Long haul services from MAN/regional airports

[Luke Mc]

Hello. .How come, has BA concentrated its long haul services at London for a long time, and has not offered services direct from MAN and other regional airports. This is a marked contrast with other European airlines, especially Lufthansa, which has annonced it is to considerably expant its long haul services from its secondary hub, Munich, even in the wake of the new climate.. .Luke

[gofer]

Could have something to do with the mentality of those North and South of the 'Watford Gap'?. . [quote] What MAN does today, LON thinks tomorrow ! <hr></blockquote>

No I didn't say that Southpaws are 'Thick' - but it might just be a possible conclusion you would draw.

[Thunderbug]

British Airways does fly a daily MAN-JFK. Uses a 2 class (Club + Economy) 767. Rumours as to wether this will continue after March are mixed. Apparently AA were going to take the route - but with the ending of the alliance - who knows....

Not much to offer in their defence and I don't know why they don't fly other long haul services - except the usual excuse that the routes don't make money.

Previously they have flown LHR-MAN-ISB (747). MAN-LAX (767). BHX-GLA-JFK (757).

[Confirmed Must Ride]

On the GLA/BHX routes they couldnt compete with CO, who are upgrading the GLA route to B767

[682ft AMSL]

Simple economics I guess. The money in long-haul is to be made from premium-fare pax, for which the market from MAN is smaller. This is due to a) the demographics of the area vs the South East b)the fact that the market from the north is generally one-way (e.g UK originating pax and return) unlike London which benefits from inbound business and tourist traffic and c) MAN's wider catchment area (which it relies on for long-haul services) includes areas served by regional airports offering inter-lining services via LHR, AMS etc.

. .The successful trans-atlantic routes ex-MAN are those which are flown by airlines as 'spokes' feeds into their 'hub' airports in the US. e.g. DL/ATL, CO/EWR, etc. They are high volume, low yield routes. Even if BA decided to forget the premium pax and tried to compete with this sort of service ex-MAN, it would be unable to do so without a code-share agreement with a US partner.

[ 06 February 2002: Message edited by: 682ft AMSL ]</p>

[Ringwayman]

When the first BA/AA alliance outcome was expected to be announced, an article in the Manchester Evening News Business Section (dated 7th July 1998) appeared, of which the below is an extract:

"Tom Horton (AA V-P Europe) spoke of the benefits it will bring at the launch of their Dallas flights. He said, "Manchester has been a good market for us and I am confident Dallas will be too. I expect Miami services will be looked at next year and the alliance will bring a number of the other possilbilites including services to Boston, Los Angeles and more to JFK and Chicago. The alliance will mean that we can link up with the BA European hub at Manchester, where it has 70 departures a day.

"People flying from all over Europe to America will be able to connect at Manchester instead of having to go to Gatwick or Heathrow."

[Hand Solo]

Unfortunately the BA management mentality is that there is no life north of Watford, and all those backward Northerners want to travel to London to connect but they just don't know it. The BHX-JFK service used to operate profitably with a 767. It had enough performance to get out of Birminghams short runway with frequently a full load of cargo, much of it expensive time critical goods from the nearby JCB plant. With that cargo on board any pax were pure profit. Sadly our short sighted fleet planners in London wanted their 767 back and subbed it for a 757 - underpowered and unable to carry cargo with a decent load of pax and transatlantic fuel. Result - a profitable route bombed within months.

I should add that had the BA-AA alliance gone ahead then our American transfer pax would be most unimpressed by our offerings at Manchester. Imagine going all that way only to stand on the apron in the rain and have all your hand luggaged removed from you as you got on an Embraer!

[ 06 February 2002: Message edited by: Hand Solo ]</p>

[Porky Speedpig]

628 has it spot-on (fancy a job when we've cleared out Waterside?!).. .Other routes tried since 1975, YMX, YYZ, MCO, BGI even EWR (Airtours B707) and JFK-BOS extension, the story has always been the same, Economy class full, pretty good Cargo loads as Hand testifies but ****** all up the front except Ppruners.. .And we now know what happens to BA when those up front stay away don't we........

[Georgeablelovehowindia]

In the late sixties and early seventies, there was the BA537/8. This was a BOAC Standard VC10 service. It went MAN PIK JFK BDA ANU BGI POS GEO and back. Enough nice destinations for you? It was, of course, a complete and utter nightmare! Spare a thought also for the staff in ANU and BDA. By the time the Iron Duck reached them, in either direction, the loadsheet and seat plan were a bit of a fairy story. To add to the fun, scheduled turnround times were forty five minutes, except at JFK and GEO. The flightdeck and cabin crew also operated to different slip patterns, WOT a shame!

[liam lord]

Yeah 682 is spot on.

Only thing he forgot to mention is that MAN is getting too uppity for it's own good. Any other provincial town full of drug crazed no-marks would only be interested in long-haul flights to Jamaica.

Hey sorted <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

[HOVIS]

Sickboy, . .That explains why Air Jamaica are starting an A340 service to MAN this Summer then!

[Unwell_Raptor]

If Air Jamaica are going to fly to MAN, Customs had better recruit a few more officers and dogs, because the JM flights to London sometimes have ten percent or more of their pax carrying drugs, usually cocaine.

[TURIN]

Excellent!!

Something to spend my six grand redundancy on then! <img src="mad.gif" border="0">

[ 07 February 2002: Message edited by: FESS ]</p>

[Onan]

682 is right on the money. MAN routes to/from NA are Mother/Daughter routes. Manchester is a destination airport, meaning the vast majority of it's passengers are destined/originate in it's catchement area. In fact, with easyJets routes and Ryanairs proposed 12 routes into Europe, Liverpool will become a more attractive proposition for longhaul flights/airlines whose pax are connecting on to Europe.. .I wonder if Liverpool Airport management have looked at this potential marketing bonanza!

[Georgeablelovehowindia]

Is 09/27 at Liverpool still 2286 metres/7500 ft? That's a bit short for longhaul operations.

[Onan]

I didn't know that there was no concrete or tar macadam left in the United Kingdom to lenghten runways. Oh well, I meant well. Sorry about that! <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">

[Georgeablelovehowindia]

It isn't the cubic metres of concrete available, Onan, but the length of the public enquiry, before they would be allowed to pour it (or not)in the first place!

[dwlpl]

"Is 09/27 at Liverpool still 2286 metres/7500 ft? That's a bit short for longhaul operations."

It currenly is 7500ft in length. But you never know what the future has in store <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

[Caslance]

"But you never know what the future has in store"

True...Stelios b*ggering off to Blackpool if the Ryanair agreement puts his nose out of joint too much, maybe?? <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

[Porky Speedpig]

Just remembered another cracker from circa 1984.. .MAN-MUC-DXB-BKK-HKG and return BA21/22 if I remember rightly - Tristar 200. Lasted two seasons at the most then 747 took over as an extension of LHR service for a bit.

[chiglet]

Porky. .Look at the c/s.....BA <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> . .QF [BA] .... gone. .BA to LAX ....gone. .BUT. .BD...ORD. .BD...IAD. .UAL..PHL. .DAL..ATL. .Go via LHR...WHY <img src="tongue.gif" border="0"> . .we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[Porky Speedpig]

Chiglet - a few others have tried and failed as well as I recall... Air India, Cathay, Malaysian (albeit coming back after drop off in sales at MUFC Megastore so my contacts in KL tell me (!), South African..etc.. .Anything new on the horizon?

[jocko0102]

All things considered any airport outside the be all and end all that is the London/SE area should be congratulated!.We are all aware that Manchester and the North west do not have as many affluent people up here and yes we also have people who take drugs,use guns,rob etc but Manchester Airport has done very well to build up the airlines it has flying from it along with 20 million passengers a year, not bad for us up North!As far as airlines that have been and gone etc that happens everywhere, im sure every time a nice shiney jet takes off from Heathrow its not always full.I have been lucky to fly BA first and club on numerous flights and they had more staff and upgrades than full paying passengers each time.The difference between Heathrow and Manchester or any other airport is they will probably keep flying out of Heathrow at a loss because the slots are more valuable there than for example Manchester.

