santos From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2007, 730 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6659 times:
"Norwegian Air Shuttle will establish a new base of operations at London’s Gatwick Airport in spring 2013. It will also establish a new base of operations at Alicante, Spain. Norwegian will offer flights to several Mediterranean destinations and the Nordic region from London"
Norwegian is planning to start its operations at London Gatwick with three Boeing 737-800s and increase to four aircraft by the end of the year. The first flights will commence in spring 2013. Pilots and cabin crew will be recruited locally.
Great news for LGW, with 3 new B737's how many routes can we expect?
Competition for the leisure market is getting fierce at LGW.
g2scandinavia From Norway, joined Jun 2010, 494 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6423 times:
Norwegian will increase their operations from LGW by 70% in 2013 to a total of 320 weekly flights.
LGW are at the moment the largest airport in terms of DU operations outside Scandinavia with 140 weekly flights.
These are the destinations to open with DY from LGW in 2013.
Nordic frequency to be increased from LGW. Especially Stockholm will see an significant increase to LGW with additional flights.
acelanzarote From Spain, joined Nov 2005, 805 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 6258 times:
Some of the routes EIN tried where not very well advertised...for whatever reason.... so it was not surprising they got the chop....the fares and service on board where great just most people did not know they where operating the route!
Anyway I hope NAX get it to work for them...certainly will look at the option when heading to LGW....
from the Island with sun and great photo's.. Why not visit Lanzarote
GAWZU From United Kingdom, joined May 2002, 235 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 6249 times:
An interesting move - would NAX be better off retracing their steps to STN? With EZY slowly retreating, and FR the only other game in town, there would be more opportunities to differentiate themselves...
UALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2548 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 6224 times:
Interesting indeed. Just a few months ago, the only option for BCN-LGW, which I fly a couple of times a year to go to southern England, was U2. Then came Monarch, then BA, then VY and now Norwegian. Very strange.
g2scandinavia From Norway, joined Jun 2010, 494 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 6170 times:
I have a feeling that DY will also fly Intercontinental services in and out of Gatwick. I got that smell from the press confrence today.
Easyjet have had numerous meetings with OSL regarding a launch of international operations from Oslo. However Easyjet seems to be afraid to challenge Norwegian directly on their in their honey basket of international services @ OSL.
I know that Easyjet have also seriously considered launching domestic operations within Norway as a third carrier, but have so far been held back by the fact that OSL does not allow more aircraft's to be based there before the completion of the new terminal.
Looking at how Easyjet are able to compete against DY @ CPH, It will be interesting to se if easyjet tends to fight back where it will hurt the most for Norwegian.
Sheridan125 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2012, 25 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6001 times:
The one thing you should not do IMHO as a so-called low cost carrier is to go into markets that are saturated by other airlines. Norwegian are going head-to-head with BA, EZY, Monarch and others on all their proposed routes from LGW. Do they really think that the established airlines will allow them any advantage? Never underestimate the competition. Disaster looms for them at LGW unless they stick to Scandinavian routes.
arn777 From Sweden, joined Jul 2010, 179 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5805 times:
I feel quite confident that we will see DY fly intercontinental from LGW as well. As Bjørn Kjos said it himself the base at LGW will be important for future intercont flying and bringing tourists from Asia to Europe. And it seems like this fit well into LGW's strategy as well.
I also would not be surprised if we would see intercont operations from DY in BER as well some time into the future.
f4f3a From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2004, 246 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 5594 times:
Well they have a lot of aircraft on order so I guess it's only a matter of time before they open new bases.
It will be difficult for them to compete with easyjet because they have so many aircraft based there. The operation
at LGW is easy's most efficient base. They have cemented a good customer base. Norweigen will have to spend a lot on advertising as most people won't naturally associate Norweigen brand name to fly to anywhere outside of Scandinavia.
I think this new competition may not affect easyjet as much as the other carriers in LGW which have a high cost base
jumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 632 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5324 times:
I am wondering how UK bilateral agreements with other countries will impact on DYs plans? Not being a UK airline or indeed an EU airline I wonder how they anticipate getting the necessary rights.
I know that despite not being in the EU Norway enjoys certain EU related benefits, but I don't know whether that would include having a quasi EU status for the purpose of an openskies agreements. If they do have such a status - and given that DY plans a whole raft of services to EU countries I suspect they do - then I guess some long haul destinations will be covered by EU agreements.
I don't know the legal answer but Norway are in the EEC (European Economic Cooperation, or something similar) which means that they do enjoy similar freedoms when it comes to air travel, which DY is making full use of. They are also a part of EASA (and previously JAR) which probably makes it easier, just like Switzerland.
This is a bit of a sneaky move by DY. But I'm not sure that they will be able to compete with EZ at their home base. It will be truly interesting to see how this evolves.
jfidler From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 326 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3586 times:
Is their main goal O&D traffic between the UK and these sunny holiday destinations, or for LGW to act as a hub to funnel tourists from various Scandinavian countries to those holiday destinations via LGW?
g2scandinavia From Norway, joined Jun 2010, 494 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3487 times:
I think the idea must be to serve mediterranean destinations between the flights in and out of Scandinavia.
For instance using their aircraft's for LGW-OSL-LGW-PMI-LGW-ARN-LGW-BCN-LGW with flights to Scandinavia operated by UK crew. This will secure transfer from Scandinavia to their LGW flights and also bring considrable lower risk to thier mediturainian operations than operating arcrafts exclusivly on mediturainian flights from LGW.
If this is how they tend to solve it, they will also free up capacity @ airports like OSL that are currently full and where Norwegian are not able to base another aircraft.
I agree to the risk of their move @ LGW, but if I know Norwegian, it's something more and solid behind this than what has yet been presented.
Candid76 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 728 posts, RR: 4 Reply 20, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3171 times:
Interesting development - I look forward to seeing images of famous Brits (and maybe Benidorm residents) on the tail of Norwegian 737s soon then!
Seriously, I have to agree with other commentators that taking EZY on is a tall order. If the initial intention is to serve these destinations using W-patterns between LGW flights from and to Scandinavia then it may work as the extra flying will spread out the fixed costs of the aircraft through better utilisation.
As for BA, I wouldn't worry about them. Here in Manchester we have adverts on our local radio station advertising cheap BA short haul flights from Gatwick (I kid you not). One of the featured destinations is Amsterdam! So us Mancunians will gladly flock to Sussex rather than use the multiple KLM and easyJet flights from the North West (spending far more getting to Gatwick and back than on the flight itself). This comes over as completely incompetent. However Norwegian will have a harder time tempting pax away from the orange empire.
gilesdavies From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2964 posts, RR: 1 Reply 21, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2833 times:
Great news for LGW and Norwegian seem to be a quality outfit...
Like other people have stated if they are reliant upon the local traffic from LGW, its going to be a tough job for Norwegian. While they are considered a LCC, their prices are quite expensive compared to the like easyJet, Ryanair and Monarch.
The UK is a very price conscious market, and if people can travel the same route cheaper with another LCC, they will. Especially flights to the likes of Spain and the Mediteranean.
Also is an airline like Norwegian that well in the UK? In order to attract passengers to the likes of southern Europe.
One or two people commented above that LGW could be used as transit point for people from Scandanavian, flying on to the likes of Spain... I might be missing a point, but could you please explain the benefits of this and how this can be cost effective? Surely people in Scandinavia would rather take direct flights, which the likes of Ryanair already offer and this is what Norwegian offer already, so unsure why they would change their business model on these routes.
heebeegb From Finland, joined Sep 2007, 424 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2301 times:
DY need to get much better frequency if they stand a chance. Great lead in fares but a quick search shows SPU and DBV 1x a week and BCN 3x a week. PMI 1x a week!!
EZY and BA will take them to the cleaners with these schedules
vfw614 From Germany, joined Dec 2001, 3770 posts, RR: 5 Reply 24, posted (1 year 1 month 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2027 times:
Quoting gilesdavies (Reply 21): One or two people commented above that LGW could be used as transit point for people from Scandanavian, flying on to the likes of Spain... I might be missing a point, but could you please explain the benefits of this and how this can be cost effective? Surely people in Scandinavia would rather take direct flights, which the likes of Ryanair already offer and this is what Norwegian offer already, so unsure why they would change their business model on these routes.
It was not me who made the suggestion, but I guess the speculation is about secondary Scandinavian markets here that cannot support nonstop flights to the costas but that do have (or could sustain) a couple of weekly flights to LON (places like TOS, BOO, TRD, AES and similar markets in Sweden and Finland). Frequency on LON services from there could be upped (or made workable in the first place) to the advantage of business travellers or London visitors if connecting passengers could be channeled through LGW rather than OSL or ARN. Customers from these secondary markets must connect somewhere anyway. Now, whether LGW is the ideal airport to make such connections and is ideally located for connecting flights to places east of Portugal and the Canaries is open to discussion, of course....
25 sweair: Norwegian should grow in eastern EU, thats where the future growth will come, us in the west have had our best days.
26 Pe@rson: That reminds me of the number of routes DY has to Scandinavia from LPA, which has, per CAPA, become a crew base. This link*, from this summer, mentio
27 LN-KGL: Is this the one you are searching for Pe@rson?