and only after our scheduled departure time were the inbound bags offloaded. Sometime after our baggage was loaded and all doors closed, a truck came along with another few bags followed by a single bag after that. We departed 30-40 mins late

[PAXboy]

I forgot to say how irritating it was to find two flights bags crowding onto belt 12, whilst belt 11 alongside - was empty and stationary. :*

I know, of course, that the strike had upset all the planning but LGW must be well used to French ATC by now...

[Steviec9]

Flew out of South Terminal on Thursday aft. Aircraft on stand 1 hour before departure time. Called to gate 50 mins before departure time. Stood in corridor waiting for gate agent who arrived 25 mins before departure time. Made mistake logging into system or system problem (never explained) and then did a manual board using one person only, boarding started 10 mins before departure time at a painfully slow rate, boarding direct to aircraft took nearly 45 mins. Departure delayed consequently. Air crew furious. It really is now operating as a slick shopping and leisure centre with some pesky planes parked up round the back. However I do have to commend security which was busy yet slick and efficient.

[True Blue]

The poor performance of the employee was hardly the fault of the airport.

I see Flynas is launching Riyadh end of July 2 weekly.

[adfly]

Flynas cannot be helping themselves launching routes at such short notice, apparently loads ex. LGW and MAN have been very poor so far. I assume they are hoping loads will pick up during Hajj. Nevertheless I wish them well on their new routes, AirAsia X seem to be doing quite well operating a low cost long haul model on primarily <8hrs routes so it would be nice to see Flynas replicate this in the future.

[The96er]

The poor performance of the employee was hardly the fault of the airport.

Why do you consider the employee to be a poor performer. If he/she is late to the gate and on their own, then that is more the fault of the employer who in this case would be the handling agent not allocating sufficient resources. If, as you said he/she was unable to log onto system that this IS an Airport problem as it's their responsibility to ensure all systems are working correctly. Manual boarding will always take longer than using an automated system.

[SandLat650]

Arrived into LGW NT at 0100 Sat morning, an hour and a half late. What a dump that place is. Despite being late, had to wait 15-20 mins for ground staff to arrive. Then after winding our way around tatty corridors, arrived at passport control to find it bursting at the seams. Almost an hour later, went to get the bags and had to wait a further 20 mins before they arrived. All in all it took over 2 hours to get out of the place. Welcome to Britain in 2014.

Compare that to Hong Kong where I've parked on the furthest stand from immigration, passed through the airport, onto the Airport Express and been in Central in under a hour. I've also been to 3rd world countries where the experience has been far better.

When are people with some responsibility going to admit that the Airport is either badly run, badly managed, under funded, over capacity or any one of a dozen more things that are probably also contributory factors? The only saving grace was that at 3 in the morning the M23 and M25 were quiet.

Unless people in high places take some bold decisions that put the country first and stop pandering to various minority groups that swing their votes, sadly nothing is going to happen and people forced to use this sorry excuse for an airport will see no change.

I know a lot of good people try their hardest to make things work, but the old phrase "you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear" is very apt; some serious modernisation is needed. One thing the whole experience taught me was to avoid the place at all costs unless absolutely necessary.

[vectisman]

Oh dear,some people do get rather worked up when they experience the unforeseen.
The reference to minority groups is also rather unpleasant. I assume the poster means anyone who doesn't agree with his viewpoint.

Gatwick has had rather a lot of money spent on it in the last 4 or so years and I am afraid the place you describe I just do not recognise. I am sorry your journey did not go as planned but the rant is a little over the top. Unfortunately I believe as the airport expansion debate moves towards(hopefully) a decision we shall see more posts like this, from all sides, trying to dam the opposition. I hasten to add I am not involved with either organisation. V.

[chris789]

Funny, I was talking to a group of non-aviation interested friends at the weekend and the overall view was that Gatwick is seen as a wonderful airport now. I really huge improvement over what we had before and certainly my choice over any other London airport (well, perhaps City aside, but that isn't a fair comparison).

We all have stories about good and bad airport experiences across the world, but overall I have to stick up for Gatwick.

