Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Outlook For London City Airport (LCY)  
User currently onlineSInGAPORE_AIR From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13735 posts, RR: 19
Posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 13753 times:

In recent years London City Airport (LCY) has seen passenger growth from 2.4m in 2006 to 3.0m in 2012, a CAGR of c. +4%.

In the past few years we have seen the recent increases in service such as inter alia: (i) British Airways' London City service; (ii) increased CityJet presence offering a greater range of European and domestic routes; (iii) the introduction of more frequent SWISS services to GVA and ZRH; and (iv) British Airways making a base there for its Cityflyer and associated Embraer fleet.

As per the 2006 Masterplan they were supposed to achieve 3.5m passengers per annum by 2015. However, this appears overly-lofty given that they only managed 3.0m in 2012 and their passenger growth appears very closely correlated to UK GDP, the short-term outlook of which appears sluggish at best.

Nevertheless, the airport seems to be upgrading its infrastructure with a new Western pier featuring new gate and lounge facilities and accommodating Bombardier CSeries-sized aircraft from 2016.

LCY also seems to have capacity to continue to act as spillover given the lack of London-area runway policy from this and most likely subsequent governments.

What's happening with BA's LCY-JFK service given I've seen that the Shannon stopvover will be ceasing due to US immigration issues ?

It would be interesting to hear the views of forum members with regards to the outlook for LCY.


Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
86 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAIR MALTA From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2462 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 13605 times:

I really don't know what the future holds for LCY but I think that Business routes have reached their peak. BA has tried CPH, GVA, WAW, DUB and they failed. ARN is so so as the route is not operating in July and August. Bucket and Spade have flourished. CityJet is struggling with its route network serving many 2nd tier French and German destinations after loosing ground to BA on many other routes.


Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
User currently offlineskywaymanaz From United States of America, joined May 2012, 433 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 13464 times:

Quoting SInGAPORE_AIR (Thread starter):
What's happening with BA's LCY-JFK service given I've seen that the Shannon stopvover will be ceasing due to US immigration issues ?

The rumor was the hours were getting cut for US Customs at SNN from 7a-7p to 7a-4p. That would affect the second LCY-SNN-JFK flight of the day. I can't seem to find anything definitive on it one way or the other but they still seem to be on longer scheduled for now.


User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11572 posts, RR: 61
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 13353 times:

They are going to focus on increasing the average aircraft size, most likely by increasing the minimum passenger service charge upwards towards the 50-70 seat mark, which in turn will drive passenger numbers. To do this they need more than just four new stands and ideally a parallel taxiway, hence the significant expansion and stand replacement planned. Only the four new stands can accommodate the next generation of aircraft (C Series, E-Jet NG etc...), so it really is essential that they get these built. Aside of operating costs, the C Series looks to have up to double the ERJ 190's useful range from LCY, although no doubt the next gen E-Jets will also see major improvements, so these are the aircraft of the future and need to be accommodated. They will also be quieter which should allow for more physical movements using LCY's quota system.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineseansasLCY From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2007, 805 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 13148 times:

As far as I know the original plan to build the new pier has been cancelled. The airport is going to invest £15m in the current stands while looking at what they can do to make the airport stands compatible for the C-Series.

User currently offlineMHG From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 756 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 12736 times:

Quoting SInGAPORE_AIR (Thread starter):

It would be interesting to hear the views of forum members with regards to the outlook for LCY.

Wouldn´t a stop in DUB make sense despite the possibly slightly longer ground time there?
Can´t imagine the added (2nd leg) distance would make it a no-go ...

... or do US Customs at DUB finish work early as well ?



I miss the sound of rolls royce darts and speys
User currently offlinereadytotaxi From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 3049 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 12667 times:

If the LCY-JFK route is a money maker for BA I feel sure they could come to some arrangement with the US government over labour cost at Shannon.


you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
User currently onlineSInGAPORE_AIR From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13735 posts, RR: 19
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days ago) and read 12068 times:

Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 1):
Quoting skywaymanaz (Reply 2):
Quoting seansasLCY (Reply 4):

Many thanks.

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 3):
Aside of operating costs, the C Series looks to have up to double the ERJ 190's useful range from LCY

Thanks - looking at the CSeries order book though no carriers apart from SWISS with 30x seem relevant to LCY. I don't suppose there's any visibility about potential CSeries services exLCY ? I note BA Cityflyer no longer has any aircraft deliveries in the pipeline.



Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently onlineAmricanShamrok From Ireland, joined May 2008, 2807 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days ago) and read 11776 times:

Quoting SInGAPORE_AIR (Thread starter):
What's happening with BA's LCY-JFK service given I've seen that the Shannon stopvover will be ceasing due to US immigration issues ?
Quoting skywaymanaz (Reply 2):
The rumor was the hours were getting cut for US Customs at SNN from 7a-7p to 7a-4p. That would affect the second LCY-SNN-JFK flight of the day. I can't seem to find anything definitive on it one way or the other but they still seem to be on longer scheduled for now

The reduced USCBP work hours have been in effect from the beginning of the winter season (end of October) and flight BA3 still operates as normal. I don't know if passengers are still made disembark at SNN or not (presumably not as it is solely a refuelling stop now). The stopover time is shorter than BA1 though for obvious reasons.

Quoting MHG (Reply 5):
Wouldn´t a stop in DUB make sense despite the possibly slightly longer ground time there?
Can´t imagine the added (2nd leg) distance would make it a no-go ...

... or do US Customs at DUB finish work early as well ?

DUB preclearance also closes 16:00 too, if not earlier.



Shannon-Chicago
User currently offlinephofmannsair From Switzerland, joined Jan 2005, 36 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 11081 times:

Quote:
Thanks - looking at the CSeries order book though no carriers apart from SWISS with 30x seem relevant to LCY. I don't suppose there's any visibility about potential CSeries services exLCY ? I note BA Cityflyer no longer has any aircraft deliveries in the pipeline.

You forgot to add PrivatAir in that list. They ordered 5 (+5 options) CS100
Bombardier press release and they're rumoured to operate those aircraft on behalf of Odyssey (new airline which would be based in LCY) Odyssey

By the way, does anyone have any new about this new airline?


User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11572 posts, RR: 61
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 10738 times:

Quoting seansasLCY (Reply 4):
As far as I know the original plan to build the new pier has been cancelled. The airport is going to invest £15m in the current stands while looking at what they can do to make the airport stands compatible for the C-Series.

Very interesting, I had not heard that. The original stands cannot be modified accommodate the CS100 and meet regulations; its tail is too high and will penetrate airspace surfaces, so they must be confident of getting a dispensation. Although I'd love to know how an aircraft with a 35m span is going to self maneuver on a 28m x 40m stand - that will be good to watch!

Quoting SInGAPORE_AIR (Reply 7):
Thanks - looking at the CSeries order book though no carriers apart from SWISS with 30x seem relevant to LCY. I don't suppose there's any visibility about potential CSeries services exLCY ? I note BA Cityflyer no longer has any aircraft deliveries in the pipeline.

My view is that ultimately CityFlyer will replace both the A318 and ERJs with the CS100, and CS300, if it proves to be capable of LCY operations.

Quoting phofmannsair (Reply 9):
By the way, does anyone have any new about this new airline?

I have heard it mentioned that they are one of the parties interested in CityJet - not from one of my more reliable sources though, so take it with a pinch of salt.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineseansasLCY From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2007, 805 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 9940 times:

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 10):
Very interesting, I had not heard that. The original stands cannot be modified accommodate the CS100 and meet regulations; its tail is too high and will penetrate airspace surfaces, so they must be confident of getting a dispensation. Although I'd love to know how an aircraft with a 35m span is going to self maneuver on a 28m x 40m stand - that will be good to watch!

I believe some form of expansion will take place but they are looking at how to best use the space and at least additional cost.

LCY have regular meetings with Bombardier regarding the C-Series so I would imagine a solution will be found.


User currently offlinephofmannsair From Switzerland, joined Jan 2005, 36 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 9862 times:

Quote:
I have heard it mentioned that they are one of the parties interested in CityJet - not from one of my more reliable sources though, so take it with a pinch of salt.

This is very interesting! Do they have a website already?


User currently offlineWingtips56 From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 317 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 9777 times:

I've not been to LCY, yet, so I don't have an image of how big it is or isn't. But, how much room for expansion is there? I ask because I read the other day that BA had to cancel both of the JFK flights due to the blizzard ... there wasn't room for both 318s to park.
"British Airways A318 G-EUNB Positions to London Gatwick.
February 8, 2013
British Airways A318 G-EUNB positioned London City – London Gatwick this afternoon as BA9158. With both A318s at London City due to the New York weather cancellations today, space was required at London City for the afternoon peak."

The aircraft returned to LCY late this afternoon.



Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines
User currently offlineseansasLCY From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2007, 805 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 9693 times:

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 13):

I've not been to LCY, yet, so I don't have an image of how big it is or isn't. But, how much room for expansion is there?

Any future expansion would involve further building over part of the dock. The proposals can be seen here
http://www.londoncityairport.com/con...ecial_Edition_%20December_2011.pdf


http://www.londoncityairport.com/AboutAndCorporate/page/ASRP

This page on the website states that "The airport is now working on a new project proposal – the City Airport Development Programme (link to CADP copy) – which builds on the ASRP and provides the enhanced facilities that will allow LCY to maintain its position as the business traveller’s airport of choice"

These are the new plans which haven't yet been made clear.


User currently offlinevfw614 From Germany, joined Dec 2001, 3901 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9495 times:

Much will depend on the fate of Cityjet. If they disappear, LCY is heading towards a risky BA Cityflyer monopoly. All other of the few airlines serving LCY - with the exception of Swiss with three destinations - only have a token presence nowadays with just one route (Skywork, Luxair, Blue Islands, Lufthansa, Alitalia).

My feeling is that given the fact that flights from LCY are more expensive than from other LON airports, the airport has reached its peak. A lot of destinations have been tried in the past three or so years but were unprofitable.

Another issue is that LCY traditionally had a strong focus on shorter cross-channel routes. These have already disappeared (e.g. BRU) or are under pressure from the High Speed Trains (AMS, RTM, ANR, PAR).


User currently onlineSInGAPORE_AIR From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13735 posts, RR: 19
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9301 times:

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 15):
Much will depend on the fate of Cityjet.

Agreed. Irish news reports indicate that 2 preferred bidders will be reached in the next few weeks. An exit from Skyteam affiliation may lead to pax reduction. If AF can't sell it then it'll most likely be downsized given the losses it's incurring which is bad for LCY.



Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11572 posts, RR: 61
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 9071 times:

Quoting seansasLCY (Reply 11):
I believe some form of expansion will take place but they are looking at how to best use the space and at least additional cost.
Quoting seansasLCY (Reply 14):
Any future expansion would involve further building over part of the dock. The proposals can be seen here
http://www.londoncityairport.com/con...ecial_Edition_%20December_2011.pdf


http://www.londoncityairport.com/AboutAndCorporate/page/ASRP

This page on the website states that "The airport is now working on a new project proposal – the City Airport Development Programme (link to CADP copy) – which builds on the ASRP and provides the enhanced facilities that will allow LCY to maintain its position as the business traveller’s airport of choice"

These are the new plans which haven't yet been made clear.

The latter are the plans I was aware of, which is for seven new stands and essentially a new terminal building to handle the increased passenger throughput. Stand wise, not much has changed really from the original replacement program plan:

http://www.londoncityairport.com/con.../City_Airport_Development_Plan.pdf

Quoting phofmannsair (Reply 12):
This is very interesting! Do they have a website already?

Not that I am aware of.

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 15):
My feeling is that given the fact that flights from LCY are more expensive than from other LON airports, the airport has reached its peak. A lot of destinations have been tried in the past three or so years but were unprofitable.

The expense depends on the individual airline's model, the key is that the operation must be managed correctly for the type of airport LCY is. Get that wrong and it all goes wrong much more quickly than at a regular airport. I don't think the destination turnover is abnormal though.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3073 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 8729 times:

Quoting SInGAPORE_AIR (Thread starter):
What's happening with BA's LCY-JFK service given I've seen that the Shannon stopvover will be ceasing due to US immigration issues ?

Continues as normal with BA003 clearing customs and immigration at JFK.

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 10):
its tail is too high and will penetrate airspace surfaces,

What does this mean? 3000ft on QNH is the minimum altitude before you can have any impact on Heathrow inbounds. Is the fin really that big? Blimey,

Quoting vfw614 (Reply 15):

My feeling is that given the fact that flights from LCY are more expensive than from other LON airports, the airport has reached its peak.

They have exchanged smaller niche flights for more mainstream destinations. Growth in recent years has been driven by BA who have gone from ten RJ100s on set up to 6 ER7s and 8 ER9s, a much more capable fleet. Add in two based mainline A318s and you see why the little guys moved out. It's certainly not peaked, the numbers do not back that up.

However, every major legacy has had a go. SAS tried and failed with ARN and CPH, OS tried and failed with VIE, LH tried DUS, HAM, STR MUC etc etc leaving only FRA remaining. We have also seen Darwn on Basle, EuroManx on IOM, Aer Arann also on IOM BA on DUB, CPH, LYS, MXP, FlyBabboo on Geneva and WAW and Air Southwest on PLH/NQY. All been and gone in recent years. The key growth is on BA routes with bigger aircraft and longer jaunts to the sun, the survival or otherwise of WX will be a deciding factor in whether this continues.

[Edited 2013-02-10 17:28:29]

User currently onlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24061 posts, RR: 23
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 8703 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 18):
Quoting SInGAPORE_AIR (Thread starter):
What's happening with BA's LCY-JFK service given I've seen that the Shannon stopvover will be ceasing due to US immigration issues ?

Continues as normal with BA003 clearing customs and immigration at JFK.

Excerpt from BA website since last October:
http://www.britishairways.com/travel/cwlconarrival/public/en_ch

Arriving at New York JFK

Clearing US immigration at Shannon means that you bypass US Immigration and Customs at JFK.* Simply follow the signs to exit the airport, collecting any bags you have checked in from the domestic baggage hall on the way and head straight into New York.

*From 28 October 2012 this service will be available on flight BA001 only.


User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8411 times:

Quoting SInGAPORE_AIR (Reply 7):
Thanks - looking at the CSeries order book though no carriers apart from SWISS with 30x seem relevant to LCY. I don't suppose there's any visibility about potential CSeries services exLCY ?
Quoting phofmannsair (Reply 9):
You forgot to add PrivatAir in that list. They ordered 5 (+5 options) CS100
Bombardier press release and they're rumoured to operate those aircraft on behalf of Odyssey (new airline which would be based in LCY) Odyssey


Beat me to it !   BBD have stated that the CS100 (but not the CS300) will be certified for LCY 'out of the box' and also for LCY-JFK n/s ETOPS. I'd be shocked if you didn't see Privat Air (operating for Odyssey) move into LCY-JFK flights. As well, in all-J config, the CS100 can carry either 44 or 48 pax, vs BA A318s 32.

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 10):
My view is that ultimately CityFlyer will replace both the A318 and ERJs with the CS100, and CS300, if it proves to be capable of LCY operations.

That seems a reasonable projection to me.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3073 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8319 times:

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 13):

Isn't the LGW trip maintenance related? It's a common weekend trip. LCY isn't maxed out on stands as it used to be, 12-14 are barely used and 11 was withdrawn. Sounds like they just positioned down a day early for routine maintenance, BA Source is inferring an issue where none exists? I haven't seen then max out stands in years now.

[Edited 2013-02-10 18:23:31]

User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11572 posts, RR: 61
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8275 times:

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 18):
What does this mean? 3000ft on QNH is the minimum altitude before you can have any impact on Heathrow inbounds. Is the fin really that big? Blimey,

Yeah it's 3,001ft - I mean what are the chances  

But seriously, the airspace surface it penetrates is the transitional surface. This is essentially a triangular wedge which begins from the edge of the clearway (FYI - think of the clearway as a 150m wide strip along the length of the runway, bisected by the centreline down its middle) and rises vertically away from the runway at one of two gradients; 1 in 5 for a runway with a non precision instrument approach and 1 in 7 for a runway with a precision instrument approach, of which LCY falls into the latter. This means the 'tailroom' at the front of LCY's original stands is 4.9m and 8.9m at the back, nearest the terminal. That's pretty tight even for the 146/RJ, or at least it would be if there wasn't a dispensation on meeting this requirement due to the relevant gradient being 1 in 6 when LCY was built. So the headroom at the back of the stands is actually 10.3m, which is pretty much bang on the height of an ERJ 190 - the tallest aircraft allowed on the original stands, even then I think there may be a dispensation involved - but LCY is full of dispensations.

So the 11.5m high CS100 and 12.5m high A318 can (wingspan issues aside) only use the new line of stands to the east, where the clearance is 8.2m at the front and 14.8m at the back, hence why aircraft still have to park nose out. Another headache for LCY will be the NG E-Jets, which are going to be higher to accommodate the new engines. The 170NG should still fit on the original stands, unless they really do increase the span, but the 190NG won't.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineLH707330 From United States of America, joined Jun 2012, 591 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 7724 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 20):
Beat me to it ! BBD have stated that the CS100 (but not the CS300) will be certified for LCY 'out of the box' and also for LCY-JFK n/s ETOPS.

Why would the CS300 be harder to certify? Can it not make the runway with a profitable payload?


User currently offlineskipness1E From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2007, 3073 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 6370 times:

Ah that makes sense. I know that the plans published had an option to cover the King George V dock and put in a proper nose in parking finger on the South side of the extension. It looked quite impressive and got around the size constraints, indeed I think the reason they lost Stand 11 was spacing out the other ten to wedge in the ER9s properly. Having to taxi off stand and try a second and third attempt to park is not as rare as it once was due to the larger aircraft.

In the best British traditions, the facility is now handing aircraft it was in no way designed or intended for. Dash 7 anyone?


25 RussianJet : With regard to Paris, why do CityJet only fly to ORY rather than CDG? Surely they miss out on a lot of potential connecting traffic given what a nuis
26 thijs1984 : As for AMS and RTM, those destinations are not affected at all by the high speeds trains due to the simple fact that it takes just to much time to ge
27 Post contains links connies4ever : Basically runway requirements, I believe. LCY runway is about 1,300 m. CS100 needs about 400m less runway than the CS300, as it is around 5,000 kg li
28 Post contains links and images PlymSpotter : Aside of the runway length as mentioned by connies4ever, the aircraft needs to fly the 5.5 degree glideslope and maintain it's approach speed - that
29 airbazar : But in an all J config (and likely with little luggage underneath), wouldn't the aircraft be well below MTOW?
30 connies4ever : Should be, I would think. But the full Monty J-class product will be fairly heavy on a per seat basis. Plus the galley kit (real China, for example).
31 Post contains links vfw614 : What I meant to say is that the traditional market for LCY has sort of peaked, high frequency services to major airports on the continent. Both AF an
32 skipness1E : From a marketing perspective, stopping in Shannon for pre clearance is hardly a competitive advantage. There's no business case for having a US CBP a
33 Viscount724 : As already mentioned, since October that only applies on the earliest of BA's 2 LCY-JFK flights. On the later flight passengers must clear immigratio
34 Post contains images PlymSpotter : I disagree. When it comes to large urban areas, being delivered to a station in the very heart of the city is often a disadvantage. In LCY's case its
35 vfw614 : With Eurostar entering the AMS/RTM-LON market, frequency will be much more competitive. To give you an example, the Thalys highspeed trains have kille
36 RayChuang : In the end, the opening of the High Speed 1 line between Folkestone and London St. Pancras (with a top speed to 186 mph) has pretty much limited the u
37 skipness1E : RayChaung have you ever set foot in LCY? To say that, excuse me while I laugh at High Speed 1, will kill p2p busines flying is just comic. I've lived
38 vfw614 : I think we are talking about the future while you are talking about the presence. Things will change. At the moment, there are no useful high speed tr
39 VV701 : When I was a regular traveller to Sweden the best part of twenty years ago getting around was more problematic in July and August as SK (and at that
40 hotplane : With a daily arrival time of 20.15L
41 Post contains images PlymSpotter : That might be your opinion, but it's by no means representative of the market from LCY, which is predominantly business travelers who use the airport
42 thijs1984 : Where did you get this info? As far as i know there will be no direct train by Eurostar from AMS via RTM to LON for the comming years.
43 connies4ever : Addition to my Reply 20 in this thread, I'd shocked if Privat Air/Odyssey didn't investigate LCY to ME destinations (JED/RUH/DHA/DOH/KWI come to mind)
44 skipness1E : I think they would be swamped by being way too close to LHR, there is no proper premium lounge facility at LCY, nor are there plans to introduce any.
45 Post contains images PlymSpotter : Hardly the same distance as the ME, but I can certainly see MOW being launched in the future. Dan
46 greenair727 : Does this mean that ONE flight from SNN enters the US on the cleared side, while the second one (which arrives/leaves SNN after the US customs is clo
47 Post contains images vfw614 : Just noted on the LCY website that they are listing the new Kristiansand service as "Kjevik KRS". I guess a lot of people have no idea where Kristians
48 connies4ever : No doubt the above firms out of LHR can offer a superior service than what can be done from LCY, but I'm talking about J, not F. Given the differenti
49 bongodog1964 : Do you realise the journey time from Canary Wharf to St Pancras to catch Eurostar ? By the time a financier has reached the concourse at St Pancras,
50 Post contains images PlymSpotter : LCY was essentially built to serve the London businessman, not just Canary Wharf, and it is still their main source of traffic. I'm afraid they do -
51 vfw614 : It may have been built for that pupose, but in reality it is not. In the 2011 CAA consultation paper, the inbound/outbound ratio is given at 50:50. A
52 skipness1E : How do you get from 50/50 to 63%?
53 Post contains images PlymSpotter : Which contradicts your statement that LCY has always had a stronger focus on inbound traffic than outbound. So, by your own figures, identify another
54 vfw614 : 50 per cent traffic is inbound (=non-Londoners), 50 per is outbound (= Londoners). Overall business share is 63 per cent. This means that 37 per cent
55 Post contains images teme82 : What I would like to see is HEL-LCY route operated for AY by FlyBe Nordic
56 seansasLCY : I would love this service. We came close to a TLL service but was cancelled before it began.
57 Post contains images PlymSpotter : That is why I clarified it by saying it is still their main source of traffic - which it is, indisputably I thought. Non London (business or otherwis
58 skipness1E : flybe got badly burned at LCY in their pre loco days as Jersey European. Not if how HEL would fare any better than CPH, though there would be feed to
59 bongodog1964 : With regard to outbound/inbound traffic, LCY probably does have a bias towards inbound for the reason that most business travellers flying out of the
60 VV701 : I gained the impression that, at least in the case of BA, the leisure destination flights had been added to improve aircraft utilisation. Few if any
61 Post contains images PlymSpotter : Essentially it allows a morning rotation to somewhere like EDI/AMS, then a rotation to somewhere like PMI, followed by another two rotations to EDI/A
62 seansasLCY : In the summer (at least the week I checked in July) there are 11 weekly flights to IBZ from LCY with BA. The route must be doing ok.
63 AmricanShamrok : Correct. Also, if flight BA1 has to divert to an alternative airport before reaching the US (as with all precleared flights) the flight's "precleared
64 teme82 : Well they are just the operator for AY. What I've seen majority of AY's LHR pax are business people for the city. So I would think that one daily LCY
65 skipness1E : You'd need two, a morning arrival and an evening departure coupled with the morning flight out of LCY feeding long haul.
66 Post contains images PlymSpotter : But LCY-HEL would be really pushing it for range year around, on either the 170 or 190 - you would be blocking seats on many days. Dan
67 greenair727 : Interesting. Why is re-clearing required in the event of a diversion?
68 Viscount724 : Correct. See Reply 19. Since last October 31, only the earliest flight is pre-cleared during the SNN stop.
69 teme82 : I would assume that to be only LCY-HEL issue.
70 thijs1984 : And some of those flights then were operated bij the VG Bae146. But the decreased number of flights is more due to the current low demand for busines
71 skipness1E : Think about it! Not much point in taking people from A to B of you have no way of getting them back now is there? BA entered the market thrice daily
72 teme82 : Yeah. Didn't need much brain work to come the same conclusion. E-170 would be the only plane that could do the flights with smallest penalty ...
73 vfw614 : I was talking about a time when KLM was still serving LHR (until 2008). For some time, KLM was serving RTM-LCY in addition to RTM-LHR. And of course
74 RayChuang : I think in the end, the relatively short runway at LCY--not to mention the potentially enormous cost of extending that runway--will limit the usefulne
75 Post contains images vfw614 : Don't get PlymSpotter/Dan started again
76 Post contains images skipness1E : 1) Have you ever been to LCY? 2) Have you ever used railways in the UK? Of course it's limited, it's always been limited. Limited to Dash 7s, then 14
77 thijs1984 : The Eurostar trains are not yet capable of running on the line Brussels-Antwerp-Rotterdam-Amsterdam due to a diffrent safety system whic is used on t
78 Post contains images PlymSpotter : Hehe The 'usefulness' is actually increasing all the time. LCY is at the very limit (technically beyond it, but that's another story!) for Code 2 air
79 brilondon : The only expansion I can see is the terminal facilities. Like having a proper lounge. I have flown through LCY just to experience it and found that a
80 airbazar : But in order to operate those rotations there has to be demand right? They wouldn't operate the flight at a loss just for the sake of utilization.
81 Post contains images skipness1E : They do rather well I believe, it's an Ibiza trip Jim but not as we know it
82 rutankrd : There are only 5 Current Eurostar trainsets capable of running of 1.5KV DC power as found in the Netherlands however are not certified to run on the
83 offloaded : This probably explains why we are getting our FAO service back for end Jul and Aug. It was a shame to lose LCY year round as it was a good seller for
84 Post contains images skipness1E : Train to London Bridge, Jubilee Line to Canning Town DLR to the airport That's London. I am surprised ARN is still around given CPH was dropped. I th
85 seansasLCY : Does anybody know the average load factor needed for any of these BA routes to break even? ARN seems to do well I think. Tickets are usually more from
86 Post contains images PlymSpotter : There is good demand - essentially the routes BACF operate are to destinations where many city workers have second homes and/or holiday. Dan
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...
Will The A318 Be Certified For London City Airport posted Fri Sep 9 2005 22:08:19 by EI321
London City Airport Ramp Space? posted Thu Dec 6 2012 04:53:18 by KaiTak747
Could London City Airport Ever Get Air Bridges? posted Wed Mar 14 2012 09:07:39 by SKAirbus
London City Airport Question? posted Fri Sep 30 2011 17:02:34 by wnflyguy
Great News For Capital City Airport (LAN) posted Sun Sep 16 2007 05:23:19 by JetBlueGuy2006
American Led Group Buys London City Airport posted Fri Oct 13 2006 21:57:00 by Columbia107
20 Year Master Plan For Capital City Airport (LAN) posted Thu Feb 9 2006 19:36:01 by KarlB737
What's The Future Hold For Sheffield City Airport posted Sun Jan 1 2006 23:55:25 by Gilesdavies
London City Airport & The North Sea Storm Surge posted Fri Oct 28 2005 02:03:50 by Timmytour
ERJ-135 Gets OK For London-City Commercial Ops. posted Wed Oct 8 2003 23:34:40 by Teahan