GATWICK

[tilly666]

For Summer 2006 BA will operate a greater programme, optimising aircraft to the maximum, by flying more night sectors on shorthaul services and upping frequency on a number of routes. By dropping HAJ and MUC BA is concentrating solely on leisure dominated routes, with the exception on AMS, LUX, domestic routes etc.


New route to Varna, varying times including one night departure
Increasedfrequency to ALG, again with an extra overnight flight
Other new routes to TIA, KEF and KBP
New route to Izmir, Turkey
Increased frequency to SKG, KRK, PRN, VNO, SPU, DBV, VCE, VRN, PSA, NAP, NCE
Reintroduction of ATH flights and transfer of RIX from LHR to LGW
Seasonal routes to Bari and Cagliari return


Does this mean that BA is committed to short haul at LGW, even though the proposal to merge the two sets of Cabin Crew is moving ahead. Surely if BA are to continue all these extra short haul flights, then a huge requirement for extra crews and aircraft is needed. Afterall those LGW 737 a/c are showing their age immensely and suffer tech difficulties quite often.

[crinboy]

I think what you're seeing going on here is a smarter use of aircraft and resources. Remember, by dropping the German services, they are losing up to six daily rotations and simply finding more inventive uses for this capacity. In terms of crew expansion, I've heard that with the new "product" - or lack of - being introduced at some point this summer, the number of cabin-crew on some shorter flights will reduce.

[flyer55]

This cant be true can it no more night flights !:\

[flyer55]

Have just checked BA.COM even though it hasnt been released but hey its true bang goes my life !

[pilothouse]

Taxied up to Gate 24C in a B737-300, stopped on the correct centreline and with the B737 bar nicely lined up with the light strip, and what happens? The jetway won't reach the aircraft! The nearest it can reach is 1ft away from the door. Nothing wrong with the jetway apparently, it's just the way it is.
Could someone at Gatwick please explain?
Thanks.

[TheOddOne]

Actually it's Stand 24M, in our nomenclature. Gates are in the building.

The jetties are normally set up so that a larger aircraft parked on the Middle of a stand are just within reach. Some stands can accommodate a 737 down the middle, but it's usual to use a Left or Right stand for 737 types - the Right is usually a coaching job, or a walk to the building, depending on distance etc. Then some jetties can't 'kneel' down enough to get on a 737 door.

Unfortunately at the moment, we have 5 stands out for planned works (6, 10 11, 12 & 34) which means that many aicraft are being displaced from their usual parking spots. This only started this week and it'll take the Handling Agents (who assign the pier-served stands) a little while to learn which a/c can fit where. Where they have to use a stand where the jetty won't reach, they'll normally meet the a/c with steps, or expect you to use integral steps (if you've got them fitted). As far as I'm aware, there is no definitive list of which 737s have steps and which don't. Some of the more experienced Handling Agent people know which do or don't, but why not let them know what your a/c can do during your call inbound (assuming you know yourself, that is!). The actual stopping place on any given stand is a complex issue, involving in the first instance, safely accommodated within the confines of the stand, 4.5 metre distance from any object whilst entering or leaving the stand, then in the right place for attachment of the refuelling dispenser, fitting of the Fixed Electrical Ground Power, ability to access the holds with the refueller parked, fit of the jetty, space for catering, cleaning, toilet, water vehicles, can the tug get on the front etc etc. It often takes a lot of juggling to & fro during several turnarounds of any given type to reach a compromise. With 7 different marques of just the 737, for instance, 4 of the 767 (with or without No 2 door) and 3 of the A320 family, it's a major task to get it right.

Cheers,
TheOddOne

[pilothouse]

TheOddOne,

Thanks for that, I had no idea it was so complicated. So our handling agents may need some educating, it seems.

Pilothouse

[Kapella]

Gatwick uses one runway for all operations but does anyone know how many runways there are at Gatwick? I seem to remember hearing that there are/were 6. Some have simply become part of a taxiway. They aren't necessarily operational.

[Hotel Mode]

Its got 1 "standby" runway for if the other one is closed, generally for maintenence, as it takes a while to get working. Also there are only SRA or visual approaches so it will severely limit movements. Normally used overnight. Gatwick has certainly never had anything like 6 runways. Heathrow did.

[Kapella]

Thanks Hotel Mode. I must have been thinking of Heathrow.

[cirrus01]

No real secret this...............has been common knowledge for last two months.


Hangars 3 and 5 , which have been vacated by BA for the last three years .

DAS air had been using H3 but have now gone ( evicted ? )Hangar 2 all empty, will go as well

Not sure about Hangar 1....... currently been used as a motor vehicle repair facility.

Think the leases on H4 and H6 have a few years left to run...:ooh:

[apaddyinuk]

Mig, dont think this will effect the new runway as I think it is planned to be constructed on the far side of the airport beyond the NOrth Terminal!!!

Oh those many SEP's in Hanger 6...how I will miss the place! lol!

[JW411]

It will certainly make landing on 26L a hell of a lot easier in a southerly gale.

The "Laker's revenge" phenomenon will be removed.

[bbrown1664]

The new runway is proposed to be behind the existing BA hangars on the other side of the A23, not the other side of the North Terminal.
Beyond the NT is the town of Horley, whilst it would be benficial to demolish the place, there are less buildings with owners to upset on the other side.

[apaddyinuk]

Bbrown, Apologies...I was always under the impression that the runway was being built to the far side of the airport!!! What was I thinking?
Suppose the thought of Horley being demolished was too good to be true!!! :}

[Spitoon]

If it was a choice between Horley and Crawley.........

[brakedwell]

I thought Charlwood was for the chop if a new runway is ever built.

[rodthesod]

The last plan I saw for new runway at LGW had Charlwood sitting between the runways with its only access from the West (ie new runway to North).

[aidey_f]

Last year (or maybe th eyear before) the local council held a 'consultation' and sent a leaflet round with 3 options on it, 2 of which were for a new runway south of the present runway, re-routing the A23 by varying degrees, and the 3rd was for 2 new runways, the southern one and one to the north of the north terminal.
I think the latter was to scare the local branch of the Nimby brigade...

[unstable approach]

I understand that the new generation A/C don't need the same level of maintenance man hours but I think its a crying shame that BA engineering at LGW has declined so much.

In the days of the Diesel 10, LGW eng seemed to have a huge ammount of expertise and capability on site, and were a great bunch to work with. I'm not saying that those who are left are any less capable, but there certainly isn't the on site capability to support the operation that there used to be.

Shame

[bbrown1664]

I agree with you there Unstable, I was one of them there engineers up until I got sock of the BA management :ugh: (I was ex-B-Cal) in 1990 and moved into IT.

[daz211]

Sorry but I cant find a Gatwick thread, so opened another, sorry if I missed it.

Can anyone tell me if at LGW, you can do TWILIGHT check-in for (TOM)
and if so what is the earliest time I can do this.

many thanks DAZ211.

[airhumberside]

In other LGW news, Sterling are starting 6 flights a week to Stockholm Arlanda next summer

[nivsy]

Lets hope Sterling will be a little more careful while landing at LGW than what they appear to be at CPH according to some reports. DUCK!:E

[725308]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/southern_counties/6064660.stm

And er Gatwick Airport is in West Sussex! :ugh: :hmm:

[Confirmed Must Ride]

The airport has switched between Surrey and West Sussex a few times and it actually has a Surrey postcode.

[Localiser Green]

But today, the airport boundary is completely within the administrative area of Crawley Borough in West Sussex.

Postcode is irrelevant, there is no such thing as a "Surrey Postcode", because Postcodes are based on postal towns, and do not recognise county boundaries (e.g. Nottingham East Midlands Airport has a Derby postcode, but is in Leicestershire).

[Edit: The BBC News article has been corrected.]

[N.S. Sherlock]

Can any regular user of the remote staff car parks at LGW tell me the frequency of the buses, and does it tail off during the night?

[Splat]

10 mins, H24. Leaves on the hour and every 10 mins from Concord House and X car park. I think the North terminal one leaves 5 mins later (or earlier??). My experience it's quite reliable.

[Barts]

Today it was annouced that the GB baggage handling operation at LGW will be moved to another company. This will happen within the next 2 weeks and only affects the loading/baggage sections. Check-in, Load Control and Dispatch will remain at BA for now.

With Virgin taking on the GB engineering contract it seems that there will be an interesting array of colours and company logos on stands in the north terminal!:rolleyes:

Who thought that we could all come together and work in harmony for the benefit of the paying passenger.:D

[Gatwick07]

Fantastic! Whoever has the new contract has got to be better than the current baggage company. Our flights are always delayed because of baggage!

[Maz11]

Latest rumour going around is that it has apparently been confirmed, GB will lose the franchise earlier than 2010.
Aparently BA crew at Gatwick have had a memo saying were going to lose it sometime in 2008.

BA are doing a cracking job of cocking everything up this month aren't they. Sorry I shouldn't say BA, i mean WW.

I just feel sorry for those who have to work for him, I say lets get out of the franchise on our terms and get on with doing things our own way.

[phantom menace]

Today it was annouced that the GB baggage handling operation at LGW will be moved to another company. This will happen within the next 2 weeks and only affects the loading/baggage sections. Check-in, Load Control and Dispatch will remain at BA for now.

With Virgin taking on the GB engineering contract it seems that there will be an interesting array of colours and company logos on stands in the north terminal!:rolleyes:

Who thought that we could all come together and work in harmony for the benefit of the paying passenger.:D

Along time coming, good news.Looks iffy for the franchise renewal though. The futures bright the futures Orange ;)

[cirrus01]

Anyone confirm how many of the GB flights out of LGW are actually BA routes ??

[Magplug]

BA are doing a cracking job of cocking everything up this month aren't they. Sorry I shouldn't say BA, i mean WW.


Do you really think that carrying on business as a handling agent for one of your own franchisees at one of your own main bases is a core business interest for BA?
Perhaps the BA loaders at LGW who have been determined to carry on in their good old fashioned 'comfy' ways have left it rather too late to wake up and smell the coffee? If your costs are too high the customer will buy elsewhere.... Aviance in this case.

BA and GB will divorce very soon. GB is a liability to BA and on the other side GB is fed up with being told by BA what routes it may fly and those it may not. There is no benefit left in the marriage for either party.

Some of GB's routes are operated using BA route licences that go back to BEA times. I don't see BA giving those up for one moment. GB clearly thinks it can go it alone with it's remaining route portfolio and the core holiday company business.

Only time will tell.

[Pickled Props]

Talking of the GB franchise renewal (or not) in 2008, the Loganair one too would also seem to be on dodgy ground, what's the current score with BMED's marriage? Can't really see how Sun Air and Comair etc. fit into BA's grand plan (?) either...

Looks to me as though they are heading for a structure not dissimilar to the big Mid-east players with a single core and a relatively limited local network, also the letters BOAC spring to mind don't really remember though if they operated much inside Europe.

What go's around....

PP

[PAXboy]

MagplugDo you really think that carrying on business as a handling agent for one of your own franchisees at one of your own main bases is a core business interest for BA?
Not a 'core' business interest but a 100% valid business interest.

In the past 20 years, I have watched the band wagon of outsourcing roll through countless companies and organisations and governments. The end result is very rarely an improvement of service to the customer. The accountants love it but you upset your staff and your customers.

As a manger, when something goes wrong, you cannot reach out and grab the the throat of the person who mucked it up - because they are not your person and getting a discipline charge through is a legal minefield. The contract is full of Service Level Agreements that, on the day can do nothing to improve things. There are all the promises that it won't happen again - and it does. The reason is simple, the chain of command is too long and has too many kinks in it.

Example: A company in the UK had difficulty delivering it's product as it was being subject to intimidation on unofficial picket lines. Whilst the Police would help, the drivers were simply refusing to drive anywhere near them. The boss summeds the transport manager to tell him to tell the drivers to drive. But the drivers had been outsourced to a UK company, who then sub-contracted to an Italian company who was the actual employer and it took some time for the problem to be overcome.

Getting bags on and off might not be core business but it has the chance to ruin your core business faster than almost everything else. Since bag handling affects the vast majority of your customers (depending upon long or short and tiem of day etc.) then getting it right is of the greatest importance.

I speak as one who has been on the inside of outsourcing as well as the unhappy recipient on the outside. The sooner this fad passes, the better.

[tristar500]

WW has no time for Franchise partnerships. Its not his business to ask 'outside' airlines to fly for him, using his brand, but when the whole thing started many years ago, it was acceptable as BA couldnt do the flights themselves and a different management structure was in place. Yes BA got the 'credit' and publicity as the public saw BA everywhere, but onboard and behind the scenes the product was being delivered inconsistantly and with some parts not delivering at all, and damaging the image of BA. This wasnt neccessarily the fault of the 'operator' or arm of the franchise as money always dictates the level of service you provide ie staff levels, training and investment etc. However WW sees no requirement for them now and is chopping the non-core (everything except LHR and T5) 'willy-nilly' and has no mercy.

Look at the UK Regions. We are facing a serious and critical review since the announcement that BAConnect is going to flybe.com. Justification to maintain the stations (EDI GLA ABZ and MAN) as BA Mainline stations with their own staff is currently being looked at by senior London based management and an announcement is due within weeks. With BAConnect making up the bulk of the regions daily work load, what future do we have without Connect? LGW is allegedly under the spotlight with loadfactors between the regions very poor although we are told that its easyjets fault... Really? Who said that Easyjet would never survive? A slap in the face for BA? LGW does its bit for the company and should be recognised accordingly. If LGW drops domestic UK flights then that leaves only LHR as a minline service. Can you honestly see BA keeping a full compliment of staff at the regional airports, with their terms and conditions and all the facilities (baggage office, ticketing desks, dispatch, loading section, check-in, restrooms etc) just for LHR? I dont think so. I would really like to beleive they would as I face unemployment through this. let me stress that NOTHING has been confirmed regarding our future in the regions yet, but the information we have, and from what we do know about WW then it does not look good at all. Oh, shouldnt forget our friends at Loganair. Guys, you will be next to leave the BA family - trust me.

Without the franchise agreements, the regions will suffer and sooner or later close. Handling agents can do the same job, for less. Give them a uniform and the public dont know the difference. By the way, Iam not having a go at handling agents. Ive been there and they work hard - looking after many airlines and provide the same service but at a lower cost than having in-house staff.

PS - The fuel surcharge issue, the pension nightmare, the move to T5 and the badly needed replacement for the B737/B747-400 (early models) as well as general fleet expansion issues, should keep WW in a job long after our futures are decided...

[Skylion]

Sorry, but the notion, sometimes popular within BA, that the franchises did not deliver a product up to BA standrads is simply untrue. The franchises have consistently each outperformed BA in delivering each and every one of its own specifications,- and this is as measured by BA itself. The franchises have added enormously to the reach and effectiveness of BA's frequent flyer programmes in the provinces and have operated routes which for the most part would be totally uneconomic to BA with its high overheads and terms and conditions way above those paid by the regionals. Through their fees they have given BA, for almost no capital investment of its own,a guaranteed profit. Overseas , Comair has given BA a reach into the South African and southern Africa regional market that it could never have achieved on its own and which many competitors would dearly love. The pity was that BA lost interest in the franchising idea some time ago and what was a highly successful business is being left to wither on the vine. For those franchises which have been bought by BA there has been little chance of survival once the accountants have insisted they be donated a chunk of BA's central overheads, IT costs etc.

[flybywire]

Aparently BA crew at Gatwick have had a memo saying were going to lose it sometime in 2008.

BA crew or GB crew? I haven't received anything from crewlink/email/letter about that and neither did mr FBW.

[flyer55]

BA Crew at LGW havent had any memo or crewlink messages about this. Its GB crew that have received the memo , so any GB crew out their and are online can you clairify ?

But interesting about the Handling of GB !

[flybywire]

But interesting about the Handling of GB !

Indeed....I believe it can only make things better for us as well, all summer we have had flights coming in late at night at the same time of some GB ones and baggage delays were just unbearable.
Coming back from NAP in september, we landed at 1245am and our bags arrived at 2am....when I asked for clarifications our bosses told me that the few baggage handlers available had 4 GB flights and the late MAD and PSA to do as well so 1hr15min delay wasn't that bad after all!! :oh:

[Off Stand]

When I got back from ATL yesterday, the BA baggage handlers were on a go slow due to GB changing the contract.

Knowing BA, it won't mean more loaders, they will use this as an excuse to lay some of them off perhaps? Less flights to handle equals less employees needed?

[In trim]

Some of GB's routes are operated using BA route licences that go back to BEA times. I don't see BA giving those up for one moment. GB clearly thinks it can go it alone with it's remaining route portfolio and the core holiday company business.

Route licenses are irrelevant now for any routes within the EU.....which is the main part of the GB network. Any EU airline can operate the routes.....therefore even though the "BA" code would be lost, GB can happily keep on operating.

However, slots are a different thing.....do GB operate everything on their own slots or do they utilise any BA slots?

[flyer55]

Very interesting point !!

[Man Flex]

GB's own slots and no memos about the franchise - only the baggage loading.

[Iva harden]

GB will continue as it has done in the past despite BA trying to de-rail it, in fact, GB may have to do more work for WW around xmas due to the impending strike action from BA staff re pensions....:}

[pinhammond]

This might all be rather good for GB. The BA product has been useless on so many routes, after all they have had to withdraw from Seville, Murcia, Valencia Jerez and worst of all from MAN/AGP where they were thrashed by Jet 2. The delays are a real issue with customers and hopefully they will get better service from handling agents who care about on time service. But I suspect that they might have to find another business partner in order to get some real strength in the market. What is certain is that freed from BA their costs will tumble and their revenues will increase. These threads have speculated in the past about the bearded one being interested. Maybe easyJet will be tempted. Who knows?

[beauport potato man]

flyer 55,

No-one in GB has received a memo about the franchise ending.

There was a memo today recognising speculation on many rumours and stories, but that's it.

However, this is the right forum for a rumour i guess??!!

Didn't WW actually tell a BA forum recently that there would be no franchises next year?

BPM

[Skipness One Echo]

Assuming that the worst case conspiracy theorists could be right, and I hope they aren't, are BA able to move all og Gatwick long haul to Heathrow.
I thought some US routes HAD to fly from Gatwick and this was the reason that ahigh yield oil route like Houston had to operate from here.

The routes involved are southern US and Carribbean :
Atlanta, GA
Dallas, TX
Houston, TX
Orlando, Fl
Tampa, Fl

Bermuda, Barbados, Antigua, St Lucia, Grenada, Tobago and Kington.

Also thought this was why American had to fly their Dallas services from Gatwick when it would make sense to consolidate at all London ops at Heathrow.

[Hotel Mode]

Didn't WW actually tell a BA forum recently that there would be no franchises next year?