[yotty]

chris789 I agree Gatwick has seen some significant improvements of late. But the venture capitalists are trying to lever the decision that they want (by spending money) whereas the real question is where would an additional runway benefit the UK the most? :cool:

[sxflyer]

Chris789, I don't fly from LGW very often. My outbound journeys (minus the issue I described below) have been positive and South is much improved. Where I would grumble is about the inbound experience as all three journeys have encountered lengthy delays for both immigration and collecting baggage. One flight parked on a remote stand from which we were bussed to North not South Perhaps I have been unlucky, but my issues don't appear to be unique.

I would say they are looking after their outbound pax as it is they who browse the shops. Inbound pax are perhaps a necessary evil and investment maybe hasn't been so forthcoming

[LN-KGL]

SandLat650 has indentified two common problems for larger UK airports - long waiting time at border control and poor performance from ground handlers with the result in late arrival of baggage. The airport company can't be blamed for these two problem areas provided UK Border Control has enough booths and the ground handler company have a fully functional baggage handling system to work with. SandLat650 also mentioned a third area that may more from airport to airport and also the season, and it's the poor on time performance one can experience at times. These delays tends to increase throughout the day and the last arrivals in the evening are the worst off. Sadly FlightStats has stopped publishing their monthly on time performance reports for airports in January this year. In these last reports UK airports showed a poor performance and could be found mainly in the bottom third. The delays can't solely be blamed on the airports, but also the carriers and ground handlers have to accept their fair share.

Since this was an arrival, it is totally natural that SandLat650 didn't mention two other common areas that create a lot of irritation, and that is long waiting time to check in baggage and ditto queuing to get though security control. The first is not under control of the airport, but the security control is one of the few areas the airport company has full control over. If a security company is hired to perform the security checks, the airport need to assume full responsibility for this service. My home airport is performing below my expectations if it takes more than 10 minutes to get through security. I have still not experienced so many minutes there, but at a few airports in the UK I have spent almost one hour in line to get through security (like on a hot summerday in August last year at MAN's Terminal 3).

[LNIDA]

The problem with arriving at most airports at a quiet time very late/very early is that there will be less resource available because they gear up for the number of flights expected and more importantly at the expected time, if your running late or early inbound v your expected time and you arrive with 3 other aircraft with minutes and only two ground crews on duty someone will have to wait, ditto there will be less border controls booths open.

LGW is much improved over the past few years and in a different league to say MAN or EMA the latter will have you standing outside in the rain if more than one 737 arrives at the same time.

The recent French strike causes huge problems for airports and airlines that are busy, we are still playing catch up with crew rostering due to people out of hours for the following days duty from last weeks strike, mainly because we didn't cancel flights just ran them late or very late.

LGW sees it first Norwegian Dreamliner flight to LAX tomorrow and JFK the day after, both flights show only a couple of seats unsold, lets hope the Dreamliner behaves its self, but with 7 in fleet and only 6 needed there is some wiggle room !!

[Heathrow Harry]

we could always employ more people on the grounds that the first impression of a country is important - Singapore seem to manage to clear everyone all the time in 10 minutes AND their baggage is ready to collect

[DaveReidUK]

we could always employ more people on the grounds that the first impression of a country is importantOr leave things as they are and give visitors a realistic taste of what to expect. :O

[Skipness One Echo]

The problem with arriving at most airports at a quiet time very late/very early is that there will be less resource available because they gear up for the number of flights expected and more importantly at the expected time,
LGW operates like MAN and GLA in waves of based aircraft. I try and avoid the waves as quieter times are when the airport works best IMHO. Out at 6am means a horde of shoppers getting in the way and landing in the last wave means immense queues at passport control. STN is similar. The bottlenecks are at the UK Border where the dynamic staffing is not a concept they like much, and why would they? I wouldn't but that's what we expect of others.

we could always employ more people on the grounds that the first impression of a country is important
Define "we". Gatwick Airport don't self handle and Swissport and Menzies are cut to the bone due to competitve pressues of consumers paying as little as possible. The UK Border is a victim of Gordon Brown's public sector spending orgy having to be reigned in.

[ATNotts]

The UK Border is a victim of Gordon Brown's public sector spending orgy having to be reigned in.

On the contrary, I would contend that the UK Border is the victim of the likes of the Daily Mail and their xenophobic readers whom HMG listen to, and as a result require all passports to be checked to the same degree, whether the holder has arrived from Lagos or Lisbon.

