Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
JL To Move From T3 LHR To T5!  
User currently offlineGSTBA From UK - England, joined Apr 2010, 465 posts, RR: 1
Posted (4 years 2 hours ago) and read 8622 times:

Acording to a article on the BA staff site and a post on flyer talk

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/briti...club/1110718-jal-move-into-t5.html

BA and JL have this week started discussions, which could see JL's LHR operation move to T5

The members of OW agreed to forging closer ties and a stronger working relationships with JAL in recogniton of there decision to remain a OW member back in January

Any co-location would have to be agreed with BAA

JL at present operate daily flight to NRT from LHR.

24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (4 years 2 hours ago) and read 8619 times:

Seems like a great idea, I love T5. Since it's only one flight a day, I imagine they can squeeze it in without too much trouble, and I wouldn't look for them to start moving other OneWorld airlines into T5, nice as that might be.


Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineGSTBA From UK - England, joined Apr 2010, 465 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 8137 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
Seems like a great idea, I love T5. Since it's only one flight a day, I imagine they can squeeze it in without too much trouble, and I wouldn't look for them to start moving other OneWorld airlines into T5, nice as that might be.

When T5C opens in May or June 2011 BA's services to GIB, LIS and VIE will transfer from T5 to T3 and future OW member IT will move from T4 to T3.

When it comes to moving more airlines into the terminal I agree with you I can't see it happening.

The are plans, with no exact date for work to start on a T5D satilite terminal near the current T5C and T3 terminals. BA are widely expected to push BA to start building the 3rd satilite once the IB merger is finalised.

T5D's completion will result in a intergrated hub operation. The current transit system that links the main T5 building will be extended it T5D and T3.

(Integrated hub operation is mentioned in BAA's 2010 capitial investment plan)


User currently offlinesam1987 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 946 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 8102 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
I wouldn't look for them to start moving other OneWorld airlines into T5, nice as that might be.

I expect IB services to move to T5 when the merger goes through, along with BA services to BCN and MAD.

Quoting GSTBA (Reply 2):
BA's services to GIB, LIS and VIE will transfer from T5 to T3 and future OW member IT will move from T4 to T3.

Do you mean from T3 to T5? I wouldn't be surprised to see AGP and GIB to move back to LGW and BCN and MAD to move to T5. There's no reason why LIS, VIE and HEL should move from T3 to T5 if there isn't capacity for them at T5.



Next flights: LGW-LBA-LGW, LHR-SIN-SYD, SYD-BKK-LHR, LGW-GRO, GRO-CIA, CIA-MAD, MAD-LGW
User currently offlineairbuseric From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 4253 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 7987 times:

Fully understandable and would be a logical decision. I guess also Itsu Japanese foodcourt in T5 gets some more clientele then  


"The whole world steps aside for the man who knows where he is going"
User currently offlineLX138 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2009, 391 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7678 times:

Good for connections from the JL flight but theres still a cost here for them as JL usually insist on having all their own staff - so expect them to want to bring all their own check-in/gate agents, line engineers (which they have at LHR), possible lounge staff, back office staff, computers and files from T3. They will all need training on T5.


StarWorld Team - The ultimate airline alliance
User currently offlinespeedbird9 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7654 times:

Quoting LX138 (Reply 5):
but theres still a cost here for them as JL usually insist on having all their own staff - so expect them to want to bring all their own check-in/gate agents, line engineers (which they have at LHR), possible lounge staff, back office staff, computers and files from T3. They will all need training on T5.

Good news that JL will most likely be staying in OW but i kinda liked the idea of BA having T5 to themselves. i suppose nothing last forever......still a boy can dream



Is the customer always right? Michael O'Leary: no the customer is nearly always wrong
User currently offlinecharliecossie From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 479 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7575 times:

Quoting LX138 (Reply 5):
line engineers (which they have at LHR),

JAL are handled by BA Customer Engineering Group.


User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5189 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7438 times:

At some point I can see BA LHR-SIN/BKK-SYD and, therefore, QF moving over.

It is really strange having, effectively, a single long-haul destination flown from T3 for seemingly no other reason than that they can't bear the thought of a couple of kangaroos disrupting their otherwise tranquil line up of Union Jacks!

True QF fly to LHR 4 x daily as opposed to once, and with A380s to boot, but surely they must be able to squeeze them in somewhere can't they?



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlinecharliecossie From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 479 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7365 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 8):
they can't bear the thought of a couple of kangaroos disrupting their otherwise tranquil line up of Union Jacks!

You forgot the smiley.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 8):
surely they must be able to squeeze them in somewhere can't they?

Don't you think that they would if they could? Don't you think it's a pain for BA having these flights (all of them, including QF) operating out of T3?


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8284 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7226 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 8):
True QF fly to LHR 4 x daily as opposed to once, and with A380s to boot, but surely they must be able to squeeze them in somewhere can't they?

A recent Photo I saw of T5C has several gates with 3 jetbridges for A380's, there must have been 5 or 6 gates at T5C of that size. BA is a long time from having 6 A380's, it would be in BA's and ONEworld's interest to move Qantas, JAL and all OW to T5 when T5D gets online.


User currently offlinefcogafa From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 771 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 6915 times:

There are already times when T5 is full so adding extra airlines is not an option.

Any T5D, will take maybe 5+ years to construct, going by the time it has taken to build T5C, and as with T5C will not add that many stands as several are already used as off peir/remote. Several buildings may need relocating including BA engineering, the fire station and fuel farm, all major projects in themselves. Don't hold your breath!


User currently offlinespud757 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2007, 327 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 6670 times:

If and when T5 is connected to T3 via the transit rail system that currently serves T5-T5B-T5C then what's the need to have all OW located at T5? Pax will be able to transfer between T5-T3 OW airlines services via the dedicated transit rail.

I can see from a branding point of view that having all BA operated services at T5 looks good and from an operational point of view it makes sense. Trouble starts when flying on a BA ticket operated by IB, QF, AA etc. Once the rail system links T5 and its satellite piers with T3 then you could have it that all BA booked passengers, regardless of the operating OW airline check in at T5 and all QF/AA/IB/AY etc booked passengers check in at T3 - all those passengers then go to their gate as usual which could be in T5 or T3 using the transit rail link so BA pax on IB operated aircraft checks in at T5 then makes there way to the T3 gate via the direct rail link and vice versa. In some ways this could work as a virtual single terminal.


User currently offlineSAM1987 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 946 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 6384 times:

Quoting speedbird9 (Reply 6):
i kinda liked the idea of BA having T5 to themselves

Me too - I think it is a nice arrangement having all BA in T5, then all other oneworld airlines in T3.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 8):
At some point I can see BA LHR-SIN/BKK-SYD and, therefore, QF moving over.

There isn't room surely?

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 8):
a single long-haul destination flown from T3 for seemingly no other reason

It isn't quite a single destination - there are three flights a day - SIN, SIN/SYD and BKK/SYD.

The reason is because they wanted to be in the same terminal as QF. BA and QF have a Joint Service Agreement where they sell each other's seats and share profits which gives the customer more choice of routings and timings, so you could be going one way on BA and the other on QF. You'd be annoyed if you departed from T3 and arrived at T5.

It is quite straightforward for them to be at T3 because all three in the early morning and depart in the evening so the aircraft are shuffled around during the day between T3, T5 and engineering.



Next flights: LGW-LBA-LGW, LHR-SIN-SYD, SYD-BKK-LHR, LGW-GRO, GRO-CIA, CIA-MAD, MAD-LGW
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15719 posts, RR: 26
Reply 14, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5881 times:

Quoting sam1987 (Reply 3):
I expect IB services to move to T5 when the merger goes through, along with BA services to BCN and MAD.

Where are they going to fit it in? As I understand it, T5 isn't even going to be able to accommodate all of BA's operations without T5D.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 8):
At some point I can see BA LHR-SIN/BKK-SYD and, therefore, QF moving over

That's what I was thinking. If they have the space to move more flights and a partner into T5, why would they not choose QF and the highly lucrative Kangaroo Route?

For the time being there is only one way I see a significant number of OneWorld airlines moving into T5, and that is if BA gets into financial trouble and cuts a lot of flights. Needless to say, I don't want this to happen.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineFlying Belgian From Belgium, joined Jun 2001, 2390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5706 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Which lounges does JL use @T3 ?

FB.



Life is great at 41.000 feet...
User currently offlineairbuseric From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 4253 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5464 times:

Quoting Flying Belgian (Reply 15):
Which lounges does JL use @T3 ?

BA lounges



"The whole world steps aside for the man who knows where he is going"
User currently offlineTristarsteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 3981 posts, RR: 34
Reply 17, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5429 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 14):
and the highly lucrative Kangaroo Route?

Do you have any figures to back this up?
LON-Australia routes must have about the lowest fares per km travelled in the world.
I can't believe its 'highly' lucrative. I suspect it turns a profit, but is way down the list.


User currently offlineJAL From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 5083 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5231 times:

Great news for JAL and OneWorld!


Work Hard But Play Harder
User currently offlinetim222 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2009, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5159 times:

firstly this move will be only IF the BAA allows it. nothing is comfirmed at all as it stated on our internal BA email.

final paragraph says...

Discussions are still at a preliminary level and no final decision has been made. Investigations into the feasibility of such a terminal move are currently underway and all decisions would be subject to approval by the BAA.

[Edited 2010-07-30 10:07:23]

User currently offlineFlyCaledonian From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2072 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4818 times:

I wonder if such a move could be a prelude to BA or JL launching Heathrow-Hanada? If they applied for a JSA (a bit similar to the BA/QF one) it would make sense for BA and JL to co-locate, and offer flights from both Hanada and Narita.


Let's Go British Caledonian!
User currently offlineSAM1987 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 946 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4583 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 14):
Where are they going to fit it in? As I understand it, T5 isn't even going to be able to accommodate all of BA's operations without T5D.

If JAL and IB (and BA's services to BCN and MAD) move to T5 I suppose some other short haul routes will have to move over. Maybe those that have the lowest connecting traffic? Anybody know which BA LHR routes have the least connecting traffic?



Next flights: LGW-LBA-LGW, LHR-SIN-SYD, SYD-BKK-LHR, LGW-GRO, GRO-CIA, CIA-MAD, MAD-LGW
User currently offlineFlyCaledonian From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2072 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 4372 times:

I'd have thought that with ATI, BCN and MAD would have amongst the least connecting traffic! Why route people through LHR for North America, when they can one-stop via AA/IB?


Let's Go British Caledonian!
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24868 posts, RR: 22
Reply 23, posted (3 years 12 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3679 times:

Quoting Tristarsteve (Reply 17):
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 14):
and the highly lucrative Kangaroo Route?

Do you have any figures to back this up?
LON-Australia routes must have about the lowest fares per km travelled in the world.
I can't believe its 'highly' lucrative. I suspect it turns a profit, but is way down the list.

I would guess that Europe-Australia routes, including LHR, are among the least profitable of all longhaul routes. That's why almost all European carriers that once flew their own aircraft to Australia have eliminated service over the years and now rely on codeshares, leaving only BA and VS, and BA has much less service with their own aircraft than they once did. There must be at least 20 airlines able to offer one-stop connecting service between Europe and Australia. That puts extreme downward pressure on fares and yields. It's also very expensive to operate such a longhaul route in terms of aircraft time and crew costs. An aircraft can generate much more revenue operating 3 or 4 round trips on shorter routes than one round trip Europe-Australia.

[Edited 2010-07-30 14:45:00]

User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5189 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (3 years 12 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3003 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 23):
I would guess that Europe-Australia routes, including LHR, are among the least profitable of all longhaul routes

While economy fares must be low-yielding I believe that these routes are very premium heavy. That's why LHR survived whereas all the rest (apart from QF to FRA) died out. Indeed it's why QF is only keeping First on LHR and LAX (although the latter is, admittedly, currently a blood bath).

I can only talk for fares originating in Australia, but Y+ on QF is routinely the same price as EK J, and QF J the same as EK F (very broadly speaking). Even SQ is often cheaper than QF in J and F.

Anecdotally, from what I've heard J on the A380 is often completely full into LHR. I haven't seen figures to support this but that's what I've heard from people who fly the route regularly in J.


I should just clarify what I said before: given that the reason that BA flies from T3 to Aus is because of their relationship with QF, if and when space becomes available QF would (to me) seem to be most likely OW carrier to fly from T5 because they are the reason why BA doesn't have 100% LH flying out of T5. I was been sarcastic before...

Quoting charliecossie (Reply 9):
You forgot the smiley

You're right, Sorry.

Still, once their is (airside?) connectivity between the terminals I could see why this would be less pressing.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
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...
Easy Jet To Move From T3 To T2B At CDG posted Tue Oct 9 2007 17:29:38 by Stevens91
Will AS Move From EWR To JFK posted Tue Sep 22 2009 03:53:07 by Rgreenftm
U.S. Carriers Move From LGW To LHR posted Thu Jan 24 2008 01:59:19 by RampGuy
Move From THR To IKA posted Fri Oct 26 2007 13:50:48 by A300
American, Delta, Northwest Move From Orly To CDG posted Fri Oct 26 2007 05:11:43 by Mats
Ecotax: Easyjet To Move From AMS To BRU posted Fri Sep 7 2007 14:26:56 by KL911
Aer Lingus Move From Boeing To Airbus posted Thu Feb 8 2007 17:19:39 by EI737NG
BA LHR To Miami From T3 posted Mon Jan 2 2006 12:06:36 by AirbusA6
Why Doesn't WN Move From PHL To PNE posted Fri Jul 29 2005 07:16:16 by Jdwfloyd
Confirmed...UA's Move From SFO To IND... posted Sat May 13 2000 23:15:38 by ATA757