heebeegb
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:01 pm

LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 3:23 pm

Hi all,

Reading the business traveller magazine article on the LGW £1bn improvements and it mentions as we know there is now no NYC link with LGW (BA 763 before 9/11, then resumed for a short time on a 4 class 772 but then dropped, DL operated a 763 a few years back upping it to double daily until both moved due to open skies)

CO of course had an LGW-EWR link before open skies, DC10s then 772, 764 etc

The article says about how the lack of US traffic caused QR to leave LGW and also head of airline busienss development at LGW quoted as saying "we've got active dialogue about transatlantic routes, its one of our key targets and we're having conversations about getting a new york here"

Who do you think would operate a NYC from LGW if anyone?

Not sure BA would try it again or VS. Maybe DL? as they have a daily ATL still at LGW,CO could restart an EWR? Not sure who else would do it. I wonder could a charter make it work? like TOM operating a 767 say a 5x weekly operation thur-mon selling packages and direct bookings?

Any thoughts?
 
1stfl94
Posts: 1082
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:33 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 3:49 pm

Quoting heebeegb (Thread starter):
I wonder could a charter make it work? like TOM operating a 767 say a 5x weekly operation thur-mon selling packages and direct bookings?

Probably not as the tour operators would probably just buy up economy seats on scheduled flights.

LON-NYC is considered a premium market and the premium travellers are going out of LHR which has resulted in the scheduled carriers pulling out of LGW when they could. BA only really kept the last LGW-JFK route going because it keeping the slot warm for the LCY service.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 3368
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 4:13 pm

Come on, if BA, DL and CO all move their services out of LGW to LHR, the route's not viable due to the proximity of the LHR-NYC market. None of the US majors or British majors will fly it so the short answer is that it won't happen with a major carrier.

Hence realistic speculation would be on someone like Sun Country adding to their weekly LGW-YQX-MSP (unlikely). The days of the likes of American Trans Air operation from secondary UK airfields to major US cities are behind us.
Gatwick can "say" what they'd like to see, it's the same as BHX, NCL et all, more long haul heavy metal. This doesn't mean that it's in any way likely.

Odd that QR can't seem to stay at LGW without US connections and yet EK manage a thrice daily service.......I suspect QR just wanted to consolidate at LHR.
 
User avatar
Vasu
Posts: 2939
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:34 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 4:43 pm

Here's a question...

If EWR can have numerous flights to London alongside JFK, why doesn't LGW have more flights to New York?

Surely LGW is to LHR what EWR is to JFK... right?
 
codc10
Posts: 1749
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 4:52 pm

Quoting Vasu (Reply 3):
Surely LGW is to LHR what EWR is to JFK... right?

Not exactly. LGW traffic has been reduced to substantially all VFR/leisure traffic, while the business traffic has flocked to LHR since Open Skies. EWR has higher yields relative to JFK than does LGW to LHR.
 
apodino
Posts: 3022
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 4:52 pm

Quoting Vasu (Reply 3):
Here's a question...

If EWR can have numerous flights to London alongside JFK, why doesn't LGW have more flights to New York?

Surely LGW is to LHR what EWR is to JFK... right?

That is an apples to oranges comparison. EWR and JFK are both about the same distance from Manhattan, and both are arguably just as easy to get to. By comparison, LHR is only 15 miles west of the Square Mile, where LGW is 28 miles south, and is much less convenient to get to than LHR.

If you want a better comparison, try LHR and LGW to NRT and HND, after the Japanese government lifts all the time restrictions on HND. I guarantee you that most of the Tokyo service will wind up at HND after that.
 
avek00
Posts: 3155
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 4:56 pm

Quoting Vasu (Reply 3):
Surely LGW is to LHR what EWR is to JFK... right?

Not at all.
Live life to the fullest.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:01 pm

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 2):
Gatwick can "say" what they'd like to see, it's the same as BHX, NCL et all, more long haul heavy metal. This doesn't mean that it's in any way likely.

   At this point, LGW is just another UK regional airport. Don't be tricked by its relative proximity to London.
 
