Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BA Leisure Traffic Ex Gatwick  
User currently offlinebonave From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2010, 10 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 7 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7671 times:

It appears that the BA long haul flts are doing well and earning money, why not try some short haul. BA could transfer some 767's to LGW and run the following:-
Winter ACE TFS SSH (Daily 767 size better suited than 777)
Summer: AGP FAO TFS HER RHO PFO
Pax do like the extras BA can provide, especially on the 4/5 hour flights as above, rather than Lcc's.

Any thoughts?

64 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3226 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7652 times:

It's worth researching why BA retrenched from LGW to LHR and moved to a single fleet cabin crew operation. The fact that BA don't have 757s, 767s and 744s at LGW is the reason they could introduce single fleet at Gatwick and break into profit in LGW long haul probably for the first time since BCAL in 1988. They already do have 19 B737s operating short haul from Gatwick and they're struggling to find a business case for the capital investment needed to replace them. Adding 20 year old B767s into the mix that are already needed at LHR isn't the answer. People do love BA's extras, it's just they seem to prefer booking with easyJet which is why one is contracting year on year and the other one is growing.

User currently offlineLX138 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2009, 395 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 7 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7491 times:

Quoting bonave (Thread starter):
Winter ACE TFS SSH (Daily 767 size better suited than 777)
Summer: AGP FAO TFS HER RHO PFO
Pax do like the extras BA can provide, especially on the 4/5 hour flights as above, rather than Lcc's.

But almost every one of those is not a 4/5 hour flight! Aside from the fact that LGW is not a 767 station, those routes are core LCC heartland - which has driven yields to the ground and made them very competitive and price sensitive.

The only reason BA keep FAO and AGP for instance is because they are still very popular ex-UK tourist destinations, so popular that there is a demand for a different price point and product offering such as the one BA offers.

BA has however said a while back that the 787 arrival, whenever that may be, will enable them to consider placing 767's at LGW - but for long haul leisure routes.



StarWorld Team - The ultimate airline alliance
User currently offlineBA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 756 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7441 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 1):
They already do have 19 B737s operating short haul from Gatwick and they're struggling to find a business case for the capital investment needed to replace them.

They are long gone paid off and fully owned by the company. They decided during the downtrurn to hold of LGW SH fleet replacement until 2015. They 734s are getting re-engineered as well as new cabin layouts to take them until then


User currently offlineplanesailing From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 816 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7397 times:

With the strong growth and sucess of BA holidays ex LGW on long haul routes, there could be room for growth of flights connected to IT bookings.

I am not sure that this is the market BA are looking towards and or that there are enough passengers who would look at service over price.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7460 posts, RR: 17
Reply 5, posted (3 years 7 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7366 times:

Quoting bonave (Thread starter):
BA could transfer some 767's to LGW

I personally do not think there is even a small chance that this will happen. However I would not be surprised if we see some of the early delivery 787s being ferried PAE-LGW to operate on holiday routes.


User currently offlineGT4EZY From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2007, 1783 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (3 years 7 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7298 times:

Quoting bonave (Thread starter):
appears that the BA long haul flts are doing well and earning money, why not try some short haul. BA could transfer some 767's to LGW and run the following:-
Winter ACE TFS SSH (Daily 767 size better suited than 777)
Summer: AGP FAO TFS HER RHO PFO
Pax do like the extras BA can provide, especially on the 4/5 hour flights as above, rather than Lcc's.

Any thoughts?

BA operated to all those destinations on brand new Airbus A320/A321's by an operator called GB Airways. Although, in the end it was ultimately down to the Franchise agreement coming to an end in 2010, GB were finding it very hard to compete on many routes. People loved the extra's that BA/GT provided on these routes.............they just weren't willing to pay for it. In many cases, Monarch, Easyjet etc would often get the business even if they were just £10/£20 cheaper. People loved the BA/GT product but many didn't place much value on it which is why the LCC's do so well.



Proud to fly from Manchester!
User currently offlineplanesailing From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 816 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 7 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7140 times:

Quoting GT4EZY (Reply 6):
BA operated to all those destinations on brand new Airbus A320/A321's by an operator called GB Airways. Although, in the end it was ultimately down to the Franchise agreement coming to an end in 2010, GB were finding it very hard to compete on many routes. People loved the extra's that BA/GT provided on these routes.............they just weren't willing to pay for it. In many cases, Monarch, Easyjet etc would often get the business even if they were just £10/£20 cheaper. People loved the BA/GT product but many didn't place much value on it which is why the LCC's do so well.

I remember the good days well. I certainly appreciated it, but sadly all too many people are price sensitive when choosing who to fly with.

I think that the only position that BA could look at using aircraft on SH routes is outside of the EU where there is less competition from the LCC's. Even so, it looks like they are (mainly EZY) moving into this arena too.


User currently offlinereadytotaxi From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 3217 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (3 years 7 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7106 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 5):
I personally do not think there is even a small chance that this will happen. However I would not be surprised if we see some of the early delivery 787s being ferried PAE-LGW to operate on holiday routes.

A 3 Class cabin from LGW-MCO perhaps?  



you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11638 posts, RR: 60
Reply 9, posted (3 years 7 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 6978 times:

Quoting LX138 (Reply 2):
BA has however said a while back that the 787 arrival, whenever that may be, will enable them to consider placing 767's at LGW - but for long haul leisure routes.

Which is likely to be at the expense of the 777s, which would migrate back to Heathrow.



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineBongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3544 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (3 years 7 months 23 hours ago) and read 6660 times:

Quoting readytotaxi (Reply 8):
Quoting VV701 (Reply 5):
I personally do not think there is even a small chance that this will happen. However I would not be surprised if we see some of the early delivery 787s being ferried PAE-LGW to operate on holiday routes.


A 3 Class cabin from LGW-MCO perhaps?

Last time I looked LGW - MCO was a 3 class cabin CW, WTP & WT


User currently offlineLX138 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2009, 395 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 7 months 22 hours ago) and read 6591 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 5):
However I would not be surprised if we see some of the early delivery 787s being ferried PAE-LGW to operate on holiday routes.

You can dream on. Theres more chance of BA deploying Concorde at LGW than seeing a 787 scheduled there for the first two years. New equipment is going to be deployed on the most competitive, yet money-making routes that are optimum to the aircraft and route within BA - such as LHR-EWR, LHR-DXB, LHR-YUL, 2nd service to SEA etc.

The capital investment in new aircraft is significant, so you want to put them on your high profile (where appropriate) routes that make up your bread and butter business.



StarWorld Team - The ultimate airline alliance
User currently offlinewilld From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 238 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 7 months 21 hours ago) and read 6282 times:

Quoting LX138 (Reply 11):
You can dream on. Theres more chance of BA deploying Concorde at LGW than seeing a 787 scheduled there for the first two years. New equipment is going to be deployed on the most competitive, yet money-making routes that are optimum to the aircraft and route within BA - such as LHR-EWR, LHR-DXB, LHR-YUL, 2nd service to SEA etc.

I agree with you but I seem to recall many people saying the same thing about the new 330s VS are getting. People said; they will be used ex LHR for East Coast US, DXB, ACC, NBO etc with their much older 343s going to LGW possibly. Look whats happened...


User currently offlinewexfordflyer From Ireland, joined Jun 2009, 550 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 7 months 21 hours ago) and read 6238 times:

Quoting bonave (Thread starter):
Pax do like the extras BA can provide, especially on the 4/5 hour flights as above, rather than Lcc's.

You're right, they do love the extras but at the end of the day pax will go for the cheapest option - especially in todays economic climate. The flight is mattering less and less to people nowadays, it is seen less as a nice experience to start your holiday and more as simply a way of getting there. Yes the little extras on your flight are lovely but not as nice as a few extra £££ in your pocket while you are actually on your holiday. Can't see BA trying to encroach on these LCC dominated routes, not for quite a while anyway.



Come with me, there's a place I want you to see, where the leaves are dark, I've got a hiding place in central park.
User currently offlineSpeedbird2155 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 871 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (3 years 7 months 21 hours ago) and read 6174 times:

Quoting LX138 (Reply 11):

You can dream on. Theres more chance of BA deploying Concorde at LGW than seeing a 787 scheduled there for the first two years. New equipment is going to be deployed on the most competitive, yet money-making routes that are optimum to the aircraft and route within BA - such as LHR-EWR, LHR-DXB, LHR-YUL, 2nd service to SEA etc.

The BA 787s are down to start replacement of the 767s in the first instance, so the current 767 destinations will be the first....so as you mentioned, EWR, DXB (seasonal 767 at moment), YUL, YYZ, BWI, YYC, EBB, DAR, NAS/PLS/GCM, LUN, TLV etc are likely to be among the first set of destinations.


User currently offlinechopchop767 From Italy, joined Aug 2010, 226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 7 months 20 hours ago) and read 5961 times:

Last weekend, I flew from NAP to LGW for the weekend. "EasyJet" also flies the route and was much cheaper at the time of booking; about a month before the departure dates. Frankly, I couldn't have been happier with BA. I loved the 737 and the service was quite good for a two and half hour flight. The Gatwick express made a connection into the city incredibly easy. My friends and I were chatting about the flight, so they could plan a visit down here. Admittedly, they're not anutters, but both said after a recent experience with EasyJet to Faro from Gatwick, they would never fly them again.
Right now BA has a marketing campaign at LGW, I noticed it there, suggesting that while you may pay a little more for their flight, the stress of the 'no frills' carriers, more than made up for the cost. I could see BA going head to head with any of the low cost carriers, and there are always going to be people who don't mind spending a little extra to enjoy their flying experience as opposed to just getting from point A to point B. With the congestion as LHR, I almost wish some of the American carriers still flew into LGW, the connection was so easy.



this year: nap, lgw, fra, dub, fco, add, jib, muc, iad, sea, dca, bos, cdg, ist, bah, prg, ord, hsv, cmn
User currently offlineLX138 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2009, 395 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 7 months 17 hours ago) and read 5458 times:

Quoting willd (Reply 12):
Look whats happened...

What has happened!? (Genuine question!)


VS is far less reliant on LHR for revenue - they are also (and I await the disagreements!) far less reliant on J class passengers within their business model. Therefore new aircraft at LGW do make sense for them and its more even spread over their operations.

Quoting chopchop767 (Reply 15):
With the congestion as LHR, I almost wish some of the American carriers still flew into LGW, the connection was so easy.

Wish no more.. both DL and US operate into LGW.



StarWorld Team - The ultimate airline alliance
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7460 posts, RR: 17
Reply 17, posted (3 years 7 months 11 hours ago) and read 5191 times:

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 9):
Which is likely to be at the expense of the 777s, which would migrate back to Heathrow.


So BA had better start buying slots now if it is to base more 772s at LHR.

Quoting LX138 (Reply 11):
Theres more chance of BA deploying Concorde at LGW than seeing a 787 scheduled there for the first two years.


I totally agree. After all BA have clearly stated that all the initial deliveries of 787s will be used to replace long haul 763s. Indeed it is clear from BA's published plans that if the 787 is to be used out of LGW this almost certainly will not happen before Q2 of 2016-17.

In addition to using its first new 787s to replace 763s it also plans to use the 787 to replace a small number (4) of 744s as shown in Slide 28 here:

http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_.../01_ID_2010_Full_presentations.pdf

before it starts to use deliveries to expand its long haul fleet.

But in 2016 - that is in 5 and not 2 years time - some (5) 787s will be used, according to the BA published plan above, to expand their total long haul fleet.

It does not seem feasible to me that BA can plan to expand their LHR long haul fleet by 5 aircraft in a single year, 2016-17. This would require them to find 70 new weekly LHR slots within a 12 month period. It therefore seems to me that the BA plan must require most if not all of the planned expansion to occur elsewhere. And this is most likely to be at LGW.

Of course I cannot conclude that all five or even any of theses additional new 787 frames will definitely be operated out of LGW. It is possible that they will replace aircraft currently in the LHR fleet - perhaps 772s - which could then be moved elsewhere and probably to LGW. However as I see the 787 as an ideal frame to expand leisure flights, I believe these 5 aircraft are, as I said before, likely to be delivered straight to LGW just like the 3 original high density, leisure market 772s (G-VIIO, 'IP and 'IR) were in January, February and March 1999.


User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11638 posts, RR: 60
Reply 18, posted (3 years 7 months 9 hours ago) and read 5119 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 17):
So BA had better start buying slots now if it is to base more 772s at LHR.

Not if they are simply swapping a 767 at LHR for a 777 at LGW. But, that's simply a rumour. The only weight it has comes from BA's continual contraction at Gatwick.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineplanefixer From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 121 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (3 years 7 months 8 hours ago) and read 5080 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 17):
However as I see the 787 as an ideal frame to expand leisure flights, I believe these 5 aircraft are, as I said before, likely to be delivered straight to LGW just like the 3 original high density, leisure market 772s (G-VIIO, 'IP and 'IR) were in January, February and March 1999.

The 787 cannot be operated from LGW as the cabin crew there are already tri-licenced, and therefore cannot operate a fourth aircraft type.
G-VIIO/P/R were not delivered to BA directly, but to AML who operated the aircraft on BA's behalf crewed by Flying Colours cabin crew in BA uniform. That coupled with the different "high density" configuaration of the aircraft was a bone of contention with BA passengers and staff alike. Hence AML was disbanded, the aircraft reconfigured and bought back into the mainline fleet, crewed by BA cabin crew. At least when Caledonian operated the routes on behalf of BA, they used their own DC-10's in CKT colours and the crew wore the Tartan uniform. Timetable stated the routes were operated by CKT as did the boarding passes. One day the DC-10 would operate a flight to TPA or SJU, with a "Club" cabin, the next day the same aircraft may have operated a CKT charter to Barbados and sold the front cabin as "Highland First".


User currently offlinebabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4910 times:

Those 767's up at LHR are in the dreadful state. The paint's peeling and cracked and they're better off being retired than sent to LGW.

I find it disappointing when I fly from LGW and get some clapped out 737 when the same flight from LHR is using the latest Airbus A32x.

LGW should never bee seen as a second class airport and shouldn't be seen as an old aircraft storage cupboard.


User currently offlinerichardw From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 3749 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4861 times:

There are significant weeks of low demand for some of these destinations.

For TFS it is November to mid December and early January to mid/late February.

easyJet has this for Thursday, less than three days away

London Gatwick to Tenerife South
Dep 27 January 2011 07:00
Arr 27 January 2011 11:30
Flight 8703
1 Adult
1 x £78.99

There's no money to be made for BA.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7460 posts, RR: 17
Reply 22, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4695 times:

Quoting planefixer (Reply 19):
The 787 cannot be operated from LGW as the cabin crew there are already tri-licenced, and therefore cannot operate a fourth aircraft type.


We are talking about summer 2016, more than five years from now. If BA cannot plan and then update their staffing over a five year period they are doomed to total obscurity.

Quoting planefixer (Reply 19):
G-VIIO/P/R were not delivered to BA directly, but to AML who operated the aircraft on BA's behalf crewed by Flying Colours cabin crew in BA uniform.


No these three aircraft were part of BA's order placed in August 1991 for 5 777As, and 20 777IGWs. As the CAA web site shows G-VIIO was delivered and registered to BA on 26 January 1999. G-VIIP was delivered and registered again to BA on, according to the CAA, 9 February and 'IR on 18 March.

Airline Management Ltd (AML) was formed as a joint venture between BA and Flying Colours at the start of the 1997 summer season. Initially AML operated a single aircraft, DC-10 G-NIUK, previously operated by Caledonian Airways. It operated in BA Landor livery with a BA flight crew and an AML cabin crew with a two-class, high-density 32J/279Y cabin configuration.

In March 1998 a further two DC-10 30s were leased by BA to AML. These three aircraft were retired in early 1999 as the 772s were delivered to BA by Boeing, The cabins of these aircraft were configured for 383 passengers (28J/355M).

These three aircraft - as the registration history on the GINFO section of the CAA web site shows - have always been registered to BA both before and after the purchase of Flying Colours by Thomas Cook, an event that ultimately led to the disappearance of both AML and Flying Colours itself.


User currently offlinesam1987 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 946 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4641 times:

I mentioned a few days ago (on another thread) the possibility of long haul growth at LGW... but we shall see if that materialises.

Whatever happens, I think we could see changes for BA at LGW sooner than expected. If you look at the new BA Leadership Team on the new IAG website, you'll see there is a new Managing Director of Gatwick:

http://www.iairgroup.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=240949&p=irol-govmanage

Who knows what she will decide to do!

Quoting babybus (Reply 20):
I find it disappointing when I fly from LGW and get some clapped out 737 when the same flight from LHR is using the latest Airbus A32x.

Agreed. Got to have consistency between bases...



Next flights: LGW-LBA-LGW, LHR-SIN-SYD, SYD-BKK-LHR, LGW-GRO, GRO-CIA, CIA-MAD, MAD-LGW
User currently onlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3226 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4469 times:

Quoting sam1987 (Reply 23):
Agreed. Got to have consistency between bases...

That's an ideal. Are you honestly saying EuroGatwick can make enough profit to jusitfy 19 new Airbuses? Year on year decrease in fleet size for how long? Year on year retrenchment for how many years? I fly through the North Terminal a lot and it's a fraction of the BA operation remaining that it used to be. This sudden idea that they intend to link LGW and MAD, aside from hope, what else are we basing this on? The intention is to route traffic between the two IAG hubs. LGW is not a hub, it's a big base for point to point leisure flown with clapped out and paid for B737s and B777s that they can't squeeze into the LHR operation. It does what it does, but it's been shedding aircaft and routes for years and the long haul traffic is till below 2005 levels.

To have consistency between bases you need new A319s, or the LHR cast offs (again) to be replaced by new A320s. It's not that interesting that they have a new "MD of Gatwick" at BA. The clue is until recently, they didn't bother their bum having one.


25 planefixer : Yes, but they were not delivered to "BA" as in operated by BA entirely. They were delivered to BA as a company holding, but were operated from delive
26 skipness1E : Well there was the decor, the seating, the tickets, the "Speedbird" callsign, the handling contract was BA and not Servisair, the fact they were part
27 sam1987 : ... and if they didn't have one, surely that explains this: (ie: because they were concentrating on LHR, leaving LGW without a formal strategy)
28 anstar : A director o f strategy for gatwick or whatever the title is could also mean more downsizing - its not necessarily a good thing!
29 planefixer : The seating was a different layout to any other BA 777's, I have a ticket issued by BA with a BA flight number, on an AA aircraft so does that make i
30 planefixer : Flying colours was not purchased by Thomas Cook, the Thomas Cook airlines was not around at that time. Flying colours merged with a small UK charter
31 Viscount724 : They were 10-abreast in Y class, much worse than the 9-abreast layout on the rest of the BA 777 fleet.
32 VV701 : Oh dear. This discussion started when you said even though the aircraft were delivered in full BA livery and, since their date of delivery, have only
33 planefixer : Exactly the point, they were painted in a certain livery. So when BA took the 757's back "in house" they simply removed the CKT livery, changed the s
34 skipness1E : They were BA coloured seats? The AA flightyou quote is a codeshare as you well know. As to Caledonian, they were a part of BA, like BA Connect and BA
35 richardw : Without a 3rd runway at LHR, will growth mean that the A319s will become too small for LHR?
36 AIR MALTA : The A319 are already small and the growth will only be coming from bigger aircraft and less rotations to some destinations... BA have reduced short-h
37 VV701 : No. Again totally wrong. If we look at the first of the KT 752s, G-BPEA, apart from all the differences between it and the 752s previously delivered
38 planefixer : Err...NO, I was working in BA Hangar 6 at LGW when we took the last CKT liveried B757 into the hangar to put the BA logo on, and we DID NOT reconfigu
39 planefixer : Seat colour!!!!???? I am talking about a completely different seat layout! I know the BA flight operated by AA is a codeshare, I am talking about BA
40 skipness1E : Flown on a BA B777 with BA pilots and a "Speedbird" callsign, with handling by BA, from a BA B777 bought by BA new, sandwiched in the middle of the B
41 planefixer : What has the cabin crew union got to do with it? GB Airways was always sold as "Operated by GB Airways" where is the comparison?
42 skipness1E : The cabin crew was the whole point of AML. Everything else was BA on a BA cost base, AML was a ruse to cut the cabin crew costs as they were sourced a
43 planefixer : No....The aircraft was operated by AML (the paper company) and different AOC - as you would have seen on the aircraft log book. But the cabin crew we
44 planefixer : Anyway, gone WAY off topic with this.[Edited 2011-01-26 15:03:19]
45 richardw : Any point bringing back BCN-LGW and MAD-LGW for a bit of feed for the BA LGW leisure B777 long hauls?
46 AIR MALTA : I think LGW can sustain the return of BCN, MAD, GVA, ZRH, CDG to feed the leisure 777s. Only one or 2 daily flights could do the job to each of these
47 findingnema : Nearly. When Thomas Cook, who were predominantly still a travel agent at this point, branched into selling their own package holidays, they launched
48 Bongodog1964 : I'm quite partial myself to the destinations offered by the "Gatwick Beach fleet" does this however carry over to residents of Barcelona or Madrid ?
49 robso2 : GVA is operated in the winter season by 2 daily flights (with 6-7 U2 flights) and i'm sure the route could support one flight a day or more in the su
50 BA174 : Still part of the problem e.g. LHR-LCA gets a 767 with a full hot meal and short-haul IFE (mainscreen) On the other hand you have the LGW-PFO rotatio
51 planefixer : Again...AML did not employ the cabin crew. The 777's in question were delivered in a completely different config to the mainline 777's and operated u
52 skipness1E : Hello planefixer. Who employed the cabin crew if not AML/Flying Colours? If it was BA mainline, what was the point of AML? My recollection was cabin c
53 madhatter : I'm sure it was in open discussion in Autumn 2010 with St. Vincent government about BA opening direct flights from LGW once the new airport had been c
54 planefixer : There was no AML/Flying Colours.....AML was 1 company, Flying Colours was 1 company, they were not linked in any way as a company. BA outsourced cert
55 skipness1E : So the key cost saver was cabin crew on differernt Ts and Cs employed by Flying Colours and contracted out to BA? OK that's roughly what I thought, it
56 richardw : LGW-PFO a 4.5 hour flight and just a sandwich? Hope it is a foot long and hot.
57 BA174 : Nope the normal "enjoy" box
58 Edina : Not really an issue as cabin crew can easily be divided into sub fleets - on mainline long haul routes during the late 90's cabin crew were licenced
59 sam1987 : This has to be one of the most irritating things about BA's LGW operation - the inconsistency. Also - you get major differences between LGW services.
60 BA174 : Exactly how BA compete with the charters on this mid-haul route to PFO which have 767/757s and IFE is beyond me.
61 Post contains images A340600 : Because they don't squish you in with 28" of legroom
62 jmc777 : Okay, just to put this whole AML thing into perspective here! I know off topic, but would like to set the record straight as an ex employee who worked
63 BA174 : I gather that Rod Eddington hated the set up at LGW when he came in and warned of BAs increasing "virtual" presence down there hence at the earliest
64 AIR MALTA : Going back to topic, an insider has just told that BA is looking again at serving Malta... Is this true??
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...
BA's June Traffic Stats/Future Capacity posted Fri Jul 3 2009 07:09:46 by BALHRWWCC
BA Sched To Ex GT Destinations Published posted Wed Nov 21 2007 05:14:23 by AIR MALTA
BA: New Routes Ex LGW posted Mon Nov 20 2006 15:43:22 by BAStew
BA's Arrival Lounge At Gatwick's North Terminal posted Sat Dec 10 2005 15:14:57 by Columbia107
Good News At BA: Sept Traffic Up posted Wed Oct 5 2005 16:17:59 by Scotron11
BA 747 Flts Ex MAN? posted Sat Oct 30 2004 17:21:03 by Babybus
Business Versus Leisure Traffic Stats? posted Tue Apr 6 2004 14:31:31 by Artsyman
BA December Traffic Down, Load Factor Up posted Fri Jan 4 2002 17:21:49 by Singapore_Air
BA Premium Traffic Falls 36.2%, Non-Premium -22.4% posted Mon Nov 5 2001 23:44:42 by Singapore_Air
BA Aircraft Numbers At Gatwick. posted Thu Jan 20 2000 17:29:29 by CX747