[Onan]

Hey Jocko. .you said that "all things considered any airport outside the London/SE should be congratulated". Of course this will include the Peel Holdings property, Liverpool John Lennon Airport, or do you draw the line at Wigan? :) :)

[jocko0102]

Yes Onan that includes congrats to the scousers although never the footy clubs!

[Onan]

Jocko. .My wife (a Merseysider) asks me to remind you that Liverpool FC is STILL the most succesful team in England and Everton FC is the fourth most succesfull team in England and between them have more trophies than any other two teams from the same city anywhere in England. However my team is the most succesful club in all of sport. That is the Montreal Canadiens Hockey Team. Go Habs Go!

[EGCC4284]

Peel Holdings now own the land that Barton is sat on. Lets just hope it stays that way <img src="frown.gif" border="0"> <img src="frown.gif" border="0">

[jocko0102]

I am aware of how good the scouse teams track record is.Unfortunately we have ManCity that scuppers any plan Manchester has of stealing the LIVERPOOL/EVERTON crown.. .I have read that potential plans for Manchesters small airfield is a race course and maybe a new airfield along with it.

[Anti Skid On]

Malaysia Airlines (I have been reliably informed) will be back into EGCC soon, at least in advance of the commonwealth games. Never quite undestood why they went from a 772 to a 744, because the 744 always seemed to be half full, but the 772 packed out!

[Ringwayman]

I believe MAS had between 75% and 80% loads on the 747s, and are expected back on the 2nd April.

[682ft AMSL]

...but the crucial thing is the yields, not the loads in isolation Ringwayman (see start of thread).

If the route regularly fills 3/4 of the available seats, yet was one of the first batch of routes that MAS axed post Sept-11th, that suggests to me that from a financial perspective, it is operating on or around the margins.

682

[Scottie Dog]

Interest to hear last year that a good number - anything upto 30-40 passengers per flight were transferring onwards to the Continent from the inbound Malaysian flight to Manchester. The majority of these went to Brussels.

Nice to see Manchester being used as a transit point rather than just 'end-to-end' traffic. Before anyone else makes comment, I accept that this was probably at a very low 'add-on', but that is the way operations from most major european hubs operate, whether it be with AF/BA or LH - they all offer nett fares from any point other than their home base.

Regards

Scottie Dog

[682ft AMSL]

Which is why Scottie, I'm always staggered to hear so many people on your side of the Pennines 'demanding' that MAPLC should get a large scale low cost operation going at MAN - despite the fact it would damage a good number of the domestic and short-haul feeder services that are vital to MAN's ambitions to establish itself as a hub airport.

682

[Onan]

Heathrow/Gatwick, Amsterdam, Brussels, Copenhagen not to mention the fact that neither BA or BD have a credible "onward" domestic/European network out of Manchester means that MAN is doomed to be a "bucket and spade" airport. Why would a pax flying from Newark (or any other point), connect through Manchester to Paris then on to Nice, when he could just make one connection in Paris? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[Ringwayman]

Perhaps a JFK-MAN-NCE routing on BA could be the tonic!

Go to <a href="http://fly.to/northwest-spotters" target="_blank">info on northwest England airports</a> and check out the airport statistics to see the breadth of scheduled services that are available at MAN.

[Onan]

OK Ringwayman, so i'm wrong. So you tell me!! Why is it that Manchester is considered a "bucket & spade", "mothers & daughters" airport by all but proponents of Manchester airport?. .I did visit your suggested site and still found Manchester airport to have FAR less connections to UK domestic destinations than London or even Amsterdam. So, when I need to arrive at UK destinations other than Manchester, I will use Amsterdam where I can connect to, among others, Liverpool, Newcastle, Glasgow, East Midlands, Birmingham, London (LHR/LGW), Belfast and even Manchester.

[chiglet]

Onan,. .As has been [repeatedly] stated before, Manchester is less than 21/2 hours by car or tain from non-[air] served destinations. Except the South West of the country. So IF you want to go to AMS, extra hour flying there, plus wait plus an hour or so back, then the transport to your final destination, please feel free to do so.. .we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[Onan]

But Chiglet I live just 20 minutes by car from YYZ (no flights to MAN until April). Why, pray tell me, would I fly to EWR, BWI, AMS, LHR, CDG, FRA et al ad nauseoum, to be able to fly to Manchester just so as I can drive 5 hours to Edinburgh or 3 hours to Newcastle or 40 minutes to Liverpool? . .I can ALWAYS get a flight from Toronto to AMS, LHR, FRA, CPH, CDG, then onto whatever destination I need to be within the UK, thus eliminating the stress of driving, hours, on the wrong side of very narrow roads in the UK. This is not to say that Manchester isn't a very convenient airport if my final destination is Altrincham, Knutsford, Wilmslow, Gatley or Cheadle but not Oldham which takes almost as long to get as it does to Liverpool from MAN. Anyway, if the latest rumours have any substance it might not be too long before MAN and EMA will be closed and a new airport built near Macclesfield. :)

[Ringwayman]

I haven't put the domestic routes up on the site yet - but going from memory they are currently: Heathrow (16 daily), Gatwick (7 daily), Stansted(2 daily), Londonderry (daily), Belfast City (6 daily), Glasgow (9 daily), Aberdeen (8 daily), Edinburgh (10 daily), Isle of Man (3 daily), Southampton (3 daily), Jersey (2 daily), Guernsey (2 daily) & Norwich (3 daily).

Strangely, the CAA don't list the Norwich flights in the published statistics.

[jocko0102]

This idea that people would rather fly to other airports than Manchester when you want to get around the U.K for example is a very strange one.Liverpool is about 35 mins by car,Birmingham and EastMidlands 1 hour,Edinburgh/Glasgow/Aberdeen plenty of flights with BA and BMI,Leeds less than 1 hour,Newcastle is the only one that might be slightly more difficult but not impossible.By the time you have flown to any European hub or a London airport i bet you can get there quicker from Manchester!

[Caslance]

Onan, for a guy who lives on the other side of the pond, you sure seem to have a bee in your bonnet about Manchester!! <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Were you frightened by a pint of Boddingtons when you were a baby, or something?

A simple glance at an atlas will show you that Manchester airport has a very central location in the UK, has a direct connection to the motorway system and a rail link with direct services (or simple connections) to almost every city in England, Scotland and Wales. (Birmingham Airport has even better commuication links, with a motorway link and a main-line rail station) This isn't partisanship or pro-Manchester propaganda - it's a simple fact.

You may not like it, but it remains a fact for all that. Come on, tell us what your problem with Manchester really is! <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">

[Onan]

Well Caslance, you don't really want to know believe me. If you insist I can elaborate but I can assure you it's not nice.

However back to the subject, between October and April, for anyone coming from Canada, there are no flights to Manchester so one would have to plus through a US hub, go via London Ugh! or via a European capital. I prefere the European solution as I avoid Manchester like the plague due to a personal experience. That is not to say I "wont" use Manchester if it is convenient to do so. But like I said, between October of one year and April of the next, a European airport is more convenient than via JFK or EWR or LHR. And I do think that it is a real pity that your national carrier doesn't offer service from Canada to other than LHR.

[Caslance]

Onan, dear boy! Sorry about that - I didn't mean to awake unpleasant associations for you.

It seems that we are in agreement, then, so far as the preference for just about any other major hub than Heathrow goes.

I agree, also that it is a great shame that "the world's favourite airline" leaves long-haul routes from other UK cities to airlines from abroad.

For instance, Continental and American both offer transatlantic flights from four UK cities, compared with London Airways who have a single daily Manchester-New York run as the only long-haul service outside London.

PIA also offer transatlantic services from both Manchester and Birmingham.

I'm not 100% certain about the status of the American Airlines services from Birmingham and Glasgow post 9/11, but you get my drift, I'm sure.

If these foreign airlines can operate routes from provincial UK airports and (presumably) make money on them, then why can't LOndon Airways? <img src="mad.gif" border="0">

[682ft AMSL]

...because (as was discussed at the start of the thread) the foreign airlines are providing feeder flights into their hub airports. A huge chunk of passengers on CO, DL, AA, US and bmi flights out of MAN are connecting onwards to other destinations. What point to point traffic there is, is generally filled by price chasers and demand 'up the front' is low. The services therefore rely on high loads @ low yields to make money.

It should be fairly obvious then why BA doesn't compete in this market. 1) it has no code-share agreement with a US carrier and therefore would have to rely solely on point to point traffic, 2) but the market for point-to-point is smaller and is lower yield than the equivalent in London and the SE (as I'm sure bmi will testify)

It's not a conspiracy, it's not about the North vs the South, it's just a trait of the market. If there was easy money to made from flying long-haul from MAN then why wouldn't BA or anybody else be doing it?

[jocko0102]

Onan, for your info you can fly daily from Manch to Nice(as well as many other European destinations with BA).Star alliance has a big operation out of Manch.

[chiglet]

Onan. .Quote..."There are NO daily flights from Canada to MAN". True. But there is a [I think] 3 times a week service, curtesy PIA. But, and it is a big [AKA] really large but, Air Canardly PULLED OUT OF MAN! with a 75-80pc load factor. WHY??????. .As to your foibles, we "have" had words before, so perhaps we could start again. From scratch <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> . .we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[Ringwayman]

I am lead to believe the PIA service now routes through Copenhagen. I had heard that AC did better than Chiglet said - 86% loads.

However, we may have two new routes by bmi: AMS and CDG which are advertised in the travel section of a Sunday paper (LBA also seems to be benefitting from an AMS link as well).

[dwlpl]

In a report to be published Monday, BMI is thought to be considering to scrap its transatlantic routes (MAN to Washington and Chicago) because of mounting losses due to a sharp decline in traffic.

It has held talks with other airlines to lease out its A330 aircraft. One airline it is known to have discussed this with is DAT. They would use the aircraft on routes from Brussels to Africa.

BMI own three A330's, it flies two on the routes to the US and has the other one idle on the tarmac at MAN.

[Ringwayman]

Continuing dwlpl's thing, this is also in the report from the FT.

[quote]BMI insisted that despite the talks with DAT, it had "no plans to pull out" of its US services. But added: "Giving a categorical assurance that these Manchester services are safe and secure without the prospect of Heathrow services starting is very difficult."

BMI's US services are losing money. Even in the best market conditions it can take an established transatlantic airline two years to make a new route profitable.

But after the September 11 attacks, demand dropped by more than 30 per cent and is still only gradually recovering. <hr></blockquote>

and from an anonymous source:

[quote]My cousin flew them a few weeks ago from IAD-MAN and return. On the flight over one of the cabin crew told him that things were starting to pick up again. When he flew back from MAN a cabin crew told him that things were vastly improving, especially with cargo<hr></blockquote>

[moleslayer]

One day the hold's full of tomatoes......

The next three days....nothing !!

[dwlpl]

ringwayman, with everything in the garden smelling of roses why try to rid itself of aircraft, if only on lease? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[Ringwayman]

dwlpl, I don't know! It might have been wiser to expand their donestic and European operations at MAN first so that they could then build a decent hub; the enhanced network of routes could then have generated some transfer traffic for the US routes.

If only the open-skies talks were to be resumed and concluded tomorrow then there would be no point in them even thinking of stopping the services or leasing out the aircraft.

[dwlpl]

With the "mighty" Star Alliance (Lufthansa and SAS to name but two) in tow they, BMI, don't need to build a hub, not forgetting its own current network as it stands.

[jocko0102]

Correct Machester does have good connections with Lufthansa and SAS,not forgetting its own network,however im not sure how many punters will fly to Manch to go over the pond unless BMI are offering good deals to the German/Scandinavian public.I do think the transatlantic services are improving for BMI,they however didnt envisage Foot and Mouth,downturn in American economy and certainly not the 11Sep.Not the best time to start long haul routes but as was said it can take several years to turn in a profit so lets see.

[Porky Speedpig]

Caslance, new MAN long haul routes, and to a lesser extent, short haul ones tend to do well in a boom but fall flat on their face in a recession especially if this coincides with the end of any subsidy from the airport. Witness - Malaysian, Cathay, AA-JFK, DL-JFK, AA-DFW, BA-LAX, SA-JNB etc. Although it is a great piece of news for plane spotters unfortunately we are dealing with peoples lives here and it makes no good sense to hire and fire. Foreign airlines get away with this - British ones - whether BA, BD or VS do not. That is why you will see that they will only add to their small long haul base if the new route is a racing certainty. As many people on here testify - being made redundant is no laughing matter.

[RICH BOY SPANNERS]

Interesting topic. Unfortumately for BA people who live in the Manchester area would rather suffer typhoid than transfer through Thiefrow with this airline.. .Aside from the fact that BA could lose a transfer bag inside a telephone box, Thiefrow is unpleasent, most of the central area appears to be falling down.. .Friends and family of mine make around 25 to 35 business class longhaul trips a year between them. In the last two years none have been with BA. Firstly a common attitude here is that if BA pull out of a route at MAN then fine, but don't expect the passengers to waste time transferring through London, sorry BA but we're not not interested.. .The first choice for the United States where most of these trips are to is Continental, AA, Delta,BMI etc. Second choice is KLM UK to Amsterdam and then on. Middle East trips pretty similiar. Heathrow transfer no way, not worth the bother.

[160to4DME]

Excuse me; sorry to butt in on what is looking more and more like a thread from Airliners(and Anoraks).net, but I am reliably informed that the DAT talks have collapsed and the story of bmi trying to lose 3 A330s includes 2 others which are due this year...ergo, the 2 currently on the MAN longhauls are not part of the equation. <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

[HOVIS]

Sorry to open this up again but, I have heard that Air Canada are returning to Man either in March or April.

Also, does anyone know how long the BA MAN-JFK service has got since the big announcement the other week?

[Ringwayman]

I believe the AC return is 15th April.

[AOG-YYZ]

Ringwayman Air Canada will indeed return on 15 April 2002 with a direct service but a stop in GLA. It will be late May early June before AC840/1 becomes 'none stop'.

[Porky Speedpig]

BA MAN-JFK doing fine thanks.

[chiglet]

AOG. .It's either a "Direct" service or not <img src="confused.gif" border="0"> . .we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[EGCC4284]

BA1503 JFK is full every day I believe.

<img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="tongue.gif" border="0"> <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

[AOG-YYZ]

CHIGLET

Direct service means "same plane" no matter how many stops. "None stop" is also directbut without a stop, obviously. So YYZ-GLA-MAN is a direct service. <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

[Scottie Dog]

Chiglet

AOG-YYZ is quite right with his reply. I now that in the passed their have been many unhappy passengers who would complain about the fact that their flight from Manchester stopped enroute - having been advised that it was a direct service.

Direct does mean without a plane change enroute but with possibly many stops - the classic was the old route Manchester to Georgetown Guyana that was mentioned by somebody else earlier in the section. Manchester/Prestwick/New York/Antigua/Georgetown - or something like that. Direct but definately not non-stop!

Those were the days......

Scottie Dog

[chiglet]

Scottie,. .I remember "announcing" the arrival of the BA New York flight at Brum in 1970 [ATCA's did the ETA and ATA announcements then]. .Un fortunately, the mike switch stuck <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> , so instead of "Air Traffic control announce the arrival of BAW flight xx from New York" the first bit went out ok, but so did "Sopping at Prestwick, Manchester, Ilkley Moor and all stations in between". :) . .Needlss to say I got my wrist slapped <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> . .we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[jocko0102]

The BA1503 is doing pretty well all things considered,one reason,it is a 767 with good cargo capacity.However the way BA are looking to concentrate on "Sh**e Row" it wouldnt surprise me if it went.

[HOVIS]

Sorry to open this up again but the rumour mill is turning again regarding the BA MAN-JFK.

Something to do with the AA/BA code share agreement.

Anyone confirm/deny that AA will takeover the BA route?

[GustyOrange]

Further to HOVIS's question does anyone know when the codeshare starts ?

Is it likely that the AA GLA-ORD daily nonstop could operate year round ?

Gusty