ChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 3918 posts, RR: 2 Posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1257 times:
From this side of the pond it seems to me as though carriers on both sides are giving up (to a degree) on Gatwick. BA is shifting whichever tansatlantic routes they can to Heathrow. Same with Virgin (i.e. BOS-LHR now). Delta gave up on Gatwick-Boston, following a rather trail of carriers that gave up on the route (AA, NW). I realize that Gatwick isn't going to turn into Mirabel...far from it. But am I portraying this correctly, that Gatwick is losing flights and has been for awhile now (at least on the transatlantic routes)?
Qantas744 From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 246 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1208 times:
LGW is rapidly becoming a low cost airport, plus a large volume of holiday charter traffic. It's single runway constrains growth and the contraction of the industry since 9/11 has resulted in many carriers consolidating their operations at LHR which is still the preferred choice for long haul operators whose passengers are transferring to other flights.
I've never flown out of LGW and I've only ever been there three or four times but it's future seems distinctly low cost.
you can't buy time but you can sell your soul and the closest thing to heaven is to rock'n'roll
Rick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 52 Reply 2, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1190 times:
I agree that the future of Gatwick will be dominated by low-cost scheduled European routes and worldwide holiday charters. BA are trying to consolidate their operations @ LGW into a 737 European base with relatively low fares.
Won't become a Mirabel by any stretch of the imagination, but all the same I think there are more schedule long-haul routes to be dropped in the future (or should I say moved to LHR).
I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
Banco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 54 Reply 7, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 2 days ago) and read 1038 times:
BA's reason for operating out of LGW has always been that it protects LHR against competition. The short haul network has always lost money - although the franchisees GB Airways and CityFlyer have always made money. BA's decision to "merge" CityFlyer with their own operation meant that those routes suddenly became heavy loss makers and many have now ceased. Their misguided short termist decision to give up slots after Sept 11th allowed the low cost boys to get a foothold at the airport, and short of a drastic re-appraisal of their cost structure, the future is going to be one of continuing retreat.
The long haul ops to the US only continue because Bermuda II doesn't allow them to go from LHR, whilst the Caribbean operations were wrecked by ending the AML agreement. Again, formerly profitable routes were then included in the BA overhead.
BA have no-one to blame but themselves.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
Leej From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 288 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 2 days ago) and read 1021 times:
Good ridance BA. As my favourite local airport, I have watched the demise of such carriers as Laker, Dan Air, B.Cal, Air Europe - all under the hand of the worlds favourite airline. If only we could see the flying carrot of Braniff again!
It's amazing that London's second airport is treated with such 'uniqueness', when it has so much to offer over LHR.
In response to Rick767, I hope it doesn't become just a LoCo airport - such a 'colourful' airport in a beautiful location.
On a side note Mr Rick767 - do you like your companies new livery, or prefer the previous? Do you care?!
Yours, in nostalgia,
Arsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 21 Reply 9, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 983 times:
Gatwick has always been seen as a "charter airline airport" with all the major UK charter airlines having extensive operations from there. With BA somehow finding a way through bermuda 2 restrictions, more US flights will be transferred to LHR, as seen by the trasnfer of SAN,PHX and DEN. IAH,ATL MCO will almost certainly be moved to LHR when open skies is agreed. Then you have DL, CO NW and US who will most likely reduce or axe altogether all LGW flights once LHR access is granted.
All this free's up valuable slot's for the likes of Easyjet and other airlines wishing to enter the London market.
767er From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 1092 posts, RR: 4 Reply 10, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 958 times:
I reckon LGW is a much nicer airport than LHR. True you don't tend to get the variety of airlines and aircraft than at Heathrow but its great for spotting and it doesn't feel as congested as LHR.
I also like the fact then when I fly into LGW and stay with my friends in Brighton I can just hop on a train and be there in a relatively short period of time. Great when you have just flown direct from Sydney. Whereas LHR to Brighton is 2 hours and GBP18 one way which is a complete rip off.
Rick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 52 Reply 11, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 890 times:
I don't think Gatwick will just become low-cost. But low-cost airlines will have a big presence there, along with BA European Routes. I think Virgin will keep the sunspot transatlantic flights @ LGW too (MIA/MCO, etc...). Someone will probably now tell me they are going too!!
But charter rules @ LGW like Arsenal said. Year on year there seems to be expansion in the market with most charter airlines operating the majority of their flights from here (BY/AMM/JMC).
As for the Britannia livery, well I can't really slag it off too much they pay my wages but yes when it first came out I hated it. It has grown on me though, looks far better on our 763s than the 757s. Something about those huge all-white engines...
If I had designed it I would have chosen something else, but generally it's ok. Of all the new charter airline colours I like the new Monarch livery best.
Where in Brighton do your friends live? I've lived here a few months now it's a great place. The train makes life far easier than the commute from Guildford! Just a shame there is no 24-hour service I still have to drive to the airport if I'm landing back after 23:00
I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
767er From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 1092 posts, RR: 4 Reply 12, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 873 times:
Yes, Brighton is a great place isn't it!!!!! I was there in September and had a very enjoyable time. Loads of Pilots and Flight Attendants live in Brighton as well. My friends live in Kemptown which is fairly close though its stil a bus ride to the Station.
Shame there isn't a 24 hour service though there would not be much traffic after 2300.
767er From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 1092 posts, RR: 4 Reply 14, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 845 times:
Yes I do know where the Marina is. I have flown into LGW quite a number of times. Twice from SYD when Airtours used to fly to Australia. Once when BA flew from SAN PHX plus a few charter airlines. I think the only quality airline that you fly from LGW to SYD these days is Emirates (don't even think about Garuda).
My favourite drinking spot in Brighton has to be the 'Amsterdam Bar' on a warm and sunny afternoon sitting oustside. My other favorite spot was Poole which is just two doors down. Very smart I thought.
Brighton followed by Bath have to be my two favourite places in the UK. Though I bets its cold there now...bbrrrhh!!!!!! It's pretty hot down under at the moment.