British Airways Regional routes to BACE at Manchester

[SQ7000]

Just heard that British Airways Regional at Manchester are to give most of their remaining routes to British Airways CitiExpress.

Consequences - 20 Pilots and 60 Cabin Crew at BAR must go.

BACE to takeover all routes to Milan, Dusseldorf, Amsterdam and more.

No bigger planes just the 145’s and 146.

Looks like those BACE guys and gals will just be working harder.

------------------
The road of life is rocky and you might stumble too, but as you point your finger someone else is judging you.

[Curious Pax]

Wonder what they are going to do with the 10 737-500s that they have just completed introducing at MAN. From the unscientific sample of reasonably regular personal experience transferring the AMS route comes as no surprise - I don't think I've been on a 737 flight with more that 40 passengers! CitiExpress will need a few more E145s though I should imagine to cover it all.

[160to4DME]

The first -500 leaves MAN in November.

Sounds like the final wind down of BA at MAN.

[Uncle Albert]

Heard rumour that CityFlyers RJ 100's would be transferring to Manchester by the end of this year. Good news for all the CityFlyer staff who signed a BA contract to work anywhere BA see fit.

[Positive Climb]

160to4DME - you are incorrect - four 737-500's will leave MAN in summer 2002. No aircraft will be leaving this year.

------------------
"After V1, we'll take the emergency into the air - You call 'Positive Climb' and I'll ask for the gear up. We'll climb away at between V2 and V2 + 25"

[160to4DME]

Positive Climb, I bow to your better knowledge. I was only repeating what I'd been told yesterday in work.
Irrespective of the date, does this signal a further running down of BA MAN's operation, or is there a replacement coming ?

[Katoi]

Uncle Albert.

Thanks for the info even if it is complete bollux. By the way no one has signed anything yet!!

[Positive Climb]

160to4DME,

as such there is no 'running down' of the BA operation at MAN. The only changes is the use of smaller (50 seater) aircraft replacing the current 737-500's. BA have made no indication that they will be reducing the number or frequency of the routes at MAN.
Of course it has serious implications for BA 'mainline' pilots who are curently based there, but as such, the only difference to the flying public is that they will now be transported in 'cigar tubes' that can't land if its foggy ;-)

------------------
"After V1, we'll take the emergency into the air - You call 'Positive Climb' and I'll ask for the gear up. We'll climb away at between V2 and V2 + 25"

[FO Nigetrussoxide]

It's a disaster both for Pilots , Cabin crew and passengers alike!

[judge11]

Why?

And remember....
DON'T BELIEVE ANYTHING UNTIL IT HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY DENIED

[pdc7]

it already has been officially denied, last week and low and low and behold it was official on tuesday, 4 737-500 down to lgw by march next year routes to be operated by cfe

[160to4DME]

...and at the risk of being flamed again, I again heard today, from a different source, that the first will go in November, with 4 gone by end April 2002.

Let's wait and see........ http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/frown.gif

[This message has been edited by 160to4DME (edited 28 June 2001).]

[bertieb]

No I have it on good authority that we will be operating the winter with 10 737-500 in Manch if they can get them all to work at the same time!
But they did say a couple of weeks ago that we would be getting the A318,so far be it from me to belive a word a BA manager says.
Its only a matter of time till Bace have 737's and we are off to British London Airways . http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/frown.gif

[MrUppity]

judge 11

I'll tell you why it's a disaster if it is'nt obvious to you.
80 families of the pilots and cabin crew involved, plus many more probably to follow, will have their lives turned upside down for no good reason, other than that London Airways as it should be known chooses not to market their services from anywhere but London. They will find that this fails dismally in the long run as the paying customers go elsewhere in Europe to transfer as overcrowded and under-invested Heathrow dies a slow but certain death.
From the passenger point of view, they will pay more to fly on smaller aircraft operated by third level operators purporting to be BA.

Now do you see why it's a disaster?

[southern softy]

curious pax,

I might be able to help you as to why the ams flight only has about 40 pax on it.
Anyone with any financial sense travels 20 min west along the M56 and pays considerably less for the same distance travelled( minus 20 miles)You can only fit a few frills in one hour.
:rolleyes:

[minogue]

or Mr uppity as the reality is likely to be
if this happens....
1) the majority of flight crew / cabin crew reductions will be achieved by natural wastage, i.e. leavers to bigger and better things, pregnancy, promotions to other fleets
....
2) the flights continue to be operated by BA (cityexpress is 100% owned)

3) passenger suffers only in that he now is likely to have somebody sitting next to him instead of sitting in splendid isolation

4) capacity being matched to demand means shock horror routes may actually make a profit, something BAR manchester has consistently failed to do, meaning ....

5) in the long run there is a future for BA in Manchester

[This message has been edited by minogue (edited 28 June 2001).]

[judge11]

MrUpitty

I suggest that the aircrew and cabin crew of BACE might take exception to be referred to as 'third level'. There will be many in BRAL and Brymon, too, who are going to have to face great change in their circumstances as a result of the creation of BACE; many do not enjoy the over-protection and copious benefits of BA.

When big fish eat little fish, indegestion is bound to follow for all concerned and 'Nigels' are not immune.

[Amazon man]

Mr Uppity,

Whether you like it or not Brymon/British Regional ie BA CitiExpress is part of British Airways now and although I may have misinterpreted your posting if I haven't then I for one would take great offence to being described as an employee of a third level airline.

I can assure you that we fly to as high a standard as BA mainline if not higher and please lets not forget that it was BA that approached British Regional originally regarding the franchise and then again in relation to their purchase of us.

We may fly small aircraft but the simple facts are that they make money lots of it, and as a result we have been consistently profitable. These small aircraft build thin routes which are then grown to a point when they can support larger aircraft as evidenced in the recent return to BA Regional of the Manchester Milan route.

I am very sorry to hear that some BA crews will be forced to change base and uproot their families if this becomes the case, but it happens all the time within many other airlines and at least they will get to keep their jobs.

[behind_the_second_midland]

Uppitty

I fully agree. having experienced that foul little aeroplane on a couple of occasions and not having been able to put my bag in an overhead locker I feel sorry for the business pax (already playing hell with the so-called Club Europe operated on these things).
Manchester has indeed been given the lethal injection by London with Birmingham to survive (BHX to get the A318, their 319's to LHR).BA will bein Manchester but in name only offering a sub standard service to an unsuspecting public. Sad times. As I recently pointed out to a senior manager at MAN. If you can't make money from that airport with that catchment area when crews are operating at "market rate" then either management are incompetent ot its a London policy.

BTSM

[chubbs]

The solution is obvious - merge BACE with BAR and bring everyone's terms of service up to those of BAR. No I don't think that will happen either but it was a nice thought!

[MrUppity]

Chubbs

I fully agree with your suggestion, but also feel that it is very unlikely to happen. Putting BACE on BAR terms and conditions would solve the problem, with some additional cost in terms of flight crew and cabin crew, but cancelling these out would be the large savings in required management and administration costs, as well as keeping training (conversion) costs and relocation costs down.
Of course, the passengers would still be subjected to small aircraft, and as southern softly said more will choose to go to LPL to travel on larger airliners.

I apologise if my reference to third level operators was taken to be derogatory, it was merely meant that the operators who will fly the routes will not be major airlines or even operators of boeing/airbus size jets, not a reflection in any way on the operating standards of these airlines.

I would say to those who seem keen to leap in to the lower paid positions that will be created by this closure that they should consider the future. Many presumably are only using BACE as a stepping stone, and as these jobs on BA terms amd conditions disappear it may be themselves who find that they are stuck at the BACE level.

[overstress]

Meanwhile, BA continue to watch as operators such as Emirates establish new regional routes right under their noses. I know Emirates have an onward route structure from Dubai, but they are growing their BHX-DXB so fast that they are thinking of replacing the 330 with a 777. (Rumour source: an Emirates Aussie A330 capt I spoke with the other day whilst visiting Flt Deck)

Sadly BA seem unable to look beyond the palm-fringed shores of Waterside and I doubt the Marketing Dept even know they have 'bases' further north than the A4.

[kala87]

Taking a quick look at BA schedules, I was surprised to see that they actually operate more flights to continental europe destinations out of BHX than MAN, many of them by A319.

Surely BA are being squeezed by EZY and KLM-UK on MAN-AMS. The many pax transferring at AMS will naturally choose KLM-UK, and for the rest there is a frequent cheaper alternative from LPL ie EZY.

[FO Nigetrussoxide]

MrUppity + Overstress, good postings.

The problem is that BA marketing /sales fail at their tasks - and the subsequent axe falls on the pilots + cabin crew of Manchester.

[MarkD]

I suspect the LHR-centric PHB's consider BA marketing doing an *excellent* job in encouraging people not to fly from MAN...

[160to4DME]

Mr A Tis

Couldn't agree more.

When presented with these accusations, BA hit back with the claim that their dedication to MAN is backed up by Terminal 3, which incidentally isn't big enough to handle all One World operations. Pathetic.

BA have long viewed MAN as little more than a feeder point for LHR, a policy which the general public have woken up to finally.
It seems the falling number of connecting passengers is being reflected in the downturn in pax on their shuttle, whilst bmi are seeing business loads on their own MAN-LHR services soar.
Why should you have to go via LON to get to EWR, PHL, MCO, ATL, ISB, DXB, MAU, ATH, LCA, BUD, HKG, SIN, BOM, IST, etc etc etc etc when other airlines offer point to point service ?

However, it is refreshing to see that one of the country's major airports isn't dominated by the national carrier.

Long may BA neglect MAN.

My patronage of them ceased when they pressured Qantas to terminate their MAN service and put pax on a "Qantas" 737 to LHR instead.

Perhaps when the plans for Star Alliance at MAN start to come online someone from BA might sit up and realise there is life north of London-Solihull Airport.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to enjoy the choice and better service offered by the many airlines who have shown the b a l l s to launch service to MAN where BA have not.

[Mr A Tis]

Well, this is no real surprise from BA who have never been committed to Manchester in any way. :mad:
They dropped MAN-Orlando,where Virgin manage six times a week, dropped Islamabad where PIA manage about 14 flights a week, dropped Hong Kong where Cathay manage daily.
You can't get on the B737 to Rome most days as it's full - but they won't increase the service, Iberia to BCN is nearly always full, but BAR will only serve BCN from BHX not MAN, Emirates daily direct DXB nearly always full - no BA option.
With the right equipment & marketing you can make money long haul from the below decks traffic, ie cargo, before you even think of the passenger side.
Lufthansa have a good network for medium / longhaul routes from the German regions.
BA = London Airways, their only interest is to shuttle to LHR. However, the punters these days much prefer to transit via AMS or FRA if there are no direct services from MAN.
Thank god for EK, IB, SIA, CX, MS, AC, CSA, PGA, PIA,AA, USA, DAL COA & BMI etc
As for the Barbie jet, http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/eek.gif well, it may be nice to fly-but for the humble pax it's awful - no headroom, no leg room, cramped, & no room for cabin baggage. To try & provide club service is laughable, though no fault of the hard pressed two cabin crew.
In fact I have a friend who just will not fly on the E145, preferring longer routings to the claustophobic feeling he gets on the Barbie. Of course this means in effect he rarely flies BA / BAR
At least the CRJ has more room ( 4 abreast) more headroom & more cabin bag space, alas, I expect they are more expensive to buy.
Bring back the Viscount for some comfort factor ! :)
In the long term, it's probably better that BA get off the scene & leave it to those actually interested in developing direct services from MAN

[This message has been edited by Mr A Tis (edited 30 June 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Mr A Tis (edited 30 June 2001).]

[airforcenone]

Mr A Tis,

Don't know if you remember the BHX-JFK service which ended a couple of years ago?

The flight was practically paid for by belly cargo, the pax generated a profit. However, this relied on them using a 767. After a couple of seasons, London wouldn't release one so they ended up with a 757 which doesn't have the cargo capacity. I can't remember the exact figures but the 757 required a load factor >100% (people sitting on the wing I guess!) in order to break even! Smart planning there eh?

------------------
Just want to say good luck, we're all counting on you .......

[MrUppity]

Very true airforcenone.

They did exactly the same in Glasgow with their New York service, as well as failing to market it.
Continental are now doing very nicely on the route with a DC10.

[160to4DME]

And the same story surrounded the MAN-LAX.

One bigwig said at the time that had they been able to lease a 763 off the general market at a competetive rate, they would have been able to make money on the route.

Instead the aircraft came from inhouse...and the rest is history http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/frown.gif