Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5726126/

Topic: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: USAirALB
Posted 2013-03-29 21:12:08 and read 18258 times.

I didn't see anything on this subject, and I thought it was kind of interesting and worth making a thread about. Today (March 30) marks the last day for US Airways in LGW. US Airways is the last remaining US carrier to serve LGW. Their sole flight to CLT will be moved to LHR. This will be the first time in over 35 years LGW will not have a US carrier.

LGW-CLT has been flown for the 25 years.

The flight from Charlotte, which will be the last landing in LGW, is en route, and estimated to land at 6am, local time.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: ORDTLV2414
Posted 2013-03-29 22:46:46 and read 17911 times.

something will return someday, dont fret.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: nclmedic
Posted 2013-03-30 04:42:12 and read 17216 times.

Sad day though, all the same. This was, unfortunately, always on the cards from when LHR was opened up.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: chepos
Posted 2013-03-30 06:48:20 and read 16699 times.

Very sad news, the end of an era. Best of luck to all the employees at the station affected.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: by738
Posted 2013-03-30 06:51:04 and read 16682 times.

Maybe when the next big thing in low cost TransAtlantic travel comes it will go from LGW. Funny how so many UK regional airports have direct US links and LGW has none, even with LHR as a neighbour.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: rutankrd
Posted 2013-03-30 06:56:10 and read 16634 times.

Quoting by738 (Reply 4):

Maybe when the next big thing in low cost TransAtlantic travel comes it will go from LGW. Funny how so many UK regional airports have direct US links and LGW has none, even with LHR as a neighbou

Actually BA and VS continue to offer scheduled daily departures to the swamps and micky land from Gatwick.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-03-30 07:00:44 and read 16598 times.

Quoting by738 (Reply 4):
Funny how so many UK regional airports have direct US links and LGW has none, even with LHR as a neighbour.

It's classic market behaviour, the same reason BHX and BRS struggle. LHR has a critical mass of choice and connectivity that sucks in traffic from the catchment area of nearby airfields. It's not all that sad, they're not moving far and anyway with US becoming part of the new American it would have been on the cards anyway. BA still offer LAS, TPA and MCO with VS offering MCO and LAS and that's pretty much it now.

[Edited 2013-03-30 07:02:16]

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: jfklganyc
Posted 2013-03-30 07:02:50 and read 16574 times.

Amazing what unregulated, free market demand calls for.

For all those years, Bermuda II forced all of these US airlines to Gatwick clearly against their will.

The regulations lifted, the consumer has chosen, and the airlines have responded.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: Panman
Posted 2013-03-30 10:27:43 and read 14000 times.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 5):
Actually BA and VS continue to offer scheduled daily departures to the swamps and micky land from Gatwick.

True!!

But they are not British and not US carriers, which is what the post is about.....

pAnmAn

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: BoeingGuy
Posted 2013-03-30 10:32:16 and read 13891 times.

Actually when I looked into a possible business trip to London, I thought LGW seemed more convenient to get to. We had business at LTN and the Thames-Link train when from LGW right to downtown London and points north. LHR just had the Tube to downtown. So I never understand why LHR is considered so much more convenient for business travelers to London. That was not my impression.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: MIflyer12
Posted 2013-03-30 10:49:25 and read 13618 times.

London is a big place. Choice of airport sensibly depends on your next in-city destination. Similarly, the primacy of LAX isn't in question, but people will argue that BUR or SNA are more convenient - and they legitimately can be.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-03-30 10:52:17 and read 13536 times.

It's not about ease of access, LHR has massive connectivity which business travellers need alongwith entrenched alliances and lounge facilities. This connectivity allows everyone to makes more money at LHR vs LGW on long haul. US, NW, CO and DL all left LGW for good reason, it's good business.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: rutankrd
Posted 2013-03-30 11:02:01 and read 13388 times.

Quoting BoeingGuy (Reply 9):
So I never understand why LHR is considered so much more convenient for business travelers to London. That was not my impression.

Because it isn't !

If you need to be in the City, South of the River or indeed anywhere along the Thamelink line or South Coast or for that matter direct access to Victoria - Walking distance from the Political centre and government offices - Gatwick really is a better option !

