ARGinLON
Topic Author
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 6:26 pm

LGW And The Future

Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:41 pm

With open Skies being a reality (please wake me up, I can't believe Bermuda 2 is over) effective MAR08 it may result is the slow disappearance of transatlantic/longhaul services operated by legacy carries with the exception of some leisure destinations (e.g. MCO, LAS).

DL,NW,CO and US will move their services to LHR as soon as they can (I am sure they have secured themselves some slots already) and BA will move all of them (IAH, ATL, DFW, ect) as from day one. However, sooner or later LGW will become a full leisure airport

So what is left for LGW other than the Thomson, MyTravel, Thomas Cook, U2. Monarch and the BA leisure markets?

I already miss the old good days at LGW (BA checking counters at Victoria Station, DL operating MD11s, NW's DC-10s., and BA flying JFK, GRU, CDG, FRA or EZE) so I only see a unexciting future for LGW.

Do you guys remember the full list of longhaul services BA used to operate from LGW?
 
IADLHR
Posts: 612
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:25 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:03 pm

I am no so sure that AA will move their RDU-LGW over to LHR. If I am not mistaken their pharmacueitcal clients that fly RDU-LGW regularly prfeer, if I am not mistaken, LGW as it is much closer to their offices. I could be wrong and stand corrected. So if that is true, I wonderf if there will be an AA DFW-LGW , in addition to DFW-LHR,or MIA-LGW so aircrat can be rotated.
 
Virgin747LGW
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 5:02 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Thu Mar 22, 2007 11:01 pm

[quote=ARGinLON,reply=0]DL,NW,CO and US will move their services to LHR as soon as they can (I am sure they have secured themselves some slots already) [/quote

given the recent cut backs of many US airlines if the LGW routes werent popular they would have been discontinued by now, bear in mind there are millions of people living in south east england who would rather fly LGW than LHR so it seems like a poor decision to pull out of LGW.
 
LHR777
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 6:14 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Thu Mar 22, 2007 11:10 pm

Quoting ARGinLON (Thread starter):
Do you guys remember the full list of longhaul services BA used to operate from LGW?

A few that I have flown in the past...

LGW-CCS, BOG, GRU, EZE, LAX, JFK, SCL.

I'm pretty sure I recall flying those all on BA from LGW in the past. I'm just not sure about LAX, as I think that might have been on a BCal DC-10 (G-DCIO outbound, possibly G-MULL return). I was around 11-12 years old at the time, so my memory is a little vague on this!

Did BA serve PIT from LGW or LHR? I flew it once on G-AWNO, but don't recall where I flew from!
 
LHR777
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 6:14 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Thu Mar 22, 2007 11:20 pm

This from BA today, regarding the LGW services post-EU open-skies...

Quote:

“We will hold the Government to its word to fight for Britain’s interests if America doesn’t play ball. Though this is a poor agreement for Britain and Europe, we are ready to exploit the new opportunities this agreement gives us for our customers and our business. Our priority will be to move the Gatwick services to Heathrow that have most connecting traffic, such as the Houston route, which serves the oil markets, and give our customers the best possible connections.”

So, it's look like those services with a lot of connecting traffic will move to LHR, as I pretty much expected. This will include IAH (great for LOS/ABV/ACC connecting traffic) and possibly DFW too. I'm not so sure about ATL though, or the Florida/Caribbean destinations.
 
airchabum
Posts: 754
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2001 8:21 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Thu Mar 22, 2007 11:23 pm

I'm sure that BA and the US carriers will want to move the majority of their longhaul flights to LHR but where are all the slots going to come from? LHR is effectively full so the only way airlines will aquire slots is by finding another airline prepared to sell them, and the prices are going to become so astronomical that it simply won't make economic sense. Will LHR be quite so attractive if half the airlines who feed the longhauls sell their slots and move out? Probably not.

