Ozair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 859 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3755 times:
Quoting Crewrest (Thread starter): Has anyone heard a rumour of Virgin starting a dedicated LHR-HKG-LHR service
The loads are certainly good enough for another flight and it would free up more seats for the SYD-LHR route, not just SYD-HKG, but maybe this is one they wait to use the A380 on. 2009 might be a bit far away though and a bit more frequency never hurt anyone.
Wunala From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 950 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3403 times:
Yes, i have heard that, as they need to free up space on the LHRHKG route to enable thru pax from SYD. LHRHKG and vv was doing well with good loads, and didn't need to have SYD tagged on. THe demand is SYDLHR not SYDHKG.
Good luck to them. When they join Oneworld I look forward to earning points on them. LOL.
HB-IWC From Indonesia, joined Sep 2000, 4505 posts, RR: 72
Reply 9, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2835 times:
As discussed here before, it was a mistake on Virgin's part to tag the new SYD flights to the already popular LHR-HKG sector, which was a line that could easily sustain itself. The LHR-HKG-LHR sectors now have to support the additional LHR-SYD-LHR traffic, and with a large number of pax still flying the LHR-HKG-LHR sectors, the airline is essentially forced into heavily marketing the HKG-SYD-HKG market.
Virgin would have done better by initiating a totally new flight, including the transit point, which could have been a variety of places, including BKK, KUL and SIN, and start from scratch with 2 new stations. As it is right now, the SYD extensions are threatening the performance of the successful HKG route.