londonlady71
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 2:39 am

Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:01 pm

the more and more passengers I check in each day with connections to LAS and it really makes me wonder why there isnt a direct flight out of LHR.

I am sure united could make it work, so many people say they dont want to fly virgin through a bad experience or cant handle the trek to gatwick etc just wondered why there isnt a direct one, anyone have any reasons why it maybe wouldnt work for any of the major handlers?

I think it would be a nice money spinner personally as I am sure more would be inclined to use it if it was there etc! let alone all the people who otherswise have connections...

thoughts please!
 
airways45
Posts: 282
Joined: Wed May 10, 2000 1:26 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:23 pm

Isn't it because LAS is not allowed from LHR due to Bermuda II? Hence, it has to go from Gatwick like Atlanta, Dallas etc?

Airways45
 
londonlady71
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 2:39 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:42 pm

I wondered if there was a reason....as a dumb female (my blonde highlights get to me) can you explain more to me about the bermuda thing?

many thanks!
 
British767
Posts: 1523
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:17 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:13 am

Quoting Londonlady71 (Reply 2):
I wondered if there was a reason....as a dumb female (my blonde highlights get to me) can you explain more to me about the bermuda thing?

Basically only certain airlines can fly between the US and LHR. BMI is not allowed at the moment, and all the airlines that fly between LGW and the US probably do so because they can't fly from LHR. There are also some destinations that airlines can't fly to from LHR, like ATL, IAH (not direct anyway) and so on.
 
StarGoldLHR
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:29 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:40 am

it's an agreement signed in the 1970's allowing only 6 airlines to fly between the UK and the US.

In the UK these are:

VS and BA

in the US these are:

(TWA and PA) replaced by AA and UA.

Additional to this Air India and Kuwait Airlines have grandfather rights to fly from LHR to JFK (thus making up the 6).

The Agreement also restricts destinations in the US which these airlines can fly.

The theory behind the agreement is that the UK needs two airports for flights to the US, LHR and LGW.

If this was unrestricted, all the US airlines would converge all their flights on to LHR, and the amount of competition would put UK airlines out of business and Gatwick airport as a complete backwater airport.

The agreement therefore forces US destinations to be split between LHR and LGW, and restricts competition against UK airlines by limited US carriers per airport each.

It so fell that LGW serves "secondary" and "holiday" US destinations, and LHR "business" US destinations.

The Actual number of flights is also restrictive, which is why BA concentrates so much on JFK, they have more flights than destinations, and cannot economically fill them to all destinations, so concentrate on the busiest.

Although I'm not exactly sure but there was some clause about Concorde flying into IAD and JFK in the agreement, and I believe it is the cessation of concorde which could allow some of the rules to be changed.


I'm not an expert but there are many on here who will probably be able to fill in the gaps a bit better.
So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
 
IFEMaster
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:17 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 1:58 am

Is the VS service to LAS flying out of LHR or LGW?
Delivering Anecdotes of Dubious Relevance Since 1978
 
cosec59
Posts: 2618
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:59 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:02 am

Quoting IFEMaster (Reply 5):
Is the VS service to LAS flying out of LHR or LGW?

LGW. Read the thread title  Yeah sure
Rules are for the obedience of fools but for the guidance of wise men
 
londonlady71
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 2:39 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:09 am

thank you stargold  Smile

I can understand why such an agreement is in place, just seems a shame that something that could be so good for some airlines isnt allowed etc

just a selfish dream!
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:12 am

Quoting Londonlady71 (Thread starter):
I am sure united could make it work

United have no feed of their own at LAS. They would have to rely on code-shares with US, which now have a hub at LAS as a result of acquiring America West. At LHR, UA also have no feed of their own and would have to rely on feed from Star Alliance carriers, some of whom refuse to code share with UA because of the disparity in service standards.

Given that LAS is a leisure market with little business traffic, I'm not at all sure it would work.
 
carduelis
Posts: 1388
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 8:24 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:15 am

LL71

When you have a few days to spare do a search on airliners.net for 'Bermuda 2'

Likewise try Google or any other search engine - there's millions of bits of information on Bermuda 2 - it really is a can of worms!

Cheers
Per Ardua ad Astra! ........ Honi Soit Qui Mal y Pense!
 
LAXDESI
Posts: 2775
Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 8:13 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:16 am

Quoting StarGoldLHR (Reply 4):
Additional to this Air India and Kuwait Airlines have grandfather rights to fly from LHR to JFK (thus making up the 6).

