GoBlue
Topic Author
Posts: 213
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 9:27 pm

A-380 JFK-LHR

Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:59 am

What carriers are going to operate this route? Same with ORD-LHR and LAX-LHR.

Could a carrier not get a great advantage on that route by filling up the premium cabins and then selling off economy at a resonable price. This would also free up slots at LHR for the carrier to operate more legs to smaller destiantions, or other markets that could use the service.

BA operates a ton of 747/777 on these routes. I know they do not have any A-380's on order. But they will have to respond to any compeition on these routes.
 
DiscoverCSG
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:22 am

RE: A-380 JFK-LHR

Sat Jul 14, 2007 2:46 am

Well, there's certainly something to be said (in terms of congestion, cost, environment, etc.) for condensing 8 daily 744's into 5 daily 388's, or whatever.

However, the answer I usually hear is that on precisely these routes - especially JFK-LHR - business travelers want frequency. With JFK-LHR eastbound, it's not that big a deal to condense:

8:00 a.m. 744
9:00 a.m. 772
6:30 p.m. 744
7:00 p.m. 744
7:30 p.m. 744
8:00 p.m. 744
9:00 p.m. 744
10:30 p.m. 744

to

8:30 a.m. 772
6:30 p.m. 388
7:30 p.m. 388
8:30 p.m. 388
10:30 p.m. 388

Here, travelers can still who up anytime from 3:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. and get on a flight within three hours.

However, consider it westbound LHR-JFK: Going from

8:30 a.m. 744
10:30 a.m. 744
12:00 p.m. 744
1:00 p.m. 744
3:00 p.m. 744
4:30 p.m. 744
7:00 p.m. 744
9:00 p.m. 772

to

8:30 a.m. 388
12:00 p.m. 388
3:00 p.m. 388
6:00 p.m. 388
9:00 p.m. 772

means that a walk-up traveler (the most profitable kind) might have to wait over four hours to get on a flight. For most of us, that wouldn't be awful, but it limits connections options, etc.

In any event, it would seem unlikely that BA (the airline I've been using as a rough example) would do a wholesale replacement of 744's with 388's on that route. However, where BA could use the 388 is for incremental capacity increases without expanding the number of slots used at Heathrow.

Just my $0.02 (or GBP0.01) worth...
 
ptugarin
Posts: 214
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 6:09 am

RE: A-380 JFK-LHR

Sat Jul 14, 2007 2:58 am

Quoting DiscoverCSG (Reply 1):
to

8:30 a.m. 772

Did you mean 8:30 a.m. 388? I don't think shrinking morning capacity is an option.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13813
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: A-380 JFK-LHR

Sat Jul 14, 2007 2:58 am

Quoting DiscoverCSG (Reply 1):
8:00 a.m. 744
9:00 a.m. 772
6:30 p.m. 744
7:00 p.m. 744
7:30 p.m. 744
8:00 p.m. 744
9:00 p.m. 744
10:30 p.m. 744

to

8:30 a.m. 772
6:30 p.m. 388
7:30 p.m. 388
8:30 p.m. 388
10:30 p.m. 388

Can't do it that way.

First, you can't assume that people flying at 7 just go at 6:30. Then there's the slot issue on the other end.

Quoting DiscoverCSG (Reply 1):
8:30 a.m. 744
10:30 a.m. 744
12:00 p.m. 744
1:00 p.m. 744
3:00 p.m. 744
4:30 p.m. 744
7:00 p.m. 744
9:00 p.m. 772

to

8:30 a.m. 388
12:00 p.m. 388
3:00 p.m. 388
6:00 p.m. 388
9:00 p.m. 772

I can't see this either, consolidating 3 morning 744s into 2 A388s with 3.5 hour spacing. Nor can you just move a flight from 7pm to 6pm and expect it to fill up. There are business days and schedules you are just ignoring here.

If anything, you might see 8:30, 10:30, and 3PM with A388, and then other frequencies with other planes.

That means for the JFK-LHR run, you only have 3 388s a day, so maybe you send those at 7PM, 9PM and 10:30PM and other equipment for the other demand.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
DiscoverCSG
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:22 am

RE: A-380 JFK-LHR

Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:15 am

Well, there's certainly something to be said (in terms of congestion, cost, environment, etc.) for condensing 8 daily 744's into 5 daily 388's, or whatever.

However, the answer I usually hear is that on precisely these routes - especially JFK-LHR - business travelers want frequency. With JFK-LHR eastbound, it's not that big a deal to condense:

8:00 a.m. 744
9:00 a.m. 772
6:30 p.m. 744
7:00 p.m. 744
7:30 p.m. 744
8:00 p.m. 744
9:00 p.m. 744
10:30 p.m. 744

to

8:30 a.m. 772
6:30 p.m. 388
7:30 p.m. 388
8:30 p.m. 388
10:30 p.m. 388

Here, travelers can still who up anytime from 3:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. and get on a flight within three hours.

However, consider it westbound LHR-JFK: Going from

8:30 a.m. 744
10:30 a.m. 744
12:00 p.m. 744
1:00 p.m. 744
3:00 p.m. 744
4:30 p.m. 744
7:00 p.m. 744
9:00 p.m. 772

to

8:30 a.m. 388
12:00 p.m. 388
3:00 p.m. 388
6:00 p.m. 388
9:00 p.m. 772

means that a walk-up traveler (the most profitable kind) might have to wait over four hours to get on a flight. For most of us, that wouldn't be awful, but it limits connections options, etc.

In any event, it would seem unlikely that BA (the airline I've been using as a rough example) would do a wholesale replacement of 744's with 388's on that route. However, where BA could use the 388 is for incremental capacity increases without expanding the number of slots used at Heathrow.

Just my $0.02 (or GBP0.01) worth...
 
migair54
Posts: 2179
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:24 am

RE: A-380 JFK-LHR

Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:29 am

it´s a difficult issue,

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
There are business days and schedules you are just ignoring here.

totally agree

Quoting DiscoverCSG (Reply 1):
business travelers want frequency

not only business travelers, everybody, if you have to fly, more frequencies means more choices.

IMO A380 will fly before on the kangaroo route and Asia (India, China, Japan....) i´ve read in other topic that AF is thinking about deploying their A380 to Tokyo and China.

Cities like Hong Kong, Singapore, Tokyo has lot of business travellers and tons of cargo, so A380 could work better with the same frequencies but with some more capacity.

This routes between NYC and big cities in Europe usually are very profitable. if you don´t fly the route somebody else will do.
 
Glareskin
Posts: 1004
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:35 pm

RE: A-380 JFK-LHR

Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:41 am

I'm amazed that most people on this forum only think about 1:1 replacement. What about growth? Both US and European economies are still growing. This should provide room for growth in air travelling. BA could wait until other airlines pick-up the extra demand or choose a more offensive approach. Same goes for other European and American legacy airlines.
There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
 
boysteve
Posts: 887
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 7:02 am

RE: A-380 JFK-LHR

Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:23 am

DiscoverCSG has condensed 1x772 and 7x744 into 1x772 and 4x388. This is too much rationalisation surely? 7x744 does not equal 4x388!
 
Shamrock_747
Posts: 1499
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 3:25 am

RE: A-380 JFK-LHR

Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:44 am

If BA do order the A380 I don't think it would be used to JFK. The aircraft would be far more suited to the likes of HKG, NRT, CPT, JNB etc. One of BA's main advantages on the JFK route is frequency. The 747-400s used on these flights have 14 FIRST and 70 Club World seats, with an overall capacity of fewer than 300 pax - it's all about schedule rather than mass capacity.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: A-380 JFK-LHR

Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:10 am

Right now, of the carriers which fly (or will fly) JFK-LHR here are the possibilities:

1-BA-Walsh has stated even if they get the A380, JFK-LHR wouldn't be a route, as frequency is king for that route...and they aren't going to upguage either, as their load factor (2006) on LHR-JFK runs at around 75%
2-VS-they are deferring their A380's..so not so sure with them, but they would be a candidate...
3-AA-no chance
4-DL-no chance
5-BD...slim to none
6- AI-if they get the A380, this might be one route for them...JFK-LHR-DEL..
"Up the Irons!"
 
trent1000
Posts: 636
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 3:55 pm

RE: A-380 JFK-LHR

Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:52 pm

Quoting DiscoverCSG (Reply 1):
Well, there's certainly something to be said (in terms of congestion, cost, environment, etc.) for condensing 8 daily 744's into 5 daily 388's, or whatever.

I appreciated your response. It obviously took some time to compile the schedules, even if they serve only for others to respond to. The condensed information makes your point clear.

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