Kind of, he told a BALPA company council meeting that he did not expect GB to be a franchise next year. No mention of Bmed etc.

What is certain is that freed from BA their costs will tumble and their revenues will increase

I think thats what Duo thought at BHX but selling tickets to Faro as the unknown GB airways (to the punters) may be harder that you think with strong well known competition around. I dare say that if this is the route GB/BA take then BA will start operating the best routes in their own right, the move to summer sun destinations seems to be going quite well at LGW already. GB will effectively be new to the market, and of course as thing stands GB have no "back office" ticketing/reservations dept to speak of, so its a fairly large short term expenditure.

Assuming that the worst case conspiracy theorists could be right, and I hope they aren't, are BA able to move all og Gatwick long haul to Heathrow.

No some of the US routes must remain at LGW until a new bilateral with the US is worked out, so it could be a while. Additionally BA are expected to announce fleet expansion for LGW/LHR shortly, management have indicated that A330's may be a possibility and they will be based at LGW sending 777s up the road. If this happens it is likely the short haul aircraft replacement will be A319s.

[swedish]

'GB have no "back office" ticketing/reservations dept to speak of, so its a fairly large short term expenditure'

Going to new a new reservations system would have no large short term expenditure. The main GDS suppliers only charge per booking, and that covers the costs of putting the system in. In fact they would be able to contract a lower booking cost than they get from currently from BA, so there will be a fairly large short, medium and long-term reduction in cost. It would also allow them to begin their own on-line bookings which have an even lower cost still.

As for route licences, they would not have any issues at all getting the right permissions for any of the their current destinations.

BA have been making good money out of GB in every area for years - which has been mutually good for both companies. The new MD isa former head of BA sales and BA cargo - I feel he knows what he is doing when he is moving things away from BA.

[tristar500]

Any truth in the rumour going round that either GB or BMED will pick up the EDI-LCY operation (This new outfit being planned) and that being the case, they will also do the EDI-LHR/LGW routes during the quiet spells of the day ie Use the AVRO to releive pressure on the Airbus/B757/B737 fleets. Afterall, EDI is expecting 10 Avros to be based there once all the handovers and changes take place at the end of March 07...

Failing that... Ive heard that whatever this new subsidiary is called, they may be asked to use the AVRO to LHR/LGW during the quiet spells of the day...

[flyer55]

Tristar cant see that happening , but you never know !

Hotel mode interesting you mention about the 777 / 330 and the expansion due shortly do you have any other inside info re this ? Can PM me if you like ?

[MostlyModerate]

Sorry if this has been posted before, but I have just asked Google Earth for a look at Gatwick.

Now I know that some of their images are not quite up-to-date, but...............................

MM

[lgwgrahams]

To enable a major reconstruction of Taxiway A, Runway 08R/26L will be operating with reduced distances and a temporary threshold for 26L on Sunday-Thursday nights from 21 Jan to 29 March. Check out UKAIP Supplements S1&S2/2007 for the details.

[Flightrider]

Etihad pulling out at the end of the winter season. They have bought a Heathrow slot from United and are moving the daily LGW-Abu Dhabi service up the road.

Not good for LGW, but the pax loads on Etihad were not particularly strong, so I guess it depends who takes up the slots as to whether it works out better for the airport in the long term.

[Jamie-Southend]

Anyone know why Gatwicks RW was closed for a "period of time" last night? Re-opened around 21.15, with all flights getting radar vectors to visual as no ILS.

Cheers

Jamie

[TheOddOne]

Jamie,
Sure thing, we're carrying out major works to completely reconstruct the holding area at Alpha. Some of the plant will obstruct the protected approach surfaces for the main runway so we've created a temporary threshold and aiming point (additional PAPI units and lighting) further down the runway. When this is in use, we can't use the ILS because it would direct the aircraft to the old aiming point. It would be too big a job for this temporary set-up to create another ILS installation. The downside is that the weather is more restrictive for this operation, no CAT III - just visual approaches from RADAR vectors, as you say.
We need to have a gap in the traffic when we're changing all the lighting over, so that we can physically inspect to make sure they're showing the correct lights and all the barriers are in place protecting the work site.
Go to the AIS website (you'll need to log in) and look for a supplement to the AIP S1/2007, which explains everything in great detail. Also look at NOTAM A0432/07 for further details of the lighting changes.
In addition to reconstructing, we're taking the opportunity to widen the access to the runway, to accommodate the A380, future-proofing the world's busiest single-runway. 34 million pax this year, aiming for 40 million by 2010. What's the next-busiest single runway???
Cheers,
The Odd One

[howflytrg]

San Diego?????

[Skipness One Echo]

Looking at the Delta operation for this summer, it seems that the two new-ish JFK services have squeezed out two Atlanta services. So ATL-LGW drops to 2 x B767s as opposed to 4 x767s in 2005 and 2 x 767s and a 777 last year.


So no expansion in real terms at Gatwick for Delta after all the headlines etc.
Are slots really so tight at the minute? Or is it gates at the North Terminal with Continental moving across?

[flyer55]

Does anybody know why Continental moving into North Terminal and where they going to park ?

[Dnomyar19]

Does anybody know why Continental moving into North Terminal and where they going to park ?

Flyer55, GAL have made some changes to the check-in and baggage sorting areas, which opens up some capacity in the North terminal. At least it does in those areas. There are no more parking stands than there were last year. CO will be using the stands allocated to airlines other than BA, i.e. from stand 51 down to stand 46.

[tubby linton]

Due to a row over union recognition the refuellers at LGW are to be balloted over strike action:http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/localnews/display.var.1302789.0.gatwick_workers_balloted_on_strike_act ion.php

[TheOddOne]

GRS are one of four refuelling companies at LGW. Dunno what percentage of the business they have, but it's a competitive game. Not sure if the others would take up the slack. Anyone got a definitive list of who refuels whom?

TheOddOne

[Fuel Boy]

Not sure how much they do at LGW, if an airline has a sole contract with one of the brands GRS cover then getting any fuel will be very difficult.

We at MAN are still trying to find out any info on their reasons for action...:ooh:

[tubby linton]

Read the link in my original post-it explains why.

[Fuel Boy]

It seems to have gone quiet down at GRS, is there anymore news on an outcome, or has it all been sorted out????

[Skipness One Echo]

Is the Continental move to the North Terminal off then?

[Confirmed Must Ride]

No the move is still on for early June

[Bagmanlgw]

Latest date i heard was June 12th

[thebeehive]

VK moved to the North to fill the void left in Zone B by the loss of the daily EY service as far as I am aware.
Not sure the exact reason behind CO's move, it will make travelling CO more pleasurable than using the South and I think BAA have/are increasing their security space in the South which has encroached on where CO check in now and BA need to save money and each desk I think (?) costs around £100,000 per year to operate so BA are losing Zone F and concentrating on just Zones C, D and half of E, especially with the introduction of the new baggage facility (TBF) at the North allowing BA to check in bags to any destiation at any desk.
I head CO were having Zone F desks 7-20 I think, the current 'Bag Drop' desks for BA, if true who will be taking F1-6?

Also does CO really need so many desks?

[Rainboe]

Does anyone know what's going on at Gatwick with all the demolishing on the south side? The old BA crew report centre has gone and is now a small car park. I see the hangars are being knocked down and removed one by one. A lot of work and a lot of expense, but not really much publicity! Is there a connection to the recent changes in planning laws that should make protracted Terminal 5-type planning procedures a thing of the past? (ie what's it going to be, new runway or new terminal?). Whatever it is, it all seems to be unnaturally quiet.

[GEAR_DOWN]

Its not been unnaturally quiet at all. It has been much publicised round LGW! They are comming down to make way for more carparking, more crew rooms, and a new multi aircraft hangar. They are all comming down except for the BA one at the end.

[Rainboe]

Thanks- that all went by me. But why are they removing perfectly servicable hangars to make another one?

[Bus429]

Follows a letter sent to BAA and DfT over three weeks ago. On a second prompt I received an acknowledgement from BAA but that is it.

To Whom It May Concern,

I have previously written to the BAA to complain about, in particular, a filthy toilet at London Gatwick; and in general, about the general tackiness of our “flagship” airports. I am often appalled at the state of facilities, particularly toilet facilities offered to those passengers not fortunate enough to use the airport lounges (I do not always have that opportunity but it is welcome when available). Terminal 4’s baggage collection area is particularly gross.

My recent experience on return from a business trip from Australia only serves to reinforce my contention that there are serious management failings regarding infrastructure, its maintenance and the attitude to passengers.

I arrived at LHR on Qantas QF 029 at around 1330 on May 16th travelling Melbourne/Heathrow/Newcastle. The aircraft could not pull in to its remote stand since the guidance system had not been switched on; no problem, these things happen. However, even with it working the aircraft could not pull in due to improperly parked cargo equipment on the stand. We finally deplaned at about 1400.

The British Airways bus that conveyed us to Terminal 4 was filthy; worn seats and a dirt-encrusted floor and fittings (I know that BA’s vehicles have little to do with BAA but it gives an impression of general sloppiness at the airport). The Flight Connections bus from Terminal 4 to Terminal 1 was also dirty. I was embarrassed to hear some Australian passengers – rightly – disparaging our shared experience.


