Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BA And QF Will Share T5 At LHR!  
User currently offlineConcorde001 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1230 posts, RR: 3
Posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7688 times:

It was originally thought that QF would not be able to share T5 with BA due to capacity constraints - however according to 'Business Traveller' (Oct'05 ed.) magazine, BA and QF have told them that they will share T5!

I have tried to find the article on their website, but as it is a magazine article, not an online one, they have only the headline 'BA and Qantas to share T5' in their archives - no article!

Here is the link for the headline!
http://www.businesstraveller.com/def...SM=ALL&DatePeriod=0&OB=D&PageMove=

Just had a look on PPRUNE and someone has also posted this same information. Here is what the member wrote:
"Well Just as I thought despite what others have suggested on this thread, in this months edition of Business Traveller Magazine, Qantas and BA have confirmed that they will operate their joint services out of T5, it also suggests BUT NOT CONFIRM that all the other Oneworld airlines will go to a specially refitted T3 so that they are closer to T5 for transfers! BA will have a presence in T3 to assist transfers to its codeshared IB,EI,AY flights!"

[Edited 2005-10-21 12:54:21]

[Edited 2005-10-21 12:59:07]

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNetworkDoc From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 77 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7637 times:

Wow, that's a surprise indeed if that's true! I can confirm the PPRUNE quote that BA could not have been clearer beforehand that partners won't join in T5 and would be assembled in T3 so that a connex shuttle could be run between T5 and T3 and the partner airlines. I asked that question myself on a recent course for T5 and was definitely told 'no way' for ANY alliance members by a big wig on the T5 project. ..........


Flown: AB/BA/BD/BI/CX/DI/DL/KE/KL/LH/LT/LX/MH/NW/OZ/PR/QF/SN/SQ/TW/UA/VS/5J.
User currently offlineDavidT From Switzerland, joined Oct 2005, 477 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7554 times:

I saw this last week in Bus. Traveller - but I forgot to post >_< Thanks for posting.

The full article is

Heathrow's Terminal 5 promises to provide a fantastic impresion for visitors to Britain when it opens on March 30, 2008.

London's newest terminal will offer state of the art passenger handling along with a six platform train station with direct city centre rail links by Heathrow Express and the existing piccadilly line.

The new terminal occupies an area the size of london's hyde park and is designed to handle 30 million pax. It is costing £4.2billion and is already two thirds complete. T5 is an airy glass structure; BAA executives toured Asia's best airports in search of inmpiration for thei nterior.

In common with practices elsewhere, BA will be T5's main tenant. THe terminal will be large enough for BA, for the first time ever, to operate all its flights under one roof.

So much is already known. But what about BA's oneworld partners? It had been thought they would join BA in T5, but Business Traveller can reveal that is not hte case. One lucky carrier will make hte move, however. Qantas, one of the "main" oneworld carriers, will join BA in T5. Meanwhile, the rest of hte members will locate to T3, closest to T5 and so we will effectively share the airport's western apron.


(sorry for typos)

[Edited 2005-10-21 13:46:24]

User currently offlineVSFLYER747400 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 134 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7548 times:

Quoting NetworkDoc (Reply 1):
I asked that question myself on a recent course for T5 and was definitely told 'no way' for ANY alliance members by a big wig on the T5 project. ..........

I wonder how the other OneWorld member airlines will react to that remark. It does make for a rather disjointed set up. I would imagine that minimum connection times would have to be on a par with a T1-T4 connection then. I tried searching to see if there was a thread on how the airlines might be distributed once T5 opens but couldnt see one.

It would make sense (to me at least) if this happened.....

T5 - BA (all ops) and the other OneWorld carriers
T4 - SkyTeam
T3 - Other long haul carriers
T2 - Other European carriers
T1 - Star Alliance

I know it probably wont happen this way, but if the OW partners go to T3 how do you see the current non alliance T3 carriers being distributed?



