Richardw From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 3709 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 years 3 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2878 times:
When BA has T5 up and running will they re time some flights to maximise the possibility of feeder passengers to One World long haul flights, or is it likely that a completely new timetable will be introduced for all flights.
BA380 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 1466 posts, RR: 9 Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2818 times:
I guess the above replies are correct, BUT...
I would have thought that the EFFECTIVE timetable for people connecting on feeder flights might change (if you follow) in that if you currently have to take a certain feeder flight in order to make the connecting time between T1 and T4 (say) and if the connecting time is reduced once all Ops are consolidated at T5 (I presume so, as they did at MUC recently), then you may be able to catch a later feeder flight in order to catch the same second leg.
BA has an enormous amount of connecting traffic at LHR - hence the reason why they moved so flights between T1-T4 and vice-versa recently.
BBADXB From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2520 times:
Would it be possible to transfer some of the BA LGW ops to LHR T5?
For e.g., MLA and some Italian destinations, are only served from LGW, with very limited onward connections from LGW. To connect to most of BA's beyond points from LON, one has to connect from LGW to LHR and the other way round on the return leg. I think that BA could benefit a great deal by concentrating its LON ops at one airport - LHR.
FlyCaledonian From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 1965 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 16 hours ago) and read 2377 times:
BBADXB, I don't think you'll see too many, if any in fact, LGW flights move to LHR once T5 is up and running. LGW is increasingly becoming used for leisure destinations by BA, with continued elimination of overlapping LHR/LGW routes (CDG/FRA). LGW has a lower operating cost for BA than LHR and switching price sensitive leisure routes to LHR would not benefit BA, especially as Rod Eddington has said he wants shorthaul to move into profit from its current break even mark (A big improvement on the huge annual losses of a few years ago for shorthaul). Of the LGW operations IAH, DFW and ATL will move to LHR if and when Bermuda II is renegotiated. Of the shorthaul routes possibly Luxembourg, Hannover and Algiers may move to LHR. But again, even this would depend on BA securing additional LHR slots.
AIR MALTA From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2364 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 2355 times:
Is there any chance of seeing TUN also move to LHR. Tunis has a great potential of transfer passengers especially to North America and South Africa. Unfortunately, BA is not exploring this option and we are obliged to transfer through CDG or FRA with LH and AF : and you know that the Economy product of both airlines is way behind BAs.
Also I don't understand why BA has so many AGP flights at LHR where they are also considered as leisure destinations. With slots taken from AGP, they could add ALG, VNO, TUN and MLA to LHR.
Ts-ior From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 3295 posts, RR: 7 Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 15 hours ago) and read 2326 times:
Once, i have red an article on Tunisia News saying that BA flies to TUN out of LGW because it is a leisure destination more that a business one. That was in the late 90s, but now things have changed a lot and with the opening of T5, the Tunisian capital will deserve a better interest from BA and a shift from LGW to LHR. Also a MAN service would be greately appreciated !!!
Speedbird2155 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 847 posts, RR: 5 Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 13 hours ago) and read 2262 times:
While BA does have more holiday destinations from LGW, it's not fair to suggest that they get any less interest from BA than other routes. BGI is one of BA's premium routes, although it is a holiday destination but it is LGW based. It's more a question of practicality. LHR can't accomodate all BA services from both LON airports.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 3 hours ago) and read 2129 times:
>I think that BA could benefit a great deal by concentrating its LON ops at one airport - LHR.<
Which would be impossible for more reasons than just operating costs. LHR is very constrained for capacity, so they cannot consolidate there. Also, customs at LGW is known for being more strict than at LHR, and they have some of their more "risky" flights come in there (such as those from Jamaica, which are known to carry extra "cargo")
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss