Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
London To Be Second Skymark Long-haul Destination  
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 12116 posts, RR: 34
Posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11264 times:

After applying for NRT-JFK Skymark now wants NRT-LHR as its second A380 route.

Quote:
Skymark Airlines (BC, Tokyo Haneda (HND)) has applied for traffic rights to operate its six A380-800s on order from Tokyo to New York John F. Kennedy International (JFK) and London Heathrow (LHR) confirming London as its second planned long-haul destination besides New York. Skymark plans to launch long-haul services in July 2014. According to Airline Route, Skymark also plans to convert one of its 27 B737-800s to a 30 seat Business Class only configuration next year for use on premium routes. Skymark currently operates as a low-cost carrier offering 25 domestic routes to 14 destinations in Japan.

Source http://www.ch-aviation.ch/portal/new...cond-skymark-long-haul-destination

More info on the first route (NRT-JFK) can be found in Skymark Japan Applies For A380 Service To The US (by LAXintl Jan 2 2013 in Civil Aviation)

[Edited 2013-01-08 00:38:47]


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 2186 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11206 times:

How much will their A380s hold? If it's in an all Y layout, wouldn't LGW be a better choice since it seems to be more LCC friendly?

BTW, does LGW have A380 gates?



Go coogs! \n//
User currently offlineUnited885 From Germany, joined Apr 2011, 63 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11206 times:

Seems that Skymark like to compete directly with JAL and ANA.
Is it poosible that one of them, perhaps ANA more likley than JAL, will order either the A380 or the 747-8 to hold up with the upcoming capacitys on the NRT-JFK and NRT-LHR routes?



I haven´t been everywhere, but it´s on my list.
User currently offlineSomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3423 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11115 times:

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 1):
If it's in an all Y layout

It won't, and based in the info so far it will be quite premium heavy


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 12116 posts, RR: 34
Reply 4, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11088 times:

The aircraft would fit 280 premium-economy seats on the lower deck and 114 business-class seats on the upper deck.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineTWA772LR From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 2186 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 11003 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 4):
280 premium-economy seats on the lower deck and 114 business-class seats

That makes 394 seats. Couldn't they have gone with the 748 and get added cargo capacity as a bonus?



Go coogs! \n//
User currently offlinedavidho1985 From Hong Kong, joined Oct 2012, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 10967 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KarelXWB (Thread starter):
Skymark also plans to convert one of its 27 B737-800s to a 30 seat Business Class only configuration next year for use on premium routes.

Sound crazy to have a sub-fleet of 1 737-800 to operate.
How many flights / routes it can offered with just 1 aircaft,
especially premium route passangers usually demand for multi-frequency on the route.

In addition, I doubt a 30 seat 738 can be breakeven even the loading factor is 100%.


User currently offlinemdavies06 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2009, 386 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10716 times:

Quoting davidho1985 (Reply 6):
In addition, I doubt a 30 seat 738 can be breakeven even the loading factor is 100%.

Under the right condition certainly. Look at BA LCY-JFK or NH NRT-FUK-BOM. They are long running routes (not claiming they are profit making, but at least they are holding on there).

Anyway good luck to Skymark. Going from an LCC to a premium carrier. I am not sure Japan can handle 3 long haul premium home carriers though. Something in me still thinks that Airbus is secretly hoping one day JL/NH will merge with Skymark, thus giving Airbus a backdoor way to have one of the two running the Whalejet.


User currently onlinefcogafa From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 839 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10611 times:

If the current market only supports B777s, some of which are low density and premium heavy (ANA), how do Skymark expect to compete , especially as all the current operators downsized from B744s a few years agog?

Also, where are they going to get LHR slots from? The more you hear about this airline, the more it sounds like they do not understand the realities of the intended operations.


User currently offlineflylonghaul From Australia, joined Feb 2010, 147 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10505 times:

For a LCC that is a very low density seating arrangement!


Flying for Pleasure
User currently offlineTC957 From UK - England, joined May 2012, 912 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10440 times:

Woohoo ! Look forward to seeing these birds at LHR. And as has been said before - BC's longhaul routes will NOT be classed as LCC service, not with 114 biz class seats anyway. Only internal Japanese 738 flights can be classed as LCC.

User currently offlineSKAirbus From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1749 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 10391 times:

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 1):
BTW, does LGW have A380 gates?

North Terminal does and a gate is being constructed as Emirates have showed an interest in operating the type to LGW.



Next Flights: LHR-OSL (319-BA), OSL-LHR (319-BA), LHR-CPH (320-BA), VXO-BMA (S20-TF), ARN-CPH (738-SK), CPH-LHR (320-BA)
User currently offlineflylonghaul From Australia, joined Feb 2010, 147 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 10303 times:

So if it not going to be a LCC carrier on long haul routes, this is just an extra 114 regular priced biz seats / day? (will this be daily?)
Sounds like potential overcapacity if they cannot offer a cheaper option than the current operators.

Just MHO



Flying for Pleasure
User currently offlineUnited885 From Germany, joined Apr 2011, 63 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 10074 times:

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 8):
how do Skymark expect to compete , especially as all the current operators downsized from B744s a few years agog?

Perhaps it´s even because that. They see an upcoming market with the retreat of their competitors. I can´t imagine, that there is no market between NRT and LHR for an A380 service with around 400 seats.
Remember, LH and AF fly their flagships to NRT too. BA and JAL operate LHR - NRT in codesharing recpectively one time daily with Boeing 777. Makes around 500 seats together...



I haven´t been everywhere, but it´s on my list.
User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 3016 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 9655 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 8):
Also, where are they going to get LHR slots from? The more you hear about this airline, the more it sounds like they do not understand the realities of the intended operations.

How many more times arrival slots in the window between 14.00 and 17.00 ARE readily available.
And this is the perfect time for a SE Asia arrival.
Departure slots are also available after 20.30 through to 23.00

As for JAL and ANA operations both have been hit by twenty years of a stagnating Japanese economy followed on by the Global Credit Crunch and specifically in the UK market near 4 years of recessionary activity reducing valuable box revenues.

JAL now has a joint venture with OneWorld Partner BA on the LHR-Tokyo Narita and Henada services giving stronger connections to Japanese domestic services.
With this foundation i predict JAL will reintroduce a second daily flight pretty soon.

ANA chose the 77W as their long haul aircraft for known economical reasons including increased cargo space compared to their existing and now withdrawn 744 international fleet.

As for the closure of Kansai services you need to look at the airport operator and their charges - this airport has priced it's self out of several markets. If Itami were reopened to regular international traffic many would move and several services would be resurrected to the city.

All that said is there room for a fourth carrier and be that a Low Cost Operator (this is not necessarily the same as a low fares operation !) using a large aircraft and making deals with Japanese Tour Companies including up scale operators and selling some cargo space at competitive rates i would suggest the answer is yes

If that SLF capacity is under 400 - they will have more footage available for boxes - that's hidden extra revenue !


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 3016 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 9505 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting United885 (Reply 13):
Remember, LH and AF fly their flagships to NRT too. BA and JAL operate LHR - NRT in codesharing recpectively one time daily with Boeing 777. Makes around 500 seats together...

Remember there is a additional daily carrier and service between the UK and Japan - Virgin Atlantic with an A346 in C45YW28Y233 fit

ANA has F8C77YW24Y138

BA use the 77W with F14C56W44Y183

JL use the 77W with F9C63W44Y156 (Not the new cabin ones - those are reserved for US ops)

Plus BA fly a daily 77E to HND with F13J48W32Y127

Thats still some capacity each day !


User currently onlinefcogafa From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 839 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 8100 times:

If these slots are so easy to get,why did BAW have to buy a whole airline to get extra slots? Ad hoc slots are available for GA but these vary from day to day. For a scheduled operator this would likely mean scheduling your flights at very different times each day

The only time that they are readily available for schedules is Saturday PM, thus the surfeit of freighters operating at that time. Yes


User currently offlineSKAirbus From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1749 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 8054 times:

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 16):
If these slots are so easy to get,why did BAW have to buy a whole airline to get extra slots? Ad hoc slots are available for GA but these vary from day to day. For a scheduled operator this would likely mean scheduling your flights at very different times each day

The only time that they are readily available for schedules is Saturday PM, thus the surfeit of freighters operating at that time. Yes

Maybe because for the flights BA want to operate, at the times that will make them money, there aren't any avialable?



Next Flights: LHR-OSL (319-BA), OSL-LHR (319-BA), LHR-CPH (320-BA), VXO-BMA (S20-TF), ARN-CPH (738-SK), CPH-LHR (320-BA)
User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 3016 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7195 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 17):
Maybe because for the flights BA want to operate, at the times that will make them money, there aren't any avialable?

That is exactly the point - I stated the period when slots ARE available. These are low times for European business ops.

Again there ARE slots in these time frames.
Not many agreed and to get a consistent schedule (Arrival time) a bit of horse play bidding necessary.

Its in these time frames that Aeromexico found some, various Indian carriers and a number of obscure CIS operator manage. Egyptair operate a quasi charter to the desert. etc.....

Get it !

These are low value and easily tradeable .No use to US for arrivals (Who wants to leave JFK at 4am local ?) or for the European business traveller.

It is no coincidence that the 27s runway change take place during this lull in arriving traffic flows.

[Edited 2013-01-08 11:13:37]

User currently offlineordjoe From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 718 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4589 times:

All the best to skymark but I see this being an utter failure for a number of reasons. If I could short this company I would do it with full force.

User currently onlinefcogafa From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 839 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4529 times:

So why didn't Vietnam go to LHR? Because they couldn't get the slots at a time the 'far east' airlines require.

For goodness sake, the alternation is at 1500 because it is splitting the operational day evenly in two and has done so for many many years, starting long before traffic levels would have been a consideration to any changes.

The extra Egyptair flight arrives late evening, most Indian airlines arrive early evening so they are a valid example of slots being available mid afternoon.

Checking the stats on the ACL site for summer 2012, demand exceeded capacity in all hours from 1200 to 2100, significantly so 1500-1700 which is the times the ANA and JAL flights arrive.


User currently offlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7619 posts, RR: 17
Reply 21, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4177 times:

Quoting rutankrd (Reply 14):
How many more times arrival slots in the window between 14.00 and 17.00 ARE readily available.

Really? What is your source? According to the web site of the official LHR slot coordinator there was not a single unallocated arrival slot on any day of the week between 1400 and 1700 hrs as at the start of the last Summer Season.

If you click on "LHR S12 Start of Season" on the Airport Coordination Ltd web site here:

http://www.acl-uk.org/reportsStatistics.aspx?id=98&subjectId=33

and go to page 11 you will see that there are 676 arrival slots per day.

On Day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 it is clearly stated that EACH AND EVERYON E of those 676 slots were allocated.

On Day 6 of the 676 available slots 660 were allocated. Six of the unused slots were between 1800 and 1900 hrs, eight between 2000 and 2100 and 2 after 2100 hrs. NONE were available between 1400 and 1700 hrs.

The availability of departure slots is no better. As can be seen NONE were available at any time on Days 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 when LHR is totally slot bound.

On Day 6 eight departure slots were available between 1800 and 1900 hrs but obviously none of these could be used by Skymark unless they could turn their 380 around in under 60 minutes. A further three were available between 1900 and 2000 hrs on Day 6.

There are also a small number of departure slots available early on Day 7, four between 0500 and 0600 hrs and six between 0600 and 0700. However none of these Day 7 departure times are that suitable for a flight between LHR and NRT as the arrival time at NRT would be between two and four in the morning local time.

Note here that all the times detailed above and listed in the linked ACL document are UTC and not BST.


User currently offlineSKAirbus From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1749 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2734 times:

TBH there will be some struggling airline willing to lease out a slot or two  


Next Flights: LHR-OSL (319-BA), OSL-LHR (319-BA), LHR-CPH (320-BA), VXO-BMA (S20-TF), ARN-CPH (738-SK), CPH-LHR (320-BA)
User currently offlinejumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 846 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2442 times:

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 22):
TBH there will be some struggling airline willing to lease out a slot or two

LOT comes to mind - sounds like they could do with a bit of cash! I know they have [or had] a LHR arrival slot from Warsaw around 4.30 in the afternoon - maybe that would do for Skymark.


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...
IB Needs To Prepare For More Long-Haul Competition posted Thu Aug 23 2012 12:49:55 by SCL767
Boeing To Study Direct 757 Long-haul Replacement posted Mon Apr 30 2012 02:50:48 by Bthebest
Air Europe 3 New Long Haul Destination posted Fri Jan 22 2010 09:44:33 by MIgAiR54
Thomsonfly To Increase Legroom On Long-haul posted Fri Jul 21 2006 12:11:36 by BananaBoY
Was The MD12 Going To Be Built In Long Beach posted Mon Apr 24 2006 02:56:59 by 747400sp
Gatwick Express Rail Link To London To Be Axed... posted Fri Feb 3 2006 18:03:14 by Gilesdavies
Next LH Long-haul Destination? posted Tue Jul 5 2005 22:32:25 by Avianca
New MyTravel Long Haul Destination For Summer 2006 posted Mon Apr 25 2005 18:36:52 by ThomasCook
Conti To Fly 737-824s Long Haul posted Wed Mar 23 2005 23:04:46 by AA737-823
QF To Get Challanged By Long-haul Carriers posted Mon Jan 31 2005 06:48:04 by 777ER