Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Any New BA Routes In The Pipeline?  
User currently offlineBA787 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 2596 posts, RR: 7
Posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7716 times:

Any new BA routes starting soon?

After the reductions lately its been nice to hear the new YYC service is off to a start, anymore good routes ?

27 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBAStew From Australia, joined Sep 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7679 times:

Well if you want to pay any attention to the BA cabin/flight crew rumour mill, the most talked about from 'someone who knows someone' are a de-linking of the EZE flight from GRU and flying direct instead. And also a return to seoul, osaka and kuala lumpur.

User currently offline8herveg From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7661 times:

I dont know any in the pipeline, but heres a few destinations which I would like to see:

Bamako (possibly operated by BMed)

Banjul (although I think they already have plans for this by BMed)

Mombassa (Perhaps a weekly service for tourists)

Windhoek - perhaps 3 x weekly

Luxor (I think this would be a good destination ex. Gatwick with GB Airways)

Calvi, Pula, Kefallania, Preveza, Zante, Bourgas...2 x weekly for all ex. Gatwick with GB Airways.

Las Vegas...I know this would never happen, but I reckon a 5 x weekly service with a B777 would work, also from Gatwick obviously.

St Martaan (I think thats how you spell it??). Yet another tourist route, which would also give god connections to the surrounding smaller islands...St Barts, Guadeloupe, Mustique etc.

Riyadh & Jeddah - I know BA pulled out some years back, but I reckon they could push BMI off the route. BA could offer much better shedules, more reguarly, with a better product, nicer AND newer aircraft andmore premium passengers.

Sri Lanka & Goa - Tourist routes again, which could be offered by the 777...perhaps without First Class. Weekly flights?

Seoul - Daily 777 ex. Heathrow. Perhaps onwards to Nagoya, Fukuoka or Osaka.

Perth via Kuala Lumpur. Offering two slightly smaller markets than Singapore and Sydney, for example. But with a daily B777, it would be filling a niche market.

And finally...the return of the Melbourne service!

I know half of these will probably never happen...just dreams. Anyone agree with me for any of the services though?


User currently offlineANstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5173 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 7666 times:

Quoting BAStew (Reply 1):
Well if you want to pay any attention to the BA cabin/flight crew rumour mill, the most talked about from 'someone who knows someone' are a de-linking of the EZE flight from GRU and flying direct instead. And also a return to seoul, osaka and kuala lumpur.

I reckon the delink of GRU and EZE once again is a great idea.... Given GRU now has an additional 3 flights a week, it could be possible!


User currently offlinePlanesarecool From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 4119 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7586 times:

Quoting 8herveg (Reply 2):
St Martaan (I think thats how you spell it??). Yet another tourist route, which would also give god connections to the surrounding smaller islands...St Barts, Guadeloupe, Mustique etc.

As much as we'd all like to see it, i think there are many Caribbean routes that would open before an SXM route, as it's more of an American and French/Dutch playground, rather than UK.

Quoting 8herveg (Reply 2):
Riyadh & Jeddah - I know BA pulled out some years back, but I reckon they could push BMI off the route. BA could offer much better shedules, more reguarly, with a better product, nicer AND newer aircraft andmore premium passengers.

These routes were pulled due to security issues there. Towards the end of it's service, BA were operating these flights via Kuwait, so that the crew didn't have to overnight in Saudi Arabia. Stopping a flight in Kuwait not only disrupts passengers by adding 1-1.5hrs to their journey, but also costs more money in fuel/fees etc, so eventually the flights became less profitable. So I doubt they'd re-enter the Saudi market.

Quoting 8herveg (Reply 2):
Perth via Kuala Lumpur. Offering two slightly smaller markets than Singapore and Sydney, for example. But with a daily B777, it would be filling a niche market.

This is similar to MEL. Although MEL was profitable, it took around 3 days out of an aircraft which could bring in more money on shorter routes, such as India and China.

Quoting 8herveg (Reply 2):
Mombassa (Perhaps a weekly service for tourists)



Quoting 8herveg (Reply 2):
Sri Lanka & Goa - Tourist routes again, which could be offered by the 777...perhaps without First Class. Weekly flights?

Weekly flights aren't economical, as they either require putting crew up in hotels for a week, or keeping the aircraft on the ground at the destination for over 12 hours. BA currently only operate one weekly long haul flight, to Luanda, and that aircraft spends 19 hours there, not making any money. And i believe BA want to add frequencies to Luanda, but are restricted by the government. The 19 hour layover is made viable by the immense profitability of most Europe-Africa routes, however this wouldn't be seen on a leisure route such as Mombasa


User currently offline8herveg From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7543 times:

Quoting Planesarecool (Reply 4):
These routes were pulled due to security issues there.

So how come BMI are allowed to operate there?


User currently offlineBALAX From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 187 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7501 times:

Look for BA278 LAX-LHR to go all year round, usually it's Summer schedule only, operating from LAX at 1535 and arriving LHR at 945. Where is that bird coming from? Who knows but it's already supposedly approved.

User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7475 times:

What about the possibility of returning to Central America from LGW after their six month attempt at flying to SJO in 1999/2000? Or would BA codeshare with IB or perhaps, even send a 767 from LHR through GCM to Central America (if BA does decide to re-enter this market)?

User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7393 posts, RR: 17
Reply 8, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7458 times:

Quoting 8herveg (Reply 5):
So how come BMI are allowed to operate there?

It was a BA decision for the protection of their crews because of anti-western terrorism in Saudi.


User currently offlineSQNo1 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 687 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7458 times:

Quoting 8herveg (Reply 5):
So how come BMI are allowed to operate there?

It's not a case of BMI being allowed to run the routes, more like that BA made the choice to pull out of Saudi Arabia because of security concerns and BMI taking over a market that they have pretty much to themsevles, apart form th eoperations of Saudi Arabian Airlines.

With Regards,
Alex.B


User currently offlineDavidT From Switzerland, joined Oct 2005, 477 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 7381 times:

Is there a specific reason why BA aren't operating LAS already? I understand it will be more of a leisure route, but they do operate other leisure routes from lGW e.g. ANU.

User currently offlineBA787 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 2596 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 7381 times:

Cheers people, do BA already fly to Las Vegas or not?

User currently offlineLHRjc From Netherlands, joined Apr 2006, 1964 posts, RR: 20
Reply 12, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7321 times:

Quoting BA787 (Reply 11):
Cheers people, do BA already fly to Las Vegas or not?

Not directly. If you try to book via ba.com it routes you LGW-DFW BA2193 then BA5065 DFW - LAS which is a codeshare operated by AA.

JC



"Our 319's are very reliable. They get fixed very quickly."
User currently offlineBA787 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 2596 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7281 times:

Quoting LHRjc (Reply 12):

Cheers, surpirses me that they don't. Is there a direct link with any other airline from the UK to Las Vegas


User currently offlineB742 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 3767 posts, RR: 19
Reply 14, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7256 times:

Quoting BA787 (Reply 13):
Is there a direct link with any other airline from the UK to Las Vegas

Yes, VS operates a daily 744 flight from LGW to LAS.

Bmi also operate a 2x weekly flight between MAN and LAX with the A332.

So there is the demand there, BA infact used to fly to LAS.

Any news on new North American or Asian routes being planned, would love to see SAN, KUL and ICN.

Rob!   

[Edited 2006-12-01 22:31:37]

User currently offlinePlanesarecool From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 4119 posts, RR: 11
Reply 15, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day ago) and read 7192 times:

Quoting 8herveg (Reply 5):
So how come BMI are allowed to operate there?

Because there is no restriction - BA pulled out voluntarily.

Quoting DavidT (Reply 10):
I understand it will be more of a leisure route, but they do operate other leisure routes from lGW e.g. ANU.

The length of flight comes into it again. A LON-LAS-LON round trip takes about 23 hours out of an aircraft. While BA do have spare aircraft at Heathrow on most days, very few have a gap of 27 hours (minimum 2hrs turnaround prior to the rotation and two hours turnaround after). It's not really a destination that can be flown off to in the afternoon, for the aircraft to be back in London at the crack of dawn the next morning.


User currently offline8herveg From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day ago) and read 7119 times:

Quoting Planesarecool (Reply 15):
The length of flight comes into it again. A LON-LAS-LON round trip takes about 23 hours out of an aircraft. While BA do have spare aircraft at Heathrow on most days, very few have a gap of 27 hours (minimum 2hrs turnaround prior to the rotation and two hours turnaround after). It's not really a destination that can be flown off to in the afternoon, for the aircraft to be back in London at the crack of dawn the next morning.

I understand what you are saying. But do you think BA will be able to serve more of these 'smaller' destinations when they receive new aircraft? For example, they pulled out of MEL because they thought the 744 would be better utilised in the China/India market where more money could be made. This obviously makes sense. But if they had more 744s in the first place, they could operate the MEL route, PLUS the new China/India destinations.

They werent losing any money on the MEL route, they just knew they could make more on others.

Perhaps if they do get those 10 B773s and any other long-haul aircraft, they could return to the MEL route, and also add more new destinations such as Las Vegas, Seoul, Kuala Lumpur, Osaka etc.

What does everyone think?


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7393 posts, RR: 17
Reply 17, posted (7 years 8 months 22 hours ago) and read 7035 times:

If the BA sale of BACON to flybe goes through my understanding is that BA will retain its fleet of 11 Avro RJ100s. My understanding is that these aircraft will be based at EDI but primarily to be operated out of LCY where there is insufficient ramp space for long term (overnight) parking.

Currently BACON operate seven rotations a day on the EDI-LCY route. These services (with current timings) could be operated in isolation with just three aircraft. The minimum turnaround time would be 35 minutes between the arrival of BA8701 at LCY scheduled at 0805 hrs and the departure of BA8702 at 0840 hrs.

BACON also operate three rotations a day on the FRA-LCY-FRA service. These three rotations could be operated with a single aircraft. The quickest turn round required would be 35 minutes between the arrival of BA8731 at LCY scheduled at 0735 hrs and the departure of BA8732 at 0810 hrs.

The MAD-LCY-MAD service is operated twice a day with a 35 minute turn round at LCY between the arrival of BA8752 scheduled at 0850 hrs and the departure of BA8753 at 0925 hours. It therefore could be operated with a single aircraft.

The LCY-MXP-LCY service is operated once a day with a 40 minute turnaround at MXP. This rotation has to be completed by one aircraft unless an aircraft is going to be scheduled to stay on the ground at MXP for a little more than 24 hours.

So theoretically these services could be operated by six aircraft when individual aircraft are committed to specific routes. If (as must be the case) cross-route scheduling is used no doubt the timings can be made less demanding even though a quick turnaround at LCY is imperative because of the shortage of ramp space.

But BA will have 11 RJ100s which currently are not only operating these services in and out of LCY but also flights into, for example, BHX.

So since BA will no longer be operating existing routes to, for example, BHX, if the sale goes through it seems pretty likely that new routes or frequencies are planned out of LCY or - less likely in my view because of the flybe situation - EDI.


User currently offlineTristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3981 posts, RR: 34
Reply 18, posted (7 years 8 months 17 hours ago) and read 6926 times:

All this talk of new routes is very good, but we must not forget the problem of Slots at LHR.
BA is always looking for LHR slots. But there are few available, mainly on Saturday evenings. So any new service out of LHR will mean a reduction elsewhere. So leaving MEL was not because of losses on the route, but because it freed up a daily slot pair to enable another service. If 10 new aircraft come to LHR, and do not replace older ones then this means that 10-15 slot pairs are required. These will probably come from frequency reductions on European routes. It is a difficult balancing act. BA can make more money flying a long-haul aircraft out of LHR than an A319, but the A319 feeds pax into the long haul network.
BA does not have the luxury of being able to introduce new services without withdrawing others at its main hub.
Look at the availability of UK domestic flights at LHR. A few years ago you could fly to Norwich and Newquay from LHR. The very idea would be laughed at today


User currently offlineBALAX From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 187 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 8 months 16 hours ago) and read 6900 times:

Quoting B742 (Reply 14):
So there is the demand there, BA infact used to fly to LAS

Excuse me, when did BA fly to LAS? I don't remember this. BA was considering adding LAS service. It was between DEN and LAS and DEN got the service, now DEN's premium market is not as great as once thought.


User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5619 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (7 years 8 months 16 hours ago) and read 6897 times:

Quoting 8herveg (Reply 2):
Perth via Kuala Lumpur. Offering two slightly smaller markets than Singapore and Sydney, for example. But with a daily B777, it would be filling a niche market.

Slightly smaller!!! Perth is about 40% the size of SYD and offers almost no connections, except to WA. KUL is about 30% the size of SIN!
So its actually two cities about 65% smaller than SYD & SIN. The chances of BA returning to PER are very, very low.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineBCA2005 From India, joined Sep 2005, 247 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (7 years 8 months 13 hours ago) and read 6806 times:

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 18):
So leaving MEL was not because of losses on the route, but because it freed up a daily slot pair to enable another service.

I don't think this was the case, because MEL was an extension of BA's second daily flight to SIN (BA11/12) which still operates as a terminator service to SIN. Therefore, it didn't free up a daily slot pair at LHR.


User currently offlineTheginge From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 8 months 13 hours ago) and read 6798 times:

BA pulling out of the daily melbourne route didn;t free up a slot as they still use it for the Singapore terminator service.

What it did do though is mean that the aircraft is now away for about 36 hours instead of about 50 hours meaning that they can fit in another service for the aircraft.

As people have said above the main problem is slots at LHR. It means that if BA wants to start a new route they have to drop either another route, or decrease its frequency to free up a slot pair, or buy a slot pair from someone else.


User currently offlineBA787 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 2596 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (7 years 8 months 11 hours ago) and read 6708 times:

Hopefully those spare RJ100's will be put to use serving new routes out of LCY, which would be good

User currently offlineFeroze From India, joined Dec 2004, 794 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (7 years 8 months 9 hours ago) and read 6620 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 17):
If the BA sale of BACON to flybe goes through my understanding is that BA will retain its fleet of 11 Avro RJ100s. My understanding is that these aircraft will be based at EDI but primarily to be operated out of LCY where there is insufficient ramp space for long term (overnight) parking.

Currently BACON operate seven rotations a day on the EDI-LCY route. These services (with current timings) could be operated in isolation with just three aircraft. The minimum turnaround time would be 35 minutes between the arrival of BA8701 at LCY scheduled at 0805 hrs and the departure of BA8702 at 0840 hrs.

BACON also operate three rotations a day on the FRA-LCY-FRA service. These three rotations could be operated with a single aircraft. The quickest turn round required would be 35 minutes between the arrival of BA8731 at LCY scheduled at 0735 hrs and the departure of BA8732 at 0810 hrs.

The MAD-LCY-MAD service is operated twice a day with a 35 minute turn round at LCY between the arrival of BA8752 scheduled at 0850 hrs and the departure of BA8753 at 0925 hours. It therefore could be operated with a single aircraft.

The LCY-MXP-LCY service is operated once a day with a 40 minute turnaround at MXP. This rotation has to be completed by one aircraft unless an aircraft is going to be scheduled to stay on the ground at MXP for a little more than 24 hours.

So theoretically these services could be operated by six aircraft when individual aircraft are committed to specific routes. If (as must be the case) cross-route scheduling is used no doubt the timings can be made less demanding even though a quick turnaround at LCY is imperative because of the shortage of ramp space.

But BA will have 11 RJ100s which currently are not only operating these services in and out of LCY but also flights into, for example, BHX.

So since BA will no longer be operating existing routes to, for example, BHX, if the sale goes through it seems pretty likely that new routes or frequencies are planned out of LCY or - less likely in my view because of the flybe situation - EDI.



Quoting BA787 (Reply 23):
Hopefully those spare RJ100's will be put to use serving new routes out of LCY, which would be good

From the press statement re the sale of BA Connect:

BA Connect also operates from London City Airport and between Manchester and New York. These services will not form part of the proposed sale nor will the regional ground handling business, British Airways Regional Ltd.


25 Jfk777 : Perth and KL are two market best served in the future by nonstop 787 aircraft. These smaller beauties will serve these distant but smaller markets dai
26 Bongodog1964 : A recent article interviewing a BA manager concerning the opening of the Calgary route stated that the BA longhaul fleet is at maximum capacity, and a
27 Sam1987 : What's your point? I think he knows that, otherwise we wouldn't be talking about new routes from LCY.... If they do MAD, MXP, FRA and EDI, I'd like t
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...
Possible New Flybe Routes In The UK posted Sat Apr 22 2006 01:35:13 by Ba757gla
Any New Upstart Airlines In The Making? posted Fri Apr 1 2005 19:45:23 by Cumulonimbus
Any New Airline Routes In 04? posted Sat Jan 10 2004 00:56:29 by AA767400
Any New Tri-Jet's In The Future? posted Sun Dec 30 2001 03:22:58 by DeltaBoy777
Any New LoCo Routes For BUD In The Summer? posted Mon Dec 12 2005 17:09:58 by Ushermittwoch
Any Word On New LH Routes To The US? posted Tue Nov 18 2003 16:12:09 by Ntspelich
New SAA Routes In 2007 posted Thu Nov 30 2006 19:39:38 by SAA201
Old DC-3 Transcon Routes In The US posted Wed Nov 15 2006 19:32:37 by DIJKKIJK
WSJ: $10bil In New BCA Orders In The Next Weeks posted Wed Nov 15 2006 06:42:28 by N328KF
More CRJ900 Orders In The Pipeline posted Wed Oct 4 2006 17:09:11 by Flying-Tiger