Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Busy Heathrow Is 'Making Airlines Flee'  
User currently offlineZKOJH From China, joined Sep 2004, 1715 posts, RR: 1
Posted (2 years 6 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 13599 times:

I picked this one up on sky news; it seems BA can't rule the airport can they, oh wait they do! now they have the BD slots

Chronic congestion at Heathrow Airport is driving international airlines away from the UK, according to a new survey.

More than half of scheduled airlines have plans to base flights in other countries because of the crucial London facility's lack of capacity, the poll showed.

And 86% of airlines said they would put on extra flights if more arrival and landing slots were available at Heathrow, according to the Board of Airline Representatives in the UK (Bar UK) survey.

"The message I hear from airlines is clear: If there's no room at Heathrow then flights will move out of the UK altogether."

http://news.sky.com/home/business/article/16210838


CZ 787 to AKL can't wait.
51 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2578 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 13496 times:

Quoting ZKOJH (Thread starter):
"The message I hear from airlines is clear: If there's no room at Heathrow then flights will move out of the UK altogether."

No airline with slots at LHR will abandon them simply because they want more slots. LHR is and will always be a slot restricted and congested airport, even with a third runway.

And yes, airlines wishing for more frequency into London will use Gatwick and Stansted. Look at Air China and Korean Air. Many others will follow in the coming years.

Thenoflyzone

[Edited 2012-04-18 20:36:55]


us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlinestylo777 From Germany, joined Feb 2006, 2990 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 13251 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 1):

LH and TK followed already to LGW


User currently offlineSomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3421 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 13019 times:

Quoting stylo777 (Reply 2):
LH and TK followed already to LGW

Yes, but they didn't cut anything at LHR despite this


User currently offlineIndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 2989 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 12951 times:

This is all just another ploy to make them take action.

The truth is that there is capacity in London at present, especially as SEN comes online now also to further give some airlines options. Airlines are also starting to use larger aircraft, which is likely what was needed anyway.

LHR will be the prized destination, with LGW 2nd, LCY as a major business option, with the LCC's and a few other players choosing to persue STN, LTN and SEN.

A well rounded offering, which although not perfect, is still a great foundation to work from.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19924 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 12933 times:

This merely means that LHR is at capacity, nothing more. The government has made it clear that capacity will not be added to LHR. There is room at LGW, STN, and LTN for them.

User currently offlinerichardw From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 3754 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 6 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 12541 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):
This merely means that LHR is at capacity, nothing more.

There's slot sitting going on with small aircraft, so not 'at capacity'.


User currently offlinebrightcedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1289 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 12496 times:

What, they will land in France or Ireland and put people on boats to reach the UK? What nonsense!

The weaker airlines will be squeezed to the less premium airports and the average aircraft size will steadily increase to maximize each slot's revenue potential.

There are still carriers offering RJ service to LHR, how about that?



I want the European Union flag on airliners.net!
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7616 posts, RR: 17
Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 4 days ago) and read 12419 times:

According to the linked article the survey determined that 85 per cent of current operators at LHR "said they would put on extra flights if more arrival and landing slots were available at Heathrow". This finding is in significant conflict with with the opening statement of the article that reads:

"Chronic congestion at Heathrow Airport is driving international airlines away from the UK, according to a new survey."

Now read who released the survey results - no less than BAA CEO Colin Matthews.

Now put his statement within the context of BAA's forced sale of LGW and the announcement of the Competition Appeal Tribunal's judgement of 1 February 2012 that found in favour of the Competition Commission's decision of 19 July last year that required BAA to sell Stansted Airport.

No doubt more than one airline with operations at LHR responded to the survey by saying that they would consider future expansion at an airport outside the UK if they could not expand their LHR operations. Hence the reported statement by Mr Matthews:

"The message I hear from airlines is clear: If there's no room at Heathrow then flights will move out of the UK altogether."

