User avatar
centrair
Posts: 2848
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:44 pm

LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 9:51 am

This IS a case of ignorance. I have never been to the UK and so I have no clue but am curious. When one is curious, always good to ask questions.

What is the deal between airlines being able to fly into Gatwick or Heathrow? I am not talking the Bermuda II here.
But why do airlines want to fly into Heathrow over Gatwick?
Why is Heathrow so appealing?
Stigma?
Is it closer to the City center?
Connections?
Good name recognition (thank you movies)?
Cheaper?

[Edited 2007-04-21 02:54:23]
My name is Centrair but HND is closer. Let's Japanese Aviation!
 
cxb744
Posts: 220
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 7:31 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:38 am

"But why do airlines want to fly into Heathrow over Gatwick?" Location, Location, Location. Heathrow is located off the M25 with easy access from surrounding London, especially the West and North. (If you call the M25 loaded with traffic doing 25 MPH easy.) Gatwick is to the south of London.
"Why is Heathrow so appealing?" Quicker connections into Downtown London, only 15 min. I believe its 30 min from LGW.
"Stigma?" No
"Is it closer to the City center?" Yes
"Connections?" If you want to transfer between major legacy airlines(i.e. BA) then Heathrow, if LCC then Gatwick.
"Good name recognition (thank you movies)?" Some what
"Cheaper?" No, slots are prime real estate at LHR.
What is it? It's A 747-400, but that's not important right now.
 
Evan767
Posts: 2198
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 10:52 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:41 am

Taking the Gatwick Express from Gatwick to the city is a pain. I remember though when looking at subway maps in London, the subway goes to Heathrow. That, IMO, is a huge plus.
The proper term is "on final" not "on finals" bud...
 
User avatar
centrair
Posts: 2848
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:44 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:29 pm

So if we were to compare it to cities around the world with multiple airports what would this me like?

LGW is to ???
LHR is to ???
My name is Centrair but HND is closer. Let's Japanese Aviation!
 
Evan767
Posts: 2198
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 10:52 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:58 pm

Quoting Centrair (Reply 3):
LGW is to ???
LHR is to ???

Location wise (ignoring size):
LGW is to JFK
LHR is to LGA

LGW is to IAD
LHR is to DCA

LGW is to NRT
LHR is to HND

You get the picture.
The proper term is "on final" not "on finals" bud...
 
LAXspotter
Posts: 3227
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:16 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 1:02 pm

Quoting Evan767 (Reply 4):
LGW is to JFK
LHR is to LGA

LGW is to IAD
LHR is to DCA

LGW is to NRT
LHR is to HND

What is your rationale?

For me its CDG = LHR
Paris Beauvais = Gatwick
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" Samuel Johnson
 
Rivet42
Posts: 604
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:26 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 1:34 pm

From a passenger point of view, the whole LGW v LHR thing is a matter of perspective. For example, I live in West London, so getting to LHR is just easier. LHR is also closer to central London, therefore it is cheaper to get to (if you compare the Underground to LHR with the non-express trains to LGW). On the other hand they both have a dedicated express train service, similar in price, and if I am flying into London and want to get to the financial district (what we call "The City"), then actually LGW is more convenient, because fast trains take you directly to a number of stations in the city, whereas from LHR you have to change on the Underground (and it takes a lot longer) or you have to take the Heathrow Express to Paddington, which is absolutely no use for The City whatsoever.

For example, if you are at the London Stock Exchange, and need to fly to, say, New York, then to get to LHR, it's either a bank-breaking taxi fare (approx USD100 to the airport), or a shorter but excrutiatingly slow taxi ride across central London to Paddington, then 15 minutes on the express, or take the underground from St Pauls station to Holborn, and change for the line out to LHR, taking at least 60 minutes (and usually standing room only during rush-hour)... For LGW, you have a 5-minute walk to City Thameslink mainline station, which has frequent semi-express trains direct to LGW, taking around 35-40 minutes.

From an airline point of view, LHR is simply ahead because it is bigger, allegedly the busiest international airport in the world, and all those other flights and destinations provide an unparalleled market of potential transfer passengers. I'm not so sure how much of a difference that makes for airlines from, say, Asia and Africa, but for airlines operating across the Atlantic, you really want to be at LHR, in order to tap into the extremely lucrative premium cabin market, with frequent connections to just about everywhere in Europe, and beyond. With only one runway, LGW just can't compete with that. LGW has traditionally been the home of holiday charter flights, and in my view it has never really been able to shake off that image. People perceive LHR as being more geared towards the business traveller, even if in reality it's not much more so than LGW.

PhiL P
I travel, therefore I am.
 
BCALBOY
Posts: 102
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:25 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:22 pm

Quoting Evan767 (Reply 2):
Taking the Gatwick Express from Gatwick to the city is a pain. I remember though when looking at subway maps in London, the subway goes to Heathrow. That, IMO, is a huge plus.

Puzzled by this comment. Lgw Express is an excellent service....departs every 15mins and takes 30mins..non-stop
into London/Victoria...its got airline style seats and the carriages are designed to accomodate psgrs with
luggage. The only downside is the cost ..its abt $30 one-way.

The Underground from LHR is not nearly so comfortable . There are abt 17 stops between LHR and Piccadilly Circus.
The carriages are not designed for psgrs with luggage...the tubes get very full and this makes it even more difficult to manage baggage without upsetting others....some of the stations are very deep and don-t have lifts so psgr have
to exit the tubes on to sometimes very crowded platforms and navigate their way thru the crowds with bags
and then manage these up very long escalators and then up steps to get on to the street .Only +ive I can see
is the cost ...abt $8.00 ow.

LHR express is similar to LGW express every 15mins and takes 15mins ...carraiges designed for psgrs
with baggage and cost abt the same as LGW.

Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 6):
LGW has traditionally been the home of holiday charter flights, and in my view it has never really been able to shake off that image. People perceive LHR as being more geared towards the business traveller, even if in reality it's not much more so than LGW

This is certainly the case. LHR is virtually 100% scheduled flights while the main Tour Operators and their in-house Charter airlines operate from LGW ( plus Ltn and Stn ). Nowadays Low Cost ,particularly Easyjet are significant operators @ LGW.


Historically LGW struggled to attract foreign national carriers .So while LH,AF,SK,KL,.SR(LX) matched BA
frequencies @ LHR , they largely avoided LGW . LH (LGW/FRA) , AF (CDG ) , KL (AMS) introduced
services briefly in the 80s but quickly withdrew due to losses. LGW depended largely on the UK
independents British Caledonian, Dan-Air ,Air Europe to provide a scheduled network and the fact
that they have all disappeared speaks for itself regarding LGW profitablity.

As result LGW frequencies were vastly inferior to LHR on the main routes and its freq which attracts the business
traveller.On FRA for e.g . BA /LH probably offer 16 flts per day @ LHR , LGW had 2 or 3/day....if you turned up at LGW and yr flt was canx or delayed you could be stranded for hours or even have to travel to LHR...while @ LHR
you could jump on the competitor or the next flt an hour or so later. Similarly if you are connecting from a delayed longhaul arrival you may face a 6hr wait for the next connection or even up on a coach on the M25 to LHR to make yr connection....not very pleasant when ypou are feeling tired after a LHL flight !


BA have said that just simply switching a service to LHR FM LGW has a dramatic impact in average yield as
result of improved business mix and this follows thru to profitability.

The range of connections is vastly better at LHR and this further contributes to better profitaability @ LHR.


This is why all airlines want to fly from LHR even though it is more congested and LGW is a nicer airport for the psgr to travel thru.
 
IADCA
Posts: 1393
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:30 pm

Quoting Evan767 (Reply 4):
LGW is to IAD
LHR is to DCA

No. No. No no no no no.

The relative difference is incredible. DCA is 15 minutes from the downtown on the train, which costs bucks max in rush hour. IAD is a 30-45 minute, 35-dollar cab ride. DCA is easy from downtown, IAD moderately difficult. A much more apt comparison would be IAD and BWI. Neither LHR or LGW is tremendously convenient to downtown London; DCA's equivalent in location is more roughly LCY.
 
stylo777
Posts: 2024
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:53 pm

Quoting BCALBOY (Reply 7):
LGW had 2 or 3/day.

currently there are no flights between FRA and LGW only FRA and LCY which I suppose you meant.
 
alangirvan
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2000 2:13 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:07 pm

LHR is regarded as better for transfers, but do airline alliances change that? If you want to transfer from BA European service to BA or oneworld Longhaul service, there is no competition, but for CO/DL/NW the hubs of their European partners will give them a lot of transfer options. If CO wants to fly a passenger from Houston to Turin, will they fly the person to LHR and put them onto a BA flight, or use CDG or AMS and put them onto AF/KL. Or does SkyTeam do transfers at LHR?

If transfers are not the point, then there is the shorter ride into London. And when people say London Airport, they mean Heathrow.
 
Steve332
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 9:27 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:34 pm

Quoting Stylo777 (Reply 9):
Quoting BCALBOY (Reply 7):
LGW had 2 or 3/day.

currently there are no flights between FRA and LGW

He meant they used to have those flights, they were disbanded a few years ago.
 
Kevin777
Posts: 951
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 5:36 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 5:22 pm

Quoting LAXspotter (Reply 5):
For me its CDG = LHR
Paris Beauvais = Gatwick

Oh come on..! BVA = Kent Airport or something.. nothing like LGW to London

Kevin777  Smile
"I was waiting for you at DFW, but you must have been in LUV" CPH-HAM-CPH CR9
 
Tristarsteve
Posts: 3384
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:04 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 6:58 pm

Before 9/11 we had flights to LHR and LGW from ARN. Both offered the same business class service.
In the morning and evening they left at the same time.
We carried an average of 10 C class pax to LGW, and 40 C class to LHR in the morning, and 10 C class to LGW and 100 C class to LHR in the evening. After 9/11 we had to cut flights. Which one would you cut?
 
