Gilesdavies From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2884 posts, RR: 1 Posted (6 years 1 month 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5715 times:
Hi Guys
I need your assistance here??? I have tried to do a search and cannot see it anywhere on the web or on a.net...
I have it in my head that I read a couple of weeks ago, that BMI will be launching an LHR-CLT service. In line with them taking advantange of the new Open Skies agreement bought in between the US and Europe.
If they are going to offer this service I am viewing it from a couple of sides:
(i) - Is it wise for a fellow Star Alliance member to take on direct competiiton, as US Airways have been operating CLT-LGW for years?
(ii) - Is the market big enough for two A330's operating daily between Charlotte and London?
(iii) - Would US Airways allow codeshare access for onwards connections from CLT?
(iv) - BMI would also be going in direct competion to Lufthansa as well, as passengers from the CLT area already have access to numerous onward European connections through MUC and FRA. (BMI cannot match the number or European destinations compared to LH)
(v) - Another way of lookng at this is that US Airways may surrender their LGW-CLT service and allow BMI the rights to operate the flight. This would allow US Airways to free up a much needed A330 to fly another long haul route to Europe (Maybe PHX-FRA?).
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31119 posts, RR: 74 Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 month 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5709 times:
They are not launching Charlotte-Heathrow. When Open Skies details were first released, a bmi official was quoted as saying they could now look at flying to some new US cities, and Charlotte was randomly mentioned. But that's it - it was randomly mentioned - most likely because it is a Star hub. BMI isn't coming to Charlotte.
LTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 51 Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 month 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5585 times:
Quoting Gilesdavies (Thread starter): Another way of lookng at this is that US Airways may surrender their LGW-CLT service and allow BMI the rights to operate the flight. This would allow US Airways to free up a much needed A330 to fly another long haul route to Europe (Maybe PHX-FRA?).
Even if US would do such a move, an A333 would have problems operating PHX-FRA due to hot and somewhat high PHX.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 4, posted (6 years 1 month 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 5408 times:
Quoting LTU932 (Reply 2):
Even if US would do such a move, an A333 would have problems operating PHX-FRA due to hot and somewhat high PHX.
Problems? It would be damn near impossible. LH had issues operating the Condor 763ERs, which have longer range than the US any A333. That route won't open till they get the A332, A350 or 787.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 5048 times:
Quoting Gilesdavies (Thread starter): (ii) - Is the market big enough for two A330's operating daily between Charlotte and London?
No.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
Humberside From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 4901 posts, RR: 5 Reply 8, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4792 times:
Quoting Gilesdavies (Thread starter): (i) - Is it wise for a fellow Star Alliance member to take on direct competiiton, as US Airways have been operating CLT-LGW for years?
I would expect any bmi services to US/UA hubs to be in codeshare with US/UA
EWRCabincrew From United States of America, joined May 2006, 5522 posts, RR: 57 Reply 9, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4765 times:
Quoting LTU932 (Reply 2): Even if US would do such a move, an A333 would have problems operating PHX-FRA due to hot and somewhat high PHX.
Only in July-August is it really hot and PHX is 1117 ft above sea level.
Boeing74741R From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2007, 1103 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4470 times:
If BD want to expand long-haul then they need more long-haul aircraft (A330s will fit in with the rest of the fleet) unless they have a burning desire to axe all of the long-haul routes ex-MAN.
However I expect them to announce a LHR-JFK flight at the first opportunity they have!
Vega From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4372 times:
Quoting EWRCabincrew (Reply 9): Quoting LTU932 (Reply 2):
Even if US would do such a move, an A333 would have problems operating PHX-FRA due to hot and somewhat high PHX.
Only in July-August is it really hot and PHX is 1117 ft above sea level.
Any time of the year. US's 333 are the earliest version of the aircraft with underpowered P&W engines. They periodically cannot even make FCO-PHL without weight restrictions.
Planesarecool From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 4096 posts, RR: 13 Reply 13, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4328 times:
Quoting Gilesdavies (Thread starter): Another way of lookng at this is that US Airways may surrender their LGW-CLT service and allow BMI the rights to operate the flight.
CLT-LGW is one of their most profitable routes - I doubt they'd want to give it up, even to a fellow Star member.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 14, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4268 times:
Quoting Planesarecool (Reply 13): CLT-LGW is one of their most profitable routes - I doubt they'd want to give it up, even to a fellow Star member.
CLT-LGW is also one of the easiest TATL routes in this country on which to find a $500 ticket.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
Vega From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4081 times:
Quoting Planesarecool (Reply 13): CLT-LGW is one of their most profitable routes - I doubt they'd want to give it up, even to a fellow Star member.
Well that's only because there is no competition to London. A ? has to be, would US acquire an (expensive) LHR slot for this route and also one for PHL (a given) and most probably PHX, or would they work a deal with BMI for a slot in favor of a code share AND would BMI accept that as a fair trade or decide to do the route themselves essentially reducing the viability of the US CLT-LGW route.
LTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 51 Reply 16, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4020 times:
Quoting Vega (Reply 12): US's 333 are the earliest version of the aircraft with underpowered P&W engines.
That's curious, because all of US's 9 A333s are HGW -323X models, not the earlier built -321s and -322s. However, this doesn't change the fact that the A333 will have performance issues in PHX, mostly because of the hot weather.
Jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7348 posts, RR: 7 Reply 17, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3905 times:
BMI will operate to the BIG East coast northern cities first, then Chicago and California. The South is owned by Atlanta & BA also fies from London to CLT. US will continue the CLT-LGW flight, until two or three PHL to LHR flights exist.
AT777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 187 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3411 times:
BA hasn't flown to CLT for around 4 years now.
I remember when they did, it was one of the first 777's i have seen, then it went to 763 service, then they left CLT.
Walter747 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1440 posts, RR: 5 Reply 20, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3202 times:
Steeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 8816 posts, RR: 19 Reply 21, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3122 times:
Quoting Walter747 (Reply 20): I don't know about Boston.
They already have
BA 3x BOS-LHR (1 in the morning, 2 at night0
VS 1x BOS-LHR
AA 1x BOS-LHR
Might be a bad decision.
Heck, people are saying that BMI will definitely serve JFK... Many of us on here, yours truely included, think that is a very unwise decision. BA, AA, and VS, pretty much have that route served to the point of saturation. Having another airline to go in there to fly JFK-LHR would be way too much. BA, I believe has 7 daily flights on that route. How many do AA and VS have. (I actually can't remember if VS flies into JFK from LHR. I know they serve EWR.)
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 22, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3066 times:
Quoting Vega (Reply 12): US's 333 are the earliest version of the aircraft with underpowered P&W engines.
US's 333 are A330-323Xs and were delivered from 2001 on. They are the max MTOW of the plane, and can make it the full range of the aircraft from most airfields.
Tornado82 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2993 times:
Quoting EWRCabincrew (Reply 9): Only in July-August is it really hot and PHX is 1117 ft above sea level.
1117ft with those temps can make your density altitudes WELL into the 5000+' range.
For example today at MGW with a similar elevation the high was 81 (which is cold by PHX summer standards) and the DA was dabbling at 3000'. PHX is high and hot enough that together they're a pretty wicked combination on hot days.
LTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 51 Reply 24, posted (6 years 1 month 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2890 times:
Nevertheless, if US would really want to start PHX-FRA, they'd either need an A332 or, which may be highly unlikely, base one or two 762s in PHX.
25 MEACEDAR: I would expect BMI to MCO/RDU/STL/BNA. I think BMI is trying to operate smaller cities rather than larger. They will have to compete wtih BA and VS if
26 Cubsrule: Do BD airplanes grow on trees? Or is their utilization that low? It would certainly explain the recent financial difficulties if it is.
27 MAH4546: They won't. They definitley, will not. You might see BA trasnfer the Orlando service to Heathrow. You won't see bmi at Orlando. The yield sucks and V
28 Humberside: I think they will do something, as long as they remain independent Te only time I could ever see that happenning is if BA cease all Gatwick long haul
29 Srbmod: For many years, both BD and VS applied for ATL-LHR in case the city opened up for LHR service. While BA and DL have the ATL-London route well covered,
30 Steeler83: Isn't DL applying for LHR slots? I think CO secured them from looking at other threads...
31 Humberside: They will from the winter 2008/09 season
32 Steeler83: That is a good 2 years out. Isn't the US-EU going into effect early in 2008?
33 Humberside: Yes. IAH will follow from the start of open skies in about a years time, with ATL/DFW following six months later, which will be the winter season (inf
34 777d: BMI, if they want to ruffle some feathers, SEA-LHR would be a nice route.
35 LTU932: Actually it's the other way around it seems. The word is that DL already secured a few slots in a deal with SkyTeam partner AF, while CO has applied
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2884 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31119 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, 
From Heard and McDonald Islands, joined Feb 2004, 1529 posts, 
From China, joined Sep 2004, 1501 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