If we can't join Schengen, then at least a crumb of common sense would make a tremendous difference at all UK borders, not just LGW.

[Skipness One Echo]

If we can't join Schengen, then at least a crumb of common sense would make a tremendous difference at all UK borders, not just LGW.
You either have a real passport check or none at all I think. It's not xenophobic when you look at the population growth and the sheer amount of overstayers and illegals in London who disappear into their respective communities. It's not possible to do the same in say France or Germany as you'd be more visible, hence people crossing all of Europe to squat at Sangatte in the hope of heading to Britain. Last time I checked, Northern France was quite nice!!

We've tried open borders under Tony Bliar where Passport Control dressed down in casuals FFS! That's one part of the experience I don't mind too much. (If) your passport has a chip then use the e-gates, I was through in 90 seconds on Sunday.

[Akrotiri bad boy]

What on earth is going on with BA's operation at Gatwick? Last week on the final EDI flight of the day we boarded the aircraft and sat awaiting the baggage to be loaded. It's happening again as I type, I know this as Mrs Akro is caught up in this one.

Frequently on arrival at Gatwick pax disembark using a jetway only to be shown the stairs down to the apron and a waiting bus. What is the point of entering the terminal only to leave it by the closest door and be bussed around to another door.

The time it takes to clear the airport, even on a domestic flight, often exceeds the journey time from EDI.

I might be able to accept a LoCo carrier being fobbed off with such bizarre and unnecessary complications, but BA?

Now come on BA you're the flag carrier operating out of one of the capital's airports man up, grow a pair, and take control.

[Akrotiri bad boy]

It's getting worse, the flight's been cancelled. For a flag carrier that simply is not good enough.:=

[PAXboy]

Akrotiri bad boy
What is the point of entering the terminal only to leave it by the closest door and be bussed around to another door.
Yes it is annoying but the reason is often aircraft utilisation. Last Tuesday, we arrived at LGW as a domestic flight but the next rotation for the a/c was to BCN. So we docked at an international jetway.

We walked off at the front and down the steps to a bus for baggage recalim, as we could not enter a terminal with already checked international pax.

[ceimanfhiadh]

It's not possible to do the same in say France or Germany as you'd be more visible, hence people crossing all of Europe to squat at Sangatte in the hope of heading to Britain

Straying off topic here, but I really find this quite hard to believe!

I walked off a flight from Germany to Spain last week and I was shocked not to have my passport checked. Don't recall it ever happening before.

[Skipness One Echo]

We walked off at the front and down the steps to a bus for baggage recalim, as we could not enter a terminal with already checked international pax.
Only 551-554 and 54-57L (I think) have airbridge access to domestic arrivals. North Terminal was built with almost no thought to domestic services. There's physically no way of getting from an international stand to domestic arrivals, which is why they bus quite so much.

[strawberry Ribena]

I walked off a flight from Germany to Spain last week and I was shocked not to have my passport checked. Don't recall it ever happening before.

Because they are both schengen states which means open borders. You would have had to show your passport on entry into Germany because that's your first point of entry into a Schengen state. you will have also noticed that you had to show your passport and be segregated when leaving Spain or any other eea country for uk/Ireland because uk and Ireland are not schengen.

[PAXboy]

Friend collecting her daughter from the North late afternoon yesterday, with only a hand case. The delay was entirely down to passport control having more pax than they could handle. Just as well lots of people can't get passports, coz they'd want to travel too ... :E

[mikkie4]

Happens all the time at gran canaria,smile at the guard,wave your passport at him and walk thru to luggage reclaim

[ericlday]

Similar action at Tenerife !

[adfly]

Looks like the first Norwegian Long Haul flight has ran smoothly so far, departed ~20mins late at both ends but padding in the schedule means it still arrived/should arrive before its scheduled arrival time. Lets hope they can keep this up and that the airport in general won't be hindered too much by the increased security measures on transatlantic flights.

[adfly]

EZY are to start KEF 3x weekly from 27th October. It shall be interesting to see how this fares with strong competition from WOW and Icelandair.

easyJet Adds New Routes for Winter 2014 Season | Airline Route (http://airlineroute.net/2014/07/09/u2-w14/)

[vctenderness]

I was on M23 Northbound on Tuesday last around 15.30. I thought I saw a Norwegian 787 on finals but with my poor vision and the distance was not sure.