As has already been stated in this thread the chances of any airline of any significance moving their existing services away from LHR let alone entirely from the UK, thus giving BA a free ride, are remote. Indeed this is only likely to happen in a BD-like situation unless the sale of LHR slots and a move most likely to the competitive airports of LGW or STN provides sufficient capital to enable that airline to keep operating.

Having said all of that one can see a non-British airline that is not a oneworld member deciding to route trans-Atlantic traffic not destined for or originating in the UK through a hub in continental Europe by adding new flights that could have operated into LHR if a third runway was built. But aren't Star and Sky Team Airlines doing that already?

Building a third LHR runway? Do you think that possibility could be the reason that it is BAA who are releasing the results of this survey?

Finally here is a link to the Press Releases issued by the Board of Airline Representatives in the UK, the reported sponsors of the survey, so far this year:

http://www.bar-uk.org/press/press_2012.htm

As at the time of posting this reply there is no press release on what is their survey. However since it is likely that all or nearly all airlines operating into LHR would like to see a tyhird runway . . .


User currently offlineTeamInTheSky From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 535 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 4 days ago) and read 12392 times:

Quoting richardw (Reply 6):
There's slot sitting going on with small aircraft, so not 'at capacity'.

Very good point. Didn't KL just release an additional slot to DL so DL could switch its LGW flight to LHR? It seems that there are definitely slot-holders that are not utilizing their slots most efficiently.



Since 2010: DL, KL, AF, WX, IG, FR , FL, U2, AK, BA, OK, UX, VS, VN, K6
User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7616 posts, RR: 17
Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 12188 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):
The government has made it clear that capacity will not be added to LHR.

Correct.

In so far as the government has approved trials for mixed mode operation under specific circumstances:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...ode-operations-at-heathrow-359602/

the actual number of movements and passengers handled is likely to increase but with no increase in assigned slots or capacity. This will be because fewer flights will be cancelled following any disruption to normal operations.

The impact of these potential changes should not be underestimated as currently a disruption lasting just a couple of hours at LHR can impact both scheduled arrivals and departures over several days as aircraft end up in the wrong place at the wrong time.


User currently offlineEI564 From Ireland, joined May 2007, 373 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 12089 times:

Quoting TeamInTheSky (Reply 9):
Very good point. Didn't KL just release an additional slot to DL so DL could switch its LGW flight to LHR? It seems that there are definitely slot-holders that are not utilizing their slots most efficiently.

Isn't that just nitpicking? If some airlines are slot holding, that still means that other airlines wouldn't be able to get the slots they want. And they'll have to thus operate elsewhere. They may choose another UK airport but they may also choose another European airport (depending on the market). You can never say they will definitely go to another UK airport.

People can't suggest that Heathrow isn't hugely congested right now because it clearly is.

When the article says "driving international airlines away", it means the lack of capacity at Heathrow is driving airlines to choose elsewhere when they they have to decide where to expand. Not that they are giving up existing slots.


User currently offlinejumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 846 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 11970 times:

Quoting EI564 (Reply 11):
When the article says "driving international airlines away", it means the lack of capacity at Heathrow is driving airlines to choose elsewhere when they they have to decide where to expand. Not that they are giving up existing slots

Well said EI564 I think that neatly sums up the situation - and without any melodramatics!


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7616 posts, RR: 17
Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 11835 times:

Quoting EI564 (Reply 11):
When the article says "driving international airlines away", it means the lack of capacity at Heathrow is driving airlines to choose elsewhere when they they have to decide where to expand. Not that they are giving up existing slots.

With respect the headline of the article says a lot more than that. It reads "Busy Heathrow Is 'Making Airlines Flee'". "Flee" means leave and leave quickly. So the headline is saying that congestion at LHR is making airlines quickly move their flights away from LHR! The article then goes on to suggest that none of this lost business will go to other UK airports be it to other London airports like LGW or STN or, as new O&D flights, to airports like EDI, GLA, MAN or BRS.

Very clearly this is more than a gross exaggeration. In simple terms no airline has or is likely to flee LHR however congested it is or becomes. Nevertheless some airlines MAY have added or MAY add flights to continental European airports that they MAY have operated to LHR if LHR slots had been available. A possible example is 9W that MAY have established its European mini-hub at LHR if the necessary slots had been freely available.

It is clearly a fact that some airlines operating into LHR have added new flights to LGW that they would likely operate from LHR if the slots were available . It is also possible that at least some trans-Atlantic O&D flights to provincial UK airports may not have been introduced if slots at LHR had been freely available. Equally feeder flights from UK provincial airports to AMS, FRA and CDG may not have been so numerous if slots had been available to operate similarly as extensive networks into LHR. But none of this can be described as "making airlines flee" from LHR.

Recognise that the announcement of the survey results was made by the BAA CEO and that BAA have been forced to sell LGW and are being made to sell STN. So they will be left with just LHR in the southeast of England. They cannot expand LHR beyond the current number of scheduled aircraft movements. They cannot expand LHR beyond the passenger handling capacity of their current and planned terminals. So BAA subsidiary, Heathrow Airport Ltd, has no way of expanding its business in the medium to long term without the construction of a third runway except by finding more terminal space to rent out more shops, cafes and restaurants and turn each terminal into an even larger shopping mall.

So, in a nutshell, that's what it is all about. New business that could come to Heathrow if a third runway was built may not go to just LGW or STN. Some could go to continental European airports.


User currently offlinemikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 11579 times:

I would just go in and flatten whatever needed to be flattened, spend whatever needed to be spent and build TWO more runways and TWO more huge shiny terminal buildings !

Anyone that objects to the development of vital infrastructure be it road, rail or air etc should be first in line for whatever cuts have to be introduced when the economy loses business to others.

End of.



Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
User currently offlineYULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2182 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 10659 times:

Quoting brightcedars (Reply 7):
There are still carriers offering RJ service to LHR, how about that?

If they are small airlines operating from small home airports at less busy hours, it makes sense.

Quoting ZKOJH (Thread starter):
"The message I hear from airlines is clear: If there's no room at Heathrow then flights will move out of the UK altogether."

There is a word for this: lobbyists.



When I doubt... go running!
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3552 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 10525 times:

I heard that LGW is at or near capacity, is this true? STN is where the real growth can occur in the LON market.


"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8969 posts, RR: 39
Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 10244 times:

Quoting TeamInTheSky (Reply 9):
Quoting richardw (Reply 6):
There's slot sitting going on with small aircraft, so not 'at capacity'.

Very good point. Didn't KL just release an additional slot to DL so DL could switch its LGW flight to LHR? It seems that there are definitely slot-holders that are not utilizing their slots most efficiently.

DING DING DING! We have TWO winners!

How to fix Heathrow

Do not pay a fortune to make Heathrow bigger, when it can first be made so much better


http://www.economist.com/node/10924139



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlinerichardw From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 3754 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 10176 times:

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 17):
http://www.economist.com/node/10924139

The article in the link is nearly four years old.


User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8969 posts, RR: 39
Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 10040 times:

Quoting richardw (Reply 18):
The article in the link is nearly four years old.

It's an editorial piece, and LHRs problems of four years ago are still clearly present.

What the article suggests to fix LHR addresses exactly what you said: too many airlines with little incentive to use slots efficiently.



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlinebabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 10002 times:

Quoting ZKOJH (Thread starter):
More than half of scheduled airlines have plans to base flights in other countries because of the crucial London facility's lack of capacity, the poll showed.

And 86% of airlines said they would put on extra flights if more arrival and landing slots were available at Heathrow, according to the Board of Airline Representatives in the UK (Bar UK) survey.

This is a contradiction. Either the passengers want to fly specifically to LHR or not. Why would an airline fly them somewhere else? Doesn't make sense.

Quoting richardw (Reply 18):
The article in the link is nearly four years old.

This article is better used as budgie cage liner. Obviously very bad journalism.


User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8969 posts, RR: 39
Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 9909 times:

Quoting babybus (Reply 20):
This article is better used as budgie cage liner. Obviously very bad journalism.

Care to tell us why you think that?



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13248 posts, RR: 100
Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 9317 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

While I'd love to see expansion at LHR, I've given up hope. Soon we'll see a new generation of TATL capable narrowbodies (I expect the A320/A321 NEO by 2020 to have the range.) LHR would be an excellent location to fragment travel further across the Atlantic. But the lack of slots will inhibit that expansion. I guess US air should send a thank you card to the Heathrow NIMBYs.   

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinerichardw From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 3754 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 9078 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 22):
Soon we'll see a new generation of TATL capable narrowbodies (I expect the A320/A321 NEO by 2020 to have the range.

Would you expect these to be part of USA based airlines' fleets?


User currently offlineredzeppelin From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 610 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 8045 times:

Does anybody know the breakdown of O&D vs connecting traffic at LHR?


Flown: DL,OS,NZ,UN,VV,NW,AA,UA,HP,TZ,AS,AF,KL,SK,WS,AZ,OK; op by OO,MQ,XJ,9E,G7,EV,QX,RP
25 gdg9 : I personally didn't mind taking the Gatwick Express as compared to the Tube when landing at London. Both were fine and got me into Central London in a
26 United787 : Here Here. Sounds like you need Richard M. Daley to run for office in London! A-Netters may critizise him for his role in getting rid of CGX, but wha
27 par13del : I would assume so, EU carriers are not using narrow bodies TATL, brings up the whole discussion of why US carriers unlike their EU counterparts canno
28 brilondon : You may want to try the Heathrow Express, you just may find it quicker. No, American carriers don't need a Jumbo bus because they don't funnel all th
29 rogercamel : But only 15% of people arriving at/leaving LHR take the tube - around 10% take LHR express (my figures are a little out of date). LHR is far superior
30 VV701 : The editorial piece was published on 27 March 2008 to coincide with the implementation of Open Skies between the EU and the USA.. T5 at Heathrow was
31 PPVRA : Not sure why you are thinking that. The article doesn't say T5 was a bad idea. What it does do is it correctly predicts that T5 will not solve conges
32 VV701 : The article said: "the £4.3 billion ($8.5 billion) Terminal 5, which opened this week, will improve Heathrow for the 40% of passengers who fly with
33 mikey72 : The thing is we all want to save the environment. not suffer from noise pollution, burn as little fossil fuel as possible etc BUT.... The cold hard t
34 rutankrd : Nothing really to do with this debate but UK PLC has been in decline for the best part of 60 years now. Yes we found a niche in Finance that has prop
35 rutankrd : Oh and that myth that we are a small island The main island that is England/Wales/Scotland in the 9th Largest island on the planet. Only Honshu in Jap
36 mikey72 : Your comments aren't even worth considering. Rutankrd - do us all a favour and go and live somewhere else. Call yourself British ? Good job we havn't
37 rutankrd : No i don't call myself British i don't have that schism of identity i my a proud English Man and European . I am not racist and i do love the capital
38 mikey72 : I don't like or dislike him as I have never met him. Have you ? I do however like what he has done for BA. I can understand your grievance to a point
39 Post contains images cloudyapple : Airlines are more than welcomed to arrive on a saturday evening after 6 and depart before 8 on a sunday morning.
40 Post contains images maddog888 : Wow, a whole 3000 millimetres long! You know you might be able to get planning permission for that one. I assume you are planning on flying similarly
41 PPVRA : The subject of this thread, of the article posted by the OP, and including the subject of the article posted by myself, is flight delays. Likewise, m
42 Post contains images babybus : I fly in and out of LHR with BA all the time. All those flight delays outbound are included in the timetable times. For arrivals, in my experience, i
43 mikey72 : Well we will just have to .....Keep Calm And Carry On........ In light of the fact that my two runways and shiny terminal buildings have got more chan
44 cloudyapple : No it is not. It is congestion, which is not the same as delay. Congestion means demand at or exceeding capacity, which may not necessarily lead to d
45 VV701 : Incorrect. It was the article posted by yourself and not I that expanded this debate beyond congestion. In Reply 17 you introduced a four year old, v
46 thenoflyzone : Nope, i still think the NIMBY's wont allow it ! Thenoflyzone
47 mikey72 : I breezed through Terminal 5 the other day, did some shopping in some fantastic shops, had a delicious lunch in an excellent restaurant with spectacul
48 PPVRA : Obviously you two are incorrect. Let's take a look at the OP article first: "He is one of the airline and industry chiefs anxious for the Government
49 Post contains links VV701 : You very clearly raised these issues as the first reference to them in this thread is in Reply 17 that you posted. And "background"? Here is the rele
50 PPVRA : The article is titled "HOW TO FIX HEATHROW" not "HEATHROW'S PROBLEMS". The "meat" of the article will obviously be the author's prescriptions to fixi
51 Pu : Just to add another angle here, if AA is taken over by Doug Parker and US, BA may suddenly find themselves with their primary alliance partner less in
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...
Who Of The US Airlines Is Making The Money? posted Thu Mar 10 2005 01:11:10 by FokkerVII
Is Kingfisher Airlines Really In Trouble posted Thu Apr 12 2012 23:19:17 by BLRAviation
Is Amsterdam Airlines Bankrupt? posted Mon Oct 31 2011 03:55:44 by pspfan
Is Shanghai Airlines Still In Star Alliance? posted Thu Sep 1 2011 10:37:42 by oksman
Is Alaska Airlines Prime For Purchase? posted Mon Dec 27 2010 14:54:23 by AirlineReporter
What Is 'Iranian Airlines'? posted Sat Jun 19 2010 19:39:10 by LH600
How Is Southwest Airlines Doing In LGA? posted Sat May 8 2010 14:28:53 by jetblue777
Is Freedom Airlines Dead? posted Fri Mar 19 2010 06:11:46 by Logos
Is Czech Airlines Still Using A310's? posted Tue Nov 3 2009 04:19:15 by Planenutz
Is Inter Airlines Grounded? posted Tue Nov 18 2008 09:05:36 by JustPlanes
Is Amsterdam Airlines Bankrupt? posted Mon Oct 31 2011 03:55:44 by pspfan
Is Shanghai Airlines Still In Star Alliance? posted Thu Sep 1 2011 10:37:42 by oksman
Is Alaska Airlines Prime For Purchase? posted Mon Dec 27 2010 14:54:23 by AirlineReporter
What Is 'Iranian Airlines'? posted Sat Jun 19 2010 19:39:10 by LH600
How Is Southwest Airlines Doing In LGA? posted Sat May 8 2010 14:28:53 by jetblue777
Is Freedom Airlines Dead? posted Fri Mar 19 2010 06:11:46 by Logos
Is Czech Airlines Still Using A310's? posted Tue Nov 3 2009 04:19:15 by Planenutz
Is Inter Airlines Grounded? posted Tue Nov 18 2008 09:05:36 by JustPlanes
Is Kingfisher Airlines Really In Trouble posted Thu Apr 12 2012 23:19:17 by BLRAviation
Is Amsterdam Airlines Bankrupt? posted Mon Oct 31 2011 03:55:44 by pspfan
Is Shanghai Airlines Still In Star Alliance? posted Thu Sep 1 2011 10:37:42 by oksman
Is Alaska Airlines Prime For Purchase? posted Mon Dec 27 2010 14:54:23 by AirlineReporter
What Is 'Iranian Airlines'? posted Sat Jun 19 2010 19:39:10 by LH600
How Is Southwest Airlines Doing In LGA? posted Sat May 8 2010 14:28:53 by jetblue777
Is Freedom Airlines Dead? posted Fri Mar 19 2010 06:11:46 by Logos
Is Czech Airlines Still Using A310's? posted Tue Nov 3 2009 04:19:15 by Planenutz
Is Inter Airlines Grounded? posted Tue Nov 18 2008 09:05:36 by JustPlanes