Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BAW A318s No Longer Operated By BAW!  
User currently offlinefcogafa From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 883 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 17820 times:

Flightglobal reports today that the two BAW A318s have been transferred to a new company, 'British Airways Limited' and will no longer operate under their AOC - strange!.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...a318s-under-new-subsidiary-372970/

52 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinecedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8188 posts, RR: 54
Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 17572 times:

Unfortunate, one thing about this unique and fabulous service I liked was that it was BA mainline, when the rest of the operation at LCY is CityFlyer / Express / franchise etc.

"The new subsidiary has emerged from a previous company established under the name Acoperco on 14 March." Sounds like something more to do with Iberia than BA.

"It has also sought clearance for British Airways Limited to codeshare with Oneworld partners Iberia - BA's corporate sister - and American Airlines on the 32-seat A318 routes." I have long been surprised by the lack of codeshare activity on the route. Well, I don't see much advantage for the unlovely Iberia, but it's a perfect route for American Airlines' corporate clients, many of whom are heading for the City, so this bit, at least, is way overdue.

Of course the pilots and ground ops will still be done by BA, and this is mostly a bookkeeping exercise, but it's still very disappointing. What convoluted announcements will start the flight? "This British Airways plc, subsidiary of International Airlines Group, international flight is operated by British Airways Limited, from London City, by your London Gatwick based crew." Make it stop.



fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 821 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 17523 times:

The codesharing with AA was in place before the service transferred to BA Limited. Approval had to be sought for BA Limited to codeshare with AA.

Whatever the reasons most customers won't notice any difference. All that will be said is that the service is operated by BA Limited for British Airways.

Nothing to get particularly excited about!


User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3317 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 17480 times:

This surfaced on pprune a while back and no one seems to know what the idea is. Given crews are pulled from LGW and LHR mainline, how does having the A318s on their own AOC impact on this?

User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8494 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 17453 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 2):
Whatever the reasons most customers won't notice any difference. All that will be said is that the service is operated by BA Limited for British Airways.

Nothing to get particularly excited about!

Whatever this means lets remember one thing, this service essentially replaced Concorde. IS BA going to change anything on its most noticible flights ? NO WAY, its 32 Club Seats only, different and better seats.


User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 821 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 17410 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 3):
This surfaced on pprune a while back and no one seems to know what the idea is. Given crews are pulled from LGW and LHR mainline, how does having the A318s on their own AOC impact on this?

It doesn't seem to affect crewing at all.

It could be one of two things:

1. As hinted in the article, BA is seeking new financing for this service or a partner and wants to transfer the operation into a separate company.

2. There is some clever finance/tax structuring going on internally dreamt up by external advisers and it necessitates setting up a separate operating/trading company, and the niche LCY-JFK happens to be the perfect vehicle to do this.


User currently offlineCapEd388 From United States of America, joined Feb 2011, 233 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 17391 times:

Im a little confused by this. Why are they creating a new subsidiary to operate two A318s under the same BA brand? Whats the game plan behind this? Is this some sort of legal loophole?


388 346 77W 787
User currently offlineRubberJungle From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 17368 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 3):
This surfaced on pprune a while back and no one seems to know what the idea is. Given crews are pulled from LGW and LHR mainline, how does having the A318s on their own AOC impact on this?

Take a look at the comment about finding new sources of financing. That's the thing BA is being mysterious about.


User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3317 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 17159 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 4):
ever this means lets remember one thing, this service essentially replaced Concorde.

Oh good grief, it most certainly did not, they just gave it the same flight numbers. That and JFK are the only two things in common. It's the slowest way to cross the atlantic by commercial aviation. This is a Business Class route, Concorde was a First Class + route.

So can the mainline crew still fly this even though it is not on their Air Operators Certificate?

[Edited 2012-06-13 16:03:13]

User currently offlinethenoflyzone From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2682 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 17012 times:

What's even more interesting is the new ICAO code and callsign for this new subsidiary.

ICAO code - BAT
Callsign - Gherkin

however I'm pretty sure BA will still use BAW and Speedbird for the flights. In fact, today was their first day of operation, and based on flightaware, ICAO code was still BAW.

Thenoflyzone



us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
User currently offlineWingtips56 From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 443 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 16932 times:

AA noted in an internal announcement today that it's codeshare with BA on these flights is temporarily suspended because it is now classed as a wetlease agreement with a carrier AA is not approved to sell codeshare tickets on. Current AA* flight number bookings are being rebooked onto the BA prime flight numbers. It expected it to be a temporary situation.

Very curious.....



Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines
User currently offlineblueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4173 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 16842 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Maybe someone figured a stand-alone entity, unburdened from BA plc, would be raking in profits and could finance new aircraft for expanded LCY service on better terms than BA plc could...

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 2):
Approval had to be sought for BA Limited to codeshare with AA.

The US DOT granted approval for AA and IB code-shares on June 11.

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 5):
It doesn't seem to affect crewing at all.

Yet.
I can't help it but find this arrangement a bit puzzling. BA ltd is going to rent crews from BA plc only to lease them back to BA plc under a wet-lease. Why not do a dry lease?

There may be an explanation as innocent as the one I propose above, or not. Since it has it own AOC and code-share authorizations, there's nothing stopping BA ltd from hiring its own crews tomorrow if it wanted to; or stopping BA plc from selling the whole operation, lock, stock and barrel, and running it as a franchise.

Of course, those are just my worse-case scenarios (from crew's pov). The future may be far less dramatic, but it may not be.



I've got $h*t to do
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3317 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 16825 times:

God who would fly it? Experienced ETOPS crew wanted for the same route every day........

User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7737 posts, RR: 17
Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 16096 times:

Quoting cedarjet (Reply 1):
"The new subsidiary has emerged from a previous company established under the name Acoperco on 14 March." Sounds like something more to do with Iberia than BA.

My guess is that it is a contraction of "AirCraft OPERating COmpany".

Coincidence? Probably not.


User currently offlineEIDL From Ireland, joined Apr 2012, 495 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 16037 times:

"Gherkin" isn't a bad callsign for an airline that's likely to only ever operate from LCY - seeing as the building with that nickname is one of the most visible features near LCY.

However I can't see them not using Speedbird 1 / 2 seeing as they have that to hark back to Concorde.


User currently offlineDano1977 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Jun 2008, 515 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 15978 times:

Isn't this almost like, when Boeing 777's based at gatwick where owned by another operating company, painted in BA colours, but the crew where from First Choice Airways?


Children should only be allowed on aircraft if 1. Muzzled and heavily sedated 2. Go as freight
User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 821 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 15817 times:

Quoting Dano1977 (Reply 15):
Isn't this almost like, when Boeing 777's based at gatwick where owned by another operating company, painted in BA colours, but the crew where from First Choice Airways?

No. It will still be operated by BA mainline pilots and cabin crew.

Whatever the reason for this it is not to get around pilot/cabin crew contracts and set up a low cost operation in the UK. There's no way BALPA would be allowing this - they would see it as the thin end of the wedge. Remember BALPA agreed to productivity changes for BA mainline pilots to ensure bmi mainline pilots were integrated into BA and not kept as a separate operation to compete internally against BA mainline.


User currently offlineAIR MALTA From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2531 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 15595 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 16):
Whatever the reason for this it is not to get around pilot/cabin crew contracts and set up a low cost operation in the UK. There's no way BALPA would be allowing this - they would see it as the thin end of the wedge. Remember BALPA agreed to productivity changes for BA mainline pilots to ensure bmi mainline pilots were integrated into BA and not kept as a separate operation to compete internally against BA mainline.

Might be a tax reason then.



Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
User currently offlinemikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 15142 times:

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 9):
ICAO code - BAT
Callsign - Gherkin

BAT and Gherkin ?

lol



Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
User currently offlinemutu From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 538 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 15058 times:

It is absolutely nothing other than internal housekeeping....and creating a discrete profit centre, perhpas in advance of some expanded activity to be put through it.....Rumours are it is neutral/nothing or an exciting development.

Customers wont notice any changes, flight numbers wont change, crew arrangements wont change...its a total non story...for now


User currently offlineBongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3681 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 15014 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 5):
2. There is some clever finance/tax structuring going on internally dreamt up by external advisers and it necessitates setting up a separate operating/trading company, and the niche LCY-JFK happens to be the perfect vehicle to do this.
Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 2):
Whatever the reasons most customers won't notice any difference. All that will be said is that the service is operated by BA Limited for British Airways.

My guess is that they will still say "this is the British Airways flight to New York" The passengers will be none the wiser at the financial jiggery pockery going on behind the scenes, unless of course they are the bankers who have dreamt the idea up


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8494 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 14362 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 8):
QUOTE SELECTED TEXT_



skipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 1431 posts, RR: 0Reply 8, posted s_lt(1339628476, 'l F j Y H:i:s');Wed Jun 13 2012 19:01:16 your local timeWed Jun 13 2012 16:01:16 UTC (12 hours 1 minute 32 secs ago) and read 2736 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 4):ever this means lets remember one thing, this service essentially replaced Concorde.
Oh good grief, it most certainly did not, they just gave it the same flight numbers. That and JFK are the only two things in common. It's the slowest way to cross the atlantic by commercial aviation. This is a Business Class route, Concorde was a First Class + route.


The 45 minutes is lots less time then driving all the way to LHR from the "City". "Concorde" was neither First or Business Class, it was a narrow seat with decent catering.


User currently offlinemikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 14129 times:

Quoting mutu (Reply 19):
It is absolutely nothing other than internal housekeeping....and creating a discrete profit centre, perhpas in advance of some expanded activity to be put through it.....Rumours are it is neutral/nothing or an exciting development.

Customers wont notice any changes, flight numbers wont change, crew arrangements wont change...its a total non story...for now

for now......??

Well it's certainly got all our little brains whirring hasn't it !



Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3317 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 13952 times:

The price for Concorde and the marketing was aimed at the First market.

User currently offlinemikey72 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 1780 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 13837 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 23):
The price for Concorde and the marketing was aimed at the First market.

Of couse it was.

The price-tag for London to New York in 3 hours for people for whom getting from London to New York in 3 hours made a difference was cheap !!!



Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I can stand.
25 VV701 : The 772s in question (G-VIIO, 'IP and 'IR) were ordered by BA and on delivery were leased to Airline Management Ltd (AML), a joint venture between BA
26 JerseyFlyer : They were fitted 10 abreast in Y, whereas mainline BA 777 were / are 9-abreast. I flew LGW - St lucia on one not realising that - never again!
27 skipness1E : Nowadays ten abreast is the new norm. Emirates have them, Air New Zealand, KLM and now American are taking new their aircraft with ten abreast having
28 Dano1977 : D'oh got the wrong company but correct starting letters. Thanks for clearing that up.
29 babybus : I had a chat to the route manager recently who gave me that spiel about it being a Concorde replacement. Whatever the spin, which doesn't work, it is
30 jetblueguy22 : Spin? The A318 is wider than the Concorde was! A318 cabin width is 12ft 2in wide and Concorde was 8ft 7in. Don't get me wrong I love the Concorde and
31 sq_ek_freak : While I'm not in a position to say whether this flight is a Concorde replacement or not, it is a niche flight that is priced above BA's normal Club f
32 mikey72 : Being couped up in 'any' plane (even an A380) is no luxury. Flying is basically the pits to anyone that does it on a regular basis. No matter what ai
33 kdhurst380 : Worth bearing in mind that British Airways has been Limited since it stopped trading on the stock exchange, one can only buy shares in IAG SA, though
34 sq_ek_freak : Agreed especially on the JFK end. T7 is by far my favorite terminal at JFK - it's so easy to use and on the whole hassle free. Compare that to the me
35 mikey72 : Well i'm sure it has been discussed before but what is unique about London to New York and why things like Concorde and the A318 work is because of t
36 VV701 : All three aircraft were withdrawn from service following on the ending of the Flying Colours JV. 'IR was returned to service on 8 May 2000 followed b
37 Post contains links thenoflyzone : Yes. BAT sort of makes sense. "B"ritish "A"irways Limi"T"ed Best they could do i guess, considering BAL belonged to the former Britannia Airways. Als
38 mutu : Company No. 01777777 British Airways plc still very much exists but its shares are no longer listed on a stock exchange now
39 N62NA : You've got a lot more personal space on the A318 than you ever did on Concorde. I was thinking the same thing. We all have to realize Concorde was an
40 mikey72 : Oh I know it makes sense. Just kind of amusing for an airline. 'gherkin 001 please proceed to flight level......' mmmm Now that definitely isn't very
41 skipness1E : I doubt there is any real intention to use that callsign on the JFK flight.
42 RubberJungle : That's correct. As the flights are still branded as a BA operation, they will continue to use the "Speedbird" callsign. The "Gherkin" callsign will b
43 Post contains images mikey72 : I should think so !
44 brilondon : I disagree. The only thing that these flights had in common with the Concorde were the flight numbers, which according to some of the A-nuts on here
45 mikey72 : It's a premium service. It's exclusive. Out of the 1000's and 1000's of people that travel between London and New York daily nobody else is doing it
46 brilondon : Yeah I see your point, but my point is that it doesn't replace the Concorde service, flying non-stop to New York in 3 1/2 hours, being cramped in to
47 mikey72 : Well I don't think that 'officially' i.e from a BA perspective the service is looked upon as a replacement for the Concorde 'aircraft' itself. The 's
48 Post contains links Richard28 : not any more.... http://www.virgin-atlantic.com/gb/en.../airport-guides/jfk/clubhouse.html "Located - beyond the TSA checkpoint, in the A-Concourse a
49 sq_ek_freak : Hadn't realized this. While it doesn't negate the pain that security at T4 can be during the evening rush, it is vastly better than having the lounge
50 jumpjets : I don't think there is much point debating whether the A318 service is or isn't a replacement for Concorde - they offer two totally different types of
51 N62NA : The cabin on the A318 is wider, and you get much more personal space on the A318.
52 Viscount724 : A318 cabin is about 3.5 feet wider than Concorde.
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...
Tokyo-Sapporo No Longer World's Busiest Air Route posted Sat May 26 2012 07:18:40 by HOONS90
TOM1213 Operated By... Monarch? posted Tue May 15 2012 05:22:06 by HullCitySpotter
Ports No Longer Served Non-Stop From AKL? posted Sun Jan 8 2012 21:04:55 by byronicle6
Destinations No Longer Flown From SEA posted Sat Jan 7 2012 11:21:11 by BoeingGuy
Destinations No Longer Flown From SJC posted Tue Jan 3 2012 19:10:57 by BoeingGuy
Cities Which FR No Longer Serves? posted Thu Dec 29 2011 09:36:27 by aviatorcraig
Avod No Longer Necessary? posted Mon Sep 5 2011 07:53:45 by Delta2ual
Ryanair: Single Fleet Rule No Longer Applies posted Mon Dec 13 2010 09:00:38 by keesje
EK Pax No Longer Welcome At CO Presidents Clubs posted Wed Dec 8 2010 00:52:28 by Schweigend
Which KLM Cityhopper Routes Are Operated By F100? posted Thu Nov 18 2010 08:03:57 by OEH68