Being on: (in no order) VS BA AA EK CX MH DL EI BD KL HV NW RC LH AF DA TG QF US FR LX AC SK AZ PG SQ UA PA
User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8603 posts, RR: 13
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7532 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It doesn't surprise me too much - QF have probably the closest relationship with BA of any of the oneworld partners - even though BA have sold their stake in QF - and it is not a huge number of flights that BA would need to accommodate in comparison with any of their other OW partners .


Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineBoysteve From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 951 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7529 times:

Quoting DavidT (Reply 2):
London's newest terminal will offer state of hte art passenger handling along with a sex platform

Excellent, this will make using T5 very satisfying


User currently offlineDavidT From Switzerland, joined Oct 2005, 477 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 7522 times:

Oh dear...

should have read SIX platform. This isn't AMSBig grin


User currently offlineConcorde001 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1230 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 7513 times:

Quoting VSFLYER747400 (Reply 3):
I know it probably wont happen this way, but if the OW partners go to T3 how do you see the current non alliance T3 carriers being distributed?

They probably won't be!
SQ,NH,SK,AC,NZ,TG,RG.UA, are all STAR members and are currently in T3! Once they move into T1, there will be plenty of room left in T3!


User currently offlineRichardw From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 3759 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 7508 times:

OW routes that could be at T5 to strengthen the alliance?

AA JFK-LHR

IB MAD-LHR

AY HEL-LHR

CX HKG-LHR

EI DUB-LHR


User currently offlineConcorde001 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1230 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 7492 times:

Quoting Richardw (Reply 8):

AA JFK-LHR

IB MAD-LHR

AY HEL-LHR

CX HKG-LHR

EI DUB-LHR

AA JFK-LHR - no point as the services are not code shared (god only knows when EU and US will agree on open skies)
CX HKG-LHR - no point as the services are not code shared
AY HEL-LHR and IB MAD-LHR -not a bad idea, especially for all IB flights to be moved into T5 as they have a similar agreement to the one BA have with QF- BUT the problem with T5 is space! BA will JUST manage with their own flights and QF!


User currently offlineNetworkDoc From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 77 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 7401 times:

Quoting VSFLYER747400 (Reply 3):
It would make sense (to me at least) if this happened.....

T5 - BA (all ops) and the other OneWorld carriers
T4 - SkyTeam
T3 - Other long haul carriers
T2 - Other European carriers
T1 - Star Alliance

That would be great for the globalisation of the industry but I wonder if BA would be keen to see Sky and Star get their own terminals... That would be a lot of competition at its own doorstep, in particular as rival alliances would protect their home bases from rival constellation groups and probably not grant OW a special terminal at their bases.

Quoting Concorde001 (Reply 7):
Quoting VSFLYER747400 (Reply 3):
I know it probably wont happen this way, but if the OW partners go to T3 how do you see the current non alliance T3 carriers being distributed?

They probably won't be!
SQ,NH,SK,AC,NZ,TG,RG.UA, are all STAR members and are currently in T3! Once they move into T1, there will be plenty of room left in T3!

That's what I heard. Apparently T3 is going to be OW only with re-distribution of the other carriers....... Wonder what the existing T3 carriers to be re-homed (if true) would demand of the BAA in return... Maybe dedicated rival alliance terminals are not as utopic, as mainly Star carriers are affected (plus smaller ones without too much bargaining power).

If Star and Sky got their own terminals (which would make sense for the industry as such and pax, assuming that fares won't be upwardly affected through market power), BA might have to curb excitement about T5 which might just open a super-luctrative door for competitors.

Gonna be exciting!  hyper 



Flown: AB/BA/BD/BI/CX/DI/DL/KE/KL/LH/LT/LX/MH/NW/OZ/PR/QF/SN/SQ/TW/UA/VS/5J.
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11840 posts, RR: 62
Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7302 times:

I wish AA would be able to get access to T5.

