Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BA Looks At SJC  
User currently offlineLegacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2145 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3686 times:

British airways representatives were given a tour of San Jose Airport yesterday. The airport invited the airline to see the facilities for a possible new route.

I know BA was studying the possibility of adding a third SFO flight but they might add a flight to SJC to compliment the two SFO flights. This is just in the preliminary stages and it does not mean BA will be flying in their aircraft there in the near future.


John@SFO
24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMikesairways From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 725 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3579 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yay! Thats great to hear. I would love to see that...though i'm sure we'd only get a 767 if they were to start a SJC-LHR/LGW route. Keep us posted if you hear anymore  Smile


The red zone is for the immediate loading and unloading of passengers only, there is no stopping in the white zone...(Ai
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 2, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3571 times:

This could be at the request of their dear friends American Airlines... now that the DOT/DOJ allows them to codeshare on beyond services it might be a good idea.

It could also be indicative of an intent on AA's part to build up a better schedule at SJC, again.

N


User currently offlineMikesairways From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 725 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3535 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I remember a few years back AA applied to serve the route themselves, but were denied...I think UA got a ORD-LHR route instead.




The red zone is for the immediate loading and unloading of passengers only, there is no stopping in the white zone...(Ai
User currently offlineScottysAir From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3509 times:

Yeah, this is interested news for BA wants to began nonstop from LHR-SJC flight and how is they on the tour from SJC airport doing? Can you given me with their news from BA about open it up with new route out of LHR and after DOT is denied with these flight nonstop to LHR from years ago, right? Why did they do that, huh?

User currently offlineCopaair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3428 times:

I think that the third SFO flight may be a good idea, but the SJC flight would be beneficial to the silicon valley too.

User currently offlineMikesairways From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 725 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3388 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A SJC flight may be logical actually, if SFO already has two, it gives people a bit more of an option. I would be interested to see the number of people who originate in SJC and connect in ORD/JFK or even DFW to European destinations.


The red zone is for the immediate loading and unloading of passengers only, there is no stopping in the white zone...(Ai
User currently offlineCopaair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3370 times:

The SJC flight would be to LGW though, offering less connections. If there is a third SFO flight, it would likely be to LHR, offering a lot of connections. I guess it really depends of where the majority of SJC origin pax were headed to.

User currently offlineBehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4851 posts, RR: 44
Reply 8, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3336 times:

If its possible then it should be a 3-4 weekly B 777-200ER LHR-SJC flight as a lot of Indians will transit in LHR from INDIA to go to SJC-Silicon Valley as well as other IT ppl from FRA and CDG etc etc. I would advise BA to start the route 3 times a week and then based upon demand gradually increase it to 4 then 5 weekly flights.

If flown from LHR, the route has more chances of doing well because of excellent connections to India-Arabia-Europe and Africa however if flown from LGW, only European connections are worth noting. Many pax find it a bother to transit by changing airports though it is an efficient system between LHR and LGW, many pax are turned off at the prospect of airport change.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 9, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3333 times:

The SJC flight would be to LGW though, offering less connections

Why would that be?

SJC is covered as a San Francisco area airport. If BA has a slot at Heathrow, they can use it for SJC.

N


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8037 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3266 times:

If BA does start flying LHR-SJC, it'll of course by done using a 777-200ER. No way SJC's facilities can handle the 747-400 that BA also flies.  Smile BA could have done it with a 767-300ER, but it's possible that the 763ER could be payload-restricted in the westward direction and BA is starting to phase the 763ER out of their fleet.

User currently offlineWedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5950 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3255 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I would think that BA would use a 777 on the LHR/LGW-SJC route...especially if the MOD (Ministry of Defense) decides to go with Boeing on the Tanker deal.

User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 12, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3249 times:

While SJC is technically capable of receiving a 744, I dunno about getting all those people into the terminal  Laugh out loud

Granted, AA's terminal isn't from the 50s, but still.

N


User currently offlineSllevin From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 3376 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3161 times:

SJC is covered as a San Francisco area airport. If BA has a slot at Heathrow, they can use it for SJC.


IIRC, that's not true. AA thought the same thing you did, and was about to start this service back in 2001, only to discover that per the terms of Bermuda II, SJC cannot be used in place of SFO.

Steve


User currently offlineLeneld From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 606 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3152 times:

This is real surprising because i heard that Portland was at/or near the top of British Airways future cities list.

User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33280 posts, RR: 71
Reply 15, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 3068 times:

A British airline can fly between Heathrow and any designated US-UK gateway from Heathrow as long as a US carrier is not flying between that airport and Gatwick. The problem is, however, that San Jose is not a designated US-UK gateway (OAK, IIRC, can be used). However, St. Louis is not longer a US-UK gateway, and BA could easily argue that St. Louis be dropped for San Jose if they wanted to fly SJC-LHR.


a.
User currently offlineIflyatldl From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1936 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2855 times:

Either way, with the Technology interests I can see the potenntial. Another way of perceiving it would be that it's an alternate airport for the Bay Area as is Gatwick to Heathrow. I'm sure you won't hear the high-ups at OneWorld poo-pooing it.


Ah, Summer, Fenway Park, Boston Red Sox and Beer.....
User currently offlineMikesairways From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 725 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2770 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

SJC actually serves a very large market in its-self. When I worked for an airline at SJC, we had a lot of local pax's that travelled from Fresno (3-hours away), Monterey, Santa Cruz etc. I think that since there is such a large and growing population to the south of San Jose, I'm pretty confident the numbers are there.


