Gatwick-3

[vectisman]

At the moment air travel is at an all time low owing to the pandemic. This situation will pass, although it will take some time. In time Heathrow slots will once again
become scarce and very expensive. For some airlines, who have recently moved to Heathrow from Gatwick, these higher costs will not be sustainable in the longer term
or fit with their business models. I cannot see the big players at Heathrow allowing all recent new entrants to remain without oppostion. Leisure and holiday travel will recover more quickly than business travel with the former being more price sensitive.
In my non expert view within two to three years (as medical treatments and vaccines come online) air travel will bounce back and Gatwick will recover.
Up until the beginning of the pandemic Gatwick was handling 45million passengers a year. No way can Heathrow absorb all of these in the longer term. I believe Runway 3 is further away than ever
(or maybe gone for good).
I am confident that by 2023/2024 Gatwick will again be attracting a wide range of airlines who wish to fly to London or who need to expand their London operations. I also believe British Airways will once again operate a
significant base at Gatwick. In recent times right up to the pandemic British Airways was operating a profitable O&D base. Again it may take some time but Gatwick has an affluent catchment, and good transport links. (Especially rail).
The commercial approach of the airport's management has also been praised by the leadership of BA compared to that of Heathrow.
Yes, things may be gloomy at the moment, but things will improve.

[JW95]

An interesting read regarding VS and their relationship with LGW. Sounds like a return hasn't been ruled out after all, even if not immediate. Hopefully some good news for Gatwick.

https://simpleflying.com/virgin-atlantic-gatwick-return/

[pabely]

Gatwick expecting to handle 100 flights a day by mid December

[davidjohnson6]

Where are these 100 flights going to go, apart from UK domestic + other places the Queen owns ?
So many countries in Europe and around the world seem to be saying either "PCR paperwork requried for entry" or even "our citizens or those with a residency card only", never mind the requirements to do 2 weeks quarantine on arriving from the UK, that I'm wondering what's left to operate...

[LTNman]

I doubt most people will bother about U.K. quarantine requirements.

[davidjohnson6]

never mind the requirements to do 2 weeks quarantine on arriving from the UK - note the emphasis on *from*

[pabely]

Had a stab EZY App at Canaries, lots of flights & Geneva up to x5 day for skiing, neither warned about PCR tests required for entry but other European distinations did.

[True Blue]

Sun Express has a flight on sale Lgw to Antalya, from June it is daily. Is this their first scheduled operation from Lgw? I would not be surprised if there is not more to come from them.

[LTNman]

pabely

Some EU nations are attempting to put off their citizens from going to Switzerland to ski due to the risks. For U.K. residents a period of quarantine would follow.

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/pressure-increases-on-swiss-ski-resorts/46199694

[JSCL]

Supposedly BA have requested slots to do thrice daily Manchester flights from Gatwick in S21.

[davidjohnson6]

Slot sitter perhaps ? MAN-LGW looks more credible as a route in the press than just flying LHR-LGW 3x daily...

[JSCL]

I wonder if they're also hoping to capture connecting traffic to leisure flights with VS flying somewhat trimmed back from Manchester going forward. Particularly the likes of Vegas, LA etc

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

LGW-MAN lost money with 12 based long haul B777s flying out of Gatters, no chance of doing better a based fleet of less than half that size, it's almost all point to point traffic. Thrice daily means 2/3 of the services connect to nothing.
Worth remembering applying for slots doesn't mean it will happen, slots are quite often applied for and never operated .

[pabely]

LTNman

It's about showing face, I think a few will travel anyhow and are happy with the 14 days on way back.

[Navpi]

Skipness One Foxtrot

I think the poster was referring to CONNECTING out of Manchester not flying down to LGW.

[JW95]

Some possibly good news for Gatwick. Just spoken with CX teams in the London office and they have stated that Cathay will be returning to LGW, and that the airline has not withdrawn permanently from the airport, contrary to some media reporting. In the agent's own words "We know how popular Gatwick has been for us and it is our plan to return". Understandably, he was unable to give me a definitive date as to when CX will return to LGW, presumably once all 5 LHR sectors are back online, but at least this gives some sort of clarity for the future of Cathay at Gatwick, and the fact that LGW has, at least prior COVID, worked very well for them. It'll be nice to see the A350 back at LGW soon.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

The decision to return to LGW won't be made close to anyone in the London office. I used to get swept up in this sort of thing when I was a kid, for example United flew GLA-IAD with the B767 and Sales and Marketing were 100% supporting the service when rumours began it was being dropped, they said all the right things and were taking bookings for the summer. Almost the very next day the route was canned because the finance team stateside had reviewed the numbers and could serve the Scottish market by using British Midland as a feed via LHR. The aircraft was redeployed. It broke my wee heart but perhaps explains my cynicsim.
Cathay will not lose a significant volume of the current LGW market by serving London out of LHR only. Very few big spenders will take another route to HKG via LGW rather than use BA/CX out of LHR. Hence from a revenue and resource point of view, they'll reinstate LHR x 5 daily then likely review LGW. But that's, IMHO, not "soon" and Cathay are in retreat from Europe, with the double whammy of COVID and the CCP tightening their grip in Hong Kong leading to civil disorder. 6 daily London isn't going to be viable for a while I suspect.

Local sales and marketing will always put the best possible spin to build confidence in market, commerical reality may not agree when head office gets involved.

[Navpi]

LGW would do best expanding the Wizz operation enticing them from Luton.

[Vokes55]

davidjohnson6

There's a fairly large EZY ramp up around the 16/17 December, and BA long haul returns next week with up to 7 flights a day on some days. Extra TUI flights to the Canaries and Aruba (previously Summer only) begin around the 16/17 too. All looks fairly temporary though, January is looking very quiet. Worth remembering January to early February is the quietest time of the year for Gatwick and most other UK airports anyway.

The positive news is that although only a handful of passenger flights have been operating (between 13 and 31 per day), outbound load factors since the lifting of the travel ban have been the highest since March. Only one flight yesterday departed less than 50% full.

[SWBKCB]

Navpi

They don't need enticing, they need slots. It seems on odd business that LGW doesn't have control of this.

[racedo]

Oh slots will eventually be released BUT why would you allow people whom are your competition to potentially benefit from lost slots. Release them as late as you can and fight to hold them,

[SWBKCB]

I agree, but why should airlines have such control over how the airport does business?

[LTNman]

Vokes55

With the Schools reopening on January 4th school children would need to start quarantine on December 21st for most destinations.

[Vokes55]

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-test-to-release-for-international-travel

[LTNman]

The Test to Release for International Travel scheme is for people who need to self-isolate on arrival in England.

Under the scheme you can choose to pay for a private COVID-19 test. The earliest you can take the test is 5 full days after you left a destination not on the travel corridor list (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-travel-corridors). If the result is negative, you can stop self-isolating.

The scheme is voluntary and applies to those self-isolating in England only.

The issue will always be that the scheme is voluntary. How many people will pay more for a test than in some cases a flight is debatable but I live in hope.

[Vokes55]

I think most people will take the common sense approach that visiting their family for Christmas in Europe, Caribbean etc is no more “dangerous” than people visiting their family in Hull or Wales, which is permitted.

But that’s for another thread. Clearly easyJet and BA believe there will be enough demand over the Christmas period to warrant a ramping up of flights to most destinations. As an industry employee on an industry forum, I don’t have any problem with it.

[SWBKCB]

and for one there is no legal requirement to self-isolate, and for the other there is.

But as you said, for another thread.

[pabely]

Interesting TUI movement arriving now frim DTW. Wonder what's that all about?

[SWBKCB]

Positioning back from Mercedes related charters, Stuttgart-Detroit?

[Downwind_Left]

TUI have been operating a lot of freight charters with pretty much their whole 787 fleet, more than one on some days, mainly with the -9 fleet.

Routes operated include;

Frankfurt-Greenville
Frankfurt-Mexico City
Frankfurt-Seoul
Stuttgart-Guardalajara
Stuttgart-Mexico City
Stuttgart-Detroit

At the time of writing G-TUIJ is in Stuttgart, G-TUIN in Guardalajara, and G-TUIO is in Mexico City.

[True Blue]

Royal Air Maroc seems to be starting new routes to Marrakech (4 weekly) and Agadir(2 weekly) early next year. These routes were reported in various press as going to Lhr but they are sale on the RAM site to Lgw. Although the press seems to assume that each and every , especially new routes, will go to Lhr.

[rog747]

Downwind_Left

Both Condor Germany, and Neos Italy are also operating 767 and 787 cargo charters worldwide similarly to BA, Virgin, and TUI...

[True Blue]

BA starting Lgw - Man 1 daily from the end of March 21. I thought they were pulling out completely!

[GrahamK]

Seems not, Accra and Islamabad moving over from LHR from Match.

Credit to SeanM1977 on twitter

[True Blue]

So 3 new BA long-haul routes in 2 days. Accra, Islamabad and Doha. What a surprise! Only Lima has gone, I think.

[flyerguy]

Lima, Bermuda and then LHR starting Orlando and Barbados in conjunction with Gatwick sees some frequency change, I’m sure they’ll be more changes to come.

San Jose temporarily suspended also.

[Vokes55]

New York and Toronto gone too

[davidjohnson6]

It looks like Granada in Spain has lost its last connection to the UK - both Easyjet and BA hace dropped the route from Gatwick, as well as BACF from London City

[FlyboyUK]

easy basing 4 more aircraft at LGW this summer taking total to 71. New routes to Bilbao & Cagliari, return of Aberdeen and increased frequencies on domestics and other routes.

[LGS6753]

Moving some Stansted/Southend capacity now there's space at LGW.

[SWBKCB]

So have EZY acquired additional slots? Wizz seemed to be struggling to get hold of them?

[Albert Hall]

easyJet have acquired a load of Gatwick slots from Norwegian for based aircraft. About three to four aircraft's worth in all.

[bmaviscount]

Any guesses when south terminal will reopen?

This year?

[davidjohnson6]

London and much of south east England has just been placed in tier 3. There is a significant likelihood of a third lockdown in England being announced soon
The chance of the South terminal reopening this year is vanishingly small

[Seljuk22]

Report says EZY will base 4 additional aircraft and launch new routes to Aberdeen, Bilbao and Cagliari
https://www.routesonline.com/news/29/breaking-news/294942/easyjet-to-base-four-more-aircraft-at-gatwick/

[Seljuk22]

True Blue

Doha? Do you refer to QR code share?

[flyerguy]

Doha 1x Daily on BA metal

[mariofly12]

Why did easy get hold of more slots and Wizzair couldn't/can't? Not willing to pay for Norwegian's slots? Aren't they eager to build a hub and go head-to-head with the orange empire? Or do we still don't know what's in store for Wizz at LGW for S21? So far they have only 1 a/c based.
I believe Bilbao isn't a new route but a resumption for U2? Moreover, has BA finally decided what they're going to do with the short-haul LGW network? Is it staying put or getting transferred again to LHR?

[Buster the Bear]

I think once the plans are confirmed to split British Airways into a somewhat BOAC and BEA type operation, more will be known.

[bmaviscount]

davidjohnson6

Sorry I meant 2021, My mind has already moved into the new year!

[TOM100]

Buster - where do you get this from ? They have just combined their cabin crew fleet to do both.

[CabinCrewe]

Buster the Bear

Perhaps as a behind the scenes paper exercise but nothing more and certainly nothing the public would be aware of.

[BAladdy]

Based on the current schedule loaded for mid July 2021 BA plan to operate the following long haul frequencies:

Accra - Daily
Antigua - 6 x Weekly
Cancun - Daily
Doha - Daily
Grenada (via St Lucia) - 2 x Weekly
Islamabad - 6 x Weekly
Kingston - 3 x Weekly
Las Vegas - 3 x Weekly
Mauritius - 3 x Weekly
Orlando - Daily
Port of Spain (via St Lucia) - 4 x Weekly
Providenciales (via Antigua ) - 1 x Weekly
Punta Cana - 3 x Weekly
St Kitts (via Antigua) - 2 x Weekly
St Lucia- 6 x Weekly
Tampa - 5 x Weekly
Tobago (via Antigua) - 2 x Weekly

All flights will be operated by a 3 class 777.

[LGS6753]

https://www.travelmole.com/news_feature.php?c=setreg&region=2&m_id=s~T_mdT_Y!&w_id=38419&news_id=2045531

New Wizz route (Malaga)

[globetrotter79]

replaces Naples..?

[JW95]

Anyone know what the general picture is looking like at LGW in terms of the summer 2021 long haul schedules and airlines? Mindful that things are highly subject to change given the pandemic, but would be interested to see what and who returns to LGW in the summer.

[Asturias56]

No-one has a clue

Maybe by Easter they'll start to see a) how the vaccination programs are affecting transmission and hospitalisation b) which countries are likely to open up first

Until then it's all unknown

[racedo]

Pretty difficult to argue against that summary. Assumption is that current spike will burn itself out combined with vaccine. The scary question is "What if it doesn't", is there a Plan B ?

[tubby linton]

Has the hanger in the northwest corner of the airfield been completed and is it in use?

[FlyboyUK]

The Boeing one? If so yes it's been operation for I think the best part of a year now.

[FlyboyUK]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-55660837

Sad but not unexpected news that Norwegian is axing long haul and focusing on a core Nordic operation

[fjencl]

Does this mean that Norwegian will still hold onto a base at LGW for cabin crew and flight deck, albeit to only operate the 737 aircraft out of LGW ?
Or are they closing the LGW base completely.........

[FlyboyUK]

No all UK based operations have ceased, crew made redundant. There will be no LGW base for SH or LH.

[FRatSTN]

Only remaining Norwegian routes will likely be those in from the Nordic region: Bergen, Copenhagen, Gothenburg, Helsinki, Oslo, Stavanger, Stockholm and Trondheim. Nothing left based in the UK.

[southside bobby]

Gatwick Airport has borrowed a further £75m this week from the Government`s Covid CCFF fund for a total now of £250m with a further option available which could take the total borrowing to £300m.

[racedo]

Ultimately that money will be written off by Govt. There is no chance that it can be repaid in the next 10 years.

[Smudge's Lot]

Seeing as you can see into the future, could I please have the winning lottery numbers for next month please?

[LTNman]

An empty airport yet Jet Blue can’t get any slots https://simpleflying.com/jetblue-london-slots-complain/

[LGS6753]

racedo

I disagree. The money doesn't need to be repaid out of profits, it can be repaid from future borrowings. LGW has an enterprise value of >£1.5bn, so an extra £300m borrowings should not be unfeasible to arrange and service.

[southside bobby]

Loan repayable within 12 months.

[racedo]

Loan is never repaid out of profits, it is paid out of cash flow, interest is the only thing taht gets charged against profits.. Profits generate that cash flow and it is unlikely Gatwick will be making profits this year or next. Interest on external borrowings is likely to be in the 5% range which means Gatwick has to find £15 million a year from profits to just fund the interest.

[racedo]

southside bobby

That is just the loan term, Govt have really few options if they don't repay. Loan will just gets extended and written off in 10 years. Gatwick just say we are not investing in any imporvement until loan is repaid.

[davidjohnson6]

If LGW cannot repay the loan.... then it likely means there are not enough passengers going through the airport to need investment in improving facilities
Banks typically categorise defaulters of loans into either "Cannot pay" or "Do not want to pay". There are ample ways to deal with the 2nd category along with plenty of case law - LGW forms a real physical asset against which a land charge can be raised in the event of default, and (unlike some airlines) is not just a confidence trick

[Buster the Bear]

I know a man.....

Any govt loans MUST be repaid within the terms of the loan. UK tax payers are well covered, just means reduced dividends for shareholders.

[racedo]

davidjohnson6

Owners of LGW have already taken out loans where security of the airport has been provided.................... that is the whole basis of private equity and hedge funds. The lawyers get paid big bucks to ensure everything is included.

Taking a second or third charge is worth nothing because you have zero chance of getting anything. An airport without passengers is worth not a lot and no where close to the value when its owners took the loans out. Those who have the 1st charge get paid first and there will be little or nothing left for anybody after.

[racedo]

Buster the Bear

Good luck with that idea.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01079/

Student debt is £140 billion and that should be easy, best estimates are that only 25% of 1.3 million current under graduates will repay in full.

[JW95]

Is there any hope at all for LGW, in particular, long haul, both in the medium and long term? I really hope so, the LGW long haul route and airline portfolio was particularly strong prior to COVID, can the airport bring at least some of this and it’s airlines back once travel opens up again?

[Vokes55]

Long term, yes of course. Gatwick suffers by being in Heathrow’s shadow. It lost a lot of its long haul after 9/11, it lost a lot of its long haul after the recession (which also coincided with Bermuda II being scrapped), but in the years after, the usual constraints on Heathrow return and long haul filters back over to Gatwick again.

There’s no need to fear, aside from prestige, long haul isn’t what brings the bacon into Gatwick and the local area. It’s nice to have a daily Cathay A350, but 67 (going up to 71) based easyJet Airbuses is what contributed the most to the record passenger numbers (pre-C19) and provides great swathes of employment to the area.

[LTNman]

£5 charge to be dropped off at the airport from yesterday.

[davidjohnson6]

New summer seasonal route with Easyjet to Toulon. Wed + Sat from 23 June

[pabely]

Wizzair UK to base one of their new A321NEOs at Gatwick, other 3 at Luton.

[JW95]

Vokes55

Very true, short haul will continue to be a pertinent driver for LGW's recovery going forward, and it is encouraging to see EZY building up their LGW station again in conjunction with Wizz Air's new base here. With this in mind, what are BA's plans RE. LGW short haul? Presumably these aren't likely to be reinstated until the W21 schedules, given the majority of BAs traffic still seems to be consolidated at LHR?

Saying that, I do hope that LGW will experience a bounce back in long haul as demand for international travel starts to rebuild itself. LGW had a pretty good and diverse long haul airline and route portfolio prior to Covid, and it is absolutely devastating to see it disappear. The departure of DY long haul has more-or-less wiped out all of LGW-USA services with the exception of MCO which is now only served by BA following the departure of VS. Hopefully LGW will be able to rebuild this going forward as there clearly is demand for LGW-USA services in the long term. Same thing goes for services to the far East. I was recently talking with someone in airline relations at LGW and they are keen to get Cathay Pacific back at Gatwick in the next year or two once things stabilise, on the back of the success of the HKG route in conjunction with their LHR operation. So demand and success of long haul at LGW clearly is there and has worked before (e.g. Emirates and Qatar servicing both LHR and LGW simultaneously) and hopefully long haul airlines will come back to LGW once there is sufficient demand to justify.

[JW95]

Sadly it looks as though CI LGW-TPE suspension has now been extended until late October, with the route continuing to operate to/from LHR in the interim.

[brianj]

Regarding Cathay, there is in all likelihood going to be a huge influx of people in Hong Kong holding British passports moving to the Uk. This should make Gatwick very feasible for services.
As to Emirates, at present their booking site certainly for November only shows the early afternoon service and this is not good for connecting to many connection destinations from Dubai. The previously morning and evening services were much better for this. Fortunately I have been able to book Qatar Airways morning services, and avoid the BAW ones.
Many other Far East destination offered for example by TravelBag were from Heathrow in place of Gatwick.

[772]

JW95

very encouraging for GAL that EZY are growing their base and I believe have got some ex DY slots? That combined with WIZZ is positive for the airport.

although a much smaller operation than EZY, GAL must be very keen for BA to bring some sort of SH operation back but not sure if or when as when the slot waivers return the airline won’t want to risk any LHR slots, but on the other hand wouldn’t think they would want to lose pretty much their entire LGW slot portfolio

i guess until summer, autumn when hopefully things start to move again we won’t know

[racedo]

£5 charge to be dropped off at the airport from yesterday.

Only North Terminal.

[MARKEYD]

No actually your wrong, the South terminal is also following suit even though no flights , they are making sure no one drops off and then takes the transit over to the North
Grim ....

[JW95]

👍 Charge will be going live at the South Terminal on 12th April I think? I wonder what are the chances of the South Terminal reopening to flights this year and BA, Ryanair, Wizz Air et al. moving back?

[772]

I cant see the South terminal opening before s22

[davidjohnson6]

772 - could you perhaps see the South terminal opening for maybe two or three months over this summer ? Maybe mid July to mid October ?

[dastocks]

MARKEYD

I believe the 'transit' is actually a bus, so really grim.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Slamming a fiver to drop someone off is harsh whereas a £3 airport fee per ticketed passenger wouldn't even be noticed. It's the stripping out of costs which have caused a lot of the friction between airports and users. We know they don't come free but people see a bundled cost in the small print of your ticket as the cost of doing business but see machines charging you money before accessing security, (looking at you NQY, the 2nd most officious airport in the UK after MAN!) or taking a fiver off grandad for dropping you off at the kerbside as daylight robbery. Just up the airport usage charges FGS. It's not as if Luton becomes way more attractive to save £3 in a bundled charge at LGW!

[SWBKCB]

And get slammed by the airlines for increasing charges and forcing them to put up air fares?

[772]

davidjohnson6

Personally, no I don’t.

I can’t think GAL would open the South until they have to. This summer, even if things go well, BA, what 7/8 flights a day?, little to no DY, no VS, no EK until w21 I believe, a smaller EZY/BY operation than pre covid. Sure we may see small VY, EI, GR ops plus a few other smaller airlines.

I assume landslide checkin terminal capacity, will be the driver for opening the South as in terms of airside, plenty of stands to use and even if it got busy plenty of coaching gates down at the cow sheds gate 45 to coach pax to aircraft.

All up in the air and subjective, but until EZY get up to a sizeable operation I think North has the room for what looks likely this summer.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

SWBKCB

By *THREE BRITISH POUNDS*, yes, slam away.

[Jn14:6]

brianj

I suspect CX will opt to restore the FIVE daily pax schedules into LHR before LGW gets a look in.

[racedo]

MARKEYD

Following suit but not applicable yet because they not in place as of last Saturday.

[racedo]

Skipness One Foxtrot

BUT the family of 4 who live in Redhill and get the train pay £12 for no benefit.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

That's why I said £3 rather than £5. Unbundling of costs has been the way of the industry but as in most things in life we don't know when to stop.

It's not rational, it's perception and it the perception could be removed with the nominal fee. Decent infrastructure needs to be paid for, otherwise every airport would be Luton and every airline would be Spirit. (Looking at you British Airways A320 NEOs)

[SWBKCB]

Airlines need to understand that airports need to make money.

[FRatSTN]

Or rather the airlines will only help pay towards infrastructure they believe their customers will value, for instance EasyJet are not going to pay for premium facilities primarily used by Emirates or BA Club World.

[Albert Hall]

SWBKCB

I think the same could equally be said in reverse!

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

FRatSTN

I don't think things like lounges come out of general fees to locos. Airlines who want them invest in them, often heavily so. Some airlines resent cross subsidising extravagances like er....travellators, airbridges and.....(no really!) wheelchair meet and assist. We all use the core facilites, drop off should be one, like check in (I use occasionally), bag drop (seldom) etc.

[davidjohnson6]

otherwise every airport would be Luton and every airline would be Spirit
Some of us rather like the idea of flying for minimal cost...

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Then you'll love Luton.

[Vokes55]

A whopping 19 passenger flights departing from Gatwick today, the highest since January 10th. Nice to see destinations like Jersey, St Lucia, Bilbao, Rome and Paris back for the first time in a while.

[True Blue]

Freebird Airlines now has Antalya on sale this summer, 2 weekly. I hope all this extra capacity to Turkey is needed, as looking at the Covid case numbers in Turkey, it doesn't look good.

[moku]

Not sure about BAs plans for LGW this summer. My flights to ACE in July/August have just been transferred to LHR.

[True Blue]

I read today BA will not operate any short haul flights ex Lgw this summer. No flights now until winter timetable.

[RJ100]

My BA flight to St Lucia has also been moved to LHR again this summer.

[JW95]

True Blue

Sad news for LGW. Unfortunately, this more-or-less confirms that the South Terminal will now remain closed for the remainder of 2021 :( I really do hope BA and LGW will be able to bounce back from this awful pandemic once international travel resumes on large scale, whether that be later in the summer or early in the autumn. It is desperately sad watching just how badly Gatwick has been hit with the near total loss of its USA network, and long serving airlines such as Virgin Atlantic. Given that there is still so much uncertainty and lack of clarity regarding the resumption of leisure international travel, my guess is that we probably won't see significant improvements regarding LGW for the rest of 2021, but hopefully in 2022. Hopefully by then LGW can begin to rebuild itself and start bringing back some of its lost services, including long haul operators that were doing well at LGW prior to suspending operations.

[wallp]

Gatwick does seem to have been impacted the most among the ‘London’ airports. Like you I hope that by 2022 things will start to look a lot brighter for the airport.

[EI-BUD]

Isn't Norse Atlantic Airways going to be at LGW?
They'll probably secure the US routes to the likes of JFK, SFO, etc. How sustainable that model is remains to be seen, though at least will give LGW that business segment. I think that once a semblance of normality resumes LGW will quickly be full up again. Though with a new mix, less wide bodies and more low cost short haul in the mix. Hopefully the airport can create arrangements that allow for the eventual accommodation of more long haul wide body flying.

[LTNman]

Gatwick’s problem is that it is suffering from slot hoarding so the likes of Wizz can’t get a foothold at the airport even though Gatwick is on life support. If the airlines won’t release the slots they should at least be made to pay Gatwick an income for slot retention. That would at least focus a few minds.

[JW95]

EI-BUD

Correct, that is the plan and it is the intention to very closely mirror the ex DY long haul operation. IIRC, they are anticipating a December 21 launch, although this may yet change in the months ahead depending on the progress of the vaccination programme and emergence of travel corridors between Europe and the USA. Time will indeed tell. Certainly I am hopeful that this will work out for LGW, as prior to Covid, USA services from here were very popular and provided many of us with a good alternative to LHR. It'll be good to see more US destinations back on the departure boards at LGW. On the subject of long haul, I do wonder what the picture will look like for Gatwick going forward medium and long term? I am not anticipating too much of a difference recovery-wise in S21 but what do people reckon LGW will have in store for W21 and S22? LHR will, inevitably quickly fill back up again, so I wonder if those airlines which suspended LGW in the wake of the pandemic will be back in the next year or two? (e.g. Virgin, Cathay Pacific, China Airlines).

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

EI-BUD

You mean Norwegian II : Back From Insolvency
https://flynorse.com/
"Norse Atlantic Airways believes that there is a need for a new and innovative airline serving the low-cost intercontinental market as the world re-opens. The new airline will offer comfortable flights with fuel-efficient and more environmentally friendly Boeing 787 Dreamliners."
It's not NEW it's a warmed up and relaunched Norwegian Long Haul using the same aicraft and probably the same staff coming back by necessity as the "Rednose Warriors" are recalled. As for innovating, they mean doing EXACTLY what was done before but having written off the enormous debts accumulated in version one.

I wonder if those airlines which suspended LGW in the wake of the pandemic will be back in the next year or two? (e.g. Virgin, Cathay Pacific, China Airlines).
Cathay will want to get up to speed on 5 x daily slot holding at LHR first and I think China Airlines are super keen on LHR, however Air China may be back but it depends on how fast that market recovers. It looks like they're moving towards military intervention in Taiwan so who knows!

[southside bobby]

...Norse Atlantic Airways = Disruptor Mk2 possibly of course.

[Flightrider]

It's not NEW it's a warmed up and relaunched Norwegian Long Haul using the same aicraft and probably the same staff coming back by necessity as the "Rednose Warriors" are recalled. As for innovating, they mean doing EXACTLY what was done before but having written off the enormous debts accumulated in version one.

Seems to be quite a lot of that sort of thing going on around the industry at the moment ...

[pamann]

Norwegian/Norse;

Albert Einstein is widely credited with saying, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results.

I happen to agree with him.

[CW247]

On the other hand, Norwegian suffered from the most unreliable engines in the history of commercial aviation, which resulted in obscene wet leasing costs for years on end. The Max debacle you could say did not really impact them as Covid superceded that issue. Lessons have been learnt and this would be the first time the same management of a previously failed transatlantic loco are starting over again. Usually it's new kids on the block. Ultimately, the legacies will fend them off once again with a price war but I see it working for 5-10 years before that. In that time, it would've made a few people exceptionally more rich. Which like all businesses, is the primary aim.

[Alteagod]

Totally agree.

[Vokes55]

CW247

Not to mention that the majority of LGW routes were somewhat successful in their own right by the end, and it was COVID that ultimately brought the curtain down. Some of the armchair CEOs on this website seem to have forgotten the transatlantic market has been closed for the last 13 months.

[wallp]

Good luck to them. I hope they play a big part in Gatwick's recovery

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Vokes55

They managed an operating profit after taking on unsustainable levels of debt and destroying shareholder value to get there. That's not a succesful business plan in anyone's book. To say COVID brought them down is disingenuous to say the least, it was, like flybe and Thomas Cook, an inability to service existing debts, that destroyed the viability of the operation. The US is not going to be open properly til 2022 as we've no idea how panicked leaders will get when COVID comes back in winter, just like the other seasonal viruses. There might be a summer window like last year but we're going into semi lockdown again, that's why furlough and the other emergency legislation was extended, there will be one last push to see us through this winter IMHO.

[compton3bravo]

I know everybody is entitled to their opinion but come on, but some on here really should mull over the history of low cost long haul over the past 50 years ranging from Highland Express to Norwegian. I would have thought that by now that it is not possible to make money with low cost long haul. Personally I think it is scandalous that Norse Atlantic Airways or whatever they want to call themselves would receive an operating licence considering the debts left and the countless people who have lost their jobs.

[Vokes55]

Skipness One Foxtrot

So going by your theory, and I’m not disputing it, Norse Atlantic should be a roaring success. Operating the routes that were operational profitable in a previous colour scheme, yet detached from the unservicable debt. The rest of your post is crystal ball stuff, but they’ve stated they won’t be starting until late 2021 or early 2022.

Saying COVID brought them down is no more disingenuous than saying low cost long haul brought them down and doesn’t work. A lot of things Norwegian did were unsuccessful, some stupid. A lot of their short haul was haemorrhaging money, and the Max transatlantic venture was doomed from the start. They had a lot of bad luck thrown in with the Max and RR. But one thing was proven was that, on a select few routes, the model can work. And that’s why it’s a small fleet coming back to pick up the routes that DID work.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Some good points. They turned an operating profit on high volume core leisure out of LGW, any future success may depend on how wounded BA are and how willing they are to defend their north atlantic market share post COVID.

I note you said "coming back", this rebrand fools nobody.

[Vokes55]

Of course not. And as somebody with close friends who lost their jobs with Norwegian in January, I understand the sentiment and skepticism. But if they can bring back the routes that worked, under a more sustainable model, without the debt and other parts of the company that were dragging the core routes down, without the MAX and, hopefully, without the RR issues, then it's good for some of the redundant former employees, it's good for the airport, it's good for the local economy which has been decimated and it's good for the customer.

I do find it odd how many of the contributors on this forum, who would've been happy to see Norwegian go bankrupt years ago with the loss of thousands of jobs, suddenly care about the shareholders or creditors that have lost out. And those same contributors are equally opposed to the (re-)creation of hundreds of jobs, including pilot positions, on a professional pilots forum.

[davidjohnson6]

Air travel employment will be strongest if things Gatwick-related is seen to have a robust long-term and sustainable business model. You can try hiring a few pilots but if the business model is rubbish or the creditors keep getting shafted, banks lose confidence in the entire industry and capital / financing for future airlines either becomes more difficult to obtain for future start-up airlines or dries up completely. Furthermore, employees of other airlines (e.g. Easyjet) find their employment T&Cs being degraded if they don't have access to the magic-money-tree granted to Norwegian v2. Selling an unrealistic and unstable image to new hires helps nobody - people have to make life choices and commitments when entering the airline industry - if those plans are wrecked after 18 months, it just leaves a path of destruction all round.

Last autumn, I met a pilot flying a tiny puddle jumper in the back of beyond while he lived in a small town in northern Scandinavia; his wife and small kid were living with her parents elsewhere. He told me how he used to fly a 737 and they lived in Crawley until early 2020. He was hoping for better times. He did not complain and showed dignity. I have sympathy for him and his young family. Somebody like him needs a stable existence, instead of having to scrabble around and moving home so as to find work. That stability comes only when you have secure business models, instead of failed charlatans deciding to roll the dice once more with somebody else's money in the casino

[Vokes55]

Cute story, unfortunately in the real world the majority of pilots don’t have the means to live in a small town in Northern Scandinavia, and are more likely to be delivering Amazon parcels from Horley until another opportunity comes up.

Evidently those funding Norse Atlantic don’t believe the business plan is “rubbish”, and the point about other T&Cs is largely irrelevant with Wizz Air and Ryanair offering vastly inferior pay and conditions to even the worst of the old Norwegian contracts. Competition from Norwegian may have been given a reason for attacks on T&Cs in certain airlines (whilst reporting a £2billion profit), but if the pilots chose to swallow it up rather than fight it, that’s up to them.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

1. Investors and their money will soon be parted, the leasing companies have little choice here as those Dreamliners need to be flying and no one is buying.
2. Two wrongs don't make a right, Norwegian famously used every trick in the Ryanair book and some more to avoid industry level terms and conditions. Pilots can't fight this when there's a never ending supply of kids paying tens of thousands of pounds to qualify as cadet pilots and the laws of supply and demand still apply.

These guys haven't flown a single flight yet but already they're talking about a UK subsidiary on a different AOC alongside whatever the Norse markets will support and to me that's already running before you can walk. You can either be in niche Norse markets that are underserved by SAS and charge good money to grow the market and be a profitable local player or do what they did before, get starry eyed over high volume low yield high frequency super competitive UK markets. It's already a pan European ego trip before one flight has flown IMHO.

[Vokes55]

So, again going by your theory, surely an airline planning to recruit enough pilots to fly twelve 787s is a positive, as it'll narrow (albeit slightly in Covid times) the gap between demand and supply? BA pilots had every opportunity to fight their diminishing terms and conditions, they just bottled it at the first hurdle when the company threatened to take their staff travel privileges away.

People like to jump on the employment terms bandwagon when it comes to Norwegian (/Norse), but turn a blind eye to the the employment terms of those flying the 130 pink and purple A320s or 450 blue and yellow 737s around Europe, the real bottom feeders who take the "never ending supply of kids" straight out of flight school. Norwegian 787 pilots had far from the worst T&Cs in Europe - probably industry average at worst - and none came straight out of flight school. It's just another excuse to be outraged at Norwegian.

[NickBarnes]

Jetblue have chosen Heathrow and Gatwick as their London airports

1x daily flights to JFK starts 30th September

[772]

interesting to have a split Lon operation, assume the LGW flight goes up the road as and when slots become available

[JW95]

NickBarnes

This is absolutely fantastic news for LGW and welcome after having a string of airlines recently suspend/leave Gatwick. Will be nice seeing JFK back on the departure boards again after so long. Plus, JetBlue won't be facing any direct competition from Gatwick (assuming BA don't reinstate their own JFK service). Looking forward to their arrival to the airport soon, I wonder which terminal they will be operating out of long term? Assuming North (provisionally)

[772]

Norwegian Mk2 I am sure will operate JFK but yes, BA JFK won’t return so that’s true. Be interesting regards terminals, North to start with. When south opens, next summer ? Be interesting to see who moves over, whether it will be the same as pre covid or not

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

BA need to slot sit their LGW slots as well so if the opportunity to strangle Zombie-Norwegian2 at birth, why not drop in a LGW-JFK? It's a poor tactical use of a B772 but it could be in their strategic interests. JetBlue are clearly after LHR slots, I'd be surprised if they really want to fly a small London operation across two airports, LHR slots may soon be selling at lower levels as weaker airlines seek emergency liquidity in fast cash, that may also be good news for LGW as some airlines will leave higher cost LHR.

[772]

im sure BA/IAG will want to slot sit at LGW as and when waivers are removed but only possible as long as they can protect and operate a large enough LHR schedule to protect all their slots up the road

[JW95]

Official press release and bookings now live :JetBlue | JetBlue Set to Bring Transatlantic Travelers Low Fares, New Choices and Incredible Service as It Lands at Both London Heathrow and London Gatwick (http://blueir.investproductions.com/investor-relations/press-releases/2021/05-19-2021-130145701)

First flights from LGW-JFK kick off 29th September 7 weekly A321LR service as long anticipated. Schedule upon launch will be:

JFK-LGW

Dep. JFK: 19:50
Arr. LGW: 7:55

LGW-JFK

Dep. LGW: 12:00PM
Arr. JFK: 15:33

JetBlue will be using the North Terminal (whether this is a temporary measure, due to the South Terminal closure remains to be seen). Absolutely delighted for Gatwick, I really am :) Press release also highlights Gatwick as an airport for the "long term growth" of the airline's London-US services, so seemingly confirms that they are indeed here for the long run and here to stay, despite also launching in parallel with LHR.

[keith williams]

sadly far too many people think that red means stop, green means go and amber means go as fast as you can. How many people really need to go on holiday to an amber country? How many people really need to be told that going to an amber country involves more risk than going to a green one?

[772]

But Going to an amber country is legal.

as long as you follow the rules on testing and home quarantine you aren’t breaking the law.

It becomes a grey area when you’re advised not to rather than not being allowed. Surely travel Insurance becomes invalid though if FCO advice against travel to a country?

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

JW95

I would 100% love to agree with you as I love Gatwick and flew many happy times out of it BUT I have been around to know press releases are PR fluff and forgotten tomorrow. They've fought hard for LHR slots and if they can get 1/2 decent ones as COVID casualties disrupt the slot pool, then they can compare LHR vs. LGW numbers and every single US airline that has operated from both airports has upped sticks and left Gatwick. Maybe narrow body A321 NEO ops will mean that will no longer happen but it will literally be unprecedented and we won't know until we're settled into a post COVID world.
Don't set your heart on it but fingers crossed.

[davidjohnson6]

Sounds like Belavia might not be flying to Gatwick for a while
https://news.sky.com/story/transport-secretary-tells-airlines-to-avoid-belarusian-airspace-after-journalist-detained-12315967

[pabely]

Should have renamed airport London Chelsea today!

[JW95]

Just noticed something strange on the LGW terminal page which has recently been updated to now no longer show Virgin Atlantic as operating at LGW. As has been the case for the past year, the South Terminal has been closed until further notice and all airlines are currently operating at the North Terminal. However, it indicates that China Airlines is/will operate from South upon their return later this year, while other airlines, including suspended users (e.g. Cathay Pacific, Air China) are now indicated to be operating North (again, assuming services are reinstated by these carriers in the near future). Is this a page error, or does it indicate that some of these airlines may be in the pipeline to return?

[BA318]

Its all a bit of a guessing game at the moment. China Airlines haven’t managed to get permanent slots at LHR so might come back. CX is doubtful. I imagine it would take a while to get back up to 5 daily at LHR given they are only at 5 per week at the moment. If demand really came back strong then maybe. Otherwise nobody really knows.

[rog747]

Re Virgin Atlantic at Gatwick - fairly soon after Worldwide Air Travel basically screeched to a halt and Lockdowns began over a year ago, Virgin Atlantic having furloughed or laid off most of it's Crews and ground staff formally announced to them that they would NOT ever be returning to LGW.
The brand new LGW Virgin Clubhouse was closed down, and Virgin's Gatwick HQ 'The Office' has been sold.

Ok so, big firms can change their minds over time, but there is no word that I know of VS going back to LGW.

Such a shame really, end of an Era.

[772]

anything can happen but I can’t see VS at LGW in the short to medium term. Maybe in the years to come some seasonal services if demand is such that LHR can’t handle all that VS wants to operate but even then I’m not sure.

EZY is so vitally important to GAL, now more than ever, I think they have 60% (?) of LGW slots? So once they get back to or close to utilising those then LGW will have it’s bread and butter back but replacing the likes of VS, BA short haul and DY won’t be easy. I know Wizz are always making great noises about LGW plans and Norwegian Mk2 may become reality but still gaps to fill

[allnamestaken1]

On a different note,does anybody know if the Gatwick Express is running,if not how do i get from Gatwick to central London.

[ezyBoh]

National Express coach.....

[BAladdy]

National express only operating there 025 service to London at present. It operates 4 x Daily via LHR

[davidjohnson6]

Southern services to Victoria and Thameslink services to London Bridge have been running throughout the pandemic and continue to run, albeit subject to the occasional bit of weekend engineering work

[allnamestaken1]

Thanks for your replys.

[pabely]

Should have renamed airport London Chelsea today!
Deffo now!

[brianj]

See Air Senegal are to operate a scheduled service to Stansted this summer operating 3 times a week to Dakar. Isn’t this the kind of traffic that should be selecting Gatwick? May not be a long term service but would at least look good for Gatwick.

[davidjohnson6]

Just before the pandemic, Air Senegal announced a plan to open a route to London in summer 2020 - but it was cancelled during the spring.
Do you have a source to indicate they will begin (or resume) flying to London in summer 2021 ?

[southside bobby]

Appear to be doing well over Dakar-MXP tho increasing to 5pw from 1.7.21 on A321.

[JW95]

772

Sadly, you're right. The airline is/has just undergone an enormous restructuring programme, including fleet downsizing and massive redundancies in an attempt to stay afloat in the midst of this truly awful pandemic. It is such a shame for both the airline and of course, for LGW, as it had historically been the birth place of the airline. Even prior to Covid, it is arguable that VS's commitment to LGW was questionable on the basis of stagnant growth, long standing leisure routes being moved across to LHR (LAS springs to mind) and the "flagship" A350s and 789s being stationed at LHR while older A332s and 744s were handed down to Gatwick. Saying that, I do recall VS planning to launch service to JFK from Gatwick, although I suspect this was largely driven to drive DY/BA off the route as opposed to base expansion. I really hope that VS will return to Gatwick one day, perhaps once LHR fills up again and VS need to utilise their slot portfolio to grow their business route frequencies (JFK, LAX et al.), then its possible the leisure and Caribbean flying will be transferred back to Gatwick. I think VS were quoted as mentioning they would be retaining their Gatwick slot portfolio for this such instance, does anyone know if they still have hold over the slots? They invested £££££££ in their check in/lounge there following the move to the North Terminal, so everything would (presumably) be ready to go for them if they come back.

[772]

this talk of VS retaining their LGW slots for a possible return, surely they mean as long as the slot waivers are in place? The minute the 80/20 rule is returned, or even a 50/50 then they’ll have to give them up surely.

[SWBKCB]

I really hope that VS will return to Gatwick one day, perhaps once LHR fills up again and VS need to utilise their slot portfolio to grow their business route frequencies

This might be what VS might want, but not great for LGW. Surely it's unrealistic for VS to to expect they can continue to block slots when they aren't using them and there are others wanting to fly from LGW.

[Downwind_Left]

772

The slot waiver specifically doesn’t apply here, because you have to operate some of them. An airport that you pull out of, you can’t protect the slots, for obvious reasons.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

The space will be repurposed by Gatwick Airport for another tennant, I don't think it will be mothballed in readiness for any return years from now as there's no return on the money being spent. As for Virgin, they have financing til the end of the year and then if key markets are not open in volume then they're back to refinancing again. A return to LGW would be a medium term "nice to have", survival with a LHR/MAN focus is all right now.

[772]

Downwind_Left

true but, sorry what I meant was when VS left they said they would retain the slots, I believe.

if the slot waivers are abolished surely either VS either have to come straight back or give up the slots?

I would have though BA not bringing back their short haul operation would be of much bigger concern to GAL than VS not returning

[772]

Skipness One Foxtrot

the checkin area is no big deal really, the atrium/self service area of N terminal zone A was modified for VS but wouldn’t take much to make it generic again. As for their lounges in the 4th floor, not sure GAL would, as mentioned above would mothball in case VS return. On the other hand, not sure what use the 4th floor lounges would have for anyone else in the N terminal. You already have mylounge and number1 lounge, Emirates (a smaller operation) and aspire lounges on other levels

with demand lower for years to come and lack of ‘premium’ airlines, I can’t see any use for the ex VS lounges in the N terminal

[JobsaGoodun]

772

With secondary slot trading permitted in the UK, VS can retain ownership of all of their LGW slots if they find another operator to lease them too. It might be more difficult just now, but LGW is still an attractive airport so it might be possible to do one, or multiple deals to avoid returning slots to the pool.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

I don't see demand being lower for years, once vaccine is globally available beyond a certain point, most countries NEED the trade to help pay off COVID debts, perhaps with a few exceptions. But demand is clearly massive albeit pent up and many people are accumulating large cash cushions they're dying to spend. I am pretty cynical, (no really I am!) but summer 2022 should be a boom summer, if not back to 2019 levels just yet. There will likely be some panicked restrictions as seasonal virus does it's thing in winter but most of us will be vaccinated.

The key disruptor event may be with LHR slots being freed up as some companies collapse or don't return which may well restrict a return to long haul at Gatters. China Airlines really doesn't want to be at LGW for example as they're at a competitive disadvantage against EVA being at LHR. BA have not retired their A320 fleet in large numbers, if you see that happening, then look to LGW being massively downsized. The only unscheduled withdrawals thus far have been the B747-400s and the 2 LGW based B777s to Teruel for "storage". The LGW A319s are rotating through LHR to keep them active.

[772]

JobsaGoodun

thank you I wasn’t aware of that

[brianj]

https://simpleflying.com/air-senegal-london-stansted/

[772]

Skipness One Foxtrot

do you know which LGW 777s are at Teruel? Assuming two of the three 4 clasS birds? Two from VIIV, VIIW, VIIY ?

[772]

Briana

interesting, I’m sure GAL would have hoped to attract Air Senegal

[CabinCrewe]

Can’t see it lasting at STN. Will move to LGW or LHR at some point.

[pamann]

That’s from last year. This hasn’t been announced for 2021.

[JW95]

I wonder if TUI might be relocated there (Zone A), as they have a fairly sizeable operation at LGW (once things are fully up and running again that is). Other contenders could be the yet-to-be announced Norse Atlantic operation mirroring the ex. DI network, although I suspect this is more likely to be South Terminal once it reopens. Hard to tell given the times at present, but I'm suspecting the space will be taken over by an airline with a fairly sizeable presence at the airport, given how large the check in zone/bag drop area is. It doesn't make sense logistically to have an airline permanently based there with small passenger flow while the rest of the space is unused.

[southside bobby]

Telegraph stating that BA are reviving plans to abandon LGW.

[FRatSTN]

I think it would make more sense now for IAG anyway to consolidate BA wholly as the hub carrier at Heathrow, and restructure/downsize Gatwick to a Vueling base for the short-haul, point-to-point lesiure traffic. In any case, cannot see IAG wanting to let go of a significant number of their Gatwick slots longer term.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

What's the point in setting up a Vueling base? They'd have to establish yet another British AOC with all the overheads and cost and spread over only one low cost base. BA LGW shares many costs with the parent, a blessing and a burden, but the days of high cost BA Gatwick are gone. If IAG want to be at LGW, BA was the AOC to use IMHO. There's not many more costs left to cut....

What this does is pressure Sean Doyle into having a business plan to take to the IAG Board they can buy into for the brave new world of post COVID. He could fight for a future at LGW but he'd need a strategy and focussed business plan. I don't think Accra or Doha were strategic moves, more like desperate tactical ones.

Maybe consolidating B777 long haul at LHR might be a halfway house to survival, with a smattering of paid off A320s based at LGW. Rename it British Airtours if you have to!

[JW95]

southside bobby

Dear God, please no for the sake of everyone at the airline, and of course LGW. Airports all over the world have been hit hard by this awful pandemic, but LGW in particular has taken a lot of beatings over the past year compared to some of the other London airports with the loss of VS and DI long haul. At this point I’m preying BA don’t go either- there will come a time, post pandemic, when LHR fills back up again and airlines will be looking to once again serve London. With this in mind, surely it makes sense for BA to retain their LGW base in the knowledge that if they leave, likelihood is that they won’t be able to return once air travel takes off again (I’m thinking of Wizz Air and EasyJet swooping in on their slots). Not everyone wants to have to trek down to LHR, be it for short or long haul

[Plastic787]

I think this is partly a case of Gallego wanting to own and rubber stamp the decision that Walsh made last year himself. Whilst there are definite short term difficulties the outlook is far more positive than it was at Easter and early summer last year. Given at that time Walsh made the decision to retain a presence at Gatwick, it is difficult to see what would reverse that decision given that the outlook certainly for Summer 2022 is far better (providing a modicum of sanity returns to the equation from HMG). Let’s face it though this has been very difficult to predict from day one so I very certainly could be wrong.

Don’t forget also that LGW is on its knees right now and IAG/BA may be wishing to extract further concessions, they’d be foolish not to at least try. As Skipness says above the Airbus fleet has remained largely untouched, until BA/IAG issue a press release to say we are terminating our LGW operations this is pinch of salt territory, but still enormously stressful for the remaining BA employees at Gatwick.

[772]

well this is depressing to read and also caught me a bit by surprise. I had thought having restarted ops a year ago at LGW and limping along as they have that the LGW operation may have been OK.

who knows how much of a review this is or whether it’s a done deal, only time will tell, awful news potential for LGW, the local area and the good folk at BA LGW who have been through this only a year ago

[Douglas Bahada]

The Telegraph says that the order has come from parent company IAG – possibly implying that British Airways management is not in favour – which is paranoid about the long term impact of losing take-off and landing slots at Heathrow.

As we have covered many times on Head for Points since covid appeared, an airline has to use an airport slot on 80% of dates. If it fails to do so, the slot is automatically forfeited and made available to any other airline which wants it.

There are two slot ‘seasons’, Winter and Summer, with switchover dates in late March and late October. There are separate slot pools for each season.

Since Spring 2020, the slot rules have been suspended. With some caveats, British Airways can run as few flights as it wants at present with no risk of having the slots taken away.

At some point, possibly next Spring but almost certainly in Autumn 2022, this waiver will end.

Without a waiver, British Airways will have to start running its full pre-covid schedule or it will start to forfeit slots. This simply isn’t possible – with the retirement of the Boeing 747 fleet, I doubt it has enough aircraft to do so, even if it wanted to.

Without a slot waiver, moving British Airways flights from Gatwick to Heathrow is the easiest – and probably only – way to ensure that the airline keeps its full slot portfolio.

Luis Gallego, chief executive of IAG, reportedly told analysts last month that:

“Gatwick is an important decision that we need to take as a group. It’s true that we have the issue with the slots.

“Gatwick has some strategic value, but we need to be competitive there. This crisis is going to change the profile … of the demand. So we are analysing the different options.”

[CabinCrewe]

Presuming the daily LCA flights with DE are some sort of W pattern or do they have a based aircraft in Cyprus?
Didn't they operate from UK/MAN in the past alongside TCX? Lets see if it gets off the ground.

[772]

condor operating LGW-LCA?

[pamann]

The timings are delightful. :yuk:

[772]

Just seen it on Twitter, those timings :yuk: wow

W rotation. Oh well, a new route for LGW in these times must be welcomed!

[True Blue]

Gatwick arrivals showing a lot of Wizz routes that maybe have been planned but never released for sale. So if the information there is in anyway correct, would seem to show that they have been planning at this stage to have 9 based aircraft?

[Charley B]

As I understand Wizz will restart here 30/7 ...not sure how many based aircraft though

[FRatSTN]

The flight info will be showing what's in the schedule. W9 are obviously still holding the slots and don't have the need to hand them back currently.

[pamann]

Some interesting destinations shown by Wizz. Looks more like the Luton departure/arrival boards. Could be bad news for the latter if Wizz do expand Gatwick.

[pabely]

complement, wouldn't want to loose Luton slots.

[pamann]

You hope :ok:

[Downwind_Left]

FRatSTN

To retain the slots without using them they need to be handed back, at least 3 weeks before the date of operation.

If you don’t hand them back by that deadline, you’re classed as not having operated them, and will be subject to the normal rules of having them removed. The hand-back requirement is so the slots can be re-allocated as a series or as ad-hoc slots to another operator while the historic operator isn’t using them.

The waiver also doesn’t apply to any operator who’s pulled out of an airport completely, so no waiver for Virgin Atlantic at LGW. Can’t retain historic slots at an airport with no flights operating at all.

The hand back rules allow launches such as the JetBlue at LHR that had previously been denied slots.

I think the above rules are important, they protect airlines dealing with reduced demand. But they also protect airports by opening up unused slots to other airlines. Otherwise incumbents would just sit on their slots, not use them, but the airport would be closed to new entrants due to there being no slots available!!

[Downwind_Left]

Great arrival experience today at LGW this afternoon with TUI (from a Green List Destination)

Had been braced for the worst after hearing horror stories about long waits in arrivals at UK airports generally.

Aircraft arrived on stand a couple of minutes early on 47L, followed by a 10 minute wait for steps.
10 minute walk to immigration to find e-gates open and no queue whatsoever. Straight through with a friendly comment from the host asking If I'd had a nice holiday.
Downstairs to find all bags already on carousel. On way to car 15 minutes after disembarking, 25 min after arriving on stand.

Yes it was mid-afternoon and airport was quiet, but still a pleasant and stress-free experience.

Only criticism would be that every single travelator airside in North Terminal was switched off and barriered off as out of use. I know the airport is saving money by doing this... But a lot of the people on my flight weren't young and the nearly 800m walk was a huge hike. Thought it was a bit of a middle digit to many of their customers currently providing vital business to the airport. Personally, I tend not to use them before/after being sat idle on an aircraft for hours, even preferring to walk the tunnel to/from the B/C Gates at LHR T5.

[AirportPlanner1]

LGW is getting a route to Dakar of its own as TUI are launching a weekly flight in winter ‘22, Covid permitting of course. Evidently a new beach resort is under construction.

[VickersVicount]

Not sure would be my first choice of venue. Banjul Gambia on same coast used to be all the rage in the 90’s with Monarch, Tania etc all serving but died a death.

[pamann]

Tui are due to resume Banjul twice weekly from 02/11/21 after possibly a 10 year(ish) absence?

It never really died of death, it just wasn’t a feature of any mainstream operators. The Gambia Experience have featured charter flights for years ex LGW/BRS/MAN (possibly others) using the likes of Titan I believe.

[inOban]

The change in government in the Gambia a few years ago may be a factor in the return.

[AirportPlanner1]

It looks an interesting place and I would jump at the chance to go - perhaps not the beach resort so much - but I agree it may be a hard sell in the UK. I suspect it will be successful from other parts of the TUI network, it’s only one flight a week from the UK so I guess if it doesn’t sell they will pull it or if it doesn’t sell well enough it’ll be a one-season wonder.

[Flightrider]

Good on for TUI trying something new.

Banjul was a staple of Thomas Cook's winter flying programme for several years, alongside the Monarch A300s and 757s for Gambia Experience. Ebola was the biggest single impact on the market and there has been little or no mainstream activity there since.

Although it wasn't an every-day thing, I seem to recall more than a few tech stops in Dakar coming north out of Banjul where no fuel was available, after tankering everything you could on an LGW-BJL to keep enough on board to then get from BJL to DKR with sufficient reserves.

[bycrewlgw]

Interesting choice of destination. Having said that a few other seemingly ‘random’ destinations have popped up over the years with various tour operators. Good on them for giving the Brits who want something different to Benidorm etc.

People will just need to remember that while it’s a secular government, Islam is the main religion of the population and local customs and modesty will need to be followed more closely than in other destinations where tourism is more established such as Tunisia and Egypt. Not that that will be a problem with the tourists it should attract. LGBT+ people should pay particular attention to local laws as the President recently stated that maximum penalities will ALWAYS be used. Included on those ‘suspected’ 😳.

checked the flights, no premium available so guessing it’s a 737Max route?

[rog747]

Good on for TUI trying something new.

Banjul was a staple of Thomas Cook's winter flying programme for several years, alongside the Monarch A300s and 757s for Gambia Experience. Ebola was the biggest single impact on the market and there has been little or no mainstream activity there since.

Although it wasn't an every-day thing, I seem to recall more than a few tech stops in Dakar coming north out of Banjul where no fuel was available, after tankering everything you could on an LGW-BJL to keep enough on board to then get from BJL to DKR with sufficient reserves.

Not so new - in the early 1990's Thomson Holidays began a series of Dakar coast package beach holidays from LGW using a 757 iirc of in-house Britannia AW.
They wanted to do it as a there and back for the crew - Big hoo hah - my flat mate was a #1 CC for BY at LGW and told me all about it.
The series lasted not even one season I think.
Crew did not want to night stop as they felt it was too dodgy, but OK for Thomson's to sell package holidays to the punters lol.
Now it appears new resorts are being built there so we will have to see if it sells.
Senegal saw the introduction of the first Club Med resort in the 1970s, and tourism has grown to be an important part of the Senegalese economy.
Since the 1990s, Senegal has made an effort to reach beyond visitors from the former colonial power France and was trying in attracting tourists from Spain, Britain and Italy, in part motivated by the example of neighbouring Gambia, which drew a much larger tourist share from Northern Europe.

Having now lost most of the Egypt and Tunisia market for years now, I guess Tour Operators are scratching around for new beaches, or those that do not suffer from ''resort fatigue''...

Banjul as we know gained bigger popularity in the early 1970's, mainly at first discovered by the Swedes, who love the sunshine, and then of course the Germans.
BCAL had the route and had built a new hotel on the beach (Atlantic ?) so it then soon became the darling of the Brits for some exotic winter sun, being not too far away.
BCAL's Blue Sky holidays offered the destination.
In 1976, Alex Haley published his novel called Roots. It was made into a TV mini-series the following year and received many awards. Roots is about Kunta Kinteh and the subsequent generations of his family. He was a slave from West Africa, taken to America from his village on the northern banks of The Gambia river.
It was this TV series that created interest and helped to put The Gambia and the West Africa people on the map.
The site of his birthplace is now a common tourist attraction in The Gambia.

Thomson with Britannia 737-200's in 1977 made the first UK package charter flights to BJL (with a Tech stop) and the crews night stopped.

Tania 737-200 here at BJL https://i0.wp.com/jamoroki.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/187.jpg?resize=768%2C780&ssl=1

Most UK charter airlines then started to fly to BJL as we know for their winter staple business, along with the Canary islands.
Business boomed until the military coup in 1994 and the Gambia holiday business was then never the same again.
70% of the business was lost overnight.
In 2006 the Government sought to draw up a master plan to re energise the market by 2020.
A less than savoury part of the BJL travel business for the past 30 years has seen flocks of European women of a certain age seeking ''company and comfort'' at a cost, with young Gambian beach boys known as Bumsters. An issue not specific to the Gambia, but also present in Jamaica, Tunisia, Turkey and Egypt.

The Gambia and Senegal are not Playa de las Americas, nor Benidorm.
Quote from - AirportPlanner1
I guess if it doesn’t sell they will pull it, or if it doesn’t sell well enough it’ll be a one-season wonder as seen before. Yup!

[SWBKCB]

Wasn't Banjul largely self-contained 'fully inclusive' resorts which customers got bussed into and barely left?

[rog747]

As such not really - but there was not a lot to do around the hotels, some of which were remote, and standalone on the beach - as is the new RIU Baobab Hotel in Senegal (Likewise same with Cape Verde hotels)

All-Inclusive had not been invented back then as a product. It was still HB or FB...
There are tourist attractions in The Gambia, and some offbeat tourism.

Montego Bay gained popularity in the 1970's with Thomson Sky Tours which is why Britannia AW got 2 707C's for a bit.
That was very much stay behind the hotel wall and don't go out....
The Mombasa coast beach hotels - same - very popular in it's day - may make a comeback???

[772]

Thank you all for your inputs, all very interesting and yes I remember much of what has been talked about. Good memories..

mombasa, now there is a thing. MON used to operate it I think? I certainly remember the days of ASA African Safari Airways operating a weekly charter into LGW from Mombasa with the DC10 then The A310, I think (?) it operated via Basel, it sure if that was always a thing or a tech stop at times.

re Banjul, yes Titan operated the route on behalf of The Gambia experience in 2018/9 I think, 767 was quite frequent, also Enter Air. Passengers mix was always a mix of VFR as well as tourists

[Vokes55]

I believe there is a meat market not far from the threshold of one of the runways in BJL, which attracts a number of large birds and has resulted in a disproportionally high number of bird strikes, including the 2016 one which nearly wiped out both engines on a TCX A321. After that, Thomas Cook changed their flight times to depart BJL in the late evening once the market had closed - looking at the times of the TUI flights, it seems they’ve done the same.

Off topic but thought that pointless bit of trivia might be of interest.

[rog747]

772

Always fun to read Trivia and anecdotes on here.

As for MBA Mombasa - always been at first popular with the Germans, Scandinavians, and the Swiss since the 1960's.

Sterling LTU Condor and even Paninternational 1-11 500's flew there,
along with African Safari Airways - call sign Zebra.

Swiss entrepreneur Karl Jakob Rüdin, at the collapse in 1967 of his Globe Air airline after the crash of a Britannia, and irregularities found during the after crash investigation, Rüdin was necessitated to disappear from front lines.
So Kenya, a destination he knew well from his airline back ground, proved best. Rüdin with the help of 'others' money would soon acquire hotels and he made good contacts with the highest Kenyan authorities, such as President Kenyatta and the Coastal Commissioner.
Rudin was interested in creating a complete holiday getaway in Kenya with his Company taking care of everything for his passengers along the way and he founded the tour operator African Safari Club, and they would start with their very own Watamu Beach Hotel, being constructed in the coastal town of Mombasa, followed by the Bahari Beach Hotel, the Silver Beach Hotel and the Silver Star Hotel. From then, nothing stood in his way, and he became one of the big tycoons of Kenya.
Rüdin would form his own airline, African Safari Airways to fly the passengers to the ASC hotels. The airline would use a previously owned Globe Air Bristol Britannia aircraft along with 2 others to launch charter flights from Switzerland, France, Germany and the UK to Mombasa Airport.
Britannia's would continue on to fly to 1972 when they were replaced with larger Douglas DC-8s. African Safari would upgrade these, replacing the smaller DC-8 30 with DC-8 50s and DC-8 63 types.
Business was booming for ASC with more than 60,000 passengers carried to Mombasa a year. At that time, ASC also benefited from the huge hit film "Out of Africa" ​​(1985) which was set mainly in Kenya.
While the airline was small, the African Safari Club was expanding and would own 12 Beach hotels and 5 Safari Lodges and a cruise ship. Unfortunately, this expansion would not be sustainable and the company started to take on huge debts as the Gulf War and oil crisis of the early 1990s drove down the demand for leisure travel. The airline would also have to respond to the fuel-guzzling Douglas DC-8s that would be replaced with an ex-KLM DC-10 30 in 1992.
Internally ASC was seeking ways to solve the company’s increasingly dire financial situation, and so appointed a new CEO in hopes of fixing the tour operator’s financial woes. While hotel property changes would be small, the airline changes would be substantial. The idea of owning more aircraft for African Safari Airways would cease as the DC-10 would be removed from the fleet in 2002 in favour of leasing 2 Airbus A310s from Hapag-Lloyd of Germany. Although African Safari Club would limber on through the 2000s, the company used various asset sales to stay afloat. The situation worsened in 2002 with the Mombasa attacks, and in 2007 when the Kenyans saw a bloody political uprising take place following the Presidential elections which many saw as rigged. The violence across Kenya forced African Safari Club to issue a statement that their resorts were not impacted by the threat of violence and that tourists would be safe on their property. However, the scenes coming from Kenya were more than enough to drive tourists away.
By 2008 African Safari had trimmed their hotels to just nine. The airline was down to one 233-seat Airbus A310, operating with 54,000 passengers per year with a route map similar to the one they started with in the 1960s. As a result of the drop in passengers and the general downturn ASA would be the next asset to be removed. The airline would be suspending charter flights in 2009 and the Airbus A310 would be returned to its lessor, but before this it had started to outsource its MBA flights to airlines such as Monarch and Edelweiss.
Sadly African Safari Club would continue its downward spiral until the entire company collapsed in 2011 and filed for bankruptcy.

Back to Gatwick - Mombasa, sought of on topic, Monarch, Britannia, Caledonian, and Air 2000 all served the hugely popular Gatwick-Mombasa holiday route from the late 1980's with 757.767, and Tristar aircraft mostly all having an en-route stop to refuel.
At that time along with Mombasa, we saw The Maldives, Goa, and Thailand all added to the Gatwick resume of seasonal (winter) exotic charter airline flights, joining long standing Banjul.

In 2002 saw the Mombasa attacks against an Israeli-owned beach hotel and an attempt to shoot down a Boeing 757-300 belonging to Arkia Airlines.
An all-terrain vehicle crashed through a security barrier outside the Paradise Hotel and blew up, killing 13 and injuring 80. At the same time, attackers fired two surface-to-air missiles at an Israeli Arkia 757 charter plane but they missed.
The attacks were believed to be orchestrated by al-Qaeda operatives in Somalia in an attempt to disrupt the Israeli tourist industry to Africa.
The attack was the second al-Qaeda terrorist operation in Kenya, following the bombing of the U.S. embassy in Nairobi in 1998.
Following the attacks, the UN Security Council and other nations condemned them and in 2003 Western countries advised all of their citizens against traveling to Kenya because of the terrorist threat. British Airways stopped flying to NBO and most Charter flights would cease.
This negatively impacted Kenya's economy which was based mostly in the tourism industry, and the Kenyan economy began losing nearly $130 million per week.
To this day stability and security for holidays to Kenya remains uncertain, along with Egypt and Tunisia.

So we come full circle back to the OP about a new Gatwick- Dakar route for TUI Holidays, and the topic of Banjul still sustaining holidays....
BIG Q mark for me.

[AirLCY]

Great to read the history - but it does seem the pandemic is forcing airlines to re-think / think outside of their normal comfort zones !

[Buster the Bear]

https://www.airport-technology.com/news/uk-gatwick-airport-slot-allocation-plan/

[CW247]

Apologies for going a little off topic... Does one have to pay for using the Gatwick "Drop off" Zone even if just passing through and not stopping?

[FlyboyUK]

Yes I believe so. Think it’s all done with ANPR cameras.

[FlyboyUK]

New easyJet route to Bergamo starting this winter

[772]

a route BA launched in 2019, never performed very well and with Milan being the epicentre of the Italian and European covid outbreak loads fell off a cliff very early in February.

im sure knowing EasyJet , they will make a go of it

apologues, 2019 not 2020

[LBA]

I flew LGWBGY with BA Sep 19 well before COVID

[772]

apologies, yes 2019 you’re right,

[JW95]

With travel restrictions beginning to lift and the negation of quarantine for some amber-listed destinations, does this give slight prospect of LGW reopening the South terminal this year? LHR have just reopened Terminal 3, so there are signs that travel is beginning to recover at long last. That said, it is clear that LGW has been the worst hit of the London airports over the last 18 months, and no doubt LGW are keen to have more clarity on the future of BA's operation here, since they are the biggest user of the South terminal. Am personally hoping it will be reopened soon. I've always enjoyed travelling through the South, and it'll be nice to see more airlines (long and short haul) return to LGW as the UK continues to build back up again RE. air travel. Prior to Covid, the airport was doing very well with a great mix of carriers, so it'll be nice to see LGW flourish again :)

[vectisman]

As I said right at the beginning of this thread I an confident that Gatwick will flourish again, even though it make take a bit of time.

Some of those airlines who have managed to get slots at LHR during the pandemic may be edged out of there by the higher costs involved and the established carriers returning to
use their slots more fully. Today I see Loganair will be pulling out of the Isle of Man to LHR route, part of the reason being the higher costs of operating from LHR.
Maybe they should try LGW! I remember Flybe used to operate 4 to 5 flights a day from the Isle of Man to Gatwick. Even when Easyjet entered the route they continued. Both carriers serving slightly different market segments.

As for British Airways we may know more when they announce their results on Friday. They have invested a lot in their facilities at Gatwick in recent times, and were carrying nearly 6 million passengers a year from the airport
pre-pandemic. I am not sure all of those customers will follow them to Heathrow. They had based aircraft of about 45 in the summer months. The airline has said that Gatwick management is more commercially focused than the team at LHR. There must be a great deal to be done! Hopefully we will know soon.
I am sure that BA will take into consideration what happened back in 2008 when they decided not to buy GB Airways. Result, Easyjet swooped and have never looked back! I believe pre-pandemic Easyjet had 60 plus based aircraft.
Personally I believe the airport needs both airlines to them both on their toes!

Generally there was a good mix of operators and route offerings pre-pandemic. Hopefully these days will return eventually.

I believe Virgin Atlantic may also rue the day they decided to pull out completely. I think there will be surging demand for the kind of holidays Virgin Holidays offered from Gatwick at competitive prices.

I am no expert, but just a few of my thoughts.

[Vokes55]

South will reopen when BA make a meaningful return to LGW. Without BA's sizeable operation and Norwegian's 787s, which accounted for the bulk of South's activity, there's no need for it. They've only just reopened Pier 6 in the North Terminal.

Last Friday was the busiest day in terms of outbound passenger numbers since March 2020, however it was only a few hundred more than the busiest day of last Summer, had fewer flights than the busiest day of last Summer, and was about a fifth of the number of passengers on the equivalent day in 2019. A long way to go.

[JW95]

vectisman

Very much agreed with you good sir! I think China Airlines haven't secured long term slots at LHR (I stand corrected), in which case, we should see them back at LGW for W21, unless things change. I am also hoping that other long haul carriers will return to LGW over the course of time in the short/medium term. Cathay Pacific were doing very well on their HKG route right up to its suspension in February last year. I reckon that CX will opt to get the existing LHR services back up to 5 daily 77Ws first and then look at returning to LGW. This has long been a flagship route for Cathay, and I'm sure demand will build back up again once restrictions are further lifted, in which case, the airline will need more than just its 5 daily LHR 77W flights. So I'm very hopeful that LGW has not seen the last of Cathay.

Regarding British Airways- like you, I am also hopeful that they won't pull the plug on LGW completely. They have invested heavily in their LGW base in recent years, particularly with the relatively recent move to the South Terminal, which makes the terminal stand out as "home" to British Airways in a way North never was. Similarly, the LGW 772 fleet has also recently been reinvigorated and gradually increased in size prior to Covid. Indeed Wilie Walsh has frequently given his preference of LGW over LHR owing to management style and quality of facilities. So I can't see a complete withdrawal. I can see the cost-saving merits a consolidation to LHR could bring to BA, however, I reckon they would be fools to do what VS have done and pull out completely, as that'll just cement EZY's dominance in LGW even further. LHR will, inevitably fill back up again, and airlines like BA and VS will need to think of shifting short and long haul leisure flying back to LGW while keeping the business-orientated services at LHR. So LGW does hold value for both airlines in the long term, and no doubt BA will be factoring this into their operational review. I also agree RE VS- again, withdrawing from LGW made sense from a cost-saving point of view, however, they will find it increasingly harder to get back into Gatwick in a year or two from now if Easyjet and Wizz get their way and expand. In which case, there will be very little, if any slots left for VS to return to.

[Musket90]

JW95 - Completely agree. Gatwick is important to BA and switching most Gatwick flights to Heathrow due COVID effect is a temporary measure to be expected to reduce cost. As the BA network at Heathrow continues to recover then BA will return to Gatwick.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

I think with COVID hammering aviation, when the 80/20 rule returns there will be slot churn at LHR. It's clear China Airlines, Westjet and jetBlue don't actually want to be at LGW and so I'd suspect they'd snap up any of the available slots. jetBlue taking really sub-optimal LHR slots to just get started shows that much. LGW's future expansion is likely to be Wizz Air focussed more than anything.

[Vokes55]

Not sure how you draw the conclusion that it's clear Westjet don't want to be at LGW, considering they've continued to operate into Gatwick over the past 18 months despite the fact they could've easily got temporary slots into Heathrow. It's also been said many times that existing users of LGW will not let Wizzair get a significant foothold in LGW, as was evident by Norwegian's slot sale to easyJet, but keep repeating the same thing as you please.

[vectisman]

I have just listened to the IAG results podcast question and answer session. A question was asked about Gatwick. Sean Doyle said they were reviewing Summer 2022 at Gatwick. They are in talks with stakeholders.
He also said they had to remain competitive in certain market segments, that he hinted would be even more price sensitive than pre-covid. I take this to mean the leisure and VFR marketS.
This could be hopeful news for Gatwick as it is a lower cost airport to operate from as well as being a more leisure orientated operation.
As I have said above, the Gatwick management is commercially pragmatic(perhaps more so than the management at LHR) and hopefully both airport and airline can see the advantages of a mutually beneficial deal.

[CabinCrewe]

curiously despite covid, I heard the travelling domestic connections to euro ‘beach’ routes eg Mykonos etc are going great guns from LHR, levels far higher than short haul LGW. Just shows what more extensive domestic connections can do and the appeal of transfer through T5 LHR for the (slightly more) premium leisure traveller. BA are taking note..

[vectisman]

Interesting comment Cabin Crew. Maybe more domestics at Gatwick then. Joking! However it isn't all about the front cabin although that is important.
Also as demand returns and slots become scarcer, (as they will overtime), does a A320 to Mykonos compare to 777 to New York. Some leisure destinations are more premium than others too.
I don't doubt your point but it may depend on destination. BA have also never flown to Mykonos from Gatwick.

[055166k]

Perhaps the clever money is on Wizz to do the Atlantic with 321NEOs? Why break the bank on wide-bodies?

[davidjohnson6]

Much as I would like to see Gatwick in S22 running at full capacity and BA returning with their S19 schedule.... I think this is unlikely. Despite the progress with vaccines, much of the world outside N.America/western Europe remains unvaccinated and it will take a long time to achieve vaccination levels compared to the UK. Furthermore, there is the possibility of a new variant emerging, and I imagine after the volatility over S20 and S21 as to which countries are or are not permitted from the UK, passengers are going to be a little bit cautious about spending money only to find they have to cancel to avoid quarantine
S22 is going to be a rebuild-confidence season.... we are unlikely to see a robust and thiriving Gatwick before S23

[772]

there are beach routes and there are beach routes, routes such as Mykonos, santorini etc the more niche destinations and ones harder to reach from the regions were always LHR routes even pre covid. The AGP, ALC, FAO etc types are easier from the regions so connections through London is much less attractive, sure BA offer a club product unlike the regions but for. 2 1/2 / 3 hour to somewhere like AGP, connecting rather than direct is not very attractive,also pre covid BA didn’t need feed onto the LGW beach routes as they were filled with Gatwick joiners

[bycrewlgw]

also don’t forget that choice of destinations is very limited at the moment so those who are desperate to get away will compromise and go to any destination that they can resulting in higher levels on routes that may not have been as popular before Covid.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Vokes55

Plainly evidenced by the fact they keep applying for LHR slots but didn't get enough to move the whole operation and so stayed for another year at LGW. To compete against Air Canada, their primary competition, they want to move. They're not a loco anymore. easyJet are as big as they're likely to get. That base is mature with a tremendously strong network and frequency. There just isn't the same growth anymore, so frankly, I disagree. But maybe WestJet love Gatwick, are really loyal and won't move like everyone else did, I could be wrong. Perhaps Wizz won't get into LGW after all in numbers, but that just makes it even more orange....

[JW95]

Vokes55

I very much agree with you. It is true that WS has gradually been moving away from its initial LC-orientated strategy since the arrival of their 789 and their new business class product. However, I still reckon they are predominately leisure-focused, in which case, Gatwick works well for them. Plus, let's not forget the value of LGW's catchment area - at least prior to Covid, it was very strong, and I reckon WS sense the value in that. It is the scarcity of suitable long term slots at LHR that is informing the decision to remain at LGW- WS knows that it simply does not have the frequency and scale in order to effectively compete against Air Canada's LHR operation (and thats not mentioning BA's Canadian services, which again are vastly larger in scope compared to what WS can currently offer even if at LHR). My hunch is that WS will remain at LGW, after all, a move to LHR does not by any means guarantee success for every airline.

[Vokes55]

Westjet were operating two cargo flights a week throughout most of the winter, and are up to the dizzying heights of four passenger flights a week right now. If Ukraine, Pegasus, Jazeera, Rwandair, Blue Air, Vistara, Loganair and just about every Chinese airline could get temporary slots into LHR, I’m sure Westjet could have, especially if they “don’t actually want to be at LGW”.

[FRatSTN]

Pegasus have only been operating into LHR because of Turkey's red-light status, and even then they're still operating freight only into and passenger out of STN. Their focus is still very much on STN and I'm sure that will be the case for some incumbent carriers at LGW too.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Vokes55

The reason they didn't was they expected they'd end up having to run a split LHR/LGW operation as they have four daily flights on a BAU basis and couldn't make the move all at once, or worse move back to LGW entirely when things pick up. But you knew that. 😏 The examples you gave are mostly new entrants at once daily or less. Loganair got special treatment for domestic connectivity. Westjet as a new entrant didn't get enough to move everything in one go.

The fact they consistently keep applying for enough LHR slots to close their LGW operation shows how commited they are to LGW.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

JW95

BA's Canadian services are poor. YYC gone, YUL a mere B788, YYZ twice daily and YVR daily. WS want to better compete against Air Canada and to fill the front cabin easier, they want to move to LHR. They can't match Air Canada but they can compete better with BA to Western Canada and YYZ. Your point would be a good one if we were talking about Air Transat, who did try LHR for a few years and are genuinely better fitted and do well at LGW.
Talk of a "Gatwick catchment area" is not helpful IMHO. It's a Canada-London market predominantly here, and for the segment WS seek to grow, LHR makes more sense. That's why they keep trying to leave LGW!

[Vokes55]

So you’re saying that they didn’t move their less than daily London service to LHR over the past 16 months just in case they couldn’t get slots for the seasonal 737 service to YYT next year and had to keep it at LGW?

If they were as desperate to leave LGW as you suggest, they would’ve moved to LHR over the past year. And if they were as desperate to leave LGW as you suggest, they’d accept a split operation.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Yes that's my understanding, they're understandably reluctant to run a split operation. If they were so keen on Gatwick, please remind me why they keep applying for enough LHR slots to close LGW completely. That's the bit of your argument that baffles me, For example, Norwegian were committed to making LGW a long haul powerhouse, they invested heavily. That's not the case here I think. We'll see what happens

[Vokes55]

I never said the won’t leave LGW, I replied to your typically anti-LGW remark that they “don’t actually want to be there”. They’ve had plenty of opportunities to move to LHR over the past 16 months but haven’t bothered. And if they “don’t actually want to be there”, they’d move their most important/competitive routes to LHR and run a split operation until they can obtain all the slots they want. They wouldn’t be the first airline to run a split operation between LHR/LGW. They haven’t done either.

Anyone can apply for slots at LHR, it doesn’t cost them anything. Norwegian even obtained slots at LHR.

[BA318]

It has a cost if you want any kind of reasonable number or useable slots. The slots Norwegian got were unusable for any decent route hence they didn’t use them.

There is a significant cost involved in split ops so Westjet could very much want to leave LGW but not be willing to pay double and so just wait until it is able to move completely.

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

What happened to most long haul airlines who ran split LHR/LGW ops?
NWA, US Airways, Delta? Continental? All ran PR saying they'd still serve LGW, all had comparative nos between the two, all closed LGW. The exception being Cathay which opened LGW again at the peak of LON-HKG traffic which given the current situation in Hong Kong seems to suggest that peak won't be seen again for many a year, so will they need a 6th daily London rotation? I suspect not. Not sure Qatar will be back at LGW or CWL but Emirates will go from strength to strength, but even that is a different sub fleet of low capacity premium cabins and high volume economy on some flights. Suspect Icelandair will be back too but a split operation is not something Westjet want to do from what I understand.

As for my "typically anti Gatwick remark", I'd say I have flown almost as much from LGW as from LHR. Pre T5 I preferred LGW North over LHR T1 every time when flying BA. I have fond memories of what LGW used to have, but the commercial reality is what it is unless government re-regulates. I am genuinely hugely fond of the place but it has, more than most UK airports, changed beyond all recognition for me.

And the worst of it is, jetBlue will move lock, stock and barrell to LHR just as soon as they can. It is what it is, it's ***p for LGW sadly.

[Vokes55]

Not really sure what your point is. I’m not denying that a split operation would probably result in the whole op moving to LHR, but the fact is that they haven’t even done that yet. Even with the door wide open to them.

BA318

Genuinely intrigued to know what you believe the “significant cost involved” of a split operation is? And what exactly you believe would cost double?

[BA318]

Well you’d need facilities and contracts at both airports. Two sets I assume would mean two costs. You need staff at both destinations. You can no doubt get a better deal at one place being served by four flights a day than one flight at one and two or three at another.

Very few long haul carriers split their London ops. Most that do, did it fairly big with multiple daily flights- Emirates, Qatar, BA and Virgin. I think CX was one of the few that split ops with just a daily flight at the second airport.

[Rutan16]

And yet pre COVID Gatwick handled MORE UK passengers going and returning than Heathrow - your reference to use North terminal included . The fact much most were point to point should not be under estimated.

And its become quite evident the US route domination at Heathrow has become a serous risk to that airports portfolio in these times !

Compared to the other European Hubs including Amsterdam/Frankfurt and Roissy, that reliance and rapid loss of the North Atlantic has been devastating has it not ?

[Skipness One Foxtrot]

Actually we agree. LGW has always been more about Brits going on holiday than international connections, was ever thus. But as for "devestating", I am unclear of your point as LGW took a much bigger hit than LHR with COVID.

[True Blue]

There are actually 2 other reasons at play as to why airlines move to Lhr from Lgw:
1. Higher yield. That much vaunted reason pushed as a success story actually means higher fares for us, especially at the front end of the plane. Because of this, it actually suits airport/airlines for Lgw to never become successful in long-haul. So Lhr, airlines, frequent flyer programmes, big corporations, they all act together to ensure it is always more attractive to fly from there, for a number of reasons. If you have status with an airline, are you going to miss those perks to go fly from Lgw with another airline, even though the fare might be less?
2. Airlines themselves have an obsession with Lhr, like a snobbish obsession. Think of some of the airlines that have recently moved to Lhr, like Jazeera, Rwandair, some also from Ltn and Stn and ask yourself, what benefit will it be to them? They are not part of an alliance so connecting traffic is not a part of the story. I bet the passenger who would use these airlines would use them whether at Lgw or Lhr. Think of some of the airlines who did move to Lhr and they were no bigger success there, Garuda comes to mind. Remember we all make silly decisions, so do the chief execs at the top of airlines.

[BA318]

I wouldn't say it's a snobbish obsession. Jazeera and Rwandair among others are not competing on their own. They are up against Kuwait Airways, BA, Emirates, Qatar etc. So when people search for flights they will be at a disadvantage offering LGW while the rest all go to LHR. For many abroad, they know LHR has the tube so assume it is easier. Garuda wouldn't make those London flights work regardless of where they flew - its a corrupt, basket case of an airline and is massively reducing in size now reality has caught up with it. And plenty of people will still connect even if the airlines are not in an alliance together. When looking for flights from my home in Sweden, I'm usually always offered routings via LHR with non-partner airlines like SAS connecting to VS or SAS connecting onto Rwandair for example.

As to the point about higher yield, part of that is the perceived better location of LHR. Lots of companies along the M4 for example. I worked in Mayfair and commuted and I tried all airports offering the route I took at the time. LGW, LHR and STN and for me LHR was without a doubt the easiest, cheapest and quickest. After that I didn't even bother looking at LGW because it was too much hassle and the schedules were much more holiday focused leaving earlier or arriving too late, where as at LHR I had a choice of carriers with multiple flights a day so I had flexibility to take an earlier or later flight depending how things went and in the one instance I had problems, it was easy for them to move me to another carrier.

[True Blue]

Yes all nicely established, very hard for Lgw to break that down now.

[inOban]

On the other hand there are lots of communities south of the river, and indeed north of London for whom it us much easier to get to LGW by direct train than to get to LHR. Crossrail next year will make quite a difference to reaching LHR from East London.

[vectisman]

Maybe I'm being naive, but it would be great to read about actual Gatwick news, airlines and routes rather than the often revisited Gatwick v Heathrow debates.

As I said at the beginning of this thread Gatwick will flourish again but it may take a while. We have to accept LHR and LGW are different. Airlines prefer one to the other.
Both airports have their different strengths and weaknesses.

I find both airports interesting places and enjoy travelling from both. However, I do have a soft spot for London Gatwick as, when I was younger, it was the starting place for many great holidays.
As a family we loved looking in the shops and enjoying the all day breakfast before boarding our flights! Even now, many years later, I still feel excited when using the place!

It was at Gatwick that I first went, as a teenager with friends, to see aircraft close up many years ago. (Anyone else remember how you could actually walk along the roof of one of the piers and watch airline operations really close up!)
I spent many happy summer days watching the airport at work from the great viewing area that used to be on top of the South Terminal. I was never a plane spotter, I just enjoyed watching the goings on and the whole atmosphere.
In some ways it was more interesting then (1970s 1980s early 1990s) with so many more UK airlines and aircraft types! However it is still great in my view.

Just be good to read some more real Gatwick news on here.

I have always been intrigued how many posts the smaller UK airports get on here compared to Heathrow and Gatwick. Although I admire the passion some have for the local airports.

As always just my opinion for what its worth!

[CabinCrewe]

Yes, some in particular!

[Vokes55]

BA318

The actual answer is it costs very little to have a split operation. Handling is outsourced and will be done on a per flight basis (or in the case of Ryanair, on a per passenger basis) so this is negligible. As for facilities - this is the UK, not the USA, no overseas airline owns or leases any facilities here, bar a few lounges at LHR. The only real additional expense would be engineering provision in two locations. Currently Boeing handle engineering for WS at LGW. One would assume they’d need to source a different company at LHR, but this is another very small expense in the grand scheme.

Very few airlines split their operations because very few airlines need to. Once they get enough slots at LHR, there’s no point staying. But the majority of airlines with a sizeable LON operation that migrated from LGW to LHR started with a split operation until they had enough suitable slots. There’s a difference between a split operation to capture different parts of a large market, and a split operation until suitable LHR slots can be obtained for all flights.

[JW95]

vectisman

Here here! I completely agree- and I do hope LGW will be on the road to recovery soon. Would be nice to see some more long haul return to Gatwick in addition to its short haul network. As we all know, JetBlue will be commencing services from LGW to JFK next month, so it'll be welcome seeing New York back on the departure boards again following the cessation of BA and DI on the same route. Also, the upcoming Norse Atlantic venture is one to watch- they had the livery and brand reveal yesterday, so it'll be interesting to see confirmation of the airports they will be using in the near future. London has already been flagged as a key base for the airline for sometime, so no doubt LGW will be up there. Hopefully others will follow- I hope that LGW can retain a good mix of short and long haul just as it did pre-pandemic, as it had been doing well. Slot availability at LHR will continue to grow scarcer going forward as air travel picks up, restrictions further lift and more people get vaccinated, so hopefully LGW stands a good chance at getting some of its lost long haul network back, such as Air China, China Eastern, Cathay Pacific.