MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 30438 posts, RR: 77 Posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 17138 times:
I'm in shock at this because of how suddenly AA's opinion of serving Gatwick has changed. They have acquired an additional Heathrow slot and will no longer fly to Gatwick effective 13 April 2008.
I don't agree that this is the wisest decision to make. There will always be a market for Gatwick flights, and now AA is ceding this. They were also positioning themselves, in a post-Bermuda II world, with the advantage of serving all three major London airports, an advantage they are now losing.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined exactly 7 years ago today! , 20630 posts, RR: 62 Reply 1, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 17133 times:
This seemed expected, as they had a large LHR operation and were only flying to LGW because they had to, not because they wanted to. They also connect with BA onward.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 9348 posts, RR: 63 Reply 2, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 17109 times:
All I have to say is wow. If true, this is quite a sad development indeed.
I understand how, from an economic perspective, it makes more sense to focus on concentrating their main London operations at Heathrow (with perhaps a Stansted flight or two, but we'll see if those last). Why dedicate an entire other aircraft to DFW-LGW when you can just stick with the existing flights at LHR? But, I did believe that AA would still maintain at least a single daily 763 DFW-LGW.
I must admit, I will be quite sad to no longer be able to get the silver tails to Gatwick - that airport is so dramatically far superior to Heathrow in terms of comfort and convenience. Wow!
WorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 17058 times:
The exodus from LGW is not justified. There is business to be had there... and the market is substantially different from LHR.
OTOH, I'm not sure there is an example of a US airline serving 2 or more airports in the same metro area in any other city in the world (outside of the US).
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 9348 posts, RR: 63 Reply 4, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 17017 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 3): OTOH, I'm not sure there is an example of a US airline serving 2 or more airports in the same metro area in any other city in the world (outside of the US).
If there was any global city that could, would, and forever will support it, it would be London - one of the largest air travel markets on the face of the earth.
Delta will be serving Charles de Gaulle and Orly this summer.
Oh, and by the way, as shocking as it may be - I am in complete agreement with you, WT. There was, is, and absolutely always will be a massive market for London. Gatwick is - by far - the best mix of convenience and comfort of all the London airports, and for anyone living south or east of the city, there's simply no contest on the location of Gatwick vs. Heathrow (or Stansted or Luton, for that matter).
It's official. Sent out to employees this morning. Flight is already zeroed out.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 3): The exodus from LGW is not justified. There is business to be had there... and the market is substantially different from LHR.
Agreed. And I think that with an open Heathrow, Gatwick might become increasingly popular for travelers.
G-CIVP From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1175 posts, RR: 12 Reply 6, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16893 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Thread starter): I don't agree that this is the wisest decision to make.
Well the guys (management) at AA think differently! It's going to big business at LHR come late March 2008, when the competition moves in. This is where the profits are going to be made or lost.
WorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16892 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 4): If there was any global city that could, would, and forever will support it, it would be London - one of the largest air travel markets on the face of the earth.
Delta will be serving Charles de Gaulle and Orly this summer.
good points.
also goes to show that we really do debate the issues and not just to be thorns in each others' sides.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 9348 posts, RR: 63 Reply 8, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16870 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 5): It's official. Sent out to employees this morning.
Indeed. Just got it from someone else. It's official. Sad.
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 5): Agreed. And I think that with an open Heathrow, Gatwick might become increasingly popular for travelers.
Well, as someone who has used Gatwick - and AA DFW-LGW - for almost two decades, I am deeply saddened to lose such an easy and (relatively, at least) enjoyable access point into London, my second favorite city in the world (NYC, #1).
That being said, I'm very hopeful that with all the changes now occurring at Heathrow, perhaps the level of chaos, discomfort and torture typically associated with that London gateway will diminish a bit. Apparently, once BA starts moving over to T4 in March, and the huge gate reshuffle begins, work on improving T3 (a.k.a., "the big shopping mall with departure gates") will speed up. Hopefully that miserable excuse for a terminal can be fixed, and the experience their improved.
Damn, this is sure going to make the trip out to Bromley a lot longer!
WorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16821 times:
Quoting G-CIVP (Reply 6): Well the guys (management) at AA think differently! It's going to big business at LHR come late March 2008, when the competition moves in. This is where the profits are going to be made or lost.
AA is just deploying its assets where it can most effectively demonstrate its size in London. There is no doubt that profits will decrease, though. There is no economic theory that says that more competition results in higher profits.
DAL767400ER From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 5721 posts, RR: 52 Reply 10, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16735 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 2): (with perhaps a Stansted flight or two, but we'll see if those last)
IMHO, those flights will be gone no later than 3 months after EOS and Silverjet are gone.
That said, I'll agree with the overall consensus that the sudden ending of the LGW flights is surprising but logical from a operations POW. But at the same time, it also offers potential for other carriers like CO or DL to capture those AA pax that don't want to follow AA's planes to LHR and would still prefer LGW, be it for LGW offering superior facilities, better fares, or simply being closer to their home.
LAXdude1023 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 6083 posts, RR: 28 Reply 11, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16731 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Thread starter): I'm in shock at this because of how suddenly AA's opinion of serving Gatwick has changed. They have acquired an additional Heathrow slot and will no longer fly to Gatwick effective 13 April 2008.
So they do have another slot DFW-LHR?
Next flights: DFW-GRU-SDU-EZE-DFW on AA/JJ/EK in J!
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 9348 posts, RR: 63 Reply 12, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16658 times:
Quoting DAL767400ER (Reply 10): But at the same time, it also offers potential for other carriers like CO or DL to capture those AA pax that don't want to follow AA's planes to LHR and would still prefer LGW, be it for LGW offering superior facilities, better fares, or simply being closer to their home.
Agreed. There will no doubt be some share shift away from AA and towards others who stay at LGW, as some passengers simply won't make the trek over the clusterf*ck that is Heathrow. However, with the move to Heathrow, AA will probably easily be able to make up for that drop with the mountains of new online connecting passengers they'll get by being able to plug their DFW/RDU flights into one of the largest hubs in the oneworld alliance.
Now, that being said, just as if there was one city in the world (outside of a few U.S. markets like New York, etc.) that could support large, multi-airline longhaul operations from several large airports, it is also true that if there was one U.S. airline that actually could afford to consolidate all of their London operations at a single London-area airport, and not see a significant appreciable negative impact on their finances, it would be AA.
AA has - by far - the largest, oldest and most recognizable brand equity and visibility of any U.S. carrier in London. AA is a massive presence in London, as anyone who has strolled through Terminal 3 at Heathrow on a Sunday in July can tell you. Seeing all those silver 777 tails lined up, you'd think you were at DFW or ORD (neither of which receives the same number of 777 flights each day as Heathrow!). Plus, again, AA is going to get an enormous benefit from the shift to Heathrow that other airlines won't - they're now going to have access to hundreds of thousands of additional on-line connecting passengers each year who previously were forced to double-connect over LGW/LHR to fly AA/BA. That alone is probably going to compensate any material drop in yields associated with the opening of competition at Heathrow due to U.S.-E.U. Open Skies.
LAXdude1023 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 6083 posts, RR: 28 Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16618 times:
Quoting Commavia (Reply 12): Yes. I'm interested to know where from.
Im interested to know the details of it. Id bet it might be a flight that arrives later.
Next flights: DFW-GRU-SDU-EZE-DFW on AA/JJ/EK in J!
AA1818 From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Feb 2006, 3328 posts, RR: 6 Reply 14, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16604 times:
So what will AA's London (LHR) schedule look like after LGW flights cease.
MIA x? 777
JFK x? 777
DFW x1 777
LAX x? 777
Also- besides DFW what other AA flights are currently into LGW?
RDU x1 763
DFW x 1 777?
I am indeed shocked. I used to fly into LGW and out of LHR, and now I'm taking advantage of the STN flights which are far more convenient for accessing Cambridge.
Definitely sad to see AA leave LGW. Does UA serve LGW?
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 30438 posts, RR: 77 Reply 15, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16554 times:
Quoting DAL767400ER (Reply 10): IMHO, those flights will be gone no later than 3 months after EOS and Silverjet are gone.
I would agree with you, except for the fact that they are performing quite well. Far better than anybody ever thought, and great cargo traffic. I wouldn't write them off as fast as people want to think. Eos and Maxjet have shown that there is a healthy market for STN-USA, and American will have the market all to themselves when Eos is gone.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 9348 posts, RR: 63 Reply 16, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16541 times:
Quoting AA1818 (Reply 14): So what will AA's London (LHR) schedule look like after LGW flights cease.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25729 posts, RR: 86 Reply 17, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16533 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Thread starter): They were also positioning themselves, in a post-Bermuda II world, with the advantage of serving all three major London airports, an advantage they are now losing.
Totally agree
Quoting MAH4546 (Thread starter): There will always be a market for Gatwick flights, and now AA is ceding this.
That is absolutely true, especially considering the unique connections there.
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 1): This seemed expected, as they had a large LHR operation and were only flying to LGW because they had to, not because they wanted to. They also connect with BA onward.
BA serves many destinations exclusively from LGW.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined exactly 7 years ago today! , 20630 posts, RR: 62 Reply 18, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16490 times:
Quoting N1120A (Reply 17): BA serves many destinations exclusively from LGW.
Obviously not enough for AA to give a damn. But thanks for contradicting me. Again.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 9348 posts, RR: 63 Reply 20, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16411 times:
Quoting N1120A (Reply 17): BA serves many destinations exclusively from LGW.
While it is true that BA serves many destinations exclusively from LGW, it is important to note that the vast majority of these destinations are more leisure-oriented, vacation-focused markets with little or no connectivity to or from the U.S. There aren't too many people flying from DFW or RDU to, say, Dubrovnik, or Ibiza, or Varna. Not to mention that many of these cities - even as they are - are only served a few days a week, and most involve schedules with early morning originators out of LGW and late evening returns back to LGW, meaning next to no connectivity with AA flights.
On the flip side, out of Heathrow - there are seemingly endless connection opportunities to countless major global business, political and cultural capitals throughout Europe, Africa, the Mid East, India, etc.
Bicoastal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 16416 times:
WOW!!! AA passengers will be privileged to experience that wonderfully functional and problem-free airport.....Heathrow!!!! I can't wait for all of the positive customer emails that will be sent to AA's Dallas headquarters.
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 9348 posts, RR: 63 Reply 23, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 16346 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 22): Hopefully that will change come November.
ORD-LHR usually seasonally adjusts down to 4x daily for winter, anyway. Why not just send that 777 down to MIA?
LAXdude1023 From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 6083 posts, RR: 28 Reply 24, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 16252 times:
When will we find out the schedule of the new DFW-LHR?
Im of the camp that thinks this is a bad idea. I dont think all LGW flights from the USA will cease to be profitable once open skies kicks in. It is a different market. But I guess AA is going for the business traveler and business travelers much prefer LHR.
Next flights: DFW-GRU-SDU-EZE-DFW on AA/JJ/EK in J!
25 Flighty: Think about it people, AA is in a close alliance with BA. It makes sense for them. For others, however, they will keep their LGW options open. 2008 vs
26 Bond007: OK, but what are the O&D numbers for LGW. London is a huge destination by itself, without the need for every flight to be a 'connection'. In my exper
27 UAL747: So lets see, AA only operates 3 flights to LGW, which happen to be the 2 DFW flights and the one RDU flight. The rest all go to LHR, and as someone sa
28 Commavia: Indeed. That is what the mantle of the thread thus far has focused on. LGW absolutely is a huge O&D market, no question. Yes, on 30 March. It was pla
29 UAL747: True, that it quite a daily capacity, 3x777's, but nothing in comparison to ORD or JFK sadly. But, I'm all for all LHR routes to London. It gives AAe
30 Atrude777: I don't mean to turn this into an EOS thread but what crystal ball showed you guys that EOS is going anywhere anytime soon? Loads are doing good, and
31 OA412: Correct! Back before the switch to LHR, DEN was often operated by a 744 as were PHX/SAN. Also, IIRC, they have flown 744s ATL-LGW as well as IAH-LGW.
32 Atrude777: It's not letting me edit here but I wanted to add, you guys had facts AA is doing well, so where are the facts that EOS is doing bad and will be gone
33 Commavia: True, but DFW is no ORD or JFK. Well, that's definitely true, and I don't suspect that will change anytime soon. For airlines the world over, there a
34 Commavia: Forgive me, I was referring to DFW-LGW. BA has, on occasion, flown 744s LGW-DFW-LGW in the past 10-15 years. I do have some recollection of seeing th
35 Bond007: I disagree. People who want connections might 'want to be at Heathrow', but those leisure O&D travelers, oh, and those business O&D travelers (London
36 MAH4546: They are losing money and burning through cash like there is no tomorrow. Eos is good as gone.
37 WorldTraveler: if there really is that much of a difference in what BA gets to/from LHR and what AA gets, then BA is not likely to agree to a joint venture that wou
38 OA412: Oops! Guess I misread it. Anyway yeah, I believe you are correct that BA did indeed operate the 744s on LGW-DFW. Whether they were scheduled or not i
39 44k: This is sad news indeed. I always preffered to connect via LGW over LHR. Now I might be forced to drive LHR-LGW to some connections which do not serve
40 Burnsie28: I think this leaves AA as the only one that wont continue Gatwick service, obviously UA doesn't even serve it, but NW, US, DL and CO have all said the
41 LAXdude1023: From what ive heard ATL-LGW on BA is a very poor preformer. DFW-LGW is also a below average preformer. Im guessing that it does better based on the f
42 WorldTraveler: which makes sense given how much of the world DL serves nonstop from ATL. When you couple that with DL's nonstop to both LHR as well as their continu
43 Commavia: That may change in time, though. Long-term, I don't see NW or US remaining at LHR. Neither have hubs that really require LGW service. PHL is perfectl
44 SKY1: ...and it's very curious AA is serving Stansted. Remove LGW while keeping STN ...it sounds pretty odd.
45 Commavia: That would be illegal, as AA and BA - lest we forget - have been unfairly and unjustly prevented from coordinating schedules since they don't have an
46 Super80DFW: On AA.com, I checked July 23, 2008 on DFW-LHR. There is only ONE scheduled nonstop! Flight 50. Are the new schedules just not loaded yet or what?
47 WorldTraveler: interestingly, I did leave out the verb in my comment about AA and BA. The intended verb is "wanted". Didn't say or suggest that BA told AA to do any
48 Avianca: but I have my doubts with the yield on the cargo bellys.
49 LAXdude1023: Give it a couple of days and I bet itll be up. We still dont know what times the flights are.
50 Gigneil: It isn't just the aircraft. There is the cost of operating a station there. This is the major reason why UA never served DEN-LGW, and why that was th
51 Commavia: Of course, especially given that AA had quite a presence at LGW that was quite costly. Portions of the AA M&E Europe is at LGW, although most of it i
52 CrAAzy: While unexpected by many, this move may make some sense. They'll be adding additional capacity to STN (767) in the spring and now shifting 1 of thier
53 Commavia: The second JFK-STN has actually now been pushed back from March to August. Now that DFW-London will be all at LHR, it will definitely be 777s all the
54 CrAAzy: Thanks. Thought process for 1 aircraft gain as follows: Planned: RDU-LGW (767), DFW-LGW (777), JFK-STN (767) Now: DFW-LHR (777), JFK-STN (767) .... ?
56 44k: And, it will remain a 777, just as RDU-LGW was.
57 LACA773: I have a question regarding LHR T3. I know that it is horribly overcrowded and nobody really likes it-bottom line it's dreadful. With so many a/c arr
58 MasseyBrown: EOS third quarter revenue was $21.8 million on which they lost $12.1 million, according to DOT data.
59 FCAFLYBOY: Well I fly with AA 5/6 times a year to DFW, Not anymore though. If they really do pull out of LGW (15 mins from my House) the it's see ya later! I wil
60 UAL777UK: I am not surprised at all by AA's announcement, IMHO it was on the cards, as soon as open skies was agreed. Whether people like it or not, LHR is the
61 Gilesdavies: Sad news, but this comes as no surpirse at all... LHR is always going to be London 's premier airport and where the airlines want to fly from, in orde
63 G-CIVP: WorldTraveler - with reference to reply 9 - I agree with your comments. I think one of reasons for the move is that the preferred airport in London to
64 FCAFLYBOY: Of course, but given that I will HAVE to fly from LHR now, I would much rather fly BA, and why continue to line the pockets of AA if they are inconve
65 ContinentalEWR: It really does make sense, given that AA would be keeping the LGW station open only for the RDU flight. Gatwick is a much more relaxing and pleasant w
66 G-CIVP: To be honest, in terms of departing and arriving at LHR or LGW, I don't think there is an awful lot in it! Gatwick is a little less congested but not
67 8herveg: I reckon they should drop STN and bring back the 6 x daily B777 service JFK - LHR. Makes sense to keep all operations at one London airport. Even if
68 Par13del: Well, we all like to talk about competition, so lets see how it works, this will be a good case study to see how the free market really works and how
69 Bond007: If "Mr Joe Public Average" does not know, then he really doesn't care whether he flies to LGW or LHR, does he? Of those that DO know, many of them wo
70 Commavia: It's all common-use, first-come, first-serve. The BAA allocates gate space each day based on requirements and capacity constraints. Yes, it's all bas
71 EXAAUADL: Im not, it doesnt make sense to fly to both LHR and LGW.....LGW yields are generally lower than LHR, but once LHR opens up, LGW yields will really fa
72 EXAAUADL: True but only with a 757 and from JFK..also Orly has better local AF connections than BA does in LGW. Arent there unique destinations served by AF fr
73 EXAAUADL: Is EOS im worse shapr than SilverJet? If Silver Jet failes first, there might be hope for EOS. And I am sure the LGW connections werent very good in
74 Commavia: They were horrible. Probably the majority - and if not, certainly a large plurality - of the markets BA served uniquely from LGW were cities with eit
75 Planesarecool: Why? Plenty of airlines fly to both Newark and JFK, which is a very similar market overall. I know at least 10-15 people that regularly connected thr
76 JoFMO: You might be surpriced, but LH comes pretty close to BA in terms of destinations served. LH has DTW, PDX and CLT while BA exclusively flies to PHX an
77 8herveg: Well what happened to the 777 that used to fly the 6th JFK - LHR a day? Surely they could bring that back?
79 Commavia: They're using it somewhere else, like, for example, upgrading 44/45 JFK-CDG-JFK to 777 next month.
80 Humberside: No. Most of LGW's destinations are leisure ones that couldnt justify LHR slots
81 AApilot2b: While I hate to see the Gatwick operation stop (like many of you, I absolutely hate LHR), I can actually see beyond my airport preference and see the
82 Bond007: Right, most people here think London is ATL, where most everyone is connecting. London is a huge destination for both business and leisure travellers
83 Splitz: Wow, this sucks literally for me. My wife is English and we live in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. 2x a year we take the DFW/LGW 777 flight (78/79). Grea
84 LACA773: Commavia, Thanks so much for the information in regards to gate assignments and how they are allotted @ T3. Though I've never been transited thru the
85 Atrude777: No, EOS is doing far better then Silver and continues to be flight profitable. Investors are still giving more money to EOS, while silver has to take
86 SPREE34: This one of my concerns about BA and AA working together. Sort of like Mercedes and Chrysler. It won't bring AA up, just drag BA down. I'm referring
87 STNDEICER: A couple of people have said that JFK-STN 2x daily has been put back till august. Does anyone know why this is. I believe AA are fairly committed to S
88 Lightsaber: Sad to see LGW losing more service. But the connections at LHR will drive up yeild. In today's environment the airlines must try to maximize their pro
89 Splitz: Yea....BUT...you've got to get to JFK for that service. STN is GREAT, closer to my relatives than LGW, but, dealing with connecting in JFK can be a n
90 Commavia: It's because AA is reducing some longhaul capacity (mostly 767/777 flying) over the next 4-6 months due to stubbornly high fuel prices and a pilot sh
91 JJeff: So what will the comparable UA numbers looks like?
92 VV701: Primarily the three major domestic destinations, EDI, GLA MAN. This ensures that there are connections between these British cities and the overseas
93 LAXdude1023: Not after March 29. BA 2192/2193 DFW-LGW and LGW-DFW is becoming BA 192/193 DFW-LHR and LHR-DFW. Nothing will remain from DFW-LGW. Does anyone know w
94 Willyj: I would have to say this is a good thing for you. 30 miles each way - that's an extra 60 miles of driving each trip. I agree Gatwick north is better
96 Commavia: No, not yet anyway. But it is most definitely official - it has already been confirmed and announced internally.
97 VV701: BA0192 DFW-LHR d. 05.30pm a. 08.35am BA0193 LHR-DFW d. 11.40am a. 03.40pm
98 Incitatus: This is great news - It is "The End of Transatlantic Services at Gatwick, Part II" just started. Folks, use some common sense. BA has an enormous cust
99 Norcica: I'm booked on DFW-LGW-BUD 4/15. I was to have met someone for lunch in London so I chose the late Malev flight. I suppose the switch from LGW to LHR w
100 LAXdude1023: I meant the new AA flight DFW-LHR (78/79).
101 Planesarecool: I'm not quite sure how this is 'great' news to anybody other than AA themselves. By having one DFW service at LHR and one at LGW, at least customers
102 Humberside: I read on pprune that AA's corporate customers are supporting the service as an alternative to STN. Seems safe to me as long as there is that support
103 Ikramerica: People also must consider consolidation of cargo operations and the cost savings involved by shutting down AA cargo at LGW. Not to mention catering co
104 Bond007: Which numbers? I'm not disagreeing that consolidation is a good move from the airlines' perspective. I was more commenting on the fact that many peop
105 Commavia: AA hasn't had an Admirals Club at Gatwick since around 2003-2004. When they moved over to the North Terminal and started using BA ground handling, th
106 Bond007: Agreed, but most pax on those flights, especially RDU, are connecting from somewhere else in the US anyway. Jimbo
107 MAH4546: Raleigh flight is mainly O&D. There are a fair amount of connections from Miami, sometimes from Dallas, but that's about it.
108 Bond007: OK, but those other pharma guys presumably were OK with LGW. This RDU flight is an exception anyway ... since it's not based upon 'true' demand. Jimb
109 Cubsrule: Brentford (GSK headquarters) is just a few miles east of LHR, though I think GSK has a big research facility somewhere south of London (Brighton mayb
110 Norcica: The flight is now showing up on aa.com...as a 763. Flight number is 2978. What is up with the 29?
111 LAXdude1023: Wow, only a 763! Im surprised that they arent putting two 777's.
112 Commavia: Yep, it's a placeholder, since 78/79 are still loaded as DFW-LGW. 2978/2979 are the placeholders until DFW-LGW is completely rebooked and 78/79 are s
113 MAH4546: It should not come as that surprising. The local market simply doesn't see as much F demand as JFK, LAX, MIA, or ORD. That being said, I wouldn't be
114 Planesarecool: It's actually in Crawley, just a couple of miles from Gatwick. With the guarentee of a profit that isn't reliant on loads or connections, I am surpri
115 Incitatus: BA offers 10 or so flights per day to New York. If it was of any relevance to have a flight from Gatwick, they would. The other 11 destinations are a
116 Group51: LHR in the future: 2008 - T5 2012 - Heathrow East 2013/14 - AirTrack? http://www.airtrack.org/what_is_airtrack.htm 2017 - Crossrail "Crossrail will ra
117 Planesarecool: So did you only chose to read half of my post: No, not everybody is using public transport, but for those who are, Gatwick is much more convenient, a
118 Apodino: Here is my prediction. Yields at LHR will plummet big time due to the economy and all that increased competition at LHR, which is the reason the legac
119 LAXdude1023: The reason why its surprising is that they were flying 2 777's daily to LGW. That being the case, why would they only fly 1 777 and 1 763 to LHR?
120 Commavia: Yields will drop, but they'll hardly plummet. Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Sure, increased competition from the likes of Continental, Delta, Nor
121 Commavia: They're not. It's a placeholder. 78/79 are still loaded into the system as a daily 777 DFW-LGW. Until they can get everything shifted around and fina
122 LAXdude1023: I wont argue that DFW doesnt have as much F demamd as JFK, LAX, or MIA, however DFW-LGW with two 777's has always been a profitable preformer. Why wo
123 Gilesdavies: Several people have mentioned on here how LGW was quite a poor airport for connections... This is entirely true, but I think the vast majority of pass
124 MAH4546: Sending 777s to London, in the past, had to do with AA's desire to send a consistent product on all flights to the London market. While there were pe
125 Commavia: While this is true at times, AA absolutely can profitably fly two daily 777s DFW-LON. Sure, the 777's F cabins may have some upgrades and AAdvantage
126 MAH4546: There is no doubt they can, and I didn't mean to make it seem like there was. But there might be better places to put the second 772. I don't think i
127 Splitz: This would make sense to laymens people. Here's the situation: My wife's mum/dad live in Norfolk, to get to Norfolk you have to go on the EAST side o
128 Commavia: That connection has gotten infinitely more bearable now with AA's new JFK terminal - which is nothing less than stellar, and by far the best terminal
129 VV701: As I said before I do not know if there is enough potential O&D traffic. Neither do you. We can only guess. But the AA/BA ticketing history will iden
130 Commavia: But again, though, it is important to remember that a very substantial portion of that list is cities that are served either once per day or less, an
131 NYCAAer: I'm coming into this thread late in the game. Just came back from a trip to LHR. I'm not at all shocked we're leaving LGW... I stated somewhere else a
132 LAXdude1023: I would love to see a 777 on DFW-GRU. AA did at one time do 2x daily DFW-GRU on a 763. While that might be a bit much, a 777 might be good for it. Ho
133 MAH4546: They used to have a 772 on DFW-GRU, but not anymore. It is unlikely they would do it again, because despite the cargo capacity that would be very wel
134 LAXdude1023: Oh, I didnt know that they still did operate it during the summer. I would have thought that a daily 777 would be a better fit than 2x 763.
135 Commavia: Perhaps, but it might be hard - as MAH mentioned - to fill an F cabin with paying customers and not as many upgrades. That being said, even if they c
136 MAH4546: The F cabin would go out empty, though. Increased summer demand on this route is driven largely by Brazilians going on holiday, and flying coach. Lot
137 Cubsrule: I wonder if it would cannibalize DFW-SCL's cargo loads too much, though. I've always heard that DFW-SCL is not a very good performer pax-wise but mak
138 A380US: Thats what I thought but they might decide to keep it because they want extra NY routes.
139 VV701: What you are saying is often valid and sometimes realistic. And when you are looking at second line cities the situation you illustrate with your exa
140 Commavia: I'd much rather fly DFW-IAD-VIE-PRN or DFW-ORD-VIE-PRN and take a double connection than have to go via LGW - only three days of the week, mind you -
142 Commavia: No U.S. carrier serves Linate. To my knowledge, the airport is open only to intra-E.U. and regional flights.
143 HeeBeeGB: I am not disagreeing with you about LGW connectivity because LHR is so much better for it and LGW mainly caters for O&D demand but why choose DRS and
144 Humberside: Perhaps this example is an exception, but taking SAN, is there the market for Zoom twice a week and say BA three times a week? Zoom and BA can probab
145 VV701: That is your choice. However we are discussing the AA LGW service. And since AA6500 is the code share number on the BA LGW-PRN flight I assume that o
146 LAXdude1023: In high season, DFW-SCL does well pax wise. Its a poor preformer mostly in low season.
147 Tsnamm: CO is planning to continue serving LGW from EWR and IAH as well as LHR...so it must be something specific to AA's business plan...I believe DL will al
148 Commavia: Right, and you can't discuss AA at LGW, and the connections it feeds, without also discussing the competition for those connections. Sure, they'll se
150 Planesarecool: I'm not sure why there is this issue over connections, as that clearly isn't the reason why AA are moving the second service. By offering a service to
151 VV701: Sorry. I thought I had. If you look back to my Reply 139 you will see that I accepted your (not my choice) of PRN as an example. I then listed all of
152 Commavia: Um, no, you can actually fly: OS0770 PRN 0700 VIE 0910 OS0093 VIE 1050 IAD 1500 UA7681 IAD 1650 DFW 1930 Or, if that's no good, alternatively: OS0770
153 ERJ170: Yes, RDU-LGW was mostly O&D. However, RDU-XXX-LHR flights were very popular also. I know there were several times, when I lived in Raleigh and was tr
154 VV701: Um, no. I am sorry but I think that you may have lost your way a little. We are discussing the move of the AA DFW-LGW and RDU-LGW services to LHR. I
155 DFWEagle: Regardless of the reason, AA has always found a strong preference of passengers for Heathrow rather than Gatwick. This is especially true of high-yiel
156 MaverickM11: On an unrelated note, anyone know what happened to the AA thread on the PAPJFK inflight death recently?
157 Slider: AA can thank Carl Icahn for that. SOB sold TWA's LHR slots. Yes, I'm still angry about it. This assumes facts not in evidence and economics that rema
158 Viscount724: They're still both horrible in my experience. If I was actually originating/terminating anywhere in the greater central London area, I would rather u
159 Ckfred: I'm just playing devil's advocate, but if LGW is as great as people say, then why didn't AA offer JFK-LGW and ORD-LGW? In fact, my wife my start flyin
160 Cubsrule: ...and I think this illustrates part of BA's problem. WAW is certainly a station with plenty of demand from the United States, BUT you have some 4 da
161 Commavia: Because both of those cities were able to have nonstop flights to Heathrow, which is where most of the high-yielding business traffic wants to go, an
162 Cubsrule: Commavia, I think you're right, but I want to play devil's advocate for a moment.... if BA can fill the aircraft at LHR without the short-haul flight
163 Cornish: For the RDU flight, LHR makes so much more sense given the corporate traffic. As mentioned by Cubsrule, Brentford is actually the Worldwide HQ for GS
164 Planesarecool: As I've already explained, Gatwick is much better than Heathrow for ground transport connections, including those to the City. It is also much quicke
165 Cubsrule: Thanks... I'm glad someone knows where all of their facilities are (it's tough for a Yankee to keep them all straight...)
166 GCT64: Back in June 2000, BA had at least 7 B744s based at and operating out of LGW. Destinations included IAH, DEN, MCO, SAN, Brazil, Seychelles, Africa ..
167 GCT64: I wouldn't bet on LHR gates and terminals becoming much emptier. T2 will be demolished once T5 gets up and running and Heathrow East will be a long t
168 Ikramerica: IAH - because they can't fly from LHR DEN - because they can't fly from LHR MCO - because they can't fly from LHR SAN - gone
169 Planesarecool: And that has what exactly to do with what he was saying? Aside from which, Denver clearly could be operated from LHR, as it has been for the past 5 y
170 Aisak: It's still unclear when BAA will be able to kick all airlines out of T2, so for the time being there will be more space. Also T5 and T5B clearly have
171 VV701: According to BA a key element of its success on the north Atlantic and particularly on the LHR-JFK route is frequency. And to the business traveller
172 Cubsrule: Does having a dual hub (LHR and LGW) make this easier or harder?
173 VV701: I do not think that BA would chose to operate the dual-hub. By road T5 LHR to North Terminal LGW is only about 40 miles. So having the two hubs does
174 Airnerd: How long had AA served Gatwick? I remember flying DWF-GTW on an AA DC10 in 1982.
175 Commavia: AA started nonstop service from Dallas/Fort Worth to Gatwick in May, 1982 (May 19, to be exact). When it was launched, it was AA's first service to E
176 McMax: Here's the link to a story in the Financial Times: http://us.ft.com/ftgateway/superpage...ws_id=fto030320081504171662&page=2 It indicates AA acquired
177 Commavia: Interesting that the slot came from IB. It makes sense, given the two airlines' long-standing alliance and their imminent expansion of that alliance
178 Humberside: IB are moving their Bilbao service to Click Air out of Gatwick. Co-incidence?
179 Viscount724: I don't think that was the key element in Swissair's downfall. It was their strategy of investing in many other marginal airlines that required too m
180 VV701: My appreciation was that there were often significant differences between the Swissair amd KL operations. For example KL first used Air UK and then bo
181 Commavia: Just a quick update for those still interested... It appears that, as predicted, the second daily DFW-LHR flight, 78/79, will indeed revert to a 777 f
182 Cubsrule: Interestingly, it also looks like the 1-stop service through ORD will still be around, though the westbound flight number changes to 47... good news
Sponsor Message: 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 30438 posts, 
From United States of America, joined exactly 7 years ago today! 
, 20630 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1175 posts, 
From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 5721 posts, 
From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Feb 2006, 3328 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