Humberside
Posts: 3225
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:44 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 7:33 pm

Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 6):
On the other hand they both have a dedicated express train service, similar in price, and if I am flying into London and want to get to the financial district (what we call "The City"), then actually LGW is more convenient, because fast trains take you directly to a number of stations in the city, whereas from LHR you have to change on the Underground (and it takes a lot longer) or you have to take the Heathrow Express to Paddington, which is absolutely no use for The City whatsoever.

Crossrail, when it is finally built, will greatly improve connections from LHR to the City (and Docklands) though

Quoting BCALBOY (Reply 7):
The Underground from LHR is not nearly so comfortable . There are abt 17 stops between LHR and Piccadilly Circus.

My guess is that most people using the underground to LHR are airport workers from Hounslow etc and not passengers
Visit the Air Humberside Website and Forum
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 1683
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 8:05 pm

Quoting Humberside (Reply 14):
My guess is that most people using the underground to LHR are airport workers from Hounslow etc and not passengers

I found that a lot of people have been on it when i used it.

I think that one of the reasons that LHR has more flights is its position, for most people in england LGW is a nightmare to get to because of having to get round london.

Fred
Image
 
swiftski
Posts: 1837
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:19 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 8:11 pm

Quoting Humberside (Reply 14):
most people using the underground to LHR are airport workers

D'oh.

Go there and look at all the people. It's always, and I mean always, rammed with travellers.
 
shuggie
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:33 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 8:21 pm

It's worth remembering that LHR serves as the largest airport for the whole of Great Britain and to an extent is our main airport, it's proximity to the M25 is a definite bonus in this, along with it's being on the north side of London. LGW does a good job of serving the city itself and people on the south coast but it is a lot more difficult to get to for everybody else (unless they are flying in which case it makes no difference).

Popularity breeds popularity, LHR is the busier airport and so is going to be more attractive to airlines seeking new rotes as it offers more potential connections, therefore it becomes more popular still and so on. I don't suppose this is any different to other major airports.

LGW is also disadvantaged going forward as it cannot expand beyond it's current two terminals and one runway. A recent attempt to get a second runway at LGW was met with massive opposition and the plan was eventually changed to a second runway at STN and it'll be interesting to see if they eventually take the crown as London's second airport.

(I'm not really adding anything that hasn't already been said but I wanted to get my first post out of the way  Silly )
 
gffgold
Posts: 184
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 9:23 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 8:29 pm

If you particularly want to go to London as your final destination then there is frankly not much in it between LHR and LGW as regards public transport. In my own (limited) experience, however, I'd say it takes on average longer to get through LHR both for arrivals and departures as LGW is more compact. Also don't worry if you miss the view on the way into LHR because you'll inevitably circle round again a few more times! LCY is a little peach of an airport, but heaven help you if you need to transfer between London airports - always a nightmare.
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 8:39 pm

Heathrow versus Gatwick is a debate that rages in every forum, ranging from airliners.net chatrooms to IATA conferences.

LHR and LGW have shown themselves over time to be equivalent vis-a-vis ability to draw traffic from the London O&D market. The difference however is that LHR has the ability to draw higher yielding traffic, mainly on the strength of its network accessibility.

Going forward, LHR will always remain a premium airport by virtue of being the "hub" airport, while LGW will become more of the airport catering for O&D (carriers catering to VFR/vacation/LCC traffic) and if properly developed, intermodal traffic.

LGW has the benefit of having a mainline railway station on property and that will undoubtedly develop into the preferred means of domestic transit in the next decade as focus on "green" transportation and airport congestion grows.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
BCAL
Posts: 2925
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 10:16 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 9:46 pm

Like already posted above, location is perhaps the prime reason why LHR is the preferred London airport for the majority of passengers and therefore for the airlines.

LGW is south of London and therefore difficult to get to if you live on the north side of London, or to the north and west of England. LHR is to the west and equally accessible from north and south London. LHR also sits on the motorway network at a much more convenient location (M4/M25 junction and close to the M40) whereas when you come off the M1 at the M25 Gatwick is another 50 or more miles further.

From the centre of London:
  • LHR is approximately 17 miles (average car journey time 45-60 minutes) and LGW is 32 miles (60-90 minutes)
  • LHR has the Heathrow Express service to London Paddington (15 minutes) and is also on the Piccadilly line of the London Underground (average journey time 55 minutes, stopping en route at 17 stations).
  • LGW is located on the main London Brighton railway line and there is a dedicated Gatwick Express service to London Victoria (30 minutes) as well as services operated by other rail companies including First Capital Connect who operate services from LGW to several City stations.
LHR has two runways whereas LGW is probably the world's busiest single runway airport.

LGW also handles a large volume of charter/IT flights which LHR does not. Although the total percentage of charter flights has decreased over the past few years, back in the pre-1970s LGW was regarded primarily as the principal airport for the "bucket and spade" brigade (i.e. passengers on an IT) and this has forever tarnished LGW's reputation. As the number of charter flights decreased, there was an increase in flights operated by LCCs (principally U2 who is now the second-largest airline at LGW in terms of number of daily flights) which has also resulted in LGW being regarded as the "poor man's" airport.

Quoting BCALBOY (Reply 7):
LGW depended largely on the UK
independents British Caledonian, Dan-Air ,Air Europe to provide a scheduled network and the fact
that they have all disappeared speaks for itself regarding LGW profitablity.

As a general rule a full-service operation at LGW with a fare structure that is identical to a similar operation at LHR produces a 10% lower load factor. Similarly, on average, a scheduled service at LGW generates a 20% lower revenue and results in an up to 25% lower yield than a comparable service at LHR.

British Caledonian did not disappear due to LGW's profitability. They disappeared (or rather, like Dan-Air, were taken over by BA) because of the UK's Government's reluctance (at that time) to live up to the spirit of the "Second Force" aviation policy through concrete deeds, the UK Government's conflict of interest as (then) sole owner of BA as well as the regulator for all British airlines, and other politics of the skies (i.e. privately-owned airlines providing scheduled services in competition with government-owned flag carriers, highly restricted bilateral air service agreements etc.
MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
 
HT
Posts: 5857
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 6:20 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 9:58 pm

@ Shuggie: Welcome to A.net !

Quoting Shuggie (Reply 17):
LHR ... being on the north side of London.

Umpf ? "LHR NORTH of London " ? Last time I checked a map. it was dead center WEST of London ...  Wink
-HT
Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 10:33 pm

Quoting Shuggie (Reply 17):
It's worth remembering that LHR serves as the largest airport for the whole of Great Britain and to an extent is our main airport, it's proximity to the M25 is a definite bonus in this, along with it's being on the north side of London. LGW does a good job of serving the city itself and people on the south coast but it is a lot more difficult to get to for everybody else (unless they are flying in which case it makes no difference).



Quoting BCAL (Reply 20):
LGW is south of London and therefore difficult to get to if you live on the north side of London, or to the north and west of England. LHR is to the west and equally accessible from north and south London. LHR also sits on the motorway network at a much more convenient location (M4/M25 junction and close to the M40) whereas when you come off the M1 at the M25 Gatwick is another 50 or more miles further.

From looking at maps, it is readily apparent that LHR can draw extensively from traffic.

Quoting B747-437B (Reply 19):
LHR and LGW have shown themselves over time to be equivalent vis-a-vis ability to draw traffic from the London O&D market. The difference however is that LHR has the ability to draw higher yielding traffic, mainly on the strength of its network accessibility.

A lot of businesses have chosen to have office complexes out near LHR due to its status as being the primary gateway with the best connections, as well as the hub of the principal UK airline.

Quoting BCAL (Reply 20):
British Caledonian did not disappear due to LGW's profitability. They disappeared (or rather, like Dan-Air, were taken over by BA) because of the UK's Government's reluctance (at that time) to live up to the spirit of the "Second Force" aviation policy through concrete deeds, the UK Government's conflict of interest as (then) sole owner of BA as well as the regulator for all British airlines, and other politics of the skies (i.e. privately-owned airlines providing scheduled services in competition with government-owned flag carriers, highly restricted bilateral air service agreements etc.

Lack of which concrete deeds? Underinvestment in facilities at LGW and ground transport?
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
jplane1
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:37 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sat Apr 21, 2007 10:36 pm

As a frequent user of LHR in my view the Underground is a good way of getting to LHR if you are near a Piccadilly line station in the centre of London. LGW is not as convenient from central London and is a real problem to get to unless you live south of London if you are a UK resident. This combined with all the reasons already stated means LHR is much busier.

My first post out of the way!
 
shuggie
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:33 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:58 am

Quoting HT (Reply 21):

Umpf ? "LHR NORTH of London " ? Last time I checked a map. it was dead center WEST of London ... Wink
-HT

Good Point!  blush 
 
ekskycargo370
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 4:46 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 2:23 am

LHR is possibly the worst airport in the world.The security restrictions put in place are a joke,as they do not have the staff to cope with it.As an employee,the logistics of the airport are all wrong too.
 
vv701
Posts: 5847
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 2:24 am

Many of the reasons given for the popularity of LHR both as an international hub and in preference to LGW that are given above seem to be logical but do not always hold up to historical scrutiny.

An example is the Heathrow Express. It opened on 23 June 1998, less than ten years ago. So, in terms of cause and effect we can br sure that it had no impact on making LHR more desirable than LGW. This is particularly true when you consider that the Gatwick Express opened in 1982 and that while the Gatwick Express delivers you almost into the heart of London's West End, you alight from the Heathrow Express on the north west periphery of central London and much further from the City of London.

Similarly the motorway system is quoted in some replies. Yet the M25 was not completed until the early to mid 70s while LHR was opened around ten years before the first stretch of British Motorway, the M1 running north from close to Watford.

To find the main reason for LHR's importance and relative popularity we need to go back before the immediate post World War 2 years when it was opened.