Worse, however, was the condition of the “Flight Connections” security area at Terminal 1. There were plastic bottles and other litter strewn about the area. The carpet was dirty, torn and in places repaired with tape.
What sort of impression does this give visitors to the United Kingdom?
I am fortunate to travel to many places around the world and most airports I use – even those in countries we consider “Third World” – have better airport facilities than we have in the UK. In fact, during the trip described above, I used Melbourne and Hong Kong, both examples of clean and tidy airports. One does not have to travel far to see how to make an airport look good; visit Amsterdam, Brussels, Helsinki, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Düsseldorf, Köln, Frankfurt or Helsinki if you fancy a day out.
Further away, Almaty and Karachi are decent airports; we do not have to discuss Dubai or Singapore. They all make Heathrow and Gatwick look like what they are: shabby and unkempt shopping centres.

If you deign to reply, kindly do not offer platitudes about forthcoming improvements. What matters is the state of the airports and the level of service offered to passengers today.

[boogie-nicey]

Well done, if nothing else it humms a note of discontent from the PAYING public. BAA is a prime example of the "we're doing you a big favour" or "don't you know we own Heathrow and Gatwick" attitude.

Let 'em have it :D

[geriatrix]

Agreed - was in Term 3 on Monday. The Gent's toilets near the check in area were a disgrace. Most cubicles and all hand dryers were out of order. This indicated by barely literate notices taped to the offending objects. Unbelievable.

[BHDflyer]

Teminal 3 altogether is a right hole, years old and no sunlight in the place at all. That roof inside the terminal, which when you look up at you become dizzy by all those squares (you get the idea?), is also a bit of a health hazard, I mean I couldn't tell you the number of cobwebs:yuk: I walked into, we'd probably be here til Christmas!

Terminal 1 nearly one time did me an injury, I was exhausted at carrying all that luggage for ages, sat down on a filthy, white, plastic garden seat (which there was loads of by the way), only to just about stop myself from getting hurt, as a leg on the seat snapped in half. Airpot worker came over and said would you like another seat, didn't even ask me if I was ok, and don't ask me how I didn't lose my temper, I really do not know! I just picked up my luggage, pretended she didn't exist by not replying to her, and just went to check-in.:ugh:

[cjhants]

you want to see the state of the airside toilets:yuk:

[kala87]

I totally agree, I had a similar experience at LHR when I arrived on a BA flight from Delhi recently.

The aircraft couldn't pull onto stand due to a defective airbridge, so we had to deplane and use a cement-floored staircase, which some pax had difficulty in negotiating. I know this kind of problem happens at other airports, but over the years I've used LHR many times and problems with airbridges or aircraft parking seem to happen more frequently at LHR. The terminals are definitely showing their age (roll on the T5 opening!) and yes, the toilets are often filthy. Why does BAA love acres of swirly patterned carpet so much? It looks so dated and an eyesore. The signage is appalling, and of course, assumes everyone understands English.

One of my main gripes has always been the bus stations.The T4 bus station has no departure information such as monitor screens, which means bus pax end up asking their equally bemused travellers about which bus leaves from which stop. The central bus station, amazingly, also has no system of monitors near the bus stops with departure information, although departure information is posted on a board in the booking hall. In my experience, drivers and supervisors can be relied on to be over-officious and unsympathetic in their dealings with travellers. And yet we are constantly exorted to use public transport to travel to/from the airport.

Despite this, some airlines do go the extra mile to give very good service at check-in. Full marks to Virgin Atlantic, United, Air-India amongst others. Nil points to BAA though.

[STLIM]

Malaysia airpot is the best, which nice and easy to get fresh air....:D

[Woofrey]

Agreed, it's certainly not a pleasant experience going through Gatwick these days. The South Terminal is looking very tired now with filthy carpets, broken doors, plenty of black and yellow sticky tape and pidgeon droppings on floors and handrails......and that's just the journey from the car parks - a "first and last impression" !
In my opinion there are a number of factors in all of this :
1. The terminal buildings are virtually at their capacity, allowing no window for proper maintenance, cleaning and development work without creating further disruption and inconvinience.
It's all well and good talking about bigger aircraft and load factors to bump up the throughput on the runway(s), but the terminals can't cope.
2. Money. Of the other airports named, how many are privately owned and demanding of a significant return on investment ? BAAs new owners are in this category, and like all businesses in the UK consider cleaning to be an overhead to be squeezed, many often specifying reduced frequencies and not cleaning above "reachable height" as ways to contain costs.
3. Culture (1). Let's face it, in the UK we think of cleaning and cleaners as some form of underclass, and cannot recognise the value of this service until it is missing. Cleaners generally have the lowest wages and unsociable hours in society. OK, I know the work is labour intensive and does not require a lot of mental agility, but perhaps if they had better pay and conditions they would have some pride in the job which would reflect in the results.
4. Culture (2). Just whos mess is it the cleaners are picking up ? Not theirs that's for sure, so perhaps the travelling public, to some extent, get the environment they create ? It's the travelling public that drop the litter, spit out chewing gum, appear not to be toilet trained, use seats as footstools, spill drinks, leave empty cartons and bottles on tables, etc etc.

[Bus429]

It falls to one thing:

Poor management.

[Wycombe]

Passed through the North Terminal this week (BA from BLQ). After immigration, we waited by the screens to show us which baggage re-claim to go to downstairs ...and waited ...and waited ...for half an hour, after which I said I'd go downstairs and see what's up.

Got downstairs to see our bags going round-and-round and to hear an announcement (which was not being broadcast upstairs) telling us which reclaim to go to :mad:

It can't be that hard, can it?

[Skipness One Echo]

How did the Continental move to the North Terminal go? Anyone know what gates they tend to use ?

[Dnomyar19]

I can't comment on how it went, but the stands are mainly those in the 52 - 46 region, with some 757 flights on 61, and 111 on a Monday.

[scottishtrollylad]

Any idea as to why a qantas 747 has just landed into lgw this evening about 1930

[flyer55]

It could have been due to the Gas Leak at LHR yesterday

[Off Stand]

It says on the Rumours and News forum that the gas leak is today. The only delay we encountered coming into LHR yesterday was a KLM a/c still on the runway when we were on approach, so had a go-around.
The weather was fine at 1900 local too, so not sure why the QF ended up at LGW.

[tubby linton]

Does anybody know anything about damage at LGW to three aircraft that coincidently all seem to have happened on the same stand over a couple of days?

[cesare.caldi]

Today at LGW South Terminal open the first Yotel.

Yotel is a new hotel chain of capsule hotel japanese style but with luxury features for a cheaper price.

Is possible to take a room only for hours or for entire days

The second Yotel will open before the end of year at LHR, in next years will be open a lot of Yotel in many major airport and city in the world

[Dan Air 87]

I was passing through LGW again en route to ABZ last week for a few more days up there. A few questions for the LGW spotters!

1. What was a North American B757 doing there last week?

2. What was the DC10 in there on Thursday afternoon? (I really thought I had one too many drinks from the bar when that came into view)

3. What is happening with TAAG starting their LAD service?

Cheers

Dan

[spanishflea]

2. What was the DC10 in there on Thursday afternoon? (I really thought I had one too many drinks from the bar when that came into view)

Subbing for a MYT flight or something similar

3. What is happening with TAAG starting their LAD service?

Not gonna happen anytime soon as they've been banned from the EU

[Mr @ Spotty M]

Astraeus have been operating a "N" reg B757 while one of theirs is under repair, might be that one.

[Dan Air 87]

Thanks for the info. TAAG not starting the LAD service means that I will to go out to LAD via CDG with Air France unless they are banned by the Angolan's. One of the crew on my BA flight last week mentioned that there was a private Il 62 in the other week for a few days. Can anyone confirm?

Finally, the security is as you would expect. If after you have got through security then you have the shops and eating which at the North terminal is pretty rough. For an international airport, the choice is awful.

[spanishflea]

The Angolans have said they're going to ban all EU carriers but I don't think they've actualy gone through with it just yet...

[Charlie Roy]

Gatwick - Lisbon

[airhumberside]

Wonder if Monarch Scheduled will stay on the route now or not?

[TartinTon]

Wonder if TAP will seeing as Monarch have 60% market share :ok:

[flyer55]

Any info on Jet2 coming off the LGW - NCL route and BA going back in ?

[hapzim]

Or all the staff getting kicked out of R carpark and then Easy moving in:mad:

If your orange or red tailed BAA think the sunshines from your :eek:

[iain8867]

I'm in YYZ at the moment waiting to operate a flight back to LGW and have a delay, looking at the BAA website seems a lot of delays today? Could someone let me know whats going on at LGW! Is it weather? Cheers

[54.98N]

Weathers crap (heavy rain and TS).

We operated through the London TMA today and had 40 minute delay.

[kubik]

Wizz Air launches London Gatwick – Katowice flight
Wizz Air announced today that it would launch its Katowice - London Gatwick flight from January 31 2008. Gatwick is already the third London airport where passengers from Katowice airport will be able to fly with Wizz Air. The new route will be operated daily.
By introducing London Gatwick to its network from Katowice, Wizz Air will increase its number of routes from its largest base to 25. This will further reinforce its position as the leading airline in Silesia, which offers the most flights on most routes from Katowice.


Well, what will be next? Heathrow?

[True Blue]

See Oasis is going 10 weekly Lgw - Hkg.

true blue

[lgwgrahams]

Work is about to restart on the project to reconstruct Taxiway A and move the centreline to the west. The work will be taking place 5 nights a week starting on Sunday 7th October, with REDUCED DISTANCES on Runway 08R/26L. For full details see UKAIP SUP S27/07 and a Briefing Note for pilots at http://www.baa.com/gatwickreduceddistances.pdf.

[thepeacock]

Sterling is expanding services to LGW again.

Starts 10 March - daily excluding Saturday.

[tubby linton]

Is Aer Lingus going to start a route to LGW from Dublin?

[petey156]

aer lingus to start service from lgw south terminal to dublin - 4x daily service starting 28th october, oman air to start service to muscat from 28th novmber, norweigan to start services to oslo and stavanger from 28th october.

[petey156]

which fuel refinery supplies gatwick and is there a direct pipeline from which ever fuel refinery like buncefield for lhr. norweigan and estonian air to be handled by servisair. gb airways taken over by easyjet - easyjet will fly routes on ba's behalf until march 08 and then after that routes will be absorbed into easyjet route map. which handling agent will be looking after aer lingus and oman air

[Jamie-Southend]

Pipelines for Gatwick are Buncefield also, plus one from Walton.

[Dropline]

Aer Lingus - Menzies
Oman - Groundstar/Swissport

[Woofrey]

Presumably easyjet will incorporate the GB business into South ?

I think in the last 12 months GB accounted for about 2.3 million pax and almost 16,000 aircraft movements at Gatwick.

Can South Terminal readily absorb that level of traffic ? It's not pleasant at busy times at the moment.....

Any guesses at who could move out to North to accomodate the influx ?

Do you think BAA Gatwick have a plan to facilitate this ?

[chrism20]

Flybe?

Their operations would probably be more suited to the North Terminal

[petey156]

i definitely know that qatar airways wants to be in the north. should have happened when continental moved over from south. baa offered qr at the time to come over but they would be boarding from coaching gate to a remote stand and qatar airways declined their offer.

[Bagmanlgw]

I think Thompsonfly would be a good bet , once the tie-up with First Choice is complete

Also agree QR will go to the North once Continental / American transfer the wide bodies to LHR
Looks like the South Terminal will be Orange -- very Orange !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Good luck Menzies -- your going to need it

Bagmanlgw

[JulietNovemberPapa]

Will be flying CO LGW-EWR-MEX in 3 weeks.

Can someone please confirm whether CO has a fast checked bag drop off area at LGW? I'd like to check-in online.

Cheers!

[Bat Fastard]

GB/Easy North Terminal is my guess long term!

[WexCan]

GB/Easy North Terminal is my guess long term!

There's a lot of airlines that would probably be more "suited" to the North, and I suppose a lot depends on what BA decides to do with its Gatwick operation.

[Woofrey]

A few points to consider though ;

1. Easy would probably like to go to North as the facilities are more modern, and they are harping on about "differential pricing" or rather the lack of it to the Competition Commission and the CAA.

2. North hasn't as many pier served stands as South - an advantage or disadvantage to their operation ?

3. What do BAA Gatwick plan for Pier 1 - it's been in their development plans for ages but nothing has happened probably due to South pax nos continuing to grow and I don't think thay can close it down and remain operational with the same pax numbers ?

4. The assumption that GB pax will migrate to Easy should be challenged ? If GB pax wanted to fly Easy they would in the first place. Personally I prefer GB / BA over Easy anytime and will continue that way.

5. BAA divests itself of the problem and leaves it up to the new owners when it sells Gatwick in 2009, against it's wishes but is forced to do so "as a result of Competition Commision findings".......

[True Blue]

Would Gatwick be better off out of the BAA camp? I have always felt that Baa is quite happy to keep Gatwick as the poor cousin.

True Blue

[manx crab]

The sooner Flybe move out of that disorganised dump BAA call "South Terminal" and into the considerably nicer North Terminal the better

[easyprison]

Rumour has it........! easyjet want the North Terminal for themselves!

[flyer55]

That rumour has always been around . Didnt realise flybe on the move , but also know thomson cabin crew reporting to Jubilee house (north terminal) from april onwards and virgin wanting into North Terminal

[toledoashley]

This is getting as confusing as Heathrow when Heathrow Airways moves to T5

[Skipness One Echo]

Having used the North Terminal to catch a BA Domestic recently, I got my photo taken by yet another big brother camera "because the lounge is used by International passengers" as well. Yet this doesn't happen at Stansted ( BAA again) and I can't remember if I had to have my pic taken flying easyJet to Glasgow from the South Terminal. So can someone explain WHY they need to check my photo as I board at the domestic gate to see if it matches the one taken at security. It baffles me, I thought arriving and departing passengers were segregated, and connecting pax would have cleared UK immigration by this point as they can walk out of UK arrivals before the photo check.

Can someone explain the point of this? I believe Heathrow Terminal 5 will involve a fingerprint being taken.()

Oh Mr Orwell how we mocked you...

[Woofrey]

Isn't it because the connecting / transit pax don't clear immigration before getting to the departure lounge ? Without the photo check someone could arrive on an International flight, with an onward non domestic connection, get to the Departure lounge via the connecting route, swap a Domestic departure flight boarding card with an accomplice and then arrive at the other UK destination without passing through any border control ? The photo check prevents this. Meanwhile the accomplice takes the onward non domestic connection....
maybe ?

[WexCan]

Flew from the South this morning, very few BAA peeps at security. Most scanners and metal detectors manned by Scottish people, didn;t catch company name on their shirts.

[Skipness One Echo]

I was sure that before you get to the domestic gate, you can turn left and wander off out of UK arrivals free as a bird. Surely you show your passport and documents and airfield of ENTRY to the UK and not final destination.
Heads up from someone in the know?

On the security thing, the peeps at Glasgow have god awful "sky - something" branding, with "Your Security" titles. It is sooooo NOT my security. If it was, I wouldn't wasted a stack of money on a pointless moronic marketing ploy. T

[WexCan]

Yeah that sounds about right - wonder what they're up to in Gatwick.

[Whalerider]

Believe they are covering LGW staff annual leave. Despite the uniform - they are BAA staff in a rebranding exercise planned to be rolled out throughout BAA.

New service starting next week - Tarom B737-700 twice weekly to Cluj. Where ? I hear you ask !

[Alan Tracey]

Who is handling them ???

[Charlie Roy]

New Easyjet Route:
Gatwick to Biarritz

[True Blue]

The BAA Gatwick time-table is showing flights to KUL by Malaysian between June to Sept 08. Is this a special series or is MH trying Lgw as well?

Anybody know?

True Blue

[Sean Dillon]

Rumour has it........! easyjet want the North Terminal for themselves!
Looks like you Orange folk are staying in the South, it's been confirmed the joint First Choice Airways/Thomson will be staying/moving to the North Terminal...

[HKLCY]

Malaysia Airlines are to operate two weekly services to Kuala Lumpur using 777-200 from 22 June to 18 September.

[LGWAlan]

Ops Thurs and Sun 1300-0840 MH7347 ex LGW

[petey156]

well the rumours are about gatwick as to airline terminal movements and security arrangements.
easyjet to split operations between the north and south terminal with former gb airways routes in north. thomsonfly/thomas cook airlines/qatar airways to move from south to north.
also, some airline may be moving to different zones within each terminals.
with regards to security with one bag rule - apparently south terminal both central search and flight connections can take more than one bag where as over in the north, from the 11th of this month passengers will be able to take more than one bag at flight connections but will be one bag only at central search.

[True Blue]

The flights to KUL are available for booking via many of the travel sites, but do not appear on MH's own site. Why would this be?

True blue

[spanishflea]

I understand AA have come across another LHR slot and their final LGW flight (the 78/79 to DFW) is transferring across later in the year?

[thebeehive]

I understand TOM/FCA to take most of zones A&B with (I assume) Lithuanian, Air Plus Comet, Delta staying on Zone A, Virgin Nigeria and Oman Air keeping zone B? and Brussels Airlines, Malev etc on Zone Z.

BA to keep zones C & D, Easyjet to have the whole of zone E for ex-GB routes and Geneva and Belin I think and Continental and Emirates to have Zone F between them. Don't know about where Qatar will go.

[Bagmanlgw]

Anyone goy any information on a possible start up for Pakistan Airlines into Gatwick this summer / next autumn

Not sure if it is a transfer of a flight from Heathrow or a extra service ?

Info i heard was for a daily service arriving at 14;00 departing at 17;00 !!!

Bagmanlgw

[airhumberside]

They had been using Stansted as a 2nd London airport

[bycrewlgw]

Hi All,

Anyone know what a/c is used on the LGW - SSH (FCA470) on a thursday during the summer?

any info will be great!

Thanks
BCG

[mmeteesside]

Thomsonfly Cargo schedule shows B752 on the FCA470 to SSH

[bycrewlgw]

cool cheers for that mate! :ok:

[virginblue]

Telegraph reporting about faulty scales at LGW according to a Trading Standards study:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/02/nbags102.xml


Wonder what airline qualified for the top spot with 10 out 18 scales ripping of the pax.

[jetsetwilly]

Isn't the 'landlord' responsible for the accuracy of the scales, not the 'tenants'???

JSW

[virginblue]

Well apprntly it was more about "forgetting" to reset the scales properly etc. If they were allowed to, they worked properly.....

[flyer55]

Announced today as of 27th October'08 their will be a daily service on a 4 class a/c

[LGWAlan]

Lgw-jfk 1110-1405 Ba2173

Jfk-lgw 1800-0605 Ba2172

[13Alpha]

Hmmm.... this is inconsistent with the general move of longhaul services from LGW to Heathrow.

So is this just a one-off tactical move, or the beginning of a change in strategy...?

13Alpha

[Charley B]

will this be a 777 or a 747?
-had heard a rumour that these may return to LGW:)

[Charlie Roy]

New route: LGW - Vigo

Tue, Thurs, Sat starting June 21st

[londonmet]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7381323.stm

:)

[Notso Fantastic]

Celebrate? Manchester is a total Horlicks at the moment. It has the most disgraceful crew security facilities I have ever seen anywhere- how nice to queue up next to giant trolleys of washroom towels and tissues in a cold concrete corridor with wheelie bins wheeled past as the doors are wide open on freezing wet days! They run Bournemouth Airport as a shambles- have you actually seen it? Huts! Could this be the only company worse than BAA? Heaven help us!

[thedeadseawasonlysick]

The article makes the point that BA is only interested in serving the SE. I would qualify that to, only interested in serving LHR.

My prefered airport is Gatwick. I travel to a lot of European destinations, but mainly Geneva, Paris and Frankfurt. The service BA provides to these cities from Gatwick is either non existant or atrocious. Flights to Paris and Frankfurt were normally at least 70% full, but BA has pulled off both these routes, citing competition from Eurostar. Now that the Eurostar terminal has moved to St Pancras and the number of stopping services at Ashford has been cut, this arguement no longer holds water.

It is impossible to plan on using Gatwick to go to Geneva, as the service varies between nil per day to three per day, at wildly fluctuating times. It is little wonder that that passengers shun the service. It is the classic ploy, used by Government as well, when they wish to cut some service or other. Make it so difficult to use the service that people go elsewere and then cut the service citing lack of demand. BA at the moment schedules what services it does offer out of Gatwick round A/C availability and avoiding crews overnighting, not passenger convenience.

The Government lets BA get away with this, despite their avowed wish to cut carbon emissions. There must be many, like myself, in the SE, who drive past Gatwick, faced with another 40 miles to LHR. The cost in carbon, wasted time and conjestion on the M25 doesn't bare thinking about.

I would welcome a new owner at Gatwick, especially one who persuaded or forced the airlines to offer services that passengers wanted, at a time passengers wanted.

[Morbid]

Sorry to interupt a serious thread but I can´t get over the photo on the right hand side of the article headed:

"WHAT MAG OWNS"..... looks like a bus stop is about all :\

[Pjlot]

This is just a general comment on the situation; I haven't kept up to date on the proposal to force BAA to sell off one or more of the three London Airports, only what I have read briefly here and seen on sky news.

Does it not defeat the purpose somewhat to allow the second biggest consortium in the UK (MAG) to take over one of the capital’s main airports. I understand that BAA has complete domination over London’s airports, however, is it in the best interests of passengers to allow the second biggest airport consortium in the country to take over Gatwick. Will it open up the services to allow passengers access to the destinations they want or will they operate services there and favour their existing airports like Manchester. MAG will have considerable investment in Gatwick and it will be in their best interests to make it profitable.

BAA owns Gatwick and has close links with BA and a long running relationship. Can MAG really make a difference in Gatwick, they can't force BA to fly out of Gatwick and why would BA bring more destination to Gatwick and jeopardise their well established Heathrow operations.

The situation in London's airports is more than simply BAA dominating the airports and how they are run. There is also the National airline and its long established links with BAA and Heathrow in particular. With the planned new runway at Heathrow it’s difficult to see how BA will move or greatly expand any of its operations in Gatwick. If it does what’s to say it doesn't just do it in the interim until the new runway has been completed at Heathrow. Should the government not look at how the three airports could be utilised together in a structured manner rather than building more and more at Heathrow.

Forcing BAA to sell off one or more of London’s airports is a good idea but I think it needs to be planned very carefully.

[LGS6753]

The BAA needs to be forced to divest both Gatwick and Stansted, as well as either Glasgow or Edinburgh. Only true private competition works in the interests of the customer, and a stitch-up leaving the rest of BAA as a quasi-monopoly by selling Gatwick to MAG is just not acceptable.

MAG is not a private sector company as it is owned by a consortium of councils. As such, it is not fit to purchase other airports outside its area (although it has done so in the case of HUY, EMA and BOH).
The public sector is an inappropriate owner of, well, virtually everything, as it has a tendency verging on certainty to c0ck things up.
Under the leadership of The Blessed Margaret we managed to abolish inefficient public sector entities. Don't lets regress to the chaos of the seventies.

[7006 fan]

I note the article does not mention that MAG are flogging off HUY.
MAG is owned by Local Authorities and has a Local Authority mindset.
God help Gatwick if they get it, that is all I can say! :sad:

[StoneyBridge Radar]

7006 fan: I note the article does not mention that MAG are flogging off HUY.

What does the fact MAG are offloading a financial burden on the balance sheet have with them having a desire to invest in something more likely to afford a significantly better return?

Council owned/run or not, MAG remains a for-profit venture.

Stoney

[CentreFix25]

I'm just curious to know which Airline and aircraft type went tech and stopped 240 fans from getting to Moscow. Anyone know?

[BHDflyer]

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
A Chelsea Supporter!

[flybar]

Moscow Charter should have been operated by Air Via

[Mr @ Spotty M]

Aircraft was a B757 Operated by Gadair, Hydraulic leak and it was 224 fans.:ok:

[Skipness One Echo]

anoraks.net is reporting that BA will LGW-JFK all to themselves as Delta are withdrawing from this September

[Haven't a clue]

Been through Gatwick South three times in the past three weeks. Armed with online check-in printed boarding pass average time from train to Pret a Manger on the upstairs floor airside has been 10 minutes. OK, it's around 2pm, but that is so much better than a few months ago. The worst queues are now for buying water at WH Smiths.

And the opening up of the upstairs floor into what I guess was part of the landside Gatwick Village has had a huge impact on available space airside with more seats both inside and outside the new food outlets.

Well done Gatwick!

[BlueTui]

Dont forgot, Thomsonfly one of the airports biggest customers moved less than three months ago from south to north terminal.

The only thing that has changed, is the misery is now at North Terminal rather than South.

[lgwgrahams]

Great excitement on Sunday when an evacuation of the Control Tower at Heathrow caused 15 arrivals, including SIA SQ318, to divert round the M25 to Gatwick. Thanks to some sterling work by BAA's Airfield Ops and Groundstar, the aircraft ( 9VSKC) was parked, refuelled and sent back to Heathrow three hours later.

All the diversions contributed to the setting of a new record for daily movements - 894.

[newscaster]

PIA planning to link London with three other Pakistani cities flights will operate as Faislabad-Sialkot-Peshawar-London vice versa, two domestic stops seem odd though, A310 will be used, could end up operating from Gatwick.

[True Blue]

Co has announced that is dropping all flights to Lgw at the end of October. All services to operate from Lhr. Not sure if Cle will operate at all.

True Blue

[muckin fuddle]

Co has announced that is dropping all flights to Lgw at the end of October. All services to operate from Lhr. Not sure if Cle will operate at all.

True Blue

Any idea whether they will continue with their VS codeshare flights ?

[True Blue]

I believe so. I think there may a press statement on their web site.True Blue

[FLCH]

LGW will be sorely missed by us at CO. The dispatchers and ground staff have been nothing but a pleasure to work with. I guess we are adding an additional LHR flight to make up for the loss. which is not near enough. I'll be drinking a pint to all involved on my last trip there later on this month

[Skipness One Echo]

Do Continental self handle at Gatwick? I know that they use KLM Ground Services at Heathrow so I guess there are going to be some job losses.

[FLCH]

No SOE we use Servisair for ops and theres a few folks that work for us that are still here when I was hired 21 yrs ago. :(

[Confirmed Must Ride]

I owe a lot to LGW as they brought me up into the wide world of working at airports...now moved on but have fond memories...

DC10 daily delays, 747's barely making it off the runway...ah the good ol days

[mudcity]

some excel rescue flights
N720AX DC10 sat 0915
SX TIC 747 sat 1600

CS TMP L1011 sun 0700
SX TIC 747 sun 0315
SX TID 747 sun 1635
SX TIC 747 sun 2255

[Cloud1]

G-FBEC - Flybe E195 doing a rescue flight between LGW and Cagliari (and return)......I am pretty sure its on -EC. I don't think the plans have been scrapped and possibly going to be for a couple of weeks.

[Aeromaniac]

If it`s there for a while, could we start to see a Flybe base at LGW. Be about time as it`s the biggest catchment area in the country ????
( bar LHR, and thats just way too pricey!).

[Whitehatter]

I am not being critical of your suggestion but why would Flybe want to?

They are profitable as a regional operation, and would instantly be up against stiff competition. Crewing would be more costly as well for a Gatwick operation.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it is a mantra often ignored to the cost of many airlines. Flybe are profitable in their niche and Gatwick would be a hefty gamble with that profitability.

[Cloud1]

Thats a very good question Aeromaniac, however as Whitehatter has said it would be costly for Flybe to set up a base as such. I believe operations at LGW may very well be increasing at some point as suggested in Mike Rutter ( :rolleyes: ) various interviews with media but I doubt very much they would make it a base.

[Aeromaniac]

In their website news about bank holiday bookings, 4 out of the top 10 routes were ex LGW. very good, but currently they can only go to where they have a base, EDI, INV etc, what about the rest of Europe???

[Cloud1]

I think there is too much competition for Flybe at LGW on European routes. Their expansion plans are really aimed at North East and Scotland, but not LGW. Also there are a lot of London passengers that commute down to Southampton and use Flybe services simply to avoid the chaos that can become LGW South terminal. I would like to see Flybe move over to the North but this has been rumoured before and I am still waiting :)

[airhumberside]

In their website news about bank holiday bookings, 4 out of the top 10 routes were ex LGW. very good, but currently they can only go to where they have a base, EDI, INV etc, what about the rest of Europe???
They currently have a summer Saturday LGW-Bergerac service and BE could fairly easily add a few non-base routes from Gatwick doing patterns such as JER-LGW-Bergerac or NCL-LGW-Poitiers

[ix_touring]

Sky reports that BAA is to put Gatwick up for sale a month after the comp commission told it to slim down.

Branson mentioned as potential suitor.

iX

[Powerjet1]

BAA put Gatwick up for sale.

[sevenforeseven]

Thank god. Just hope whoever buys it turns it into a airport and not carry on with the slum it is.:mad:

[t211]

Well I hope Ryanair & Easy Jet are now verry happy. But doesnt that Mean when It sold that they Become unregulated and then they can charge what they like, Of course If any Airline atempts to buy them Isnt there a conflicts of Inerest.Bad day for the aviation busines.:=:=:=:*

[Re-Heat]

It does not necessarily mean that they will become unregulated - while that would be the optimal solution from an economic point of view, I do not believe that would be feasible for a number of years yet.

The sale of Gatwick is great news for the industry, as in the short term it will indeed permit development of the airport as a competitor to other airports, hopefully raising standards of service.

While Virgin ownership of Gatwick might be viewed to be negative for other carriers, it is not entirely uncommon for airlines to have significant ownership interests in, or close ties to airports - many in the Far East are an example.

They are unlikely to be permitted to charge differing access charges to different airlines, but they would be able to enhance their service standards to the detriment of others. However, with competition among airports, those airlines are free to move elsewhere - overall, I cannot see any particular negative impact of Virgin themselves owning the airport.

[Airbus Unplugged]

At least BAA won't be running security. Perhaps we'll be able to perform our duties whilst maintaining a little dignity with the new buyer?:)

[EGHH]

I think MAG might have something to say about the situation before everyone assumes that Beardy will pick Gatwick up.

[green granite]

A list of potential buyers: From Gatwick airport: The potential buyers | Business | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/sep/17/baa.theairlineindustry?gusrc=rss&feed=uknews)

Virgin Atlantic:

Virgin has already declared an interest in buying Gatwick as part of a consortium.

Global Infrastructure Partners: GIP owns a 50% stake in London's City airport,

Macquarie Group: Its private equity investment fund, Macquarie Airports Group, owns 50% of Bristol airport and 24.125% of Birmingham International airport.

Hochtief: Hochtief AirPort, Co
Owns stakes in six airports: Athens, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Budapest, Tirana and Sydney . HTA is one of the world's biggest private airport managers with a portfolio worth 1.3bn euros (£1bn) at the end of last year.

[Filler Dent]

So will this allow Gatwick to have it's second runway then?

Since the agreement not to build one was between the BAA and West Sussex Council. Dunno how it stands legally, but look at all that empty space to the South of the existing runway, then tell me it hasn't been planned for years.

IMHO, probably good news for LGW not to be owned by the BAA. :ok:

[VAFFPAX]

Hochtief is a good match... Hamburg has turned into quite a nice airport, and from past experience, Düsseldorf is just as good. Hochtief has extensive construction experience, so can draw on its own other divisions to make extensive improvements on the airport.

Virgin has always pointed out that they want to buy Gatwick as part of a consortium, not alone.

S.

[Re-Heat]

You are right - my understanding is that the agreement not to build the second runway would be null and void under any new owner.

[helldog]

I bid £622M. Looking for an investor to back me to the tune of £622M, PM me:ok:

[Capot]

But doesnt that Mean when It sold that they Become unregulated and then they can charge what they like,Gatwick would remain regulated...it's its size, not its ownership, that's the key factor.

Ironic, isn't it, that after BAA played very foul to have Redhill kicked into touch in 2003 as a potential feeder for LGW, but also a potential monopoly-breaker, and the Department of Transport - Alistair Darling - bowed to BAA's demands to protect their monopoly, BAA's new Spanish owners are now exploiting that to maximise the asset realisation values, of which Gatwick is only the first to be realised for cash from the highest bidder, regardless of who that will be.

We need to ask ourselves why it's Gatwick that's being disposed of first. A sale of Stansted may provide better competition for Gatwick and thus reduce its value. But a sale of Gatwick will not affect Stansted's already poor open-market value.

A sale of Heathrow can safely be put off until last without reducing whatever value it has now. It was only ever an exercise in buying some badly managed assets, adding some superficial value, or simply letting the value increase in a growing market, and selling to maximise the gain as a short-term investment.

Would the present perceived slow-down in growth have anything to do with the timing? Of course it would; BAA's owners could and would have ignored the Competition Commission's "recommendations" if it suited them.

I give it 5-10 years before we see the Spaniards marching off into the sunset with their cash, having continued the DfT's work of destroying any hope London ever had of a viable, prosperous and coherent airport system.

[condorbaaz]

maybe Vjay Mallaya will buy it?

[VAFFPAX]

BAA won't get rid of LHR, ever. Whether Ferrovial will get rid of BAA after relieving BAA of some of its airports is another matter altogether... but that's a thing to wonder about after the banking crisis is over.

:-)

S.

[hangten]

I bid £622M. Looking for an investor to back me to the tune of £622M, PM me

I just checked my bank account and I can't afford it. :{ I do get paid a week on Friday though so I'll let you know...

Personally I don't think Branson has any interest in buying a large stake in the airport - it's purely a publicity exercise. Although if some conglomerate said they'd put Virgin's name on it for a measley percentage I could be proved wrong.

[marchino61]

Personally I can only see Ferrovial as a big loser here. Each individual airport is worth less when not part of a monopoly and the credit crunch just makes matters worse for them. They did not have the political nous to see that while BAA was "British" a monopoly was acceptable, but became unacceptable as soon as a foreign company took over.

[PAXboy]

Before all the RB haters jump in, it is reported that VS would be interested in part of a consortium. That means a minority role with their staff closely involved NOT to have RB sitting at the top of the table. But don't let that stop a good rant. :rolleyes:

It is certainly very sensible of BAA to get on with the sale now in their own time, rather than wait to be forced. The local residents will already be with their lawyers going over the small print of their agreement.

In the BBC report there is an amusing quote:However there were misgivings at the Unite trade union, whose national officer, Steve Turner, said: "It simply beggars belief that a 'For Sale' sign can be hung across the country's second largest airport. "Gatwick is a core component of the national infrastructure and an essential part of the UK's aviation sector, yet it is to be flogged off with little care for the wider social impact."Mr Turner is a bit late. The Conservative govt sold it off 'with little care for the wider social impact' 20 years ago!

[Out Of Trim]

Well, my crystal ball could see the likes of Emirates buying Gatwick up and building a London super-hub for themselves.

I expect they can afford to outbid anyone else!

Perhaps, it could also afford to seriously upgrade the infrastructure, to attract some major carriers back to LGW from LHR and get some income from them! :E

[One9iner]

Vermin.. a slight off topic question here but for what reasons do you feel VA will be on the ropes in 6 months or so?

[fivegreenlight]

Actually i'm going to buy it.
Then sack all the security staff and employ humans.
Then make sure the airport has more than 1.5 ambulifts.....:ugh:

or maybe just have really pretty women in security, or...
boy this is going to be fun. :}

[Jox]

Bit of drift going on here chaps but back to the rumour, here's one for you.

News whispered in my shell intimates that any consortium will have a majority made up from the construction company Laing O'Rourke.

Taking over an operation the size of LGW with all the immediate compliance measures would need a steady hand at the helm.

A search of Mr Google would appear to add a little weight with the former managing director of LHR, one Mr Tony Douglas who left BAA to take over as the Chief Operating Officer of the construction giant in a prime seat, assisted by the recently departed Heathrow MD Mark Bullock who has only just joined Laing O'Rourke.

Now if Donna Boote, Mr Bullock’s significant other and a recent departee from the role of security manager at LHR were to be employed by the new operating company, well I never.

If it smells like smoke and looks like smoke - it might just be smoke !

I'm back off to Irish Paddy's betting site to have a few quid on this one.

You heard it on PPRuNe first :E

[VAFFPAX]

The Gatwick campaigners (NoGaR) have vowed to renew their efforts to stop any future plans for a second runway at Gatwick:

BBC NEWS | England | Sussex | Vow to fight extra Gatwick runway (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/7622481.stm)

Clearly they are aware that the deal between BAA and West Sussex County will be null and void once the airport is sold, which would leave the future owners open to pitch Gatwick as a viable alternative to Heathrow, which could lead to a second runway.

So the whole farce goes back to square one.

S.

[Dairyground]

If the Gatwick locals don't want a second runway (and the Heathrow locals don't want a third), then the train journey to BHX is only a little longer (less than 20 minutes from parts of central London) and likely to be further reduced over the next few months.

Would a bit of marketing from the West Midlands, to both passengers and airlines, depress the price that Ferrovial et al are expecting to get for Gatwick?

[Skipness One Echo]

If the Gatwick locals don't want a second runway (and the Heathrow locals don't want a third), then the train journey to BHX is only a little longer (less than 20 minutes from parts of central London) and likely to be further reduced over the next few months.

Yes let's all fly from Birmingham. Can't think why I never thought of that. Genius. I guess if you take the northernmost part of the M25 then it might be 20 minutes nearer to BHX than LGW, but that's quite seriously clutching at straws.

[Guern]

Fly Green I like your style!

Maybe subcontract security to Hooters?

[True Blue]

Mexicana to launch lgw - Mexico City early jan 09. A little good news for lgw at last.

True Blue

[Spitfire boy]

Wait and see about MX.

[True Blue]

Well, the flights are available on their web site for booking, are you suggesting that they might not operate as shown on the site?

True blue

[SuanLum]

Just read this news on LGW website and business traveller mag but so far nothing on QR website and no message sent to me yet(got a booking later this year)
Was this as sudden as it seems and is there anything behind it?

[LGWWelsh]

It was planned to happen, Continental are ceasing operations at LGW from today, therefore check-in and aircraft parking have become available from tomorrow.

[colinwebster]

Gatwick had lost quite a lot of routes recently with XL and Sterling both stopping. easyJet have so far only taken up Copenhagen, but today I saw this:

Cimber air has announced a new service to Billund (http://tinyurl.com/5w365g)

Anyone know what A/C this will be on ?

[VICKERS VC10]

In amadeus, it shows operating with CRJ (CANADAIR REGINAL JET 200)

VICKERS VC10

[flyer55]

Is easyjet going to move out of north terminal to south and consolidate their operation into one terminal !

[stalling attitude]

according to the beeb Easy and Virgin are looking at making a joint bid for Gatwick.

[davidjohnson6]

If just 2 airlines (along with some financial backer) were to bid for LGW wouldn't there be a risk of a conflict of interest occuring somewhere ?

If there are 10 significant sized airlines in an ownership consotrium, it becomes much harder for any single airline to ask for some sort of preferential terms. Yes, the CAA can put in all sorts of regulatory rules - but it can't police every internal meeting. Put in enough rules, and the whole organisation becomes overly bureaucratic and incapable of adapting to customer demand.

If you're part of LGW senior management and both (for example) VS and ZB were trying to get hold of the same resource - could you really put hand on heart and always act completely objectively ?

[Nubboy]

Are you saying that we already have impartial treatment throughout the BAA group? Just try saying that to the non BA passengers at LHR with the chaos they're going to have over the next 4 years.

[davidjohnson6]

Whether BAA treat BA differently or not is a debatable point, but because BA do not have a substantial equity ownership of BAA / Ferrovial, it makes it harder to claim conflict of interest as oppoosed to simply giving your biggest customer a better deal.

From what I can tell, most private companies in the world give their big-spending customers better terms. Where discretion permits, do Fraport really not sometimes try to make things slightly easier for LH, or AdP for AF ? I can't think of any long-haul airlines which don't have some sort of loyalty scheme.

If just a couple of airlines (who happen to be amongst the bigger customers) have a significant equity stake as well - then in my opinion the likes of Monarch, Thomson and others would be justified in publicly complaining about conflict of interest rather than the milder "they take more interest in their biggest spending customers"

[kriskross]

A number of UK airlines already are large investors in NATS, but I don't see any favouratism. UK ATC is as even handed to everyone as always - unlike some others I could mention.

[davidjohnson6]

7 airlines jointly hold 42% of the shares in NATS - thus diluting the influence of any single airline. Further, staff hold 5% and the Govt holds 49% plus a golden share - thus largely overriding the commercial interests of any single airline.

This is not to say there is absolutely zero conflict of interest for NATS senior management - but it appears to be quite small.

In comparison, Easy+Virgin being principal members of a consortium bidding to own an airport might raise significantly more conflict of interest

[wakeup]

Who owns the other 4% less 1 share?

[niknak]

I'm not sure if this has been thought through clearly.

Gatwick would be owned by a separate company which would have to suitably distanced from both Easy & Virgin Management and Directors to satisfy competition rules.
This isn't a case of both airlines taking an equity stake in another airline, they're proposing taking on a major UK business with many existing customers and different types of businesses on ONE site who aren't going tolerate any crap.

If they do make a successful bid, to run Gatwick properly on a day to day basis they're going to have to appoint much stronger and more astute management and directors than currently exist at either airline.

[davidjohnson6]

niknak - I agree that the company running LGW will have to be on an arm's length basis from EZY / VS. However, I still suspect that there will be a perception of conflict of interest.

Does anyone know how Plymouth separates airport operations from those of AirSouthWest, given that Sutton Harbour essentially runs both companies ? I'm guessing this may not be the best example as no other scheduled airlines currently fly there.

wakeup - BAA own the other 4% of the shares in NATS. The golden share exists so that the Govt essentially have a veto on anything they consider strategic

[racedo]

If they do make a successful bid, to run Gatwick properly on a day to day basis they're going to have to appoint much stronger and more astute management and directors than currently exist at either airline.

Given the actions of Stelios with the board of Easyjet do you think the city is more likely or less likely to want to fund a bid by him.

Gut instinct is it will be less likely as irrespective of what he has done before the bullying of a board by its biggest shareholder will inspire no confidence from the fund managers.

Their viewpoint is if he treats Senior Board like this will our £X million stake get treated the same way.

[Skipness One Echo]

It's being reported that NWA are pulling Detriot from January. Anyone confirm?

[Seljuk22]

NW will drop DTW (5th Jan) and SEA (8th Jan).

[virginblue]

Both Flybe and Aer Lingus have filed slot requests with the German slot-coordinator for flights from DUS to LGW with the E195 and the A320 respectively. EI is only a once-daily midday service, so LGW might be just a dummy for something else (BFS?). Because of the scarcity of slots at DUS, none of the requests has been met so far.

Would be nice to get back a DUS route from LGW. The route has a long tradition and was served by BCal Commuter, Air Europe, Cityflyer etc. A while ago there were flights from DUS/MGL to LHR, LCY, STN, LGW and LTN by seven airlines, now we are down to four airlines, no service to LTN and LGW and STN facing a downgrade to the 78-seat DHC8-Q400 in 2009.

[TCASIII]

How is it downgrade?? More like an upgrade!! The Q400 is far more state of the art than the old 737's BA have. It is here to stay & seems to be making money!!

[virginblue]

Capacity-wise.

I was talking about the overall LON-DUS market, and not only have some routes disappeared, but also on others capacity has been reduced. LHR by BA used to be 757/767 and is now mostly Airbus, STN used to be 100 or 150 seater with Air Berlin and will now be reduced to a 78 seater. Plus the loss of LGW-DUS, LTN-MGL and LCY-MGL (and, if you want so, due to the proximity of the two, LHR-CGN by BA, LTN-CGN by X3, LGW-CGN by 4U/BA).

[west lakes]

I hear (via airline staff) that in the recent wet weather about 50 cars may be written off after the staff car park flooded.

Apparently the affected area is know by BAA to have a history of flooding and there used to be signs around the area warning of this that have now been removed.

BAA are denying all responsibility or liability and apparently are trying to blame the airlines for not warning staff of the no liability clause.

Notwithstanding the fact that BAA will not let staff park elsewhere!

[Easy Ryder]

Luckily i escaped that day by parking further down closer to the entrance. I normally park in the flooded areas....

If I was one of those few with written off cars i'd be getting my insurance company onto the BAA. They're liable and there's definitely no signage to warn of flood risks.

I was also never made aware that area was a flood risk when i collected my car park pass from the BAA offices.

To say its the airlines fault is a joke!

[mmeteesside]

Who runs the car park? BAA
So therefore who's responsibility is it to tell people about possible risks? Not the airlines is it...
:rolleyes:

[racedo]

Which car park ?

[Woofrey]

There is more than one staff car park, which one did the flood occur in ?

[west lakes]

Car Par X..................

[jetset lady]

It's more than a few with written off cars I'm afraid and BAA are refusing to accept responsibility at all, blaming the owner of the river, the contractors they employed for dumping rubbish in the river, the airlines etc. In fact, everyone but themselves!

Good old BAA. 2 cxxk ups at Gatwick in 4 days! :mad:

[lgwsfg]

Hey all

By sounds of it what i have heard 300 cars were involved int he flooding, with at least 70 been written off as we speak!

BAA are fully accountable for this, we need to get all airlines all staff involved in this mighty BAA cok up to get together and fight the BAA!

Anyone who is affected by this please post on here any updates, how many of your airlines/company employees are affected, so that we can get proper figures to all that need them!

lgwsfg

[racedo]

Thought you were talking of Sth Term B Nth along the railway which has flooded before.

[wiccan]

Had "similar" probs at Manch [area 5].....moved to T2 [public] cp...
bb

[Turnberry]

BAA charge the airline company for the privilege of the airline employee parking in this car park so, surely, it must be BAA liability for the damage.

If the BAA wish to blame someone else (a local landowner) then they must, in turn, claim against the landowner.

The BAA will have insurance for such things happening on their property.

[pamann]

Pam would also like to know "where not to park" in X car park :*

Can anyone advise where/which parts to steer clear of? Of course it's BAA's fault, time they took some responsibility!

[JB007]

Having been off for a few days and also a user of the delightful 'X'...this is just disgusting. I hope some people get some money out of the BAA for this.

Head right down to the bottom guys, last bus stop, never seen it flooded down there and you can overtake the inbound busses and still catch it!!!!! (Nobody really does 30 on Perimeter Road South right!?!)

[lgwsfg]

JB

Dont park down at the last bus stop, thats where all the flooding was! Right from Row 1 through to 8!!!

So do not go anywhere near there!!!!

lgwsfg