Don't the Indian private carriers, Jet and Sahara, get the rights to fly from JFK too under the new India-UK bilateral?
 
LAX2IADandORD
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 1:52 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:19 am

Quoting StarGoldLHR (Reply 4):
Additional to this Air India and Kuwait Airlines have grandfather rights to fly from LHR to JFK (thus making up the 6).

I believe Air New Zealand flies LAX to LHR which can be purchased as a separate leg (as it is a continuation of their flights from New Zealand onto England).
 
IFEMaster
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:17 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:41 am

Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 6):
LGW. Read the thread title

What an arrogant comment.

The question was for clarification purposes. I *thought* that the VS service to LAS operated out of LHR. Clearly the concept of a clarifying question was too complex for you...

But, thanks for clarifying anyway.
Delivering Anecdotes of Dubious Relevance Since 1978
 
alphascan
Posts: 795
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:04 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:42 am

There is only one carrier that offers "direct" flights to LAS from either London airport, and that is US Airways out of LGW. However, considering the US Airways "direct" flight involves a change of gauge at PHL, many connecting flights are just as competitive and convenient out of both London airports.

If you are meaning "nonstop" flights, there are none offered by scheduled carriers.
"To he who only has a hammer in his toolbelt, every problem looks like a nail."
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2107
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:49 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 8):
United have no feed of their own at LAS. They would have to rely on code-shares with US, which now have a hub at LAS as a result of acquiring America West. At LHR, UA also have no feed of their own and would have to rely on feed from Star Alliance carriers, some of whom refuse to code share with UA because of the disparity in service standards.

Given that LAS is a leisure market with little business traffic, I'm not at all sure it would work.

Sorry thats not correct, United, whilst it does not have the feed of a hub city, it has loads of connections on TED out of LAS to SFO, LAX, DEN and if you really want to go back on yourself, ORD and IAD.

I would say UA could easily work a 767 into LAS from LHR, post Bermuda II albeit that I doubt F would be needed only an upgraded J product and Y.

Having been in LAS over two weeks ago connecting through SFO on UA, let me tell you they have a busy operation down there, flights on both TED legs where packed.
 
IFEMaster
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:17 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:51 am

Quoting Alphascan (Reply 13):
There is only one carrier that offers "direct" flights to LAS from either London airport, and that is US Airways out of LGW. However, considering the US Airways "direct" flight involves a change of gauge at PHL, many connecting flights are just as competitive and convenient out of both London airports.

If you are meaning "nonstop" flights, there are none offered by scheduled carriers.

That's inaccurate. VS offer a direct, non-stop service LGW - LAS.
Delivering Anecdotes of Dubious Relevance Since 1978
 
alphascan
Posts: 795
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:04 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:25 am

Quoting IFEMaster (Reply 15):
VS offer a direct, non-stop service LGW - LAS.

I stand corrected. Virgin does have a "nonstop" (VS 043/044) but I didn't see any "direct" flights offered.
"To he who only has a hammer in his toolbelt, every problem looks like a nail."
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:44 am

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 14):

Sorry thats not correct, United, whilst it does not have the feed of a hub city, it has loads of connections on TED out of LAS to SFO, LAX, DEN and if you really want to go back on yourself, ORD and IAD.

UA have nonstop service to LHR from SFO and LAX, so changing planes at LAS is not an advantage for either UA or for passengers. From SFO and DEN, LAS is way out of the way as place to connect on the way to LHR, compared to ORD or even IAD.

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 14):

I would say UA could easily work a 767 into LAS from LHR, post Bermuda II albeit that I doubt F would be needed only an upgraded J product and Y.

B767 CASM is too high for a leisure market like LAS. You expect UA to use the MD configuration LAS-LHR?
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2107
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:59 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 17):
B767 CASM is too high for a leisure market like LAS. You expect UA to use the MD configuration LAS-LHR?

Good point, well thats that out the window!!!
 
Cadet57
Posts: 7174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 2:02 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:10 am

Quoting StarGoldLHR (Reply 4):
it's an agreement signed in the 1970's allowing only 6 airlines to fly between the UK and the US.

In the UK these are:

VS and BA

in the US these are:

(TWA and PA) replaced by AA and UA.

Uhhh, what? idk what you are taling about because US air flies quite a few flights to LGW from PHL and CLT

Quoting IFEMaster (Reply 12):
What an arrogant comment.

What a rude comment  sarcastic  they were meerly pointing out your mistake....
Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
 
IFEMaster
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:17 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:15 am

Quoting Cadet57 (Reply 19):

What a rude comment. they were meerly pointing out your mistake...

Except, as I explained before, it wasn't a mistake.

It was a question to clarify.
Delivering Anecdotes of Dubious Relevance Since 1978
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:17 am

Quoting Londonlady71 (Thread starter):
I am sure united could make it work

Would be pretty much impossible for them to make it work.

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 8):
They would have to rely on code-shares with US, which now have a hub at LAS as a result of acquiring America West.

America West acquired USAirways, not the other way around. In any case, given where most of that feed would be coming from, United may as well fly them on their own metal from there and connect through LAX

Quoting LAX2IADandORD (Reply 11):
I believe Air New Zealand flies LAX to LHR which can be purchased as a separate leg (as it is a continuation of their flights from New Zealand onto England).

Yes, they can and do

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 14):
Having been in LAS over two weeks ago connecting through SFO on UA, let me tell you they have a busy operation down there, flights on both TED legs where packed.

That is because you were at a United hub city getting on an O&D heavy flight, not because everyone was connecting from London

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 17):
B767 CASM is too high for a leisure market like LAS. You expect UA to use the MD configuration LAS-LHR?

DE uses a 763ER on FRA-LAS all the time. The issue is UA's lack of feed and presence in the market. LAS is all Ted now and focused on O&D. The people flying United to Las Vegas are not people from there, they are people going there
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
boysteve
Posts: 885
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 7:02 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:40 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 8):
Given that LAS is a leisure market with little business traffic, I'm not at all sure it would work

I am confident that LHR-LAS would pay. However, given slot restictions at LHR, an airline can make a different destination pay even more!
 
StarGoldLHR
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:29 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:40 am

Quoting Cadet57 (Reply 19):
Uhhh, what? idk what you are taling about because US air flies quite a few flights to LGW from PHL and CLT

But not from LHR they dont...
So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
 
cosec59
Posts: 2618
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:59 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:42 am

Quoting IFEMaster (Reply 12):

What an arrogant comment.

If arrogance is knowing the routes then I apologise
Rules are for the obedience of fools but for the guidance of wise men
 
StarGoldLHR
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:29 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:43 am

Personally I dont get the LHR obsession the Americans have.

LGW doesnt have the crowds, you can get there just as quick from central london, has lower taxes on your ticket, cheaper to park, and cheaper by train to get there (ignoring the Gatex, but taking the regular train).
So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
 
sllevin
Posts: 3312
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 1:57 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:45 am

As others have said, LAS is not a uber-high yield O&D market.

It also faces the issue of density altitude during the summer, which can restrict the window in which the flight can operate.

Steve
 
Cadet57
Posts: 7174
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 2:02 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:48 am

Quoting StarGoldLHR (Reply 23):
But not from LHR they dont...

right but you said that there are only 6 airlines that can fly between the us and the UK..  Wink
Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
 
IFEMaster
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:17 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:46 am

Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 24):
If arrogance is knowing the routes then I apologise

Knowing the routes isn't arrogant. Assuming someone hasn't read the thread title is.

Quoting Boysteve (Reply 22):
I am confident that LHR-LAS would pay. However, given slot restictions at LHR, an airline can make a different destination pay even more!

Any idea what the VS load is like? And don't they vary the frequency according to peak/off season times? I would imagine that, as a few people have stated, because it's primarily a pleasure destination, any competitive non-stop market could get saturated very quickly indeed.
Delivering Anecdotes of Dubious Relevance Since 1978
 
iowaman
Posts: 3878
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 2:29 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:24 pm

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 14):
Sorry thats not correct, United, whilst it does not have the feed of a hub city, it has loads of connections on TED out of LAS to SFO, LAX, DEN and if you really want to go back on yourself, ORD and IAD.

Don't forget the FAT and PSP UA EMB-120 flights to LAS.

Quoting IFEMaster (Reply 28):
Any idea what the VS load is like?

Even if loads are great, LAS yields are generally poor.
 
TinkerBelle
Posts: 1436
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 7:46 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 1:58 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 8):
some of whom refuse to code share with UA because of the disparity in service standards.

WHAT? Source/proof please?
If you are going through hell, keep going.
 
planetime
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:16 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:15 pm

In the days of open skies suprising that US and Uk who always potray themselves as one is so childish in the aviation agreement between them.
 
wdleiser
Posts: 865
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 9:32 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:10 pm

Quoting Londonlady71 (Reply 2):
I wondered if there was a reason....as a dumb female (my blonde highlights get to me) can you explain more to me about the bermuda thing?

many thanks!