Need to connect over London on BA/One World - Heathrow rocks your boat

Want to connect via an alternate alliance go via Paris/Frankfurt/Munich and have many many more choices of final destination.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: SurfandSnow
Posted 2013-03-30 11:13:17 and read 13184 times.

It's not just the U.S. carriers that struggle at LGW. KE's recent attempt at LGW was unsuccessful, and even the almighty EY and QR dropped LGW as soon as they had sufficient LHR service. Really the only exception appears to be EK, which is incredibly strong in the U.K. market and probably getting most of the eastbound long haul leisure traffic that is used to using LGW instead of LHR (westbound to places like MCO and the Caribbean, eastbound to places like BKK, MLE, and SYD).

Let's face it, LHR is the preferred airport of choice for higher yielding pax, and so all of the major airlines flock there to get that traffic. Both of LHR's long haul hub carriers use LGW to serve lower-yielding leisure markets like ANU, BDA, CUN, HAV, MCO, and MLE due to a lack of slots at LHR; LHR slots must be reserved for higher yielding markets like HKG, JFK, JNB, LAX, and NRT. Second rate carriers wishing to enter the London market often opt for LGW, recent examples would include GA, IA, and VN. Otherwise, LGW simply functions as an LCC and charter carrier hub with ample service to any and every European vacation destination imaginable  .

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: rutankrd
Posted 2013-03-30 11:24:29 and read 12999 times.

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 13):
LHR is the preferred airport of choice for higher yielding pax, and so all of the major airlines flock there to get that traffic

Its completely undisputed but the market is wrong by a magnitude on the convenience factor .
That said i won't change any time soon

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: lightsaber
Posted 2013-03-30 14:12:02 and read 10778 times.

The market has clearly spoken. In some ways, for better or worse, passengers associate LHR=London. I'm not saying that is right, but it makes it much easier to sell a ticket. In particular in this day when even premium passengers must book their own ticket.

And its far easier to sell 'surplus' tickets at LHR thanks to the connections (even non-OW).

Quoting by738 (Reply 4):

Maybe when the next big thing in low cost TransAtlantic travel comes it will go from LGW.

There is a HUGE push to make the A321NEO TATL capable. While BA would re-allocate slots to those routes, the reality is that LGW well positioned to pick up on that demand if a much lower cost per flight airframe becomes available.

I wonder if LGW would not be the best opportunity for a LCC 'hub' to expand TATL (assuming such aircraft become available). I could see that alone forcing demand for a 2nd runway.  

LGW isn't done. Its just 'resetting.'

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 11):
US, NW, CO and DL all left LGW for good reason, it's good business.

   And as you noted by that collection of *A and Skyteam airlines, its not just OW (US started the move to LHR long before the committed to the merger/OW).

Lightsaber

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: Viscount724
Posted 2013-03-30 14:24:53 and read 10596 times.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 12):
Want to connect via an alternate alliance go via Paris/Frankfurt/Munich and have many many more choices of final destination.

I'm not sure whether MUC has more directly-served destinations than LHR but CDG and FRA certainly do, as does AMS.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: Flighty
Posted 2013-03-30 14:37:13 and read 10432 times.

Sometimes, if a restaurant is crowded, people assume it must be a good restaurant. Maybe LHR's "high demand" reputation comes from how it sucks to use, and has capacity problems. If so, people are dumb. Just a thought.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: USAirALB
Posted 2013-03-30 14:49:44 and read 10232 times.

I used to have family in Weybridge, and LHR was there preferred airport of choice, being only 15 minutes away, compared to about 45 minutes from LGW. When I flew PHL-LGW years ago, I was surprised at the distance outside London LGW was. I think the big thing is about location. While LHR might be convenient for some folks, I see it just as inconvenient to others, especially those to the east of London, like in the Dartford area. I'm surprised airlines haven't been able to make LON work like the NYC area. EWR and JFK have long been able to coexist together, with many international airlines serving both (BA, LH, LX, VS, LY, AI).

After Bermuda II restrictions were lifted, I have heard LGW has become much quieter, and with the Gatwick Express train, I think I would prefer to fly into LGW over LHR.

Quoting SurfandSnow (Reply 13):
Let's face it, LHR is the preferred airport of choice for higher yielding pax, and so all of the major airlines flock there to get that traffic.

  

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-03-30 14:59:38 and read 10089 times.