As for LGW yes it may turn into a more leisure dominated airport but the leisure traveller is going much further these days so there will still be plenty of scope for longhaul flights. I fondly remember the days when we used to have the likes of Cathay, Air New Zealand, PAL, etc at LGW but for every carrier that moves to LHR another one moves back so we have airlines like Malev, Air Namibia and Bulgaria Air to add a bit of variety. It's not all bad!  Smile
Biggidy biggidy bong
 
rampart
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:58 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Thu Mar 22, 2007 11:53 pm

I don't see why LGW couldn't maintain a full slate of international services. For instance, New York City has two full international airports, both with connecting opportunities. JFK has more, but EWR is certainly full service. Personally, because I think LHR is a mess, I'd fly to LGW unless business or connection required me to do otherwise.

-Rampart
 
COEI2007
Posts: 837
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:33 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:18 am

I think CO will keep CLE and some EWR services at LGW. Firstly I dont know they can get enough slots to operate all of their flights ex LHR, plus LGW will give pax a choice!
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:27 am

Quoting COEI2007 (Reply 7):
I think CO will keep CLE and some EWR services at LGW. Firstly I dont know they can get enough slots to operate all of their flights ex LHR, plus LGW will give pax a choice!

Sounds good for now, but once CO can acquire enough slots at LHR for its entire London operation, LGW will be history regardless of how CO is spinning it now. IAH will be the first service to move to LHR, then EWR, and finally Cleveland. My guess is that CO will maintain an IAH-EWR-LGW 752 service just as long as the Cleveland flight operates into Gatwick (with this arrangment, all three hubs continue to have Gatwick service......just like the press release says). When a slot is obtained for CLE (at which time the CLE-London flight may upgrade to 764 equipment), its bye-bye Gatwick for CO.

Remember that CO once flew EWR-STN, for years many thought that they would return, but CO did not.....CO would rather focus on one London airport.

I think this logic will be true of most US carriers.......over time, most will move operations from LGW to LHR.
 
COEI2007
Posts: 837
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:33 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:44 am

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 8):
Sounds good for now, but once CO can acquire enough slots at LHR for its entire London operation, LGW will be history regardless of how CO is spinning it now. IAH will be the first service to move to LHR, then EWR, and finally Cleveland. My guess is that CO will maintain an IAH-EWR-LGW 752 service just as long as the Cleveland flight operates into Gatwick (with this arrangment, all three hubs continue to have Gatwick service......just like the press release says). When a slot is obtained for CLE (at which time the CLE-London flight may upgrade to 764 equipment), its bye-bye Gatwick for CO.

Remember that CO once flew EWR-STN, for years many thought that they would return, but CO did not.....CO would rather focus on one London airport.

I think this logic will be true of most US carriers.......over time, most will move operations from LGW to LHR

Oh, I agree LGW will be a 757 operation eventually. CLE, plus IAH-EWR-LGW is most likely, and then once all of the slots are in place, they'll cut LGW. But thats gonna take awhile!!!!
 
fdex727
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 2:01 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:15 am

Hopefully US will at the very least move the CLT flight to LHR. PHL already has BA do they not to LHR
 
commavia
Posts: 9623
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:30 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:27 am

Quoting ARGinLON (Thread starter):
please wake me up, I can't believe Bermuda 2 is over

I know. It really is, in the historical context of global civil aviation, an earth-shattering and momentus event.

Quoting ARGinLON (Thread starter):
effective MAR08 it may result is the slow disappearance of transatlantic/longhaul services operated by legacy carries with the exception of some leisure destinations (e.g. MCO, LAS)

Gatwick will definitely lose most of its longhaul to the U.S., but there will still be some market at Gatwick and I feel confident that Continental, and probably American and possibly Delta, will probably not completely abandon London's second airport. I certainly hope not!

Quoting ARGinLON (Thread starter):
DL,NW,CO and US will move their services to LHR as soon as they can (I am sure they have secured themselves some slots already) and BA will move all of them (IAH, ATL, DFW, ect) as from day one. However, sooner or later LGW will become a full leisure airport

I generally agree. BA will move its remaining business-oriented U.S. Gatwick routes (IAH, DFW and ATL) to Heathrow from day 1. Delta will likely switch all of its flights to Heathrow as soon as it gets slots, while Continental appears to be taking a more phased approach -- stating in their press release today that 1) IAH flights will move to Heathrow first, by June 2008, 2) Newark flights will eventually move there later, and 3) Continental will maintain a presence at Gatwick. Northwest and USAirways -- both with only two daily flights to Gatwick -- should probably be able to find slots through alliance partners in due time -- but as these two carriers have the most minimal presence in the London market, I doubt either is in nearly as much of a hurry as CO or DL. As for the U.S.' existing 'Heathrow 2,' United will probably launch Denver-Heathrow immediately, and I think AA will probably switch its D/FW-London route to Heathrow the instant it can get slots, if for no other reason than because they don't want to be uncompetitive with BA's DFW flight, which will probably move over immediately. Raleigh will probably move over to Heathrow too, eventually, but I believe that AA won't completely leave Gatwick. I think that Gatwick still definitely has a market, and my personal prediction is that AA will move its two existing DFW-London flights (50/51 and 78/79) to Heathrow, and then reinstate the off-and-on third flight, 80/81, as a daily 767 to Gatwick.

Quoting ARGinLON (Thread starter):
BA checking counters at Victoria Station

My, my, the remote check-in counters at Victoria -- that seems like a lifetime ago.

Quoting IADLHR (Reply 1):
I am no so sure that AA will move their RDU-LGW over to LHR.

I think AA will ultimately move RDU-LGW to -LHR. I, too, thought that much of gsk and pharma traffic in RDU and the Research Triangle preferred Gatwick, but was corrected -- by several -- a few months back when I posted that on another thread. Apparently, according to some on A.net, Heathrow is actually closer to where this pharma traffic is going.

Quoting COEI2007 (Reply 7):
I think CO will keep CLE and some EWR services at LGW.

I think CLE will eventually move to Heathrow, but I definitely agree that CO will likely still maintain at least a single daily EWR-LGW flight for the local traffic in the New York area that still wants to go to Gatwick.
 
planesarecool
Posts: 3208
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:06 am

Quoting Commavia (Reply 11):
Apparently, according to some on A.net, Heathrow is actually closer to where this pharma traffic is going.

The global HQ of GSK is nearer to LHR, however there is also a reasonably large manufacturing plant in Crawley, just a few miles from LGW.

I don't think the RDU flight will move to LHR - remember that it is profitable however full the flight is, and whichever airport they use, so they don't need to use a valuable LHR slot. Also, there is no direct competition, so anybody needing to fly between London and Raleigh/Durham will most likely use that flight, whichever airport it uses.

Quoting Fdex727 (Reply 10):
Hopefully US will at the very least move the CLT flight to LHR. PHL already has BA do they not to LHR

I can't see them having one flight from LHR and one from LGW. It would be either one or the other, and most likely it would be LHR.
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:17 am

I'm not sure DL's traffic will necessarily move to LHR. LHR is great if you are connecting through London because of the number of onward flights, but I actually prefer LGW if my destination is London.

I find it less crowded, easier to get in and out of and better in terms of passenger facilities (with the exception of LHR T4). The Gatwick Express gets me into London just 20 minutes later than it takes me to get there from LHR but I don't have to walk what seems like 10 miles to catch the train.

Of course everyone will want to say they serve LHR but given the premium that airlines will have to pay for slots, I'm not sure the move will necessarily make a lot of sense.

[Edited 2007-03-22 19:18:24]
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
Humberside
Posts: 3223
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:44 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:51 am

LGW is going to loose a lot of US flights

Quoting LHR777 (Reply 4):
So, it's look like those services with a lot of connecting traffic will move to LHR, as I pretty much expected. This will include IAH (great for LOS/ABV/ACC connecting traffic) and possibly DFW too. I'm not so sure about ATL though,

I would expect ATL to be moved. Its an important business destination

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 8):
CO would rather focus on one London airport.

I think thats a mistake. LGW could almost certainly fill at least a once daily B757 to EWR with traffic from the immediate area.

Quoting Planesarecool (Reply 12):
Quoting Fdex727 (Reply 10):
Hopefully US will at the very least move the CLT flight to LHR. PHL already has BA do they not to LHR

I can't see them having one flight from LHR and one from LGW. It would be either one or the other, and most likely it would be LHR.

Agreed. US's London operation is too small to be split across 2 London airports
Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
 
richardw
Posts: 3131
Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 3:17 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:01 pm

If First Choice and TUI merge, they could possibly base themselves in the South Terminal, and if AA and Delta and BA move some long hauls to LHR, then this means more space at the North Terminal, BAA might want to move some airlines from South to North.

BA/GT operated flights less than 3 hours are very likely to go buy on board in economy, with some losing their AA codes.
 
gffgold
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 9:23 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:14 pm

I previously lived south of London (Brighton) and like a few million others I found LGW a much more convenient airport than the dreaded LHR. So much so that I regularly paid over the top for fares just to avoid the nightmare journey by road or rail and the inevitable chaos (to say nothing of the endless congestion on the taxiway and in the air at times) at LHR. Heck, am I imagining it or did GA fly to LGW years ago?
 
A340600
Posts: 3892
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 10:24 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:29 pm

Quoting ARGinLON (Thread starter):
So what is left for LGW other than the Thomson, MyTravel, Thomas Cook, U2. Monarch and the BA leisure markets?

I already miss the old good days at LGW (BA checking counters at Victoria Station, DL operating MD11s, NW's DC-10s., and BA flying JFK, GRU, CDG, FRA or EZE) so I only see a unexciting future for LGW.

LGW has some very interesting traffic ex East and Africa, yes the US routes will be a major loss but it wont become a charter hub only.

Quoting Airchabum (Reply 5):
but for every carrier that moves to LHR another one moves back so we have airlines like Malev, Air Namibia and Bulgaria Air to add a bit of variety. It's not all bad!

Exactly, we have some decent carriers.

Quoting Richardw (Reply 15):
BA/GT operated flights less than 3 hours are very likely to go buy on board in economy

I'm not so sure on this one. I don't think BA Y shorthaul will go BOB if LHR doesn't, it'll completely destroy the product. I don't see very long now for BA shorthaul at LGW, I didn't see long before this happened, now even more so. I doubt BA will order anything to replace the 737's and as the leases run out on the -300's/500's the routes will cut down and then i'm sure the -400's will be retired. The industry constantly changes and we've seen this one coming for a long time now. I'm still not sure the US airlines will pull out completely, it would make sense for some routes and airlines to stay.
Despite the name I am a Boeing man through and through!
 
planesarecool
Posts: 3208
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:36 pm

Quoting GFFgold (Reply 16):
Heck, am I imagining it or did GA fly to LGW years ago?

They operated a flight to Gatwick from Denpasar via Bangkok, but it stopped a few years ago.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Graham Hitchen



Like many others have said, i really cannot see Gatwick becoming a ghost town. The spaces left by flights moving up the road will more than likely be filled up by new airlines, routes and increased frequencies.

Virgin won't budge - in fact the increased gate space in the morning might encourage them to open up more leisure routes from Gatwick. BA won't change much, with the exception of the IAH, DFW and maybe ATL flights moving to LHR. The short haul flights will not be cut back.

And who knows, some airlines may use this as an opportunity to sell up some or all of their LHR slots and move to LGW (think Air Baltic, Air Namibia, TAP etc).
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:38 pm

Quoting LHR777 (Reply 3):
Did BA serve PIT from LGW or LHR? I flew it once on G-AWNO, but don't recall where I flew from!

Both actually... with the LHR service, BA flew a 747 on routings like PIT-BWI-LHR and PIT-PHL-LHR beginning in 1985. This service was actually launched with a Concorde, which I cannot believe! In 1993, the 747 service ended, and was replaced with daily 767 flights on PIT-LGW. This ended in 1999 when US started PIT-LGW. That lasted until 2004, when the US hub was closed.

Nobody has flown transatlantic flights since then. I hope that the axing of Bermuda 2 will bring back service to London from PIT at the very least... US probably will never bring back transatlantic flights. With Bermuda 2 gone, BMI seems like the only hope for PIT ever seeing transatlantic flights.
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
iclcy
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 9:06 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:47 pm

Quoting GFFgold (Reply 16):
am I imagining it or did GA fly to LGW years ago?

Yes they did I flew on their 767 in 1998

LGW-DPS via BKK & CGK - Same a/c & flight number.

DPS-CGK-BTH(Batam)-AMM(Amman)-LGW again same a/c & flight number.
 
vv701
Posts: 5773
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:36 pm

Of course all the airlines want to operate all of their trans-Atlantic flights out of LHR and shut down their LGW operations as quickly as possible. But hey! Wait a minute. What about their customers? Don't they count? Perhaps some of them want to fly to LGW. Some may actually prefer LGW to LHR.

And isn't time money? Suppose you work for AmEx. Their world-wide HQ is in Manhattan. The HQ for their International Operations (the world excluding the USA and Canada) is in Stag Place just across the road from Victoria Station, the London terminus for the railway line to Gatwick. Operationally their International HQ is in Brighton with outlying offices at Burgess Hill, both south of LGW and both requiring a 50 mile longer drive from LHR or a trip into central London, round the circle line and then back out again down the line through Gatwick Airport station. So surely the preferred route from their south Manhattan office to their Brighton office is Manhattan-EWR-LGW-Brighton and not Manhattan-EWR or JFK-LHR-Paddington-Victoria-Gatwick-Brighton which will add a lot more than two hours to their journey time . Or am I missing something?

Of course one swallow does not make a summer. Of course LHR is a huge international hub and LGW is not. But a lot of O&D trans-Atlantic passengers neither live nor work in central or west London. And even for some of them LGW is the better choice, And AmEx is not the only multi-national employer with a UK centre of gravity much closer to LGW than LHR.

Remember. While you can get away with not offering a service your customers and potential customers may prefer, every time you withdraw an existing service you are certain to upset someone. So before you shut down your ATL-LGW, your RDU-LGW or your EWR-LGW services take a long hard look at from whom you currently make most of your money on those routes.

Indeed I believe - and I would welcome others comments here - that while there is economic sense in BA 'withdrawing' existing trans-Atlantic flights from LGW to its main hub and base at LHR, other airlines, especially the US legacy airlines already serving LGW, could profit from this by sitting tight at LGW (excepting the CO IAH-LGW flight that should be moved to LHR because most of its high yielding traffic is not O&D) and then expanding their services by putting new, incremental flights into LHR. This approach would also have the advantage of limiting the inflation in the cost of LHR slots that is likely if four airlines rush around seeking prime-time LHR slots for all their existing US-LGW flights plus all the new services they want to add
 
ARGinLON
Topic Author
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 6:26 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:42 pm

Quoting VV701 (Reply 21):
Indeed I believe - and I would welcome others comments here - that while there is economic sense in BA 'withdrawing' existing trans-Atlantic flights from LGW to its main hub and base at LHR, other airlines, especially the US legacy airlines already serving LGW, could profit from this by sitting tight at LGW (excepting the CO IAH-LGW flight that should be moved to LHR because most of its high yielding traffic is not O&D) and then expanding their services by putting new, incremental flights into LHR. This approach would also have the advantage of limiting the inflation in the cost of LHR slots that is likely if four airlines rush around seeking prime-time LHR slots for all their existing US-LGW flights plus all the new services they want to add

CO will probably keep the 757’s in LGW.
LHR slots are pricey and in my opinion having a 752 with only a few business class seats (I believe CO has 16) does not make much sense.
 
cslusarc
Posts: 553
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Sat Mar 24, 2007 4:45 am

Personally, I think that if CO, DL, NW or US move any of their routes to LHR from LGW they would have to operate any future LHR flights with aircraft like the A333 or B772 or larger. Both CO and DL have a limited supply of this guage of aircraft, restricting the ability of maximize their profit per departure for any future LHR service.
--cslusarc from YWG
 
N174UA
Posts: 860
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Sat Mar 24, 2007 1:10 pm

Quoting ARGinLON (Thread starter):
I can't believe Bermuda 2 is over

Bermuda 2 is still the active treaty, and until it's new replacement is ratifed by the U.S. Senate, it remains in effect. The agreements are in place, the EU has approved it, now we just need the Senate to approve it.

As for LGW...I remember flying on a British Caledonian DC-10-30 between LAX and LGW back in August '82. Those were the days...

LHR is congested as it is...and now we're going to see all these US airlines moving their operations there as well, making it even more congested!
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Sat Mar 24, 2007 1:21 pm

Quoting N174UA (Reply 24):
LHR is congested as it is...and now we're going to see all these US airlines moving their operations there as well, making it even more congested!

Aren't there proposals to expand LHR? Granted there really isn't much room. Too bad the land isn't like the grounds of PIT... thousands of acres available for expansion...
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
N174UA
Posts: 860
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Sat Mar 24, 2007 1:25 pm

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 25):
Aren't there proposals to expand LHR? Granted there really isn't much room.

Well, T5 for one will be opening, not sure when. T3 is a DUMP, and I believe T1 or T2 is Shengen-only (within EU). I thought there was a proposal for a new runway, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

With this additional traffic, seems like delays will only increase. The other side to this is that the newcomers won't be getting the premiere time slots like UA, AA, VS, and BA already have, so that may minimize it somewhat.
 
ckfred
Posts: 4694
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Sat Mar 24, 2007 1:42 pm

My father-in law used to fly to London a lot. His travel agent kept trying to route him through one of UA's or AA's hubs to LHR, but he insisted on flying NW or DL to LGW. He had gone through LHR enough to learn that the extra time spent traveling to and from LGW to his hotel was more than made up by the time saved at LGW, including ticketing, security screening, and waiting out delays.

He says that LGW is to MDW as LHR is to ORD.
 
Humberside
Posts: 3223
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:44 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Sat Mar 24, 2007 6:35 pm

Quoting N174UA (Reply 26):
I believe T1 or T2 is Shengen-only (within EU).

The UK is not part of the Shengen treaty AFAIK. Though T1/T2 have traditionally been mostly UK Domestic/European
Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
 
LHR777
Posts: 645
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 6:14 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:32 pm

Quoting Ckfred (Reply 27):
He says that LGW is to MDW as LHR is to ORD.

Shouldn't that be "LGW is to LHR as MDW is to ORD"?
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Sat Mar 24, 2007 11:02 pm

Quoting N174UA (Reply 26):
Well, T5 for one will be opening, not sure when. T3 is a DUMP, and I believe T1 or T2 is Shengen-only (within EU). I thought there was a proposal for a new runway, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

I think there is a proposal for a new runway. So, more planes can land. Without any additional gate space, you're going to have those planes just sitting on the tarmac waiting to pull up to an empty gate. Is T5 an additional terminal, or is it replacing an existing one?

Quoting N174UA (Reply 26):
With this additional traffic, seems like delays will only increase. The other side to this is that the newcomers won't be getting the premiere time slots like UA, AA, VS, and BA already have, so that may minimize it somewhat.

How many airlines hub at LHR, at least 3, right? British Air, BMI, and Virgin Atlantic? Now even more airlines will flood the gates at LHR. LHR could get interesting in the next couple of years...
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
COEI2007
Posts: 837
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:33 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Sun Mar 25, 2007 2:05 am

I love how airlines are rushing to serve to LHR!!! In my experience, its a dump. I know its better for connections etc, but from a pax perspective, i'd much rather fly to or transit in LGW!
 
N174UA
Posts: 860
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Sun Mar 25, 2007 3:23 am

Quoting COEI2007 (Reply 31):
from a pax perspective, i'd much rather fly to or transit in LGW!

I presume they've upgraded the facilities and gate areas since August 1982? Any plans for an additional runway at LGW? I think it's 8/26?
 
A340600
Posts: 3892
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 10:24 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Sun Mar 25, 2007 3:53 am

Quoting N174UA (Reply 32):
I presume they've upgraded the facilities and gate areas since August 1982? Any plans for an additional runway at LGW? I think it's 8/26?

Yes, the South Terminal has just had a refurb on the departure side, new baggage belts and modern design, bar pier 1, but that's the LCC area. Then at North, that was only opened in 1988 and the new Pier 6 is only a couple of years old and you get to go over the famous bridge. No plans for a new runway for a good few years yet. I think LGW is a brilliant example that you don't need countless amounts of runways to run a busy airport efficiently.
Despite the name I am a Boeing man through and through!
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Sun Mar 25, 2007 5:24 am

Quoting A340600 (Reply 33):
Yes, the South Terminal has just had a refurb on the departure side, new baggage belts and modern design

South Terminal is operating so far above capacity at peak hours that it isn't funny anymore. Baggage belt failures are extremely common, the checkin areas have far too little space for the passenger profile anticipated, central search is signifcantly understaffed, etc...

Granted, its still more functional than some parts of Heathrow but lets not assume that the refurb adds any functional efficiency to the airport. Its purely cosmetic.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
N174UA
Posts: 860
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:17 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Sun Mar 25, 2007 6:39 am

Quoting B747-437B (Reply 34):
but lets not assume that the refurb adds any functional efficiency to the airport. Its purely cosmetic.

When my Dad worked at PDX, he OFTEN said that airports only exist to promote the construction trades, and not promotiing air travel...a lot of that is cynicsm, but then there's a lot of truth to it, regardless of airport.
 
jfk777
Posts: 5812
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Sun Mar 25, 2007 7:42 am

Whatever happens with the Americans moving to LHR, most will continue to have a LGW presence just to keep up the capacity. Co from EWR will continue, Delta from ATL and AA from RDU. IT will not all happen at once.
 
Humberside
Posts: 3223
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:44 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Sun Mar 25, 2007 7:28 pm

According to todays Sunday Times, BA will move IAH to LHR at the start of open skies. ATL and DFW will follow six months later
Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
 
Arsenal@LHR
Posts: 7510
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 2:55 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Sun Mar 25, 2007 10:52 pm

Quoting COEI2007 (Reply 31):
I love how airlines are rushing to serve to LHR!!! In my experience, its a dump. I know its better for connections etc, but from a pax perspective, i'd much rather fly to or transit in LGW!

Airlines don't fly to airports based on how pretty or functional they are, they will fly where it makes financial and economic sense. And the reality is that LHR makes better economic sense for the likes to CO, DL, NW and US as opposed to LGW. Business pax (those who provide an airlines profits) clearly prefer LHR over LGW, the airlines know that and they also know LHR provides far stronger yields and profits-per-passenger ratio than LGW. That is why DL, CO, US and NW are in a scramble to secure their LHR status.
In Arsene we trust!!
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:02 pm

Quoting Arsenal@LHR (Reply 38):
Airlines don't fly to airports based on how pretty or functional they are

Pretty perhaps not, but functionality is a very key part of an airline's decision to operate to an airport. The startup operational functionality audit is probably THE decisive document to make a go/nogo decision on a specific destination.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
cba
Posts: 4228
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2000 2:02 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:06 am

Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 36):
Whatever happens with the Americans moving to LHR, most will continue to have a LGW presence just to keep up the capacity. Co from EWR will continue, Delta from ATL and AA from RDU. IT will not all happen at once.



Quoting COEI2007 (Reply 9):
Oh, I agree LGW will be a 757 operation eventually. CLE, plus IAH-EWR-LGW is most likely, and then once all of the slots are in place, they'll cut LGW. But thats gonna take awhile!!!!

Both are correct. Remember, LHR slots have to come from somewhere, and they will NOT be cheap. LGW service will remain, LHR is still near max capacity.

Quote:

“We will hold the Government to its word to fight for Britain’s interests if America doesn’t play ball. Though this is a poor agreement for Britain and Europe

Translation: We're losing our semi-monopoly on LHR service, bitch bitch bitch.
 
AA787823
Posts: 696
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:27 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:26 am

I dont really see where all the slots will come from. LHR is full. I dont see how all the carriers flying to LGW can shift to LHR. Dont forget that some other carriers non-us will also want to shift their flights to LHR as well.
F.U.R.P.....Families Under Reduced Pay
 
boysteve
Posts: 885
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 7:02 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:33 am

Quoting B747-437B (Reply 34):
South Terminal is operating so far above capacity at peak hours that it isn't funny anymore. Baggage belt failures are extremely common

Lol, just see the news today!
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:17 am

Quoting Boysteve (Reply 42):
Lol, just see the news today!

Don't remind me. Ruined my quiet Sunday morning....
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
A340600
Posts: 3892
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 10:24 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:08 am

Quoting B747-437B (Reply 34):
South Terminal is operating so far above capacity at peak hours that it isn't funny anymore. Baggage belt failures are extremely common, the checkin areas have far too little space for the passenger profile anticipated, central search is signifcantly understaffed, etc...

Granted, its still more functional than some parts of Heathrow but lets not assume that the refurb adds any functional efficiency to the airport. Its purely cosmetic.

I never said it helped the operation, i'm fully aware of the overcrowded situation of South, I was merely anwering the question put out as to whether the gate areas had changed since 1982.

Quoting Arsenal@LHR (Reply 38):
Business pax (those who provide an airlines profits) clearly prefer LHR over LGW

It's all a bit of an odd one, if connecting then yes, but those O&D often prefer LGW as it can be much quicker into central London avoiding LHR's often much busier lines etc and the amount of walking to get on the Express train services. Landing at LHR can be a nightmare, long holds and then waiting to cross active runways etc, you can be off and waiting for your bags at LGW by the time many flights at LHR (BA) that touched down the same time reach the gate.

Quoting Cba (Reply 40):
Translation: We're losing our semi-monopoly on LHR service, bitch bitch bitch.

Re-Translation- If we're going to give this up then it's only fair the USA do the same with their equally old-fashioned rules.
Despite the name I am a Boeing man through and through!
 
cba
Posts: 4228
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2000 2:02 pm

RE: LGW And The Future

Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:21 pm

Quoting A340600 (Reply 44):
Quoting Cba (Reply 40):
Translation: We're losing our semi-monopoly on LHR service, bitch bitch bitch.

Re-Translation- If we're going to give this up then it's only fair the USA do the same with their equally old-fashioned rules.

Old-fashioned rules? To my knowledge there are no airports in the US that are restricted in such a way that LHR currently is. Only Airlines X Y and Z can serve LHR from the US via airports A B and C... come on now, this is a system that only benefits the 4 incumbents, and BA seems to be the only one that is griping about it.

Regarding foreign ownership, I'm all for that. Any arguments to the contrary are protectionist BS. This goes for all airlines in any country: if you can't handle a little competition, then get out of the market, it's simple economics.
 
miaskies
Posts: 1231
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 3:08 am

RE: LGW And The Future

Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:13 am

Quoting IADLHR (Reply 1):
So if that is true, I wonderf if there will be an AA DFW-LGW , in addition to DFW-LHR,or MIA-LGW so aircrat can be rotated.

I doubt will see MIA-LGW, in the past AA had MIA-LHR and MIA-LGW running at the same time and favored LHR and dropped the MIA-LGW all together. Same thing for BA, their 2 daily 744 flights to MIA are via LHR.
Nothing better than making love at 35K Feet!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AirbusOnly, Baidu [Spider], barney captain, coolian2, DavecFlyer, ek17, maveman, mxaxai, northwest_guy, rutankrd, Scorpio, SingaporeBoy, SXI899, tespai, wjcandee, XAM2175 and 202 guests