Karliboy From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 254 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1112 times:
Can someone tell me how LHR can sustain around 25 daily wide-body flights to NYC every day..it's not as though it's just over the road..it's 3000 miles away.....it's beyond me!
Bkkair From Thailand, joined Aug 2001, 408 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (11 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1041 times:
I thought Karliboy was wrong on this for sure. I thought he was counting all the code share flights but I counted 23 daily flights. Guess the reason there are so many flights NYC-London is easy. Lots of pax.
JFK-LHR - 15 flights
AA - 4
BA - 5
AI - 1
KU - 1
UA - 2
VS - 2
JFK-LGW - 0 flights
EWR-LHR - 6 flights
AA - 1
BA - 2
VS - 2
UA - 1
EWR-LGW - 2 flights
CO - 2
Gregg From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 327 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (11 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1015 times:
I'd bet 50%+ of the pax are not going London to New York. Many are going from some smaller city that does not have non-stop Europe-USA flights. JFK and LHR are hubs.
Yow From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (11 years 5 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 914 times:
BA no longer flies JFK-LGW?
In addition to the reasons mentioned in the previous post, the NYC-LON route's O&D traffic is like 2 million pax a year, not even counting connecting traffic. It's one of the busiest routes in the world.
Tango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3728 posts, RR: 31 Reply 13, posted (11 years 5 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 882 times:
B737-700: Though I don't know whether Delta has never flown JFK-LGW by their own choosing or if it's due to not-so-open skies restrictions, their JFK hub to Europe acquired from Pan Am in 1991 included every route except JFK-LHR, which went to American, who had paid Pan Am lots of $$$ to acquire their LHR routes just months earlier.
As for why so many daily LHR-JFK/EWR flights, another reason is the aircraft types used today compared with 10-20 years ago. Most if not all of the frequencies flown by UA and AA are with 763 aircraft, whereas their predcessors, PA and TW, used 747s almost exclusively.
Meechy36 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 311 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (11 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 836 times:
The Pan Am routes went to UA, the TWA routes came to AA. At one point we were up to 6 NYC-LHR flights a day, 2 day trips and 4 night 2trips, I believe that one of them was a EWR trip. A couple of the night trips left minutes apart, I could never figure that one out.
H. Simpson From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 949 posts, RR: 3 Reply 17, posted (11 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 793 times:
No flights to LGA because the arpt is too small, only 7,000 feet of runway and have heavy weight restrictions...
Nighthawk From UK - Scotland, joined Sep 2001, 4992 posts, RR: 38 Reply 18, posted (11 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 790 times:
the reason is that LHR is a major european hub. The majority of passengers on these flights will be transferring on to another flight heading to europe or maybe even north africa and asia. Heathrow handles 60m passengers a year, thats almost the entire population of the UK.
If you really want to be picky you could also include GLA-EWR route with continental, and (hopefully) EDI-EWR starting this summer
Bmi330 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 1449 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (11 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 735 times:
lets not forget about Co's bhx-ewr service jsut for the supper picky people.
ps is this the planed aircraft for these routes
GLA-EWR to be a 767 over the summer of 2002 hope so
man-EWR 777 or767 depending on day
bhx-WWR still a 757 this year
dont no for sure if this is right so dont get to upset if it is uncrect highly strung people lol
Trintocan From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2000, 3192 posts, RR: 4 Reply 21, posted (11 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 713 times:
LHR-JFK/EWR is the busiest intercontinental flight in the world, linking the 2 principal social, economic and cultural capitals of the Western world. The high level of business travel also favours frequent services - after all a full business class on each flight may well compensate for a shortfall in economy pax (not to mention that cargo of high value is there for the offering too).
LGA is not an international airport so no services fly there from any foreign country save Canada - international status is not needed for those flights.
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 254 posts, 
From New Caledonia, joined Oct 2001, 3096 posts, 
From Austria, joined Aug 2001, 153 posts, 
From Thailand, joined Aug 2001, 408 posts, 
From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! 
, 327 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6659 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined Sep 2001, 4992 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