Would I be right?

[Charley B]

Yes that was a NAX 787..it was on the Stockholm flight:)

[canberra97]

vctendernes

You are aware that Norwegian do fly their 787's out of LGW to FLL JFK LAX as well as European flights usually to CPH and ARN.

[LNIDA]

There are daily Norwegian flights to the USA from LGW plus some crew training flights into LGW from ARN/CPH

[LN-KGL]

vctenderness, you saw EI-LNB (with Thor Heyerdahl on its tail) arriving from Stocholm Arlanda with flight number DY2853. Gatwick gets this summer a twice daily 787 crew training flights on weekday. The last day of this service will be on Thursday 24 July. Gatwick saw similar flights last year flown with their at that time only 787 (EI-LNA), but all flights then originate at Oslo Gardermoen.

One hour behind EI-LNB today EI-LNG (Edvard Munch on its tail) arrived from Los Angeles. November Bravo was 1 hour 45 minutes late on arrival after an almost 2 hour 30 minutes late departure from Gatwick yesterday due to a technical issue. I fear tomorrow's arrival from JFK will as late as today's LAX arrival since the departure today to JFK from LGW was around 40 minutes late. JFK turn arounds tend to lose in average 1 hour, with half of it due to poor ground handling and the other half due to slow taxiing and waiting in line for taking off. The flight times to and from has got the usual JFK padding, but this summer has been worse than ever.

[vctenderness]

Thanks for replies.

Yes I know they are flying to USA destinations but didn't think the time I saw aircraft matched any arrivals.

Didn't know they flew 787 within Europe though.

As an aside I have heard two people this week voicing concerns that they have package holiday flights booked and discover it is Norwegian!

I don't think Norwegian have got their message across yet. One conversation I over heard in a Supermarket , I think, didn't even know where Norway is I think they thought it was some dodgy place in the former Soviet Union!

The other was a relative who is a seasoned traveller but thought it strange that she was travelling to Ibiza from Gatwick on a Norwegian airline.

They might need a bit more informative advertising.

[LNIDA]

Norwegian are operating charter flights on behalf of the Tui travel group, something they have done for several years from Scandi land, people unaware of Norwegian are normally very impressed when they fly with them, they find the leg room way better than most bucket & spade operators plus the free wifi..

Charter flight numbers normally start with a 9

[adfly]

I believe they are also selling seats on some of the scheduled flights to tour operators. Most people who use Norwegian for the first time do seem to rate them quite highly, although it is worth noting that the more typical charter/leisure airlines are beginning to close the gap product wise.

So far the long haul routes seem to have worked well, with only one significant delay (although 2 1/2 hours is nothing compared to some of the earlier ones they faced!), hopefully this will continue and the 787's will not cause too much trouble.

Anna Aero interviewed Stewart Wingate on the first day of the new services during which he indicated he would like to see them launch BKK, bring JFK up to a daily service and later on introduce routes to Chicago and San Francisco (which would almost certainly be Oakland). Obviously I am aware that this is very different to a significant figure within Norwegian making the same comments and it also depends on the 787 deliveries.

[adfly]

Norwegian have added 4 new routes for the winter:

Madeira: 2 weekly from 28/10

La Palma: 1 weekly from 1/11

Grenoble: 1 weekly from 13/12

Salzburg: 1 weekly from 13/12

Lanzarote, Rome and Larnaca will also see frequency increases.

Newsdesk - Norwegian (http://media.norwegian.com/en/#/pressreleases/norwegian-launches-more-routes-from-london-gatwick-1031537)

The article also states Norwegian currently have 8 737's based there, is this correct?

[Skipness One Echo]

Four night stoppers currently I believe? Usually on 12-18 or thereabouts.

[StevieW]

Five based 737-800s (Four cover scheduled ops, one for TUI charters) and one 787-8.

An additional LPA based aircraft nightstops on two days a week, and one each from CPH/ARN/OSL nightstops on Saturday night. So 8 nightstopping on Saturday night, although one will operate the new CFU route overnight during August.

[True Blue]

Gatwick always states in press releases that it is connected to 46 of the 50 top business destinations in Europe. Apart from Frankfurt, what are the others that are missing?


TB