User avatar
Vasu
Posts: 2939
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:34 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:16 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 7):
At this point, LGW is just another UK regional airport. Don't be tricked by its relative proximity to London.

Ah, ok - thanks for clearing that one up!
 
planesarecool
Posts: 3208
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:26 pm

Quoting apodino (Reply 5):
and is much less convenient to get to than LHR.

This rubbish comes up in every thread thread about LGW/LHR. Much less convenient than LHR? Because getting on a train for half an hour from one of six central London stations is much less convenient than getting on a tube for 45 minutes, or getting on a tube for 15 mins before sitting on another train for another 15 minutes (and paying through the roof for the privilege)?
 
fcogafa
Posts: 861
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:37 pm

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:30 pm

I think that is being a bit disingenuous to Gatwick. It is used by a lot of smaller national airlines as their London destination, think Malev, Adria, Ukraine, Montenegro, Rossiya etc etc. If there was space at LHR they would go there, as some once did, but it is still the second choice for London, even though the multitude of orange tails do make it seem like a low cost airport.
 
nclmedic
Posts: 169
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 9:25 pm

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:32 pm

And you have to think about the companies that currently operate out of the NYC airports...EWR is one of CO's main bases, with JFK being home to DL and AA. There is no such split in London - all the majors are based at LHR with secondary ops at LGW to leisure destinations. I have to agree with previous posters that while LGW is coming on in leaps and bounds in terms of the development, its never really going to attract big-scale, schedules, long-haul business to non-leisure destinations. LHR is the golden egg.

As for regional airports, I'm not so sure. With capacity rapidly approaching at both LGW and LHR, the natural progression will eventually be for further development outside of London. EK has really led the way (DXB out of MAN, BHX, NCL, GLA) and those flights all do very well, so who knows what will be come in the future...
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:36 pm

Quoting heebeegb (Thread starter):
The article says about how the lack of US traffic caused QR to leave LGW

That immediately makes me suspicious of the article, as such a statement is incorrect.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
User avatar
FlyCaledonian
Posts: 1731
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 6:18 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:42 pm

Quoting apodino (Reply 5):
That is an apples to oranges comparison. EWR and JFK are both about the same distance from Manhattan, and both are arguably just as easy to get to. By comparison, LHR is only 15 miles west of the Square Mile, where LGW is 28 miles south, and is much less convenient to get to than LHR.

Yet it is LGW that has the better direct rail links, with regular services from Farringdon, City Thameslink, Blackfriars and London Bridge direct to Gatwick Airport.

What LHR has is the better range of flights, and London to New York via LGW on a once daily flight isn't that attractive for the business traveller when you look at the frequencies that VS, BA/AA, CO and DL all offer from LHR.

If anything came back I wonder if an AA operated 757 on JFK-LGW might work. Not too premium heavy, the right sized aircraft for the market, and would benefit from the AA/BA ATI deal. BA would offer some limited feed from the LGW network, though no where near what it could a decade ago. Still, perhaps more viable than DL or CO on the 757, who would pretty much have to count on O&D at the LGW end.
Let's Go British Caledonian!
 
apodino
Posts: 3022
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:11 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:50 pm

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 13):
Quoting apodino (Reply 5):
That is an apples to oranges comparison. EWR and JFK are both about the same distance from Manhattan, and both are arguably just as easy to get to. By comparison, LHR is only 15 miles west of the Square Mile, where LGW is 28 miles south, and is much less convenient to get to than LHR.

Yet it is LGW that has the better direct rail links, with regular services from Farringdon, City Thameslink, Blackfriars and London Bridge direct to Gatwick Airport.

Public perception is that LHR is the easier airport to get to than LGW. I should have clarified that I don't necessarily agree with that, but that is true. Personally I like LGW better than LHR as a passenger, as its just so much easier to navigate.

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 13):

If anything came back I wonder if an AA operated 757 on JFK-LGW might work. Not too premium heavy, the right sized aircraft for the market, and would benefit from the AA/BA ATI deal. BA would offer some limited feed from the LGW network, though no where near what it could a decade ago. Still, perhaps more viable than DL or CO on the 757, who would pretty much have to count on O&D at the LGW end.