The red zone is for the immediate loading and unloading of passengers only, there is no stopping in the white zone...(Ai
User currently offlineLegacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2145 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2723 times:

I think we all are getting ahead of ourselves. As I mentioned, the San Jose airport invited BA to look at their facilities. BA was not enquiring by themselves. Airports throughout the nation would like expanded flight ops so it is quite common for an airport to try to attract various carriers. There are other airports throughout the West seeking BA and other international carriers. I believe BA recently suspended service to SAN. If SAN could not support or sustain BA service, how can SJC with competition from SFO, which has five daily flights?

San Jose/Silicon Valley is still far from recovering, employment wise, from the rut they are currently in. Interesting note, in today's Chronicle newspaper, SF added a more jobs in the region in the last quarter than any other city in the Bay area.



John@SFO
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 19, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2640 times:

I would think that BA would use a 777 on the LHR/LGW-SJC route...especially if the MOD(Ministry of Defense) decides to go with Boeing on the Tanker deal.

Why would you say? Is there a Boeing contractor in San Jose working on the MRTT?

N


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2593 times:

SJC is covered as a San Francisco area airport. If BA has a slot at Heathrow, they can use it for SJC

Wrong.

As per Bermuda2, SJC is a co-terminal with SFO only in terms of designated gateway status to LON as a region. It is not however, considered a co-terminal in terms of LHR designated gateway status.


A British airline can fly between Heathrow and any designated US-UK gateway from Heathrow as long as a US carrier is not flying between that airport and Gatwick. The problem is, however, that San Jose is not a designated US-UK gateway (OAK, IIRC, can be used).


This is incorrect on two points.
One: for the reason I mentioned above.

Two: any of the four designated LHR airlines (not just British) can switch a LGW destination to LHR provided that it:
  • is the sole carrier operating the route
  • generates a designated amount of XXX-LON traffic flow (not sure of the specific #, B747-437B knows the answer; I do know however that the number is based on flow and not O&D) within an annual period.

  • User currently offlineLhr001 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 21, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2527 times:

    WHY SAN JOSE?

    Okay, hub to American Airlines and a few Western Flights and Japan! But seriously they have had excellent service from San Francisco for years! Why not try-

    SMF-LGW (Thrice Weekly)
    Sacramento has a lot of international connect passengers and San Francisco would take a big hit if Sacramento started to offer the international flights that could compete with SFO!

    PDX-LGW (Four Weekly)
    Portland has Lufthansa and a very good international gateway! The abilty to bring in British Airways would be an excellent addition!

    LAS-LAX (Thrice Weekly)
    Las Vegas could work as competing against Virgin Atlantic on existing LAS-LGW service. The demand is there already!


    Finally, why doesnt British Airways or Virign Atlantic offer West Coast service to LGW, with the exception of Las Vegas?


    User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 22, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2469 times:

    LHR001,
    a couple things:



    SMF is not an approved gateway by Bermuda-II to LGW nor LHR.

    PDX is approved for LGW service, but currently is not allowed service (though since PIT and STL no longer exist, it is possible to switch)

    LAS isnt one of the original 12 approved gateways for LHR, and unlike DEN/PHX/SAN, does not have the traffic to allow a legal switch (nor does VS have the LHR slot anyways)


    User currently offlineMSYtristar From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 23, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2462 times:

    I can't really see SMF getting a nonstop to Europe (too close to SFO) and PDX has all that it can handle with LH.


    Steve in New Orleans


    User currently offlineStevenUhl777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 24, posted (11 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2392 times:

    I agree...just can't see BA considering PDX at all, whether it be LHR or LGW. The passenger base in the Portland metro area isn't THAT big, plus most London-bound passengers go through SEA, or possibly YVR. There's two other options for Europe-bound passengers in Portland: take SAS out of SEA, or the new nonstop on LH, which I guess is 4 times a week now during the winter (saw that on another thread).

    But, of course, stranger things have happened...


    Top Of Page
    Forum Index

    This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

    Printer friendly format

    Similar topics:More similar topics...
    Boeing Looks At Larger 787 For EK, BA posted Mon Sep 26 2005 06:41:59 by Sq212
    UA 777 At SJC? posted Mon Dec 18 2006 19:42:03 by SJCRRPAX
    NZ Looks At Less Legroom Over Tasman On A320s posted Fri Dec 15 2006 22:42:57 by 777ER
    BA Delays At LGW Today posted Fri Dec 15 2006 16:09:52 by BFS
    NY/NJ Port Authority Looks At SWF posted Thu Nov 16 2006 22:49:44 by PVDflier
    2 BA 777s At DFW Today 11/14/2006 posted Wed Nov 15 2006 07:34:14 by DFW13L
    Air Canada Looks At Margarita Island posted Sun Nov 12 2006 06:32:06 by Luisde8cd
    BA A319 At CWL Today posted Fri Nov 3 2006 14:27:52 by Cardiffairtaxi
    BA Emergency At LHR 28th OCT posted Sun Oct 29 2006 17:33:07 by BMED
    Boeing 727 At SJC Today... posted Sat Oct 14 2006 05:11:11 by SJC-Alien