Jetdeltamsy From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2984 posts, RR: 8 Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1766 times:
about 100%
AA has been clear for years they prefer operating at LHR.
Worked for too many airlines to list. Banktupcy after bankruptcy after bankruptcy.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 21029 posts, RR: 60 Reply 2, posted (6 years 2 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1755 times:
How about RDU. Will that remain and move to LHR?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10193 posts, RR: 62 Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1673 times:
I think the likelihood of AA shifting 50/51 and 78/79 from Gatwick to Heathrow is very high. I think that, now, pretty much the only thing standing in the way of it is waiting until the Heathrow restrictions actually expire (I think now March 2008) and AA's ability to get adequate slots. If AA is willing to pay enough, which I suspect they will be, I think they will very quickly shift their flights to Heathrow from their largest and most important hub, Dallas/Fort Worth. The immense connecting opportunities alone would justify shifting the flights to Heathrow.
As for Raleigh/Durham, the future is much less certain with respect to which London airport the flight will use. I tend to think that AA will eventually shift the flight over to Heathrow for several reasons.
First and foremost, the same thing applies to Raleigh and to D/FW: the connections AA and BA could then jointly offer from RDU to cities across Europe and the world would be huge, far more than is today available via Gatwick.
Second, for simplification purposes, AA would likely prefer to shift as many flight as possible over to Heathrow where its operations are huge and it employs over 1,000 staff with a fairly large customer service group, maintenance base, etc.
Finally, if AA wants to continue to operate a 777 on RDU-London and shifts both of its DFW-London flights over to Heathrow, it will likely have to shift the RDU flights to Heathrow as well for purely scheduling purposes. Right now, the 777 that flights LGW-RDU-LGW each day is routed through LGW but originates in DFW and does a three-day DFW-LGW-RDU-LGW-DFW routing.
There are several alternatives to avoid this problem and keep the RDU flight at Gatwick, including routing a seperate 777 from DFW directly to RDU (i.e., each day send a 777 DFW-RDU-LGW-RDU-DFW) but that is hardly appealing because of the waste of the plane for a short DFW-RDU sector each day. They could also add a daily DFW-Gatwick flight in addition to 50/51 and 78/79 that are likely heading to Heathrow -- something I suspect will happen regardless of what they decide to do about the RDU flight. Although, it is likely that this third flight -- possibly 80/81 as has operated on and off for the last few years since they cancelled STL -- would be with a 767, not a 777, and then force a downgrade of the LGW-RDU route if this alternative pattern were elected.
For the foregoing reasons, I suspect -- in the end -- that even with the exceedingly high cost of getting slots at Heathrow, AA will eventually move the Raleigh flight over there.
I predict that AA's London flight schedule in 2-3 years from now will look like this:
LAXdude1023 From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6780 posts, RR: 25 Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1527 times:
I think the odds of AA shifting DFW-LON service to LHR is about 99.999%. I think AA will be willing to shell out for the slots into LHR. DFW, much like IAH, is a market that desperately needs service into LHR. I think getting service from DFW to LHR is now a huge priority for AA!!!
DFW Fan Boy: Im crude, irreverent, and blunt, but Im not clueless. I offer no apologies.
AirStatDFW From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 364 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1426 times:
I agree that AA will move to LHR, will BA follow suit or stay at LGW. I wonder if moving to LHR for BA will help their service into DFW.
Tommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6173 posts, RR: 9 Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1396 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 3): Finally, if AA wants to continue to operate a 777 on RDU-London and shifts both of its DFW-London flights over to Heathrow, it will likely have to shift the RDU flights to Heathrow as well for purely scheduling purposes.
Do you think eventually AA would downgrade this route to a 767 or scrap it in general? I know AA has contracts with businesses on this route, but I always hear that the daily 777 goes out pretty wide open. Plus I'm sure AA could better utilize this bird on another routing.
"Folks that's the news and I'm outta here!" -- Dennis Miller
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1373 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 3): As for Raleigh/Durham, the future is much less certain with respect to which London airport the flight will use.
I'd say the future of that flight is much less certain with respect to a nonstop to LON period.
Buzz from the bees is that the subsidies on that flight have no kept up with market/fuel swings; and as such is nowhere near as lucrat9ive for AA as it once was.
NorthstarBoy From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1713 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1336 times:
i was thinking about this concept earlier today. i'd be very surprised if they didn't switch the DFW flights to LHR, and I think if BA wants to stay competitive, assuming they don't get anti-trust immunity and partner up with AA, that their DFW flight will also switch to LHR. i can actually envision that just about all of the service from US Business markets to London will make the switch once heathrow is opened up. I can see some leisure service, such as MCO, LAS, SAN, and Phx maybe staying at Gatwick, but i'd be very surprised if CO, NW, DL and US didn't apply to switch most, if not all of their london routes to Heathrow. Finally, i would not be surprised, once the 2008 dust clears if Gatwick became the moral equivalent of Paris-Orly, a great small airport for the leisure pax.
Slightly off topic, what does anyone think the chances are of AA starting SJU-Europe once open skies comes into effect, to capture caribbean-europe traffic without sending those passengers all the way to MIami?
I could have elite status if I wanted it, but flying the same airline all the time is boring.
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1316 times:
Quoting NorthstarBoy (Reply 10): Slightly off topic, what does anyone think the chances are of AA starting SJU-Europe once open skies comes into effect, to capture caribbean-europe traffic without sending those passengers all the way to MIami?
I would rather see AA start SJC-Europe service instead, but AA already tried SJC-CDG and it was miserable from the start...
PHX's only LON service is to LHR. If it were to maintain a LGW service, my bet would be on US providing that-- though no guarantee they wouldnt want/try to have it to LHR as well.
Jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7348 posts, RR: 7 Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1285 times:
I would envision AA moving the main DFW to London flight to LHR then the second daily one too. They may run a 763 as a third daily trip to LGW for leisure and free award travel. That may solve the RDU problem with a 763 going DFW-LGW-RDU-LGW-DFW.
BigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2755 posts, RR: 7 Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1270 times:
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 11): I would rather see AA start SJC-Europe service instead, but AA already tried SJC-CDG and it was miserable from the start... Sad
Who knows? The economics might justify SJC-LHR. We simply don't know. Now of course if AA is the one to operate the flight is another story. Maybe BA? Who knows.
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 15, posted (6 years 2 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1237 times:
Quoting BigGSFO (Reply 14):
Who knows? The economics might justify SJC-LHR. We simply don't know. Now of course if AA is the one to operate the flight is another story. Maybe BA? Who knows.
How I would love to see SJC-LHR..but the problem is that I dont' think it AA (or BA for that matter) could sustain B777 services and AA doesn't send the B767's to LHR..
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 36 posts, 
, 21029 posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Sep 2006, 6780 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 4901 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