There are a number of cities in Europe that BA serves from LGW and not LHR, and as a result really have no connecting feed from the US except from markets like LAS and MCO. I am not sure what the demand is for service to some of those cities from the US, but I would think that a 757 from AA to LGW would be ideal for such a service to take advantage of the JV. I think the issue though is would such a flight have enough O and D and/or premium traffic to justify.
 
fcogafa
Posts: 861
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:37 pm

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:08 pm

I get the impression that those who run Gatwick want to shed the 'low cost' image. Unfortunately they are too closely tied to Easyjet for that. As EZY claim to carry a lot of businessmen to major destinations maybe it is them who need to rebrand, ditch the garish low cost image and go for something a bit more classy.

In turn this might change the image of Gatwick.
 
klwright69
Posts: 2313
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 4:22 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:17 pm

I know for some time CO operated flights to LHR and LGW simultaneously. But it just didn't work. LGW was the ugly stepchild that eventually got the boot.
 
edina
Posts: 554
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2003 3:51 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:33 pm

During both periods of operation BA's JFK services was always the highest load factor with the lowest yield....the figures were marginal at best.
Worked on - Caravelle Mercure A300 A320 F27 SD3-60 BAe146 747-100/200/400 DC10-30 767 777 737-400 757 A319 A321
 
2travel2know2
Posts: 2299
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:01 pm

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:48 pm

Well, If there's ever a LON-NYC red eyes, it'll surely be from LGW.
I'm not on CM's payroll.
 
planesarecool
Posts: 3208
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:13 pm

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 15):
As EZY claim to carry a lot of businessmen to major destinations maybe it is them who need to rebrand, ditch the garish low cost image and go for something a bit more classy.

Ditch the brand and image that has made them so successful from day one?
 
aireuropef100
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 6:39 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:20 pm

I have to wonder how many people have actually been through LGW since it was sold off by BAA and is now independently owned? Some parts are unrecognisable, there is over £1bn being spent bringing it up to the standard being required by airlines and passengers. North Terminal is being expanded, has a new transport centre, work is on going with departure extension, and Pier 4 is about to be made into a two level pier to make it easier to run without the need for dual dep/arrival ops. South Terminal - the floors have nearly all be replaced, the entire security area has been replaced with a far larger area, the south terminal drop off/pickup area is undergoing a total facelift and works starts on replacing Pier 1 fairly soon.

Its not the lo-cost regional airport which is being made out here. Sure it has not got an NYC link, but what the new owners have secured in new airlines and destinations is pretty amazing - Vietnam Airlines, Air Asia x, Lufthansa returning, Air Nigeria, rumours of Hong Kong Airlines etc. Yes its not the business hub like LHR but many people in the South/South East and parts of London can get to LGW quicker than LHR, someone will eventually fly to NYC, if the slots,fees etc are there, may not be CO(UA)/DL/AA etc perhaps VS but lets stop the LGW knocking.

And by the way Qatar Airways are holding slots for next Summer x5 days a week - the main reason they actually left was aircraft shortage so they could start MAN flights......
 
User avatar
readytotaxi
Posts: 3222
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:09 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:28 pm

Just a late night thought, how about restoring the helecopter link LHR-LGW, Hmmm?
you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:33 pm

This...

Quoting aireuropef100 (Reply 20):
Yes its not the business hub like LHR but many people in the South/South East and parts of London can get to LGW quicker than LHR

...contradicts this.

Quoting aireuropef100 (Reply 20):
Its not the lo-cost regional airport which is being made out here.

The whole point of a regional airport is to be an easily accessible, lower-cost way to get to major destinations.

Quoting aireuropef100 (Reply 20):
Vietnam Airlines, Air Asia x, Lufthansa returning, Air Nigeria, rumours of Hong Kong Airlines etc.

Sounds pretty comparable to the list of carriers at other regional airports.

And, to be clear, that's not a bad thