BACX for sale.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: England
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA mainline at Gatwick should have been rolled into CFE and left as an independent franchise run by its own management. At the very least that would have given BA an extensive LGW network at no cost to itself and with some revenue and franchise fee benefits.
Done it before so why change a habit of shafting small independent PROFIT making airlines ???
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BIGPANTS
If you are going to make who has the higher standard pilot comments let's look at some evidence. I assume form your comments you are one of those mainline BA types who can't find your way to the aircraft without being in a bus.
1. If you ask the lady who was taken off a BA mainline 767 flight to Budapest yesterday, unconscious and with a bleeding head due to a heavy landing ( in calm conditions ) causing multiple overhead lockers to shed their contents, she would not share your opinion of BA pilot infallibility. And that was on a long runway with a 3 degree glide slope.
2. If you check the history of LCY it was the Brymon DHC 7s that paved the way by landing on the dockside to demonstrate the feasibility of building an airport there. So, what became of the pilots who pioneered this. They ended up in BACX. So, with all this experience already in the company who is chosen to fly the RJ into LCY. It is the seconded BA mainline pilots we are lumbered with who have spent the whole 5 years of their career flying the Airbus electric jet from one 2 mile runway to another. Could this have anything to do with the tailscrapes?
(Meanwhile what has happened to the Brymon pilots with over 15000 hours of regional experience. Well BA in it's wisdom has stated that they are not good enough for their jets and the majority have opted to join Air Southwest. Those who have stayed are being treated well. The pilot who is number 1 on the BACX seniority list has been offered the Right hand seat of an Emb 145)
Now, about BA selling BACX. Good. Without their interference we might all be able to get back to making a profit like BRAL and Brymon did before.
If you are going to make who has the higher standard pilot comments let's look at some evidence. I assume form your comments you are one of those mainline BA types who can't find your way to the aircraft without being in a bus.
1. If you ask the lady who was taken off a BA mainline 767 flight to Budapest yesterday, unconscious and with a bleeding head due to a heavy landing ( in calm conditions ) causing multiple overhead lockers to shed their contents, she would not share your opinion of BA pilot infallibility. And that was on a long runway with a 3 degree glide slope.
2. If you check the history of LCY it was the Brymon DHC 7s that paved the way by landing on the dockside to demonstrate the feasibility of building an airport there. So, what became of the pilots who pioneered this. They ended up in BACX. So, with all this experience already in the company who is chosen to fly the RJ into LCY. It is the seconded BA mainline pilots we are lumbered with who have spent the whole 5 years of their career flying the Airbus electric jet from one 2 mile runway to another. Could this have anything to do with the tailscrapes?
(Meanwhile what has happened to the Brymon pilots with over 15000 hours of regional experience. Well BA in it's wisdom has stated that they are not good enough for their jets and the majority have opted to join Air Southwest. Those who have stayed are being treated well. The pilot who is number 1 on the BACX seniority list has been offered the Right hand seat of an Emb 145)
Now, about BA selling BACX. Good. Without their interference we might all be able to get back to making a profit like BRAL and Brymon did before.
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cruise Alt
Check your facts, or shut up
1. as a BA secondee, I have flown the RJ longer than most....was on it before it came to BACX
2. I have flown for BA for approaching 14 years, 11 in the regions
3. of that 11 years many years on BA turboprops into LSI/ORK etc
4. NO BA pilot has scraped a tail in BACX...........FACT
5. I can find an aeroplane without going on a bus..........I have for 11 years
I am no alone, there many secondees who have had the same experience as above.
Cruise Alt you are an arse and give the very good BACX pilots who are keen, enthuisiastic, and competant a bad name
toodle pip
Big Pants
You gotta problem with BACX trying to make a success out of London city flying? perhaps you could do better if you were in charge.
FACT only two tail strikes have been attributed to LCY
FACT no "tail" has been re-attached to the fuselage.........thats some point you made on a public forum..........got the facts to hand ??
You seem very bitter about life...........got your bid wrong??
toodlepip
Check your facts, or shut up
1. as a BA secondee, I have flown the RJ longer than most....was on it before it came to BACX
2. I have flown for BA for approaching 14 years, 11 in the regions
3. of that 11 years many years on BA turboprops into LSI/ORK etc
4. NO BA pilot has scraped a tail in BACX...........FACT
5. I can find an aeroplane without going on a bus..........I have for 11 years
I am no alone, there many secondees who have had the same experience as above.
Cruise Alt you are an arse and give the very good BACX pilots who are keen, enthuisiastic, and competant a bad name
toodle pip
Big Pants
You gotta problem with BACX trying to make a success out of London city flying? perhaps you could do better if you were in charge.
FACT only two tail strikes have been attributed to LCY
FACT no "tail" has been re-attached to the fuselage.........thats some point you made on a public forum..........got the facts to hand ??
You seem very bitter about life...........got your bid wrong??
toodlepip
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Horsham UK
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All jet you say...by 2005 you say...See that's a classic example of dumb-@r$e 'big airline' thinking that has caused the mess in the first place.
The "we want to be all-jet, jets are cool' philosophy just dosent stand up to a cold business assesment as history teaches us...
But I reckon In trim has it right, the withering will continue until some bright waterside spark looks deep into his or her skinny latte and thinks "I've got it FRANCHISING!!!"
Still I suppose it's just the latest chapter in the what is rapidly becoming a very long book "the BA book of management cock-ups"
The "we want to be all-jet, jets are cool' philosophy just dosent stand up to a cold business assesment as history teaches us...
But I reckon In trim has it right, the withering will continue until some bright waterside spark looks deep into his or her skinny latte and thinks "I've got it FRANCHISING!!!"
Still I suppose it's just the latest chapter in the what is rapidly becoming a very long book "the BA book of management cock-ups"
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Somewhere Over The Rainbow
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I normally stay out of these kind of debates due to the utter b*ll*cks that comes from some peoples keyboards. However I want to make few points
A few years ago 10 Airbus, a type already operated by BA were introduced into BAR over 14 months with a year and a half planning. Certainly the best way to do it if you have a choice however BACX didn't have the luxury and introduced a brand new fleet of 16 RJ in six months with six months planning before-hand. At the same time it was commercially imperative to go into LCY. That too was accomplished. A fantastic achievement.
BACX have had 4 RJ tailscrapes during introduction. Only two at LCY. Pilots from each group were involved. Some were nothing more than paint abrasions and appear to have happened during take-off rather than landing. The most severe external damage involved part of the sacrificial protection strip being removed. ie it did its job. CFE had 4 tailscrapes during introduction of the type into CFE. Other airlines have similarly suffered in the past with the type.
Brymon made all its profit from 2 areas. The GLA/EDI routes from BRS and the wet-leased Embraer operation for BAR in BHX. The GLA/EDIs were hugely affected by GO competing on the routes from 2000 (just before BACX was formed) and the wet-lease work meant Brymon got paid for the work whether there were passengers on the aircraft or not. Take those crutches away and Brymon would have been bankrupt. Arguably would be now if it hadn't been absorbed by BACX.
BRAL made a huge part of any profit it had from the wet-lease operation it conducted for BAR in MAN. It had other profitable routes but it also flew a load of really crappy routes because it had committed itself to a collection of turbo-prop aircraft at quite staggeringly high lease rates. Move on a few years, with the extra competition around and those routes with those aircraft are unprofitable. Should BACX fly routes when they lose money ? - No. Nothing to do with poor revenue management just high lease costs vs. too much capacity and low fares in the market place. If BAR had taken the wet-lease flying away from BRAL and not merged it into BACX my guess is that it would have found it difficult to stay in business.
BACX is in a market where nobody is making money in the 50 - 100 seat section. The ex-employees of BRAL/Manx/Brymon should thank their lucky stars that their ex-Companies are now supported by the bank balance of BA. I'm sure it won't go on forever. BA need to see BACX make a profit. I'm sure that the closures that have been announced so far are intended to stem the losses. I hope it works. BACX is a lot better placed to survive than many of its competitors.
A few years ago 10 Airbus, a type already operated by BA were introduced into BAR over 14 months with a year and a half planning. Certainly the best way to do it if you have a choice however BACX didn't have the luxury and introduced a brand new fleet of 16 RJ in six months with six months planning before-hand. At the same time it was commercially imperative to go into LCY. That too was accomplished. A fantastic achievement.
BACX have had 4 RJ tailscrapes during introduction. Only two at LCY. Pilots from each group were involved. Some were nothing more than paint abrasions and appear to have happened during take-off rather than landing. The most severe external damage involved part of the sacrificial protection strip being removed. ie it did its job. CFE had 4 tailscrapes during introduction of the type into CFE. Other airlines have similarly suffered in the past with the type.
Brymon made all its profit from 2 areas. The GLA/EDI routes from BRS and the wet-leased Embraer operation for BAR in BHX. The GLA/EDIs were hugely affected by GO competing on the routes from 2000 (just before BACX was formed) and the wet-lease work meant Brymon got paid for the work whether there were passengers on the aircraft or not. Take those crutches away and Brymon would have been bankrupt. Arguably would be now if it hadn't been absorbed by BACX.
BRAL made a huge part of any profit it had from the wet-lease operation it conducted for BAR in MAN. It had other profitable routes but it also flew a load of really crappy routes because it had committed itself to a collection of turbo-prop aircraft at quite staggeringly high lease rates. Move on a few years, with the extra competition around and those routes with those aircraft are unprofitable. Should BACX fly routes when they lose money ? - No. Nothing to do with poor revenue management just high lease costs vs. too much capacity and low fares in the market place. If BAR had taken the wet-lease flying away from BRAL and not merged it into BACX my guess is that it would have found it difficult to stay in business.
BACX is in a market where nobody is making money in the 50 - 100 seat section. The ex-employees of BRAL/Manx/Brymon should thank their lucky stars that their ex-Companies are now supported by the bank balance of BA. I'm sure it won't go on forever. BA need to see BACX make a profit. I'm sure that the closures that have been announced so far are intended to stem the losses. I hope it works. BACX is a lot better placed to survive than many of its competitors.
Guest
Posts: n/a
BACX axe IOM routes
No surprise I know but this appeared on the Manx radio web site this morning:
BA CitiExpress are to drop four of their routes to the Isle of Man in the Spring.
Those are currently operated by ATP aircraft, which are being dropped from the fleet.
The routes being axed are to Birmingham, Dublin, Glasgow and Liverpool, going in April 2004.
BA CitiExpress will be left with what they term their key business routes, Gatwick, Luton and Manchester.
But they say they are actively talking with carriers who are interested in taking up the routes they are dropping.
Transport Minister, John Shimmin, is putting a positive slant on things, saying that the announcement opens up the routes for carriers who see this as an opportunity and not, though he does'nt say so, as something of a financial millstone.
One airline obviously enthusiastic to be involved in the Liverpool route is Emerald, which is currently a freight carrier only.
Their CEO, Mick O' Brien, says the right arrangement needs to be made, particulary regarding passenger tax, to make to route viable.
The possiblity of job losses is still to be discussed.
Transport and General Workers Union District Secretary, Bernard Moffat, was at a meeting with the Airline yesterday in Manchester, but no word has come out of that meeting as yet.
On the positive side, David Evans, Managing Director, BA CitiExpress, says they will continue to invest in " our highly successful engineering base in the Isle of Man and we expect to announce some specific plans in the near future.
BA CitiExpress are to drop four of their routes to the Isle of Man in the Spring.
Those are currently operated by ATP aircraft, which are being dropped from the fleet.
The routes being axed are to Birmingham, Dublin, Glasgow and Liverpool, going in April 2004.
BA CitiExpress will be left with what they term their key business routes, Gatwick, Luton and Manchester.
But they say they are actively talking with carriers who are interested in taking up the routes they are dropping.
Transport Minister, John Shimmin, is putting a positive slant on things, saying that the announcement opens up the routes for carriers who see this as an opportunity and not, though he does'nt say so, as something of a financial millstone.
One airline obviously enthusiastic to be involved in the Liverpool route is Emerald, which is currently a freight carrier only.
Their CEO, Mick O' Brien, says the right arrangement needs to be made, particulary regarding passenger tax, to make to route viable.
The possiblity of job losses is still to be discussed.
Transport and General Workers Union District Secretary, Bernard Moffat, was at a meeting with the Airline yesterday in Manchester, but no word has come out of that meeting as yet.
On the positive side, David Evans, Managing Director, BA CitiExpress, says they will continue to invest in " our highly successful engineering base in the Isle of Man and we expect to announce some specific plans in the near future.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently BACX management were not going to make the announcement about the ATPs today,despite the deal being done and dusted and the union reps informed today at a BCCG.The mangement wanted to keep it secret from the workforce for at least another 2 weeks and only made the announcement when the guys there insisted very strongly that they should announce it today rather than prolong the agony of those it will affect.
Don`t you just love secrets?
Don`t you just love secrets?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assume then that the MAN route will run from MAN using initally Dash 8s, and then after their retirement 145/146 equipment?
Also does anyone know what is happening with G-MIMA about her supposed return to the lessor?
Also does anyone know what is happening with G-MIMA about her supposed return to the lessor?
