and take space and code share with Korean Air Cargo. Except for the Korean aircraft that operates into LHR, the other 747s fly out of STN. A lot of transfer freight makes the quite long road journey between the two airports.
For shorthaul air freight I also believe that all (?) DHL flights operating into LHR are operating on behalf of BA. These flights are usually at the weekend when LHR slot constraint is not so critical and DHL has spare capacity from its own business package work.
But why has BA not had its own in house freighter operation since they sold G-KILO to CX back in the early to mid 1980s?
UA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 3468 times:
My guess would be the price in gas these days. Many airlines, including WN have cut out mail cargo from their passenger fleets due to gas prices. Outside of gas, the amount of effort and time to make an airline just for cargo along with maintaining an entire fleet of cargo aircraft is a logistical nightmare for an airline like BA. With Atlas, LH, and other international cargo operators the risk for a return in profit is too high to invest 100% in, outside of their current investment in the global cargo operations.
Well BA pay for the fuel on the wet-leased freighters anyway and any bought space agreement (like the ones they have with KE, JL & BR) will be priced accordingly to cover those costs. The reason that BA don't own their own freighter fleet is all the other costs associated with buying a running a small 'airline within an airline'. Plus it makes it easier to lay on or reduce capacity to take account of fluctuations in the markets.
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 8741 posts, RR: 28
Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3259 times:
On the contrary, a lot of airlines realise that the additional revenue from freight is most welcome. Leave it to a GSA to do the sales and handling and get a fixed price for each kg flown, and the rest is pure profit as long as the additonal fuel needed for the uplift is paid. Leisure Cargo in Germany has a lot of customers who have been flying empty bellies around before they got acustomed to that business model,
BA was, with a few exceptions, never a cargo airline. They have a very bad reputation in that field some of which is caused by the "White Elephant" in LHR, a cargo centre that swallows freight and more than often they hever find the pieces again. Transit times are a night mare and unless you have a through palett you better not try to use that service. More, running the main operation from LHR and cargo from STN is not such a good idea either.
LHR is simply too congested and the place is too small to accomodate a sizeable cargo operation. With the massive wide body passenger a/c prsence, the overall tonnage still is quite impressive.
Leezyjet From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 4041 posts, RR: 54
Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 2867 times:
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 3): They have a very bad reputation in that field some of which is caused by the "White Elephant" in LHR, a cargo centre that swallows freight and more than often they hever find the pieces again.
An old friend of mine used to work for BAX Global, and they were shipping a tractor to someplace with BA, and it got "lost" in the cargo centre at LHR !!!.
It wasn't until he threatend to drive down there and search for it himself that they managed to find it.
How the hell does a cargo company manage to loose a TRACTOR ???
"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
RTFM From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2004, 408 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 10 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2722 times:
Quoting PanHAM (Reply 3): BA was, with a few exceptions, never a cargo airline. They have a very bad reputation in that field
Well I don't know what the 2005 rankings were but in 2004 BA were the 12 largest cargo carrying airline in the world in terms of FTKs (and that includes FedEx & UPS) which hardly indicates that they are 'never a cargo airline'. (Incidentally they are the largest cargo airline in the world that does not own any freighters.) They were also voted Cargo Airline of the Year in 2005 by Air Cargo News. Still I guess that's just their opinion against yours.....
As well as the 707's, BA experimented with a single 747-200F, three 747-236B combis and two leased MEA 747 combis. The freighter was deemed not suitable to their business model and sold to Cathay Pacific- the combis were refitted to all passenger use after only two years.
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 8741 posts, RR: 28
Reply 14, posted (7 years 10 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2530 times:
Quoting Leezyjet (Reply 10): How the hell does a cargo company manage to loose a TRACTOR ???
by ignorance of the employees. Someone placed it in a location where it is not supposed to be and that is all it needs. I used BA/BE cargo a lot decades ago, when BE still had their Vanguard freighters, was Ok then.
I would not even dream on using BA for FRA/LHR loco freight, it just takes toolong to get the shipments out of their system. LH is bad enough, suffering from the more than poor service Menzies as handling agents give them and the LH customers, but BA is worse.
Quoting RTFM (Reply 11): Cargo Airline of the Year in 2005 by Air Cargo News. Still I guess that's just their opinion against yours.....
My opinion is based on working experience. Of course, BA is a large carrier of cargo by sheer size of their intercontinental fleet and the bellies they have to fill daily. They never took off as a combination carrier like AF , LH or KL. There may be many reasons for that, I have mentioned some here, the location and the fact that the channel has to be crossed by road feeder traffic may be two more reasons.
Now the test to get established on the continent by using is axed as well. BA will remain what it was most of the time, a belly carrier.