User currently offlineRichardw From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 3759 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7285 times:

Quoting Concorde001 (Reply 9):
AA JFK-LHR - no point as the services are not code shared (god only knows when EU and US will agree on open skies)
CX HKG-LHR - no point as the services are not code shared

If BA put some AA and CX codes on its European routes then may be a bit of feed traffic.


User currently offlineConcorde001 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1230 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7267 times:

Quoting Richardw (Reply 12):
f BA put some AA and CX codes on its European routes then may be a bit of feed traffic.

They do codeshare on European and domestic services, but not on services between two cities they both serve, e.g. LHR-HKG


User currently offlineBeany From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7257 times:

Quoting Concorde001 (Thread starter):
That's what I heard. Apparently T3 is going to be OW only with re-distribution of the other carriers.......

That is incorrect as Virgin will be staying in T3, see here for details:

http://www.virgin-atlantic.com/en/gb...ce/pressreleases/news/pr300305.jsp


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7204 times:

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 4):
It doesn't surprise me too much - QF have probably the closest relationship with BA of any of the oneworld partners - even though BA have sold their stake in QF - and it is not a huge number of flights that BA would need to accommodate in comparison with any of their other OW partners .

actually, from what I've been reading, BA's Walsh and AA's Arpey have been in very close contacts with each other..almost to the point of some kind of "merge"..no I'm not saying they are going to merge, but thats how close their business contact has been.....suffice to say, its more than BA-QF's..

Quoting Commavia (Reply 11):
I wish AA would be able to get access to T5.

ditto here, as it would make my European/Asian connections easier!



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineKiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8603 posts, RR: 13
Reply 16, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7178 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 15):
actually, from what I've been reading, BA's Walsh and AA's Arpey have been in very close contacts with each other..almost to the point of some kind of "merge"..no I'm not saying they are going to merge, but thats how close their business contact has been.....suffice to say, its more than BA-QF's

I have read it too , and I am not ignoring it - but there are two important factors likely to prevent AA's use of T5

1 / nothing is going to happen before openskies exist - which could be soon or
it could be years away

2/ AA's ops at LHR are far bigger than QF - therefore AA would require a lot
more valuable space at T5 than QF's handful of movements a day will .


At the moment AA/BA are specifically prohibited from codesharing and revenue agreements into/out of LHR - whereas the JSA between QF/BA means that all flights between LHR and Australia ( and indeed QFs FRA-SIN-SYD service) are run as codeshares and revenue shares - a much cosier relationship than currently exists between AA/BA ( but who is to say what the case might be 5 years down the track  Wink )



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 7108 times:

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 16):
2/ AA's ops at LHR are far bigger than QF - therefore AA would require a lot
more valuable space at T5 than QF's handful of movements a day will .

on a theoretical basis, your comments are correct, I was only commenting on the comparisons between the AA-BA and QF-BA relationships....thats all... Smile



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineLH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 54
Reply 18, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 7059 times:

Quoting Commavia (Reply 11):
I wish AA would be able to get access to T5.

I wish that as well, unfortunately T5 just won't have the logistics and space to handle AA's operation as well.  Sad

LH423



« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
User currently offlineVincewy From Taiwan, joined Oct 2005, 767 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 6910 times:

Once T5 is opened, instead of opening up all slots BA freed from T1 and T4, do they have plan(s) to renovate some of the existing terminals? IMO, the best solution is tearing down T1 and T2, building another state of art mega terminal, like YYZ.

User currently offlineBHMNONREV From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1383 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 6871 times:

Quoting VSFLYER747400 (Reply 3):
It does make for a rather disjointed set up. I would imagine that minimum connection times would have to be on a par with a T1-T4 connection then. I tried searching to see if there was a thread on how the airlines might be distributed once T5 opens but couldnt see one.

Does OneWorld/BA have a plan in place for an airside shuttle from T3 to T5 and return, to cut down on those connecting times? It seems that something could be set-up, considering they will have the entire western half of the airport..


User currently offlineZkojh From China, joined Sep 2004, 1722 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 6811 times:

I looked at the article today, in the BD diamond lounge at LHR, and part of T3 will become home to oneworld, tho QF going to T5 is some good news,.


CZ 787 to AKL can't wait.
User currently offlineScotron11 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 1178 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 6739 times:

Maybe that is why T5 has 5 stands able to handle the A380? On another thread about BA's future aircraft orders, I had always wondered why T5 had the capability of handling the A380 if BA wasn't ordering any.

Now it makes sense!


User currently offlinePlanemanofnz From New Zealand, joined Sep 2005, 1676 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 6658 times:

Would there be enough room for Aer Lingus in T5? Most of it's aircraft (when in heathrow) don't spend hours on the ground plus most people wanting to fly to/from Ireland and Asia/Oceania and the middle east would connect in LHR to oneworld, wouldn't they?

User currently offlineNetworkDoc From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 77 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 6645 times:

Quoting Planemanofnz (Reply 23):
Would there be enough room for Aer Lingus in T5?

If EI will still be in OW then...



Flown: AB/BA/BD/BI/CX/DI/DL/KE/KL/LH/LT/LX/MH/NW/OZ/PR/QF/SN/SQ/TW/UA/VS/5J.
25 Planemanofnz : Trust me, they will be. Oneworld thinks that Aer Lingus' slots at LHR are probably better off with them than any other alliance.
26 Boysteve : Well I guess it's sensible airport design to have T5 A380 ready. BAA would look really stupid and it would cost far more in the long run if they had
27 Post contains images Boo25 : No big deal - considering QF have 2 flights into LHR a day compared to BA's 400-500 !!!
28 Sydscott : With the JSA and the codeshares, it makes sense for QF to move with BA and continue their current arrangements. At both QF's major international tran
29 BDKLEZ : As far as I was aware, once T5 is up and running, BA/OW will operate exclusively from there. Meanwhile, Star will be T1 exclusively.
30 Kaitak744 : That would be absolutely impossible. BA would take up 95% of T5. No room for all One World carriers. Here is how its goes. T5-BA, QF T4-Skyteam T3-On
31 BHMNONREV : I think it still remains to be seen whether or not BA will be able to get all of their flights into T5. I understand the two linear concouses will be
32 Kaitak744 : I am not saying you are nor a untrustable person, but where did you get that information from? It does seem pretty accurate. However, if you add up t
33 Rwylie77 : Why? Sky and Star will not be getting any more landing slots, they will just be based in one terminal to make transfers easier rather than passengers
34 N1120A : And there is no way that will happen because of the sheer size of AA's operation at LHR It is just good planning. AA built A380 gates in T4 at LAX be
35 DavidT : The articles make a point of BA not having to split ops over terminals. Given that most of their quotes are from oneworld themselves, I think it's re
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...
BA Move To T5 At LHR To Be Staged. posted Thu Sep 21 2006 18:47:18 by TristarSteve
BA To Use T5 At LHR posted Thu Nov 6 2003 13:25:58 by Aussie747
Observation Deck Included In T5 At LHR? posted Sat Apr 22 2006 00:56:39 by Springbok295
NZ And QF Will Merge Trans-Tasman Operations posted Wed Mar 29 2006 12:54:39 by 777ER
BA And QF On The Kangaroo Route posted Thu Nov 3 2005 02:53:08 by Iowa744Fan
I Will Soon Be At LHR. What To Look For? posted Mon Jun 20 2005 13:49:43 by Duke
Finnair To Use T5 At LHR? posted Mon Feb 28 2005 15:40:21 by Richardw
BA "babysitting" VS Slots At LHR posted Sun Nov 28 2004 12:43:37 by GKirk
QF's New Landing Slots At LHR posted Mon Mar 22 2004 06:29:29 by QF744
Why Did BA Move Some Flights To Term 1 At LHR? posted Mon Feb 2 2004 08:13:25 by Mozart