Long distance air travel really took off for the rich and influential in the 1930s. Croydon Airport to the south of London became a prime factor in long distance air travel primarily because of the then British Empire and Commonwealth and because of the close toes that still existed between the United Kingdom and independent English speaking nations, primarily the USA. There was a need for individuals to travel from London to the four corners of the world or, more specifically countries like Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand ans South Africa as well as the USA in much greater numbers than from any other city or country. Indeed the only comparable situation was the relationship between Paris, France and the French colonies in Africa and the Pacific region. However the size (particularly in terms of population) of the French Overseas Dependencies was much smaller requiring lower levels of long distance travel.

The net result of all of this was that Croydon became a European centre for long distance travel. With insufficient demand from other European cities to warrant their own services and the short range of long haul aircraft in the 1930s it was possible to fly from Croydon Airport to nearly every important world destination on the very long distance routes to the likes of Cape Town and Sydney. Indeed the only part of the world not adequately served from Croydon at that time was Latin America (although, of course, the Caribbean, the USA and Canada were well served).

After World War 2 Croydon Airport was closed down, the long distance sea planes operating from the Solent (near Southampton) were withdrawn from service and Heathrow (which had been the home of Fairey Aviation, an aircraft manufacturer) became London's new international airport. Not only were all the long haul flights moved there but so were the short haul flights that fed into them.

At this time LGW was a grass strip not used for commercial aviation. However as early as the late 1950s LHR's pre-eminence as an international hub together with the advent of a desire by the British to fly south for their summer break led to an explosion in short haul charter traffic. So in 1958 the runway at LGW was laid. (This, incidentally and deplorably was the last new runway to be laid in the south east of England with the notable exception of LCY.)

So the real reason why LHR is considered more desirable that LGW is that it was the home from the day they were founded of both British European Airways and British Overseas Airways Corporation, the former feeding passengers from all over Europe into the latter's world-wide network. LGW meanwhile grew as a holiday airport initially used primarily by charter airlines.

Soon after BEA and BOAC were merged to form BA LHR was already full to the brim. The first casualty was BA's charter subsidiary, British Airtours. It effectively had to transfer from LHR to LGW. The next casualty was British Airways themselves that had to locate all new LON services from LGW or move existing LHR services to LGW to create the space for new LHR services. And the final major casualty were all new trans-Atlantic operators and destination as Bermuda 2, signed in 1979, required these operations not to be from LHR.

The effectively enforced moves from LHR to LGW was particularly difficult for BA. Both of its predecessors had established very large and costly engineering bases at LHR. BOAC had established their base on the east side of LHR just outside what was then the perimeter road. It became the BA East Engineering Base. BEA had their base almost adjacent to the BOAC base but just inside the perimeter road. Today it is the BA West Engineering Base. So even today, for example, BA ferries aircraft from LGW to LHR to be repainted.

Although the perhaps unique but increasingly threatened status of LHR as a world-wide hub is illustrated by two statements made by BA in 1997 to explain the introduction of their 'World Tails' livery. They said that more than 40 per cent of the international passengers they flew into LHR flew out again to another international destination without ever going landside. They also said that around 60 per cent of their passengers were not British nationals.

The 40 per cent figure is particularly interesting. Recognising that it is probable that most passengers flying to LHR on domestic routes with either BA or BD are likely to be making a connection with an international flight at LHR it is possible that less than half the passengers arriving at LHR are London bound. This is certainly not the case at LHR as is well illustrated here:

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 13):
Before 9/11 we had flights to LHR and LGW from ARN. Both offered the same business class service.
In the morning and evening they left at the same time.
We carried an average of 10 C class pax to LGW, and 40 C class to LHR in the morning, and 10 C class to LGW and 100 C class to LHR in the evening.

So it is my contention that the main reason for LHR's popularity compared to LGW is to do with nothing more than connectivity.
 
N62NA
Posts: 4069
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 2:28 am

Quoting Centrair (Reply 3):

LGW is to ???
LHR is to ???

LHR=JFK
LGW=EWR
How come I can't upload an avatar photo to my profile?
 
shuggie
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:33 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 2:38 am

Quoting N62NA (Reply 27):
LHR=JFK
LGW=EWR

I agree

LCY=LGA

Well, sort of....!  bigthumbsup 
 
BA1985
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 10:47 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 2:50 am

The one thing to definately bear in mind also is that LGW is a lots more popular and in mnay ways convienient that LHR...I am based in the SE and LGW North is certainly a much more pleasent experience than LHR and many feel that way so it is not worth writing off LGW just yet !
 
ChinaClipper40
Posts: 200
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:23 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:26 am

Speaking purely from the perspective of a North American frequent flyer, I must say that I much prefer LGW. If my trip ends in London, I have the speed and convenience of negotiating a smaller terminal plus the nonstop rail service of the Gatwick Express into centre city London. If I am going elsewhere in England, the convenience of the rail connections from Gatwick via Victoria station, plus the many other trains that I can board directly from LGW to my final destination make LGW my preference. If I am connecting onwards to the European Continent, LHR is nightmarish. I always need to add at least an extra hour (preferably 2) for a connecting flight at LHR, as compared to any other connecting European hub. So, for onward travel to the Continent requiring a change of plane, I much prefer to do it at a more user-friendly airport on the Continent - like AMS, FRA, MAD, MUC, or ZRH. I am therefore in agreement with EKSkycargo370 on this one.

Quoting EKSkycargo370 (Reply 25):
LHR is possibly the worst airport in the world.

My two cents.

ChinaClipper40
 
richardw
Posts: 3145
Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 3:17 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:52 am

London's best airport for leaving the city for the wekend is L**, and *OU isn't bad either, some of the other airport operators are providing a shockingly bad service, and the airlines do nothing.
 
Evan767
Posts: 2198
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 10:52 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 4:29 am

Quoting IADCA (Reply 8):
No. No. No no no no no.

The relative difference is incredible. DCA is 15 minutes from the downtown on the train, which costs bucks max in rush hour. IAD is a 30-45 minute, 35-dollar cab ride. DCA is easy from downtown, IAD moderately difficult. A much more apt comparison would be IAD and BWI. Neither LHR or LGW is tremendously convenient to downtown London; DCA's equivalent in location is more roughly LCY.

Ok dude, calm down. I got it wrong, one "no", though still rude, is enough. Thanks.

Quoting BCALBOY (Reply 7):
Puzzled by this comment. Lgw Express is an excellent service....departs every 15mins and takes 30mins..non-stop
into London/Victoria...its got airline style seats and the carriages are designed to accomodate psgrs with
luggage. The only downside is the cost ..its abt $30 one-way.

The Underground from LHR is not nearly so comfortable . There are abt 17 stops between LHR and Piccadilly Circus.
The carriages are not designed for psgrs with luggage...the tubes get very full and this makes it even more difficult to manage baggage without upsetting others....some of the stations are very deep and don-t have lifts so psgr have
to exit the tubes on to sometimes very crowded platforms and navigate their way thru the crowds with bags
and then manage these up very long escalators and then up steps to get on to the street .Only +ive I can see
is the cost ...abt $8.00 ow.

LHR express is similar to LGW express every 15mins and takes 15mins ...carraiges designed for psgrs
with baggage and cost abt the same as LGW.

Well, for me it's all about money. Though I must say I have never flown in to LHR. Only LGW. I thought the train from Gatwick took forever, but apparently, according to you, the subway to LHR is just as long. I'd still rather take the subway, the Pound is too much more than the US dollar to spend that much on the Gatwick Express. $$$
The proper term is "on final" not "on finals" bud...
 
HT
Posts: 5857
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 6:20 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 5:52 am

Quoting VV701 (Reply 26):

Very good historic overview !
But while this very well explains the situation for long term residents at LHR, why is it that new airlines that just have formed and want to serve London are trying to get slots at LHR rather than at LGW ? (of course almost nobody gets those requested slots at LHR and then starts flying into LGW instead)
Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
 
by188b
Posts: 555
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 10:46 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 5:58 am

Quoting Evan767 (Reply 32):
Well, for me it's all about money. Though I must say I have never flown in to LHR. Only LGW. I thought the train from Gatwick took forever, but apparently, according to you, the subway to LHR is just as long. I'd still rather take the subway, the Pound is too much more than the US dollar to spend that much on the Gatwick Express. $$$

A tip from a seasoned traveller, next time you use LGW, use the Southern trains service, it uses the exact same route as the Gatwick express, is only £8.90p single - compared to £14.90p single for the Gatwick express, and is only 5 minutes slower at a total journey time of 35 minutes.

The only other tip i can pass on is that if there is a party of 4 travelling, you can ask at the ticket office for a 4 for two offer, this means that 4 people travel for the price of 2!
next flights : LHR-SOF BA, SOF-DOH-KAT QR, KAT-HKG KA, HKG-LHR VS, LHR-ATH-LHR BA, LHR-CDG-LHR AF, LHR-MAD-LHR IB/BA
 
Evan767
Posts: 2198
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 10:52 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:04 am

Quoting BY188B (Reply 34):
A tip from a seasoned traveller, next time you use LGW, use the Southern trains service, it uses the exact same route as the Gatwick express, is only £8.90p single - compared to £14.90p single for the Gatwick express, and is only 5 minutes slower at a total journey time of 35 minutes.

The only other tip i can pass on is that if there is a party of 4 travelling, you can ask at the ticket office for a 4 for two offer, this means that 4 people travel for the price of 2!

Thanks! I'll remember that!
The proper term is "on final" not "on finals" bud...
 
User avatar
Goodbye
Posts: 856
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 1:41 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:32 am

What about connections *between* the airports? Say you have a flight arriving in LGW, then you have to take a flight from LHR (or vice-versa). How would one go about doing that?
✈︎
 
HT
Posts: 5857
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 6:20 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:35 am

Quoting Goodbye (Reply 36):
What about connections *between* the airports? Say you have a flight arriving in LGW, then you have to take a flight from LHR (or vice-versa). How would one go about doing that?

