Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why No North America - STN?  
User currently offlineHeathrow From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 979 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3894 times:

Most of my family lives between london and bimingham. The closest airport for us to use is either STN or LTN. As it were, it is IMPOSSIBLE to find a way here without having to book a seperate leg with easjet or another LCC. Why is this? I know MA used to do it through BUD, OK through Parague, and even befoe I would have been able to use AA. Why is there no direct route from north american to stansted or Luton?



I remember about 10 years ago when QN flew N/S YYZ - STN. Those were the days.....

31 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12480 posts, RR: 34
Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3883 times:

STN - US has been tried a number of times, definitely by AA and I think CO too, but the services have not been successful and had to be axed. The problem is that, as a London Airport, STN is too far from the capital and also, it does not have the short haul traffic to feed it, as most, if not all, other short haul carriers at STN are lo-cos and not really interested in feeding long haul traffic. As convenient as it may, understandably, be for local residents, there is simply not the critical mass of population to support a long haul operation from there.

I would have thought LTN might have more, since it serves a larger population area; apart from Silverwings (or whatever that luxury airline was called), it has not been tried; runway length might be a limiting factor there.


User currently offlineHT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6525 posts, RR: 23
Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3882 times:



Quoting Heathrow (Thread starter):
Why is there no direct route from north american to stansted or Luton?

*London from NA* as a market continues to be dominated by LHR and LGW (and soon LCY).
Both LTN and STN has seen several attemps to fly n/s to the U.S. but premium (all Business)airlines failed due to reason discussed to death and AA flew only to protect its other LON-business from competition of those premium airlines.
Apparently there is no share for a substancial market; everybody is set for LHR and LGW.

Quoting Heathrow (Thread starter):
Most of my family lives between london and bimingham. The closest airport for us to use is either STN or LTN.

So, this places you north of M1, as otherwise LHR should be closer to you than STN ?
-HT



Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
User currently offlineSwiftski From Australia, joined Dec 2006, 2701 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3818 times:



Quoting HT (Reply 2):
So, this places you north of M1

North of the M1 is more like LBA area...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_motorway


User currently offlineHumberside From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 4922 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3693 times:

I think STN-USA/Canada could work but it needs someone prepared to take time to build the route and get passengers used to using STN for long haul. Something which no one will do in the current climate. There are a lot of people to whom STN is nearer than LHR or LGW.

[Edited 2008-08-26 01:15:22]


Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
User currently offlinePlanesarecool From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 4124 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3657 times:

It has no North American links for the same reason that LBA or MME have no North American links. Taking a look at the number of airlines that have started a service to Stansted and then pulled it, massively reduced it or gone bust in the past few years, it's clear to see that very few airlines can make it work, simply because unless its a 1p Ryanair flight, very few people want to fly from there. Not only is it too far from London, it doesn't have ideal facilities for long haul operations, it has very little short haul feed and it's transport links aren't great.

Its all very well saying that there are people living closer to Stansted than Heathrow, but there are people living closer to Bournemouth than Heathrow aswell, doesn't mean operators are queueing up to operate from there.

As somebody who grew up in Elstree, and who knows many people across North London and Hertfordshire, I know that for them, Stansted is usually the fourth airport of choice behind Luton, Heathrow and Gatwick (in that order).


User currently offlineHT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6525 posts, RR: 23
Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3638 times:



Quoting Swiftski (Reply 3):
Quoting HT (Reply 2):
So, this places you north of M1

North of the M1 is more like LBA area...

Point taken. To be more precise: North-east of M1 in a stretch from M25 to M45.

Quoting Humberside (Reply 4):
get passengers used to using STN for long haul.

&

Quoting Planesarecool (Reply 5):
it doesn't have ideal facilities for long haul operations,

How could STN nowadays cope with say 300+ pax intending to check in for a longhaul flight ?
Upon my lasts visits to STN (a while ago), check-in areas usually were crowded, leaving hardly any space to handle a flight with 300+ pax (and with longer processing times per pax as for intra-european p2p-flights due to a) onward connections and b) the immigration-hassle in the U.S.).
-HT



Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
User currently offlineN770WD From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 126 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3563 times:



Quoting HT (Reply 6):
How could STN nowadays cope with say 300+ pax intending to check in for a longhaul flight ?
Upon my lasts visits to STN (a while ago), check-in areas usually were crowded, leaving hardly any space to handle a flight with 300+ pax (and with longer processing times per pax as for intra-european p2p-flights due to a) onward connections and b) the immigration-hassle in the U.S.).

BAA will make the space for check-in if needed. Remember that both Eos and MAXjet shared an aisle with very little crowding. There's plenty of satellite facility as well (including no fewer than three available lounges).

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 1):
The problem is that, as a London Airport, STN is too far from the capital

Depends on where you're coming from. Stansted was the preferred airport for many of the London City and Canary business types. Hence BA's interest in putting in LCY service to try and protect those very high-yield passengers in the future. Stansted Express is iffy, but remember that it's the Premium traffic that makes or breaks a flight, and many of those pax come to the airport on their own or by car service.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 1):
and also, it does not have the short haul traffic to feed it, as most, if not all, other short haul carriers at STN are lo-cos and not really interested in feeding long haul traffic.

Bingo - biggest problem for new entrants is aggregating enough high-fare traffic onto a single departure, and that's where the feed at STN (or LTN, or LGW for that matter) doesn't work for business destinations. Plenty of traffic onto Eos, MAXjet and AA connected at STN - but it was relatively low-yield, advance purchase traffic that took Ryanair and EasyJet for the 1p fares.

As a result, the route profiles that work best for STN are London-originating, leisure-oriented with a heavy dose of traffic from BHX and Cambridge down to the east of London. That's why, for MAXjet at least, LAS was outstanding while IAD was pathetic. JFK is a very different beast and can work from any of the London airports... if you can keep costs down (which is very difficult at JFK).


User currently offlinePlanesarecool From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 4124 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3511 times:



Quoting N770WD (Reply 7):
Stansted was the preferred airport for many of the London City and Canary business types.

I'd hardly say preferred. If you're talking about ease of getting to the City, then Gatwick is probably the 'preferred' airport aside from London City itself, being both closer and quicker to get to.

The fact that neither PIA, Zoom or American, three airlines serving three completely different markets, could survive at Stansted says all you need to know really.


User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 15
Reply 9, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3491 times:

Interestingly when I spoke to the AA flight crews a couple of times in Cambridge they said the loads were good. Then they dropped it in July. Go figure.

User currently offlineSwiftski From Australia, joined Dec 2006, 2701 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3416 times:



Quoting HT (Reply 6):
Point taken. To be more precise: North-east of M1 in a stretch from M25 to M45.

 Smile

I knew what you meant!


User currently offlineHumberside From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2005, 4922 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3240 times:



Quoting Planesarecool (Reply 5):
Its all very well saying that there are people living closer to Stansted than Heathrow, but there are people living closer to Bournemouth than Heathrow aswell, doesn't mean operators are queueing up to operate from there.

No, but a lot less people live nearer to BOH than STN

Quoting N770WD (Reply 7):
Quoting HT (Reply 6):
How could STN nowadays cope with say 300+ pax intending to check in for a longhaul flight ?
Upon my lasts visits to STN (a while ago), check-in areas usually were crowded, leaving hardly any space to handle a flight with 300+ pax (and with longer processing times per pax as for intra-european p2p-flights due to a) onward connections and b) the immigration-hassle in the U.S.).

BAA will make the space for check-in if needed. Remember that both Eos and MAXjet shared an aisle with very little crowding. There's plenty of satellite facility as well (including no fewer than three available lounges).

Indeed, facilities can be improved, and over time reputations. Can't be done overnight but this isn't anything that can't be sorted out. Maybe a new owner for STN will do this?



Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25454 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (6 years 1 month 6 days ago) and read 3097 times:



Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 9):
Interestingly when I spoke to the AA flight crews a couple of times in Cambridge they said the loads were good. Then they dropped it in July. Go figure.

Loads and profitability are rarely very closely related. I think one of AA's problems at STN was a lack of high-yield business traffic.


User currently offlineYYZYYT From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 955 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2990 times:

I flew into STN from Toronto on Zoom two years ago - and was surprised to see they no longer offer it. It was certainly far to city centre, but it was convenient to get through the airport and find the way out in our rented (right-hand-drive - who knew!) minivan.

The fact is, while the drive into London proper took a little longer than it might have, it was still better than our return out of LHR. Driving there through traffic was neither fast nor convenient, check in was slow and the line ups to get through securty were the worst I have ever seen. We left for LHR (from downtown) five hours before flight time, arrived at LHR three hours before flight time and STILL came within a whisker of missing the flight - we only caught it because they allowed us to go through the priority security point with our 2 v. small kids. And this was several weeks before the "liquid bomb" security scare of Aug 06.

[Edited 2008-08-26 14:47:31]

User currently offlineGsosbee From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 825 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2943 times:

The issue at STN is if one is relying on the train you cannot avoid Liverpool Street Station in London. Most arrivals from the US generally will be staying somewhere other than the City. In addition a direct train to Canary Wharf/LCY is needed. You have to go to Liverpool Street (45 minutes) and either grab a taxi or get on the underground (20 to 40 minutes). To gain the business traffic a direct link to Canary Wharf/LCY is a necessity.

There are issues with departures in the check-in area, but a proper makeover could correct that.


User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7628 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2904 times:

I have only used STN once.

The public transport consists of a single train link from Liverpool Street.

My recollection of the terminal is that it was pretty basic, and that the signage was less than stellar.

I ca'nt really see it working for long haul.


User currently offlineSwiftski From Australia, joined Dec 2006, 2701 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2737 times:



Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 15):
The public transport consists of a single train link from Liverpool Street.

There are also direct services to Birmingham New St. from STN.

.... as well as EasyBus, Terravision, National Express etc offering coach services all over the place from as little as £2.


User currently offlineTrent900 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 532 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2712 times:



Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 15):
The public transport consists of a single train link from Liverpool Street.

Not sure what part of STN you went to then.

Quoting Swiftski (Reply 16):
There are also direct services to Birmingham New St. from STN.

.... as well as EasyBus, Terravision, National Express etc offering coach services all over the place from as little as £2.

And of course the Local bus services and the trains to cambridge.

The main problem we have is that BAA own the place, being more interested in LHR and LGW (i should think because they bring in more money) no thought is being carried out to increase services at STN (obviously the current climate doesn't help). Maybe once STN is sold off we may see a difference?

D.


User currently offlineGAWZU From United Kingdom, joined May 2002, 235 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2688 times:

Sure, STN has had a difficult ride with hanging on to long haul in recent years, but in some cases has been bad timing and bad luck as much as anything else?

CO started up in May 2001 - just 4 months before 9/11.

PIA started up in Aug 2006 - their 747s were banned from Europe just weeks after so the A310 was needed elsewhere.

AA started up in Oct 2008 - did they ever want to suceed? They only entered the STN market to kill off MaxJet and Eos.

MAX/EOS - see above, plus record oil prices and a difficuly market during the current 'crunch'.


User currently offlineDavehammer From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 472 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2672 times:

I think under new ownership STN could gain a little more long haul traffic though more of the leisure variety I'd guess. I also think that it suffers from its image as Ryanair central. For me though its my second choice airport after LGW I can get there easily in under an hour and the traffic is rarely that bad.

User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8386 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2577 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting N770WD (Reply 7):
As a result, the route profiles that work best for STN are London-originating, leisure-oriented with a heavy dose of traffic from BHX and Cambridge down to the east of London. That's why, for MAXjet at least, LAS was outstanding while IAD was pathetic. JFK is a very different beast and can work from any of the London airports... if you can keep costs down (which is very difficult at JFK).

Maxjet did something great, they should have stayed away from IAD and concentrated on perhaps Boston. JFK and LAX were doing well enough, a second JFK frequency would have helped.

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 9):
Interestingly when I spoke to the AA flight crews a couple of times in Cambridge they said the loads were good. Then they dropped it in July. Go figure.

AA went ot STN to kill EOS and MAXjet, typical AA, enter a route dominate it and then stop after the other airline no longer flies the route.


User currently offlineHT From Germany, joined May 2005, 6525 posts, RR: 23
Reply 21, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2474 times:



Quoting Trent900 (Reply 17):
The main problem we have is that BAA own the place, being more interested in LHR and LGW (i should think because they bring in more money) no thought is being carried out to increase services at STN (obviously the current climate doesn't help). Maybe once STN is sold off we may see a difference?

A STN in other hands could (if this is legal) lower charges, thus attracting longhaul traffic. But, as it was said earlier, it is doubtful if STN can create enough O&D traffic to fill a plane while providing sufficent yield.
If O&D is too weak, there is no efficient network of feeder flights into STN (this is "airlines that actually would interline with another airline") - only exemption coming to my mind might be AB, but they are focussing on their hub at DUS. However a new entrant could use AB's flights into STN as feed, but while many arrive in the early morning (i.e. okay to connect to NA), many depart quite late resulting in a rather long wait for pax arriving from NA.
-HT



Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
User currently offlineRandyWaldron From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 324 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2452 times:

This topic has been seriously beaten to death. Have you not watched the demise of MaxJet and EOS? Have you not seen the price of oil as of late? STN, like *many* airports in the United States, does not have the connecting or o/d passengers to warrant US service.

Quoting Heathrow (Thread starter):
Most of my family lives between london and bimingham.

While your family may choose where to live, an airline isn't going to start-up/reinstate service solely for your benefit. If you're wanting easier and closer access to international flights, move closer to LHR or LGW.



"Flaps 20, gear down, landing checklist please..."
User currently offlineKennyK From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 482 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2397 times:

If Ryanair ever decide to go ahead with long haul maybe with a 789 fleet STN could take off with feeders from across Europe by Ryanair 738s. Most flights would be headed from Europe in the right direction for North America i.e. Westwards. After all STN is flagged to expand big time due to limitations at Heathrow and Gatwick. Its a definite maybe  scratchchin 

User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25454 posts, RR: 22
Reply 24, posted (6 years 1 month 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2377 times:



Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 20):
AA went ot STN to kill EOS and MAXjet, typical AA, enter a route dominate it and then stop after the other airline no longer flies the route.



Quoting GAWZU (Reply 18):
AA started up in Oct 2008 - did they ever want to suceed? They only entered the STN market to kill off MaxJet and Eos.

That was AA's second attempt to serve STN.They also operated ORD-STN nonstop for a while starting in 1992. I don't think that lasted very long either.


25 Gsosbee : I don't know why the earlier flight was pulled, but the latest was a successful strategy to kill Maxjet and Eos. This is no different from Reno Air,
26 Fly2YYZ : Zoom did operate to STN as another poster states, the reason why they pulled out was to consolidate operations into their LGW base... not that it was
27 HT : In that case, expect to see a hefty new baggage handling fee in case FR transfers checked luggage from one flight to another. Also: With FR's current
28 Heathrow : Bedfordshire. Just along the A1 actually. What about connections (Including LTN)? I understand it probably isn't feasable to go from STN or LTN to an
29 Brilondon : Look at where QN are now. STN is too far out of London and with all the options at LHR there would be no reason to fly to STN. This has been tried be
30 Heathrow : with the exception of AA, those carriers offered business class only product. Now, I love my home, but to be honest, we aren't exactly the business c
31 Oa412 : If MaxJet was doing well at JFK and LAX, they'd still be around. The fact of the matter is that it was a failed business model that bled money.
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...
Why No SIN-North America? posted Wed Jan 31 2001 00:59:54 by Flyf15
Why No ARJ Orders In America? posted Tue Jan 22 2008 16:32:02 by Super80DFW
Why No Flights Between Luxembourg and N. America? posted Sat Sep 16 2006 21:30:23 by USADreamliner
Garuda No Longer Flies To Europe/North America? posted Mon Sep 4 2006 15:00:46 by Kingsford
North America To Romania (no Direct Service...) posted Fri Aug 19 2005 22:21:42 by Vio
Why Are There Mean FA's In North America? posted Wed Oct 6 2004 04:02:38 by Ktachiya
Vancouver Again No 1 Airport In North America posted Mon May 19 2003 20:21:39 by Connector4you
Why No More US Express "Shuttle America" In Phl? posted Sun Oct 27 2002 05:17:22 by Usairways85
Calgary (YYC) Is No. 1 In North America posted Fri Jun 23 2000 03:01:05 by Carioca Canuck
Why No US-immigration For Diverted Flights? posted Mon Aug 4 2008 08:00:40 by 2travel2know