OOOOO please wait til tomorrow when I am done with my Senior Research paper on the Bermuda II treaty and why I believe it should be done away with. I am going to make it a forum topic tomorrow and ask for everybodies opinion on it.
 
QXatFAT
Posts: 2310
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 3:51 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:15 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 21):
America West acquired USAirways, not the other way around.

Yes...thank you! The great America West acquired USAirways. Thank you America West  Smile
Don't Tread On Me!
 
siromega
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:57 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:52 pm

Quoting IFEMaster (Reply 28):
Any idea what the VS load is like? And don't they vary the frequency according to peak/off season times? I would imagine that, as a few people have stated, because it's primarily a pleasure destination, any competitive non-stop market could get saturated very quickly indeed.

Given that VS has added more flights over the past few years, I would assume the loads are excellent. FWIW, when I'm down on The Strip I do run into lots of people from the UK - more than I meet from any other individual country.

One of the nice things about LAS is that I can fly virtually anywhere in the US nonstop (thanks to WN and US/HP). Though flying internationally I would most likely go through LAX (with the notable exception of LGW and other places in N. America).
 
vegasplanes
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:22 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:06 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 17):
B767 CASM is too high for a leisure market like LAS.

As N1120A Said:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 21):
DE uses a 763ER on FRA-LAS all the time



Quoting Siromega (Reply 34):


Given that VS has added more flights over the past few years, I would assume the loads are excellent.

Seems like the yields are not bad either, I priced out a flight a few months back for a May trip, VS was a couple hundred more than what AA was charging for a connecting flight to LGW. I actually prefer LGW to LHR, seems like less hassels, more choices of flights to places I want to go in Europe, cheaper flights also.

IF LAS were to see more service to LGW, I imagine most would come from VS adding another flight as opposed to another carrier entering the market. I would say if another carrier did enter the LAS-LGW market, HP/US would be the logical choice, can anything in their fleet make it with a full load from LAS to LGW n/s in summertime with 120 degree weather in the shade ? Never know though, BA seems to have experimented on and off with flights to western US destinations such as PHX, SAN, etc. from LGW, might they try to piss on VS's parade ?
 
hawk44
Posts: 733
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 3:54 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:28 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 8):
Given that LAS is a leisure market with little business traffic, I'm not at all sure it would work.

I dunno I was just in LAS and seams to me that conventions are kind of a big deal. More then half the people around me waiting at the security check point were heading home after a convention.

And the same could be said for MCO

Hawk44
Never under estimate the power of US
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2107
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:46 pm

Quoting StarGoldLHR (Reply 25):
LGW doesnt have the crowds, you can get there just as quick from central london, has lower taxes on your ticket, cheaper to park, and cheaper by train to get there (ignoring the Gatex, but taking the regular train).

Well if you have any sense you will avoid LGW at peak times like the plague otherwise assuming your traveling by car/coach you will be stuck on the M25 for hours, Britains favourite car park. and yes I am aware that there is a train service into London, but not everybody needs to go there.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:30 pm

Quoting StarGoldLHR (Reply 25):
LGW doesnt have the crowds

You ever check out that hole most of the US carriers and the charters go from? Makes LHR look like BUR

Quoting Iowaman (Reply 29):
Even if loads are great, LAS yields are generally poor.

Actually, from Europe, LAS is a high yield destination. Additionally, if yields were as bad as people make them in LAS, no one would fly there

Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 37):
and yes I am aware that there is a train service into London, but not everybody needs to go there

There is also train service to Brighton, Birmingham and the West
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
BCAL
Posts: 2925
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 10:16 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:34 pm

Quoting StarGoldLHR (Reply 4):

Bermuda II is an agreement that in simple terms imposes a limit on the number of entry points ('gateways') in the USA that can be served from London, and it restricted the number of airlines permitted to operate trans-Atlantic services from LHR. The official terminology is that Bermuda II is "a unique agreement which enshrine[d] an elaborate system of controlling capacity on routes between the two countries" in an attempt to "provide a framework within which the airlines of the two countries can compete on broadly equal terms.

The original airlines were PanAm and TWA on the US side and BA on the UK side. There were four airlines that had fifth freedom rights on the route - Air India, Kuwait, Aer Lingus, and Air New Zealand. Other airlines were restricted to operating trans-Atlantic services from LGW but even then, there was a limit on the number of US gateways.

The most significant amendment of Bermuda II was prompted by the demise of PanAm and TWA in 1991. Under the renegotiated agreement, AA and UA were permitted to operate from LHR in place of PanAm and TWA. In return, a second UK carrier, VS, was permitted to operate routes from LHR alongside BA. VS was the only UK airline (although it is 49% owned by SQ and 51% owned through offshore trusts) that could be considered - British Midland then did not have any desire to operate long-haul nor any suitable aircraft to do so, and successive Government policies had seen the demise of the independent UK airlines like Laker Airways (the Skytrain Laker) and British Caledonian.

As had already been said, if you do a search on Google or on a.net, you will find hundreds of articles giving further information on Bermuda II.

As regards loads on VS's service LGW-LAS, I am informed by inside sources within the travel industry that they are good but very low yielding, since LAS is principally tourist destination.
MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
 
MYT332
Posts: 7283
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 7:31 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:52 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 38):
There is also train service to Brighton, Birmingham and the West

Plus the North West as in Manchester. For shame on you.  Wink
One Life, Live it.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:59 pm

Quoting Myt332 (Reply 40):
Plus the North West as in Manchester. For shame on you.

Ah yes, where you must fend off pikey pub owners and chavs in liquor stores
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
User avatar
BNE
Posts: 2921
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2000 9:37 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:04 pm

I found this article written by Sean Mendis on a.net about 3 years ago and thought it was the best explanation of Bermuda II. You might find it with a search. It is about 3 years old that it was posted but I think it is still relevant today.


Questions about the 1977 "Bermuda II" bilateral between the UK and the US arise on a regular basis, so I prepared this primer to address most of the relevant questions that might arise regarding this treaty. The specific details of Bermuda II are very complex, but I'll try and explain them in brief below.


a) Only two US and two UK airlines may operate to the US from LHR. Currently these are UA, AA, BA and VS.

b) ONLY the following cities may be served by US airlines from London : ANC, ATL, BOS, CLT, CHI, CVG, CLE, DFW, DTT, HOU, LAX, MIA, MSP, NYC(%), PHL, PIT(*), SFO(%), SEA, STL, WAS(%)

c) ONLY the following cities may be served by UK airlines from London : ATL, BOS, CLT, CHI, DFW, DEN, DTT, HOU, LAS(*), LAX, MIA, NYC(%), ORL, PHL, PHX, PIT, SAN, SFO(%), SEA, TPA, WAS(%)

d) ONLY the following cities may be served from Heathrow : ANC, BWI, BOS, CHI, DTT, LAX, MIA, MSP(@), NYC, PHL, SFO, SEA, WAS(%)

e) Some destinations are switchable with unused destinations. The other approved gateways without current service are FLL, HNL, MKC, PDX, MSY

f) No service to any cities mentioned in (e) may be introduced without dropping an existing route on either side.

g) Any US city may be served from any other UK airport (including STN) with no restrictions.

h) Each country may designate only TWO routes on which TWO of its carriers may compete. Every remaining route must have only one carrier from each side. However, if the number of passengers carried TOTALLY on the route (including traffic carried by fifth freedom carriers Air India, Air New Zealand and Kuwait Airways) exceeds 600,000 in two consecutive years, or if the number of passengers carried by any single airline exceeds 450,000 for two consecutive years, then each side may designate an additional airline to serve the route.

i) US carriers may operate fifth freedom services between LHR and BER, FRA, HAM and MUC only(&). UK carriers may not operate cabotage within the United States. Air India (#) and Kuwait Airways may operate fifth freedom service between LHR and NYC. Air New Zealand may operate fifth freedom service between LHR and LAX.

j) US and UK carriers operating indirect flights between the US and London may not offer fares lower than the lowest published fare offered by a carrier offering nonstop service in the same market.


* - LAS was approved as an additional service destination in an April 2000 modification to the agreement in exchange for PIT being approved as a US carrier gateway.

# - Air India was granted additional fifth freedom rights for LHR-ORD in 1998 and are currently seeking rights for LHR-LAX. Air India's fifth freedom awards predate the Bermuda 2 agreement and AI has been serving the LHR-JFK route continuously since 1962, making them the longest serving airline in the UK-US market with longer tenure than any carrier from either the UK or the US.

@ - Service on LHR-MSP may be operated by a US carrier only. UK carriers may not service MSP.

% - NYC includes JFK/EWR. WAS includes IAD/BWI. SFO includes SFO/OAK/SJC.

& - UA's fifth freedom service LHR-DEL on their RTW flight was extra-bilateral in nature and subject to additional restrictions on traffic. UA was not permitted to provide for fifth freedom sale capacity in excess of 38% of that offered by BA/AI on the LHR-DEL route. The service by VS on the LHR-DEL route is done utilizing unused AI frequencies as an Indian carrier and hence counts towards the Indian figures rather than the British figures.
Why fly non stop when you can connect
 
747uk
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:44 pm

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:43 pm

Quoting IFEMaster (Reply 28):
Any idea what the VS load is like?

Average load factor for the month of April is 93% (LGW-LAS) which is excellent as it does not include last minute bookings so that load can only go up. This does not prove that the route is profitable. However, I have never seen VS charge less than $500 (usually more) for a seat on that route.
When the route started 2 years ago, it initially operated 3 times a week. However, from June 2006 the route will be operated daily.

The aircraft that operates the route holds 451 passengers. Surely, VS would not have expanded if they were not making any money. If you compare this to VS ANU & UVF routes which have not increased their frequency at all with only a 2 or 3 direct services a week

The route mainly depends on O&D traffic. They don't have much feed from LGW as they would if the operated the route from LHR. However, Bermuda 2 does not allow it. Majority of the passengers on these flights are British leisure travellers.

For anyone who is interested, the aircraft config for the route is as follows

Upper / J class - 14 seats
Premium / W class - 58 seats
Economy / Y class - 379 seats
Route flown on a 747-400

747uk
 
StarGoldLHR
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:29 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:43 pm

Quoting Cadet57 (Reply 27):
right but you said that there are only 6 airlines that can fly between the us and the UK..

Dzien Dobry,  hyper 

Between LHR and the US I meant to add.


besides it's 7 anyway...

oh whatever.  hissyfit 

I also said I wasnt an expert  talktothehand 
So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
 
StarGoldLHR
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:29 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:50 pm

Quoting Hawk44 (Reply 36):
I dunno I was just in LAS and seams to me that conventions are kind of a big deal. More then half the people around me waiting at the security check point were heading home after a convention.

My company does it's conventions in Las Vegas.. Usually 90% are from the US

10% from across the globe... and in that 10% it equates to 90% of the destinations too !

Hence why not much direct international to Las Vegas.
So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
 
StarGoldLHR
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:29 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:54 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 38):
There is also train service to Brighton, Birmingham and the West

Gatwick actually has the best rail connections of all the Airports in the country

Central London, All of the south east, Access to all of the north.

Luton is comparable... but then again it's on the same railway route and Luton/Gatwick are directly connected by rail.

LHR has only Heathrow Express (and it's slower counterpart) and it only goes to Paddington with connections to .. well nowhere except the farmlands of the southwest.
So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
 
StarGoldLHR
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 1:29 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:00 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 41):
Ah yes, where you must fend off pikey pub owners and chavs in liquor stores

At least the chavs are in the bars not protesting on the street and shutting down the country.


anyway how is this relevent to the topic ?

ah yes.. How is it only US airlines want unlimited access to LHR anyway ?
Surely they realise the yields will fall if everyone takes a bite.


Do airports like AMS, CDG, MAD have any restrictions on US flights, how many flights per day / destinations in the US do these airports serve ?
So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2107
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:04 pm

Quoting StarGoldLHR (Reply 46):
Central London, All of the south east, Access to all of the north.

Hmm, are you sure?.........How does one get on a train at Gatwick and say for instance go to Birmingham.....Yes thats right, you would need to go into Cental london, change, get on a Tube to another mainline station and then get another train.....a real pain in the a#@e!
Lets be honest with the Train to Paddington, The Piccadilly Line, Natioanal Express Terminus, LHR wipes the floor with Transport connections compared with LGW.
 
IFEMaster
Posts: 4164
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:17 am

RE: Why No Direct LHR-LAS?

Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:04 am

Quoting Hawk44 (Reply 36):
I dunno I was just in LAS and seams to me that conventions are kind of a big deal. More then half the people around me waiting at the security check point were heading home after a convention.



And it's becoming a bigger deal. There are a lot of businesses moving divisions, large operations, or even the entire headquarters to some of the growing Vegas suburbs. Henderson is an excellent example; a growing town/city that has some thriving business parks. My company recently moved our R&D to Henderson. As a result, all of our Sales conferences are held there, and there are A LOT of trade shows and conventions that occur in Vegas on a weekly basis.

But, from LGW, the market is going to be mostly leisure travellers I think.

EDIT: Typo

[Edited 2006-03-28 18:05:08]
Delivering Anecdotes of Dubious Relevance Since 1978