LGW To LHR Transfers (by Aa787823 Apr 21 2007 in Aviation Polls & Prefs)
-HT
Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
 
vv701
Posts: 5847
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:47 am

Quoting HT (Reply 33):
while this very well explains the situation for long term residents at LHR, why is it that new airlines that just have formed and want to serve London are trying to get slots at LHR rather than at LGW ?

Today LHR offers flights to most major cities in the world. There are exceptions, like a weakness in Latin America and major US cities not served because of the Bermuda 2 restrictions. But to most others the passenger has a choice of at least two airlines to most major destinations. Of course there are exceptions like SEL (served only by KE), KUL (served only by MH) and AUK (served only by NZ). New airlines wish to link into this network and so, by preference, will not fly to LGW or STN with their inferior range of connections despite the higher charges made for using LHR.

My assessment is that the only other airports that fall into the same category are FRA and JFK.

All three of these airports are strategically positioned geographically. FRA's central position in Europe is very important. Both LHR and JFK are, like FRA, amogst the world's top business centres and lie cloise to the great circle route from Europe to North America.

There are also prestige and commercial reasons. In a recent interview with the Times newspaper the CEO of DL, Gerald Grinstein, while talking about the EU/US Open Skies agreement is reported as saying 'London to New York is probably the busiest business route in the world, and you have to have it in your portfolio if you want to get the big corporate travel deals.' Although Grinstein is reported as saying 'London' here, as the discussion was about Open Skies I think he may have either said or meant 'Heathrow'.

More of the Times / Grinstein interview is to be found at:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...ctors/transport/article1654240.ece
 
Flighty
Posts: 8070
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:26 am

Quoting VV701 (Reply 38):
My assessment is that the only other airports that fall into the same category are FRA and JFK.

LAX and NRT are also basically in that category. Also, depending on your views, is CDG.
 
vv701
Posts: 5847
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 9:12 am

Quoting Flighty (Reply 39):
LAX and NRT are also basically in that category.

LAX? Yes, probably. But NRT is primarily a long haul hub more like DXB. At LHR, FRA, JFK and LAX long haul flights benefit from substantial short haul feeds.
 
Rivet42
Posts: 604
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:26 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 9:54 am

My turn again...:

Quoting Humberside (Reply 14):
Crossrail, when it is finally built, will greatly improve connections from LHR to the City (and Docklands) though

You are being very optimistic! There is still no clear sign that Crossrail will be completed... I wish!

Quoting Humberside (Reply 14):
My guess is that most people using the underground to LHR are airport workers from Hounslow etc and not passengers

That's definitely not the (suit)case - I would put the ratio of staff to passengers as 1:4...

Quoting BY188B (Reply 34):
A tip from a seasoned traveller, next time you use LGW, use the Southern trains service, it uses the exact same route as the Gatwick express, is only �8.90p single - compared to �14.90p single for the Gatwick express, and is only 5 minutes slower at a total journey time of 35 minutes.

Another seasoned traveller tip - there is another train, called First Capital Connect, that runs from Brighton to Luton (and beyond), via Gatwick airport and a number of stations in the centre of London such as Blackfriars, City Thamselink and Kings Cross (as well as Luton Airport). This in my view is much more useful than trains into Victoria Station.

Quoting Goodbye (Reply 36):
What about connections *between* the airports?

Ha! Now that's the big one! Back in the 80's there was a S.61 helicopter link service, but these days, you'd be better advised to avoid London altogether and change planes at AMS...  Smile
If you really must transfer LGW<->LHR, then there is a frequent National Express bus service that runs non-stop between the two, only depends upon traffic on the M25. In all seriousness, it's a good service, much like the Air France bus that runs between ORY and CDG.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 38):
and AUK (served only by NZ).

I assume you mean AKL, in which case you will find that it is served as a destination from London with one intermediate stop by TG, UA, SQ, KE, JL and CX, and by EK and QF/BA with 2 intermediate stops.

PhiL P
I travel, therefore I am.
 
HT
Posts: 5857
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 6:20 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:03 am

Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 41):
Luton Airport

The airport hardly can be seen when leaving the train at Luton Parkway (Railway-)Station ... Big grin
Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
 
a380us
Posts: 1447
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 4:55 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 12:58 pm

Quoting Evan767 (Reply 4):
LGW is to JFK
LHR is to LGA


NO NO NO NO NO

to start JFK is one of thetop airlines in the world
its in movies much more than Heathrow
LGA is much more xpensive and closer to city center
the largest aircraft is a 764 and its only alowed to go to florida other wise they have to keep them small
so there no conection of
LGW-JFK
and
LHR-LGA
of any thing its opposite
www.JandACosmetics.com
 
steeler83
Posts: 7391
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 2:06 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 2:22 pm

Quoting BCAL (Reply 20):
LHR has two runways whereas LGW is probably the world's busiest single runway airport.