LHR is close to North and West London, Westminster, and central London / the City. Good too for towns west of London such ad Oxford, Reading, etc, but not great for SE London or Canary Wharf. Fact is that if no traffic, you can drvie from LHR to central London in 25 minutes. Impossible from LGW, where an hour or more is required. A minicab cost £30-35 to central London, and double that for LGW.

Add to the the fact that LHR has not one, but three rail connections into the city -- the Heathrow Express (15 minutes non-stop to London), Heathrow Connect (25 minutes to Central London), and the Tube (40 minutes to Central London for just a few pounds). All have trains designed for airport passengers (esp Heathrow Express), with wide doors, platform level access to the train doors, plenty of luggage space.

Compare that to the Gatwick Express, 35 minutes into Victoria (not bad), but on trains where one has to struggle to get luggage into standard railway coaches with high steps to access the cabin and with limited storage, and from a station in LGW that often requires pax to lug luggage up and down stairs.

Put these factors together, it is no surprise that LHR is preferred by London O&D pax to LGW by majority of pax except those who destinations are physically closer to LGW.

[Edited 2013-03-30 15:10:54]

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: I380North
Posted 2013-03-30 15:23:18 and read 9709 times.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 15):
There is a HUGE push to make the A321NEO TATL capable

It seem you are a great proponent of this. I for sure will not be on any NB that will be flying on fumes on its last leg. Why? When far more capable WB are available, and more comfortable and quieter to boot.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 11):
LHR has massive connectivity which business travellers need alongwith entrenched alliances and lounge facilities. This connectivity allows everyone to makes more money at LHR vs LGW on long haul.


The impression given on a.net assumes everyone flying into LHR is connecting, You forget that LON has a massive O&D traffic. The primary advantage of LHR is because it is closer to the city center than the other two airports.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: jfk777
Posted 2013-03-30 15:38:04 and read 9463 times.

Finally an end to the "Gatwicking " of America's Airlines to the one country which Americans love more then their own. The Bermuda 2 was the most socialist airline treaty in the modern world, why the USA ever agreed to it is beyond me. America agreed to an inferior positon from a position of strength. IF Links between the UK and USA had been severed who would have suffered more BA or PAn AM ? PA could still fly to FRA and CDG, but BA not flying to the USA would have been far more punitive. Only if the Carter Administration had had some strength to stand up for our interests. But he was far more interested in getting Delta flights from Atlants to London.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-03-30 17:04:56 and read 8304 times.

Quoting I380North (Reply 20):
The primary advantage of LHR is because it is closer to the city center than the other two airports

I live in London, and frankly Central London to Gatwick is way easier. LGW is further out but quicker into town, the Heathrow Express drops you at Paddington which is way out in the sticks in London terms.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: 2travel2know2
Posted 2013-03-30 17:19:03 and read 8098 times.

If it's a relief, the day there'd be a red-eyes flight from LON to NYC, maybe by a U.S. airline, it will depart from LGW (or STN - whichever airport sells the airline an idea of the need of such a service).

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: lightsaber
Posted 2013-03-30 17:25:17 and read 7993 times.

Quoting I380North (Reply 20):
Why? When far more capable WB are available, and more comfortable and quieter to boot.

Frequency and Fragmentation. Would you choose a connection over a non-stop? Some will. Most would rather arrive at their destination 2 to 4 hours earlier. I see many state they will only fly 3 or 4 engine airframes and yet twins took most of the market. When the narrowbodies have the right seats (lie flat J) and schedules, people will fly them. I heard the same thing when CO started EWR-TXL. That flight has done well on a 752.

It cost per flight. If the right frequency and fragmentation is not possible on a widebody due to cost per flight, then the slack will be made up with a narrowbody. Hub to hub will stay widebody, so don't worry about options. And narrowbodies will only do 'near TATL.'

Out of the box, the A321NEO's 3650nm promised range will be able to do LGW-BOS with plenty of reserves.
If the 3% better fuel burn from the Pratt's holds true, than JFK, EWR, IAD, PHL, DTW, and YYZ could be added to the route map. I didn't include smaller cities, but eventually that means opening up BDL, BUF (and other upstate new-york), and any smaller Canadian cities east of YYZ.

If Airbus doesn't, Bombardier will with the CS100 (with higher MTOW) or Boeing with the -8MAX.

But comfort? I find no difference in Y on a 10 across 777 or a 6 across 737 or A320. Quiet? Sure. But how many will pay?

Something needs to be done on the European side. From BOS, the initial A321NEO will have the range for all of the British isles, Protugal, MAD, Western (coastal) France, Copenhagen, and Sweden. If one wanted to go for 'last gasp' of fuel that would be adding MUC, BCN, ZRH, CDG, BRU, AMS (and alternate Netherlands destinatins), very West Germany, and Norway. But not such a gasp if Pratt and Airbus exceed targets.

Its not a question of if there will be narrowbody TATL. We already have that (e.g., 752s out of EWR or IcelandAir including future flights with the MAX). Its a question of how much payload at range and thus routes that can be opened.

LGW would be an ideal airport to start such service. It would have a 'first mover advantage' due to slot limits at LGW slowing growth.

Lightsaber

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: TC957
Posted 2013-03-31 02:05:00 and read 5758 times.

A sad day indeed. And one many of my local clients are not happy with. Not every business traveller from down West Sussex wants to traips up to LHR, let alone those from the Brighton / East Sussex area.
It's a bit like EWR not having any European airlines serving it with everything going out of JFK.

I hope the LGW management is pulling out all the stops to get at least one US carrier to come back.
They should get the slots they want not are told what they can have.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-03-31 02:21:06 and read 5731 times.

Only thing is, no one would fly LGW-BOS. BA/AA and DL have it well covered from LHR. What more would an A321 to Gatters bring to the market that would make money against that? Certainly not frequent fliers where lounge access and premium facilities are inferior.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: usdcaguy
Posted 2013-03-31 03:14:06 and read 5767 times.

The problem with Gatwick for some travelers is that the passport line at Gatwick is (was) often ridiculously long first thing in the morning while the lines at Heathrow were often acceptable as all the flights land at different terminals that serve multiple international flights throughout the day. Getting from Heathrow is also cheaper and somewhat easier on the tube, as you're on the Picadilly line with better access to South Kensington/Green Park/Leicester Square, which are places many tourists either stay or visit. Changing at Victoria and buying new tickets was always a drag after a night of flying and very inconvenient.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: rutankrd
Posted 2013-03-31 03:34:01 and read 5692 times.

Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 27):
Getting from Heathrow is also cheaper and somewhat easier on the tube, as you're on the Picadilly line with better access to South Kensington/Green Park/Leicester Square, which are places many tourists either stay or visit. Changing at Victoria and buying new tickets was always a drag after a night of flying and very inconvenient.

You enjoy sitting on a suburban metro for 40 + minutes as it stops a dozen times with a good change of no seat and nowhere safe ! for your luggage do you ?

As for those Heavy rail trains to Paddington -One is the most expensive mile for mile on the planet and as Skip says dumps you at the worst and most remote Main line station in London combined with the most un-reliable (Fact) onward tube line services on the network !

Your comment re passport/immigration can be levelled at all UK points of entry over the last few years as they are a direct result of government policies and financial restrains.

That said the new owners of Gatwick have done a fine job of turning things around.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: babybus
Posted 2013-03-31 07:44:26 and read 5428 times.

Quoting USAirALB (Thread starter):
LGW-CLT has been flown for the 25 years.

Oh dear...I was working at LGW the day the first one came in. I remember everyone asking 'Where is Charlotte?' all day and for the next few months.

I also did my jetty training and jetty licence on a US Airways 767.

Shame to see them go. How long until a new US operator takes up the baton?

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: OA260
Posted 2013-03-31 07:48:58 and read 5414 times.

I flew this route back in November.

US Airways Envoy Suites A330+A321 F EWR-CLT-LGW (by OA260 Mar 13 2013 in Trip Reports)

Shame to see such a staple leaving LGW but at least its not being dropped totally. I know the US Crew were not looking forward to the move as they preferred LGW for the layovers apparantly.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: klwright69
Posted 2013-03-31 10:35:30 and read 5074 times.

I remember when LHR was opened to other US carriers besides UA and AA, CO launched new LHR srvices of course. They also retained LGW ops, and had a dual operation on LON for some time. Notice how long that lasted... NOT LONG. Obviously no one wanted LGW.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: 2travel2know2
Posted 2013-03-31 11:26:09 and read 4953 times.

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 31):
Notice how long that lasted... NOT LONG. Obviously no one wanted LGW.

CO LGW operations while already @ LHR lasted for as long as CO negotiated new LHR slots (and kept flying CLE-LGW).

IMHO, if LGW wants a U.S. airline now, best options would be:
1) Propose UA year-around B757 EWR-LGW Saturday/Sunday 0030h departure, LGW-EWR Sunday/Monday 0100h departure, increase EWR-LGW Monday/Thursdays, LGW-EWR Friday/Tuesday summer/December-January.
2) Talk to CLE, see if CLE can get UA B757 LON service back, with no LHR slot hassle required.
3) Study if DL would like to operate B757 BDL-LGW.
(Hurry because STN marketing department might be thinking the same...)

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: klwright69
Posted 2013-03-31 11:55:02 and read 4797 times.

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 32):
Quoting klwright69 (Reply 31):Notice how long that lasted... NOT LONG. Obviously no one wanted LGW.
CO LGW operations while already @ LHR lasted for as long as CO negotiated new LHR slots (and kept flying CLE-LGW).

IMHO, if LGW wants a U.S. airline now, best options would be:
1) Propose UA year-around B757 EWR-LGW Saturday/Sunday 0030h departure, LGW-EWR Sunday/Monday 0100h departure, increase EWR-LGW Monday/Thursdays, LGW-EWR Friday/Tuesday summer/December-January.
2) Talk to CLE, see if CLE can get UA B757 LON service back, with no LHR slot hassle required.
3) Study if DL would like to operate B757 BDL-LGW.
(Hurry because STN marketing department might be thinking the same...)

Thanks for the input. I wonder if having a dual operation in any capacity would ever interest any of the aforementioned carriers. I have this sneaking feeling the incumbent carriers would not be interested in LGW in any capacity.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: 2travel2know2
Posted 2013-03-31 12:25:49 and read 4686 times.

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 33):
I wonder if having a dual operation in any capacity would ever interest any of the aforementioned carriers. I have this sneaking feeling the incumbent carriers would not be interested in LGW in any capacity.

It's quite common for U.S. airlines in the U.S. to fly to different airports in the same area. Of course distances aren't compared to those between U.S.A. and U.K. but they've realised the major airport market isn't the same as the secondary airport market in the same metro area and both have to be served in order to improve the airline presence in the area.
LGW still has a couple of cards on its hand, one is that LGW doesn't have a curfew as LHR, therefore the idea of red-eyes between LON and U.S.A. operating from LGW. I'd think the LON-NYC market will develop and eventually there'll be a need of red-eyes flights between LON and NYC.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: rutankrd
Posted 2013-03-31 12:57:19 and read 4601 times.

Quoting 2travel2know2 (Reply 34):
LGW still has a couple of cards on its hand, one is that LGW doesn't have a curfew as LHR,

Myth 99 again !

Heathrow is NOT curfewed and there are several red-eyes from Boston/NewYork/Washington and Chicago Oh and Toronto into LHR each night.
There are 18 night slots i believe after 11.00 to 06.00 each night.

Can't think of anywhere else these are practical from.

The NEO/MAX narrow bodies may be employed as 75W replacement however more so to the UK regions and Eire in years to come however not Heathrow or Gatwick.
I expect UA to replace the 75W with the 788 on Newark at some not to distant time

Regrettably the US carriers have now left to seek their fortunes chasing BA out of LHR and i really can't see them back in the mid term.
They have also expended obscene sums of money to gain access and that will need protecting at all cost.

Through I think the market (Both Airlines and Travel Agents customers and corporates) are wrong on the convenience and accessibility of Gatwick.

[Edited 2013-03-31 13:44:10]

[Edited 2013-03-31 13:46:15]

[Edited 2013-03-31 13:51:50]

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: TC957
Posted 2013-03-31 13:30:12 and read 4447 times.

I honestly can't see routes like to BDL or CLE working from LGW as there will be very limited onward connection possibilities compared to big hub airports like ATL, EWR or BOS for example.
What should work from LGW is either MIA or FLL, with an early departure time like 0800 from LGW, that will capture a lot of cruise passenger business.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: YVRLTN
Posted 2013-03-31 19:51:35 and read 3988 times.

Quoting USAirALB (Thread starter):
Today (March 30) marks the last day for US Airways in LGW

I guess it would have been inevitable with the AA tie up.

Looks like the schedule is later to LHR vs LGW, did they buy / lease the slots sfrom someone or were they available from the pool?

0805 arrival / 1005 departure

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: USAirALB
Posted 2013-03-31 21:47:54 and read 3820 times.

Quoting babybus (Reply 29):
Oh dear...I was working at LGW the day the first one came in. I remember everyone asking 'Where is Charlotte?' all day and for the next few months.

I also did my jetty training and jetty licence on a US Airways 767.

Interesting. Nice to hear an account from someone who was there when service first started. I believe US flew CLT-LGW before starting any TATL from PHL, but I could be wrong.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 37):
I guess it would have been inevitable with the AA tie up.

Actually, this was announced before the merger.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: RyanairGuru
Posted 2013-03-31 22:21:39 and read 3762 times.

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 38):
I believe US flew CLT-LGW before starting any TATL from PHL, but I could be wrong.

Nope you're right. The route was initially Piedmont, launched in 1987 just before the merger. At that time PMUS did not fly TATL.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: USAirALB
Posted 2013-03-31 22:48:24 and read 3727 times.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 39):
Nope you're right. The route was initially Piedmont, launched in 1987 just before the merger. At that time PMUS did not fly TATL.

Ok that's what I thought. I think in 1990 US launched FRA service from PIT, then PHL-CDG in 91, then PHL-LGW, CLT-FRA, BWI-LGW in 93.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: skipness1E
Posted 2013-04-01 01:16:22 and read 3550 times.

BA used to serve both LHR and LGW to MIA, and as for redeyes from NYC, if the LGW-JFK was the lowest yielding BA LON-NYC route why would a niche time be any more succesful given AA, UA and BA offer a daylight LHR eastbound already?
Profitability will trump passenger convenience every time as a comercial operation cannot afford the luxury of not making the most money it can. If airline A is at LHR and you are at LGW, A has a competitve advantage to market.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: RomeoBravo
Posted 2013-04-01 01:38:10 and read 3487 times.

I presume it's only because of the onwards connections at LHR. LGW train links are better - more convenient for the City for starters. Paddington is right out to the west and the tube connections there aren't great. Granted Crossrail will come along soon and the tables will turn completely, maybe that's what airlines are anticipating.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: sankaps
Posted 2013-04-01 07:12:41 and read 3191 times.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 42):
I presume it's only because of the onwards connections at LHR. LGW train links are better - more convenient for the City for starters. Paddington is right out to the west and the tube connections there aren't great.

You keep saying this, and I think others have pointed this out already, but it is not about connections. At least 2/3 of LHR pax are London O&D. LHR is *much* closer to London by road / taxi / bus, and has three train options into central London, one of which costs peanuts for a 40-minute journey into Central London. And LHR is well located for pax heading west and north too.

LGW is disadvatanged by most measures relative to LHR -- the only advantages it has is for pax who are physically located closer to LGW and in the far south east of England. Taxis cost a bomb relative to LHR to get to the city, and take much longer. And the Gatwick Express and Gatwick's train station are old school compared to LHR's train options - just not comparable.

[Edited 2013-04-01 07:24:57]

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: 2travel2know2
Posted 2013-04-01 07:23:41 and read 3132 times.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 41):
and as for redeyes from NYC, if the LGW-JFK was the lowest yielding BA LON-NYC route why would a niche time be any more succesful given AA, UA and BA offer a daylight LHR eastbound already?

Both NYC-LON and LON-NYC red eyes might be very niche-time products aimed to cater passengers who can't start getting to an airport (be EWR and LGW) before sunset Saturday and other holy-days on time to do check-in.
With a daylight NYC-LON the passenger loses the whole day, while an after midnight NYC departure still allows a passenger a LON mid-afternoon arrival and some extra day-light time.

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: Boeing74741R
Posted 2013-04-01 09:07:48 and read 2870 times.

Quoting USAirALB (Reply 18):
I used to have family in Weybridge, and LHR was there preferred airport of choice, being only 15 minutes away, compared to about 45 minutes from LGW. When I flew PHL-LGW years ago, I was surprised at the distance outside London LGW was. I think the big thing is about location. While LHR might be convenient for some folks, I see it just as inconvenient to others, especially those to the east of London, like in the Dartford area. I'm surprised airlines haven't been able to make LON work like the NYC area. EWR and JFK have long been able to coexist together, with many international airlines serving both (BA, LH, LX, VS, LY, AI).

Indeed, I was in a similar position when I lived in Maidenhead a few years ago. LHR was the closest airport (and under the flightpath for planes taking off/descending) as it's 15 minutes providing the M4 behaves, but when I was flying out to OPO and back from FAO I had to use LGW which is the third closest airport (LTN is slightly closer). Like you, when I did the trip to LGW for the first time I was surprised at how far out it was.

You're right in saying that LHR isn't that convenient for those in East London/Essex, but with Crossrail on the way it will make LHR a bit more accessible as it eliminates the need to change at Liverpool Street/Fenchurch Street for a Circle Line train to Paddington for the HEx, which as pointed out isn't cheap.

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 28):
As for those Heavy rail trains to Paddington -One is the most expensive mile for mile on the planet and as Skip says dumps you at the worst and most remote Main line station in London combined with the most un-reliable (Fact) onward tube line services on the network !

Paddington isn't that bad, especially now Span 4 has finally been repaired and the semi-permanent false ceiling has been removed. The main issue with Paddington is that it's on the Hammersmith & City/Circle Lines, Bakerloo Line and the Edgware Road branch of the District Line, so unless your intended destination is on these lines you need to change. King's Cross and St Pancras stations are the best connected termini as far as the Tube is concerned with the H&C/Circle, Northern, Piccadilly and Victoria Lines all serving it.

Quoting RomeoBravo (Reply 42):
I presume it's only because of the onwards connections at LHR. LGW train links are better - more convenient for the City for starters. Paddington is right out to the west and the tube connections there aren't great. Granted Crossrail will come along soon and the tables will turn completely, maybe that's what airlines are anticipating.
LHR is connected well for traffic coming to/from the London direction, but points west it's poor. There's a bus link between LHR and Reading station but it means changing and faffing around. Those living at the intermediate stations on the Paddington-Reading-Oxford line can change at Hayes & Harlington for the Heathrow Connect, but as the Connect is every 30mins and Hayes & Harlington not geared up well to act as an interchange station it can sometimes be better to just carry on into Paddington for the non-stop Express which is every 15mins.

LGW is better connected, but only if you live in the Southern Counties. Once upon a time it had CrossCountry services to the Midlands and North West and beyond, as well as a rail service that skirted West London to run up the West Coast Main Line up to Rugby (which is about 30mins from Birmingham and London-Birmingham services calling there also serve BHX). The CrossCountry services were lost when CrossCountry withdrew the Brighton route in 2008 and the WCML service now runs between Milton Keynes and South Croydon. In addition, BA have just withdrawn the LGW-MAN route so LGW now has no air or rail connection with the North West. The only lengthy-distance rail service serving LGW is the "Thameslink" Bedford-Brighton service which also serves LTN and St Pancras for the Eurostar/HS1 Domestic services.

The irony is that Reading is closer to LHR than LGW but it has an hourly rail service to LGW whereas LHR necessitates a bus or a change at Hayes/Paddington, so by the time you've done the travelling by public transport from Reading to get to LHR you could be at LGW in that time.

[Edited 2013-04-01 09:09:07]

And on an unrelated note, don't get me started on MAN's rail services.


[Edited 2013-04-01 09:09:40]

Topic: RE: LGW's Last US Airline Leaves Today
Username: rutankrd
Posted 2013-04-01 09:31:08 and read 2739 times.

Quoting Boeing74741R (Reply 45):
Paddington isn't that bad

I give you the building should be reasonable when the ongoing works are complete .

The FGW first class lounge does do a decent coffee and cake

But the current routings up the stairs out by the taxi rank back down the stairs and onto the LUL platform is horrendous. And then to find out many trains (District line) only go one stop east to Edgware Road and its change again !

Removal of Brighton and Gatwick from the Arriva CrossCountry franchise was a big mistake imo,


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/