BA and Virgin Atlantic Likely to lose their lucrative stranglehold
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bmi has been around now for several years and like other airlines has suffered hardships during the downturn in business, not only since 11 Sept but previously during the Gulf war. It is quite clear that they and indeed any other UK airlines should be given the oppurtunity to be able to fly to the US from LHR if they so wish, they call it competition. Maybe SMB is not one to sucker up to the right people. Simplistic view I know but why can't a British Airline, from where it has its base, fly to anywhere it so wishes. Time for a change...watch out BA and Virgin.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Fantasy Island
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Erm...Donkey Duke, with regards to Delta using Air France's gates - when was the last time you tried to park a 777 in a space designed for a 320/321/737? Or even an A300?
KLM/NW might be more feasible......
KLM/NW might be more feasible......
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BahrainLad,
Hey, Delta or NW could probably pay for a new ramp or stand area.(or jetway) I have seen in ATL. .the same jetways used for Delta 737-800's, . .MD-11's, 777's, and old SwissAir 747-300's. So,. .I don't think it would be a problem. As far as space between planes, I'm sure they can work that out. Not all planes leave at the same time. NW in Minneapolis uses different airplanes in each gate--from 747-200's to 727's. Somehow, I don't think it would be a problem. Maybe Gulf Air would. .give them some space, or maybe not.
. .Thanks. Donkey Duke <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Hey, Delta or NW could probably pay for a new ramp or stand area.(or jetway) I have seen in ATL. .the same jetways used for Delta 737-800's, . .MD-11's, 777's, and old SwissAir 747-300's. So,. .I don't think it would be a problem. As far as space between planes, I'm sure they can work that out. Not all planes leave at the same time. NW in Minneapolis uses different airplanes in each gate--from 747-200's to 727's. Somehow, I don't think it would be a problem. Maybe Gulf Air would. .give them some space, or maybe not.
. .Thanks. Donkey Duke <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Fantasy Island
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Donkey Duke, I don't doubt that you have seen 738s and 743s at the same gate in ATL - the gates are probably designed for 747 size aircraft!!
The 'cul-de-sac' from where AF operate at T2 LHR is somewhat different - I doubt you could get anything larger than an A321 in there.
<a href="http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=043695" target="_blank">AF A320 at T2 - notice the size of the gates in the background</a>
That's why KLM/NW would have more of a chance - T4 gates as far as I am aware are all (apart from the west end) 767 upwards.
I've told you before - any new US operator will have to buy someone elses (Terminal 3) operation - just as AA and UA did in the early 90s.
And, hate to disappoint you, but GF's space is not for sale - it's not theirs to sell - rights/slots controlled by the member states, BAH, AUH, DOH & MCT
PS - Have you ever been to Heathrow!?. .[ 09 February 2002: Message edited by: BahrainLad ]
[ 09 February 2002: Message edited by: BahrainLad ]</p>
The 'cul-de-sac' from where AF operate at T2 LHR is somewhat different - I doubt you could get anything larger than an A321 in there.
<a href="http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=043695" target="_blank">AF A320 at T2 - notice the size of the gates in the background</a>
That's why KLM/NW would have more of a chance - T4 gates as far as I am aware are all (apart from the west end) 767 upwards.
I've told you before - any new US operator will have to buy someone elses (Terminal 3) operation - just as AA and UA did in the early 90s.
And, hate to disappoint you, but GF's space is not for sale - it's not theirs to sell - rights/slots controlled by the member states, BAH, AUH, DOH & MCT
PS - Have you ever been to Heathrow!?. .[ 09 February 2002: Message edited by: BahrainLad ]
[ 09 February 2002: Message edited by: BahrainLad ]</p>
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Baharainlad,
Yes, I have been to Heathrow, but not flying there personally. Why? Because my airline, like many large airlines from the United States, can't fly in there. Why? Because Airlines like BA and AA and UA are scared of the competition. So, most of my flying has been into Gatwick. But, IF the EU rules the way they should, soon you will be seeing NW 747's, DL 777's, CO 777's, and USAir. .A330's next to your Gulf Air birds. And I believe NW, Delta, CO and maybe USAir(maybe..?). .can afford to buy some gate space or stand space or whatever.
Hey Baharainlad, have you ever been to ATL? It's. .a lot busier and is run a lot smoother than LHR.. .(Even in the FOG)
Thanks. Donkey Duke <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Yes, I have been to Heathrow, but not flying there personally. Why? Because my airline, like many large airlines from the United States, can't fly in there. Why? Because Airlines like BA and AA and UA are scared of the competition. So, most of my flying has been into Gatwick. But, IF the EU rules the way they should, soon you will be seeing NW 747's, DL 777's, CO 777's, and USAir. .A330's next to your Gulf Air birds. And I believe NW, Delta, CO and maybe USAir(maybe..?). .can afford to buy some gate space or stand space or whatever.
Hey Baharainlad, have you ever been to ATL? It's. .a lot busier and is run a lot smoother than LHR.. .(Even in the FOG)
Thanks. Donkey Duke <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Jolly Green Giant
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If LHR does open up then Aer Lingus could find themselves owning very valuable slots indeed at LHR. Could be interesting bidding for them from the likes of Delta.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it not true that a huge part of the problem here is the lack of available capacity at LHR? Paris Amsterdam and Frankfurt have all added the necessary airport infrastructure which provides the room that free competition needs. How can we have a truely level playing field, permitting free competition, when there isn't sufficient room on the ground for the would be players.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hear BMI are in a spot of trouble at the moment due to the low cost operators. therefore they need something to help them out and rites to LHR could help. It could aloso backfire as I think any backdoor open skies policy would mean them having to give up some of their slots to other EU or US operators.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 35K
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couple of points. No one owns the slots, other than I think BAA. Gate rental is something different. The irish lads gates would be of no use to any carrier from overseas. They are in T1 which os for domestic. And while BMI will be feeling the pinch there is no way they would give up an LHR slot - thats the cashflow
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Donkey D
You tell us you have never operated into LHR, then assert that ATL "is a lot busier, and run a lot smoother than LHR (even in the FOG)
If you haven't operated into LHR, how would you know?
Are all your opinions so well informed?
Cheers mate
You tell us you have never operated into LHR, then assert that ATL "is a lot busier, and run a lot smoother than LHR (even in the FOG)
If you haven't operated into LHR, how would you know?
Are all your opinions so well informed?
Cheers mate
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not such a difficult thing to use differing size aircraft on the same stands. LGW does it very nicely on the north Terminal, with a left right and center line config. Easy peasy, and with jetties for all. So now you can fit one long haul or two shorthaul a/c on any given stand.
What's the mystery?
What's the mystery?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tandemrotor,
Well, you have a point. But from all of the responses about LHR and the total mess people complain about regularly on this forum---I guess I just inferred. No one has said anything terribly bad about ATL, and since I have been flying in and out of ATL frequently in the past, in bad weather and good, I guess I just assumed.. .I would really like to personally fly in there in the future---and I am hoping the EU rules in my airline's favor. You have to admit that the business traveller and the dollars/pounds flow. .more into LHR than LGW. (A recent USAToday article also stated that) But flying into Gatwick itself isn't that bad---the guys/gals at Gatwick director always do a good job, and there probably is less holding time on arrival at LGW---no long Bovington(?) holds for LHR. (That may be wrong---I thought I heard that on the LHR director freq.) Anyways, I look forward to flying near Big Ben and Harrods on arrival to LHR someday---hopefully soon.
Thanks. Donkey Duke <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Well, you have a point. But from all of the responses about LHR and the total mess people complain about regularly on this forum---I guess I just inferred. No one has said anything terribly bad about ATL, and since I have been flying in and out of ATL frequently in the past, in bad weather and good, I guess I just assumed.. .I would really like to personally fly in there in the future---and I am hoping the EU rules in my airline's favor. You have to admit that the business traveller and the dollars/pounds flow. .more into LHR than LGW. (A recent USAToday article also stated that) But flying into Gatwick itself isn't that bad---the guys/gals at Gatwick director always do a good job, and there probably is less holding time on arrival at LGW---no long Bovington(?) holds for LHR. (That may be wrong---I thought I heard that on the LHR director freq.) Anyways, I look forward to flying near Big Ben and Harrods on arrival to LHR someday---hopefully soon.
Thanks. Donkey Duke <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Fantasy Island
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Olmy, you're referring to the North stands which serve Gates 57 etc (UK Domestic).
You're right, more than one aircraft (if both are small) can be parked on one gate - that's because they are designed for large aircraft and have been adapted, rather than the reverse.
There would be some areas in LHR (T2 cul-de-sac, T1 Domestic) where even parking (never mind connecting to facilities) anything larger than an A320 would cause serious disruption.
Longhaul 777/747 aircraft are confined to T4, T3 and certain T1 stands only - and they're all full.
You're right, more than one aircraft (if both are small) can be parked on one gate - that's because they are designed for large aircraft and have been adapted, rather than the reverse.
There would be some areas in LHR (T2 cul-de-sac, T1 Domestic) where even parking (never mind connecting to facilities) anything larger than an A320 would cause serious disruption.
Longhaul 777/747 aircraft are confined to T4, T3 and certain T1 stands only - and they're all full.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Donkey Duke
The problem with Heathrow is the lack runway and stand capacity, which is cronic to say the least but I think "mess" might be putting it a little strongly, if I may say. At Heathrow we have to extract every ounce of capacity there is and that means being as efficient as possible.
About 7 years ago I went on a visit to Chicago. The boss there told me they did about 35 per hour off 4 of the available 7 runways, totalling 140 per hour. At Heathrow we only have 2 runways available to us and we get up to 90 per hour off them, about 45 off each. The nature of Heathrow is significantly longhaul and so a high percentage of traffic is Heavy which does impact the rates.
I think what I am trying to say is that if Heathrow were a mess we wouldn't be able to shift the traffic we do. (Actually I think we do okay, generally.) Our country is tiny compared to yours and our politicians won't give us what we have to have until they absolutely have to which means we are always behind the game. It then falls to we ATCOs to squeeze everything we can out of this inadequacy so that the passengers aren't too inconvenienced.
One little thing that drives us CRAZY. It is called BovingDon not Bovington!!!
<img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Looking forward to welcoming you sometime soon.
Nine Left
The problem with Heathrow is the lack runway and stand capacity, which is cronic to say the least but I think "mess" might be putting it a little strongly, if I may say. At Heathrow we have to extract every ounce of capacity there is and that means being as efficient as possible.
About 7 years ago I went on a visit to Chicago. The boss there told me they did about 35 per hour off 4 of the available 7 runways, totalling 140 per hour. At Heathrow we only have 2 runways available to us and we get up to 90 per hour off them, about 45 off each. The nature of Heathrow is significantly longhaul and so a high percentage of traffic is Heavy which does impact the rates.
I think what I am trying to say is that if Heathrow were a mess we wouldn't be able to shift the traffic we do. (Actually I think we do okay, generally.) Our country is tiny compared to yours and our politicians won't give us what we have to have until they absolutely have to which means we are always behind the game. It then falls to we ATCOs to squeeze everything we can out of this inadequacy so that the passengers aren't too inconvenienced.
One little thing that drives us CRAZY. It is called BovingDon not Bovington!!!
<img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Looking forward to welcoming you sometime soon.
Nine Left
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nine left,
Thanks for the kind words. I, too, look forward to the day to fly into the top international airport in the world. No one can deny that LHR is the tops. That is why everyone wants to fly into LHR. I know there isn't a lot of space at LHR. There has got to be a way that airlines can get "creative" when it comes to stand usage and usage of "space." I am sure that someone will come up with something---like scheduling certain aircraft to arrive and leave within a certian amount of time etc. Who knows? That is what engineers are paid for. But, I don't think an extra 12-17 flights a day period (given to all new entrants total) would cause a huge problem. The arrivals would probably be spread out---not all arriving at 5am. And departures would also be spread out between 11am and 4pm. I have confidence in the LHR and BAA people in charge.
Sorry about the BovingTON mess-----you are correct---it is Bovingdon. Take it easy.
. .Thanks. Donkey Duke <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Thanks for the kind words. I, too, look forward to the day to fly into the top international airport in the world. No one can deny that LHR is the tops. That is why everyone wants to fly into LHR. I know there isn't a lot of space at LHR. There has got to be a way that airlines can get "creative" when it comes to stand usage and usage of "space." I am sure that someone will come up with something---like scheduling certain aircraft to arrive and leave within a certian amount of time etc. Who knows? That is what engineers are paid for. But, I don't think an extra 12-17 flights a day period (given to all new entrants total) would cause a huge problem. The arrivals would probably be spread out---not all arriving at 5am. And departures would also be spread out between 11am and 4pm. I have confidence in the LHR and BAA people in charge.
Sorry about the BovingTON mess-----you are correct---it is Bovingdon. Take it easy.
. .Thanks. Donkey Duke <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well now you're making sense, and I doubt anyone in BA would oppose 12-17 slots per day shared between all new entrants. What we do object to is 33 slots per day handed over exclusively to American carriers. So do you agree, or disagree, that the price demanded by the US government was unrealistically high?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand Solo,
Well I was also surprised when the US Govt requested 33 or 36 roundtrip slots. That may be a little bit too many. But, you have to give the other US entrants a chance to compete. Look how many slots at JFK BA and VS have--(Ofcourse JFK. .slots are primarily used between 4pm and 11pm for the business traveler) BA has flights in the summer time from JFK to Birmingham, Glasgow, Manchester, and London (LHR and LGW). All of them. .leave during that 4pm to 11pm window.
Anyways... This is what I think is fair for the US. .Airlines (And I believe SQ also wanted to fly from LHR to ORD or JFK...I don't know)
Northwest: 2 flts a day to Detroit. . 1 flt a day to MSP (These are there. . 2 largest bases and they may also want a MEM. . flt---and they do not have a presence in JFK. . or EWR----they also may want a BOS flt)
Delta: 3 flts to JFK. . 1 flt to BOS. . 2 flts to ATL. . 2 flts to CVG. . They have a large base in JFK and to . . compete with BA/VS/AA/UA/CO they need atleast . . 3 flts a day for the businessman. They also. . have a large presence in BOS, and large bases . . in CVG and ATL. BA does compete on the ATL . . route, but not CVG.
Continental: 3 flts to EWR. . 2 flts to IAH. . 1 flt to CLE. . They also need 3 flts to compete to. . New York for the business traveler. IAH and. . CLE also need service.
USAir: 2 flts to PHL. . 1 flt to CLT. . 1 Flt to PIT. . 1 flt to BOS. . They need atleast 2 flts to PHL for . . That same NYC-PHL area, and they also need. . flts to their other hubs, including BOS . . which they have a large presence. BA flies. . 2 daily flts from LHR to PHL. BWI seems to . . be losing presence for USAir.
Well, I have changed the number to 22 flights for the US entrants, and one more for Singapore. .to fly to ORD to compete with AA and BA. I think that would be fair, and remember---not all of the cities would be in direct competition to BA---like. .Pittsburg, Cleveland, and Cincinnati. BA flies to Den and PHX---and no one competes. (Yes, they are currently from LGW----but the way BA keeps moving flts from LGW to LHR when shrinking it's inter-Europe flts---it's only a matter of time)
As far as the "space" issue----I am sure engineers. .can figure out something.
Oh yeah, I am sure VS would like some more slots--. .but that is between BA and VS---we're talking about a US/UK bilateral. Let us in please.
. .Thanks. Donkey Duke <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Well I was also surprised when the US Govt requested 33 or 36 roundtrip slots. That may be a little bit too many. But, you have to give the other US entrants a chance to compete. Look how many slots at JFK BA and VS have--(Ofcourse JFK. .slots are primarily used between 4pm and 11pm for the business traveler) BA has flights in the summer time from JFK to Birmingham, Glasgow, Manchester, and London (LHR and LGW). All of them. .leave during that 4pm to 11pm window.
Anyways... This is what I think is fair for the US. .Airlines (And I believe SQ also wanted to fly from LHR to ORD or JFK...I don't know)
Northwest: 2 flts a day to Detroit. . 1 flt a day to MSP (These are there. . 2 largest bases and they may also want a MEM. . flt---and they do not have a presence in JFK. . or EWR----they also may want a BOS flt)
Delta: 3 flts to JFK. . 1 flt to BOS. . 2 flts to ATL. . 2 flts to CVG. . They have a large base in JFK and to . . compete with BA/VS/AA/UA/CO they need atleast . . 3 flts a day for the businessman. They also. . have a large presence in BOS, and large bases . . in CVG and ATL. BA does compete on the ATL . . route, but not CVG.
Continental: 3 flts to EWR. . 2 flts to IAH. . 1 flt to CLE. . They also need 3 flts to compete to. . New York for the business traveler. IAH and. . CLE also need service.
USAir: 2 flts to PHL. . 1 flt to CLT. . 1 Flt to PIT. . 1 flt to BOS. . They need atleast 2 flts to PHL for . . That same NYC-PHL area, and they also need. . flts to their other hubs, including BOS . . which they have a large presence. BA flies. . 2 daily flts from LHR to PHL. BWI seems to . . be losing presence for USAir.
Well, I have changed the number to 22 flights for the US entrants, and one more for Singapore. .to fly to ORD to compete with AA and BA. I think that would be fair, and remember---not all of the cities would be in direct competition to BA---like. .Pittsburg, Cleveland, and Cincinnati. BA flies to Den and PHX---and no one competes. (Yes, they are currently from LGW----but the way BA keeps moving flts from LGW to LHR when shrinking it's inter-Europe flts---it's only a matter of time)
As far as the "space" issue----I am sure engineers. .can figure out something.
Oh yeah, I am sure VS would like some more slots--. .but that is between BA and VS---we're talking about a US/UK bilateral. Let us in please.
. .Thanks. Donkey Duke <img src="cool.gif" border="0"> <img src="cool.gif" border="0">
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: North of Land's End, South of John O Groats
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what do Uk airlines get from this agreement?
With 6 US airlines compared to 2 UK airlines this hardly seems fair?
How many UK Airlines will be allowed to operate to the US?
With 6 US airlines compared to 2 UK airlines this hardly seems fair?
How many UK Airlines will be allowed to operate to the US?