And aren't they adding another runway or two at LHR IIRC?

Man, just from looking at the first few posts here, it looks like LGW is in the middle of nowhere pretty much. Then progressing down, it looks like there are other factors that come into play in addition to the general location/accessibility to the flying public.

I am actually trying to find out more about LHR. When was it first built? Was it intended for British Airways? Which came first? Was the area surrounding LHR populous the whole time since even before LHR was constructed? Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks chaps!  Smile
Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
 
richardw
Posts: 3145
Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 3:17 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:58 pm

LGW to London Victoria or LGW to London Blackfriars is easier than EWR to Madison Sq Gdn.
 
HT
Posts: 5857
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 6:20 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 9:29 pm

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 44):
And aren't they adding another runway or two at LHR IIRC?

While it is the official plan to add a third parallel runway north to the 2 in existance and use, I personally have zero hopes that this will materialize. I would not put a single penny in such a bet ...
Might well be that LGW gets a second runway earlier than LHR gets a third parallel - let alone the proposed second runway at STN as well as the expansion of LTN.

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 44):
I am actually trying to find out more about LHR.

I'm sure you already checked the usual sources on the net, like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Heathrow
Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ! Keep in mind, that today is the first day of the rest of your life !
 
brettbrett21
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 6:08 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:21 pm

Quoting HT (Reply 42):
Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 41):
Luton Airport

The airport hardly can be seen when leaving the train at Luton Parkway (Railway-)Station ... Big grin

Hay! We happen to be perched on top of a hill!
i'm so excited i wish i could wet my pants!
 
trintocan
Posts: 2728
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2000 6:02 pm

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:31 am

An interesting discussion. My 2 cents' worth...

Asiana also does Seoul from LHR.

LHR certainly wins in terms of connections as well as being BA's biggest hub (which in itself adds to its attraction as a connection hub). Indeed, the heavy concentration of premium traffic there has led to BA and VS sending their more leisure-orientated routes to LGW (especially Caribbean routes); to be honest though many of BA's routes from LGW are inherited from British Caledonian and Dan Air. EasyJet has certainly shaken up the LGW scene as it now effectively competes with both the BA short-haul network and the holiday airlines (flights to AGP, PMI, IBZ etc.) Perhaps the decline in the relative share of LGW traffic held by the charters has arisen both from the rise of U2 and the increasing tendency for the charters to offer flights from a range of regional airports.

Needless to say, for ease of access LHR wins hands-down unless one is based in the city itself or in the South-East. I have driven from Cardiff to LGW and that is a torturous 4 hour drive, unlike LHR which can be done in about 2 and a half hours. While LHR does not have a mainline railway station (Heathrow Express is BAA owned and neither part of National Rail services nor available to people holding LT Travelcards) it does have bus links to many stations (including Reading for services to Oxford, South Wales, Bristol and the West Country, Woking for Surrey services, Watford Junction for services to Birmingham, North Wales, Manchester, Liverpool and Scotland, Feltham for Surrey again plus stations to Waterloo, thus bringing South West London into easy reach and West Drayton and Hayes & Harlington for services to Slough and environs). The Heathrow Connect service has expanded rail reach from LHR by tying in intermediate districts between it and Paddington (including Southall) and offers additional Tube connections at Ealing Broadway. Indeed the Connect was launched principally to serve airport workers, many of whom live in the districts it serves. There is no doubt that the Tube carries many workers but anytime I use it to LHR travellers seem to be in the majority. LGW's train links are excellent isofar as the City and South-East plus Bedfordshire are concerned but beyond that links are weaker (though it does have services to Reading too). LGW certainly has the advantage of being a mainline station in this regard.

The National Express airport buses tend to serve both LHR and LGW but as they generally call at LHR first the journey to LGW ends up being longer.

TrinToCan.
Hop to it, fly for life!
 
vv701
Posts: 5847
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: LGW Vs LHR: What Is The Deal?

Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:25 am

Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 41):
I assume you mean AKL, in which case you will find that it is served as a destination from London with one intermediate stop by TG, UA, SQ, KE, JL and CX, and by EK and QF/BA with 2 intermediate stops.

Yes. Thanks for the correction. I did not consider flights with intermediate stops and aircraft changes as you can get to almost anywhere served by a commercial air service from any major airport with a couple of stops.

Quoting Trintocan (Reply 48):
I have driven from Cardiff to LGW and that is a torturous 4 hour drive, unlike LHR which can be done in about 2 and a half hours.

If you can get to LHR in 2.5 hours you can certainly get to LGW in a lot less than 4 hours. From LHR T4 to LGW South Terminal is precisely 40.5 miles and apart from leaving LHR and arriving at LGW it is M25/M23 all the way. It takes about 40 minutes.

According to the AA from Cardiff Castle to LHR T4 the distance is 139.7 miles and the drive takes 2hr 36min. From Cardfiff Castle to LGW South Terminal is 174.6 miles and the journey time is 2hrs 59min. The route they recommend to LGW is M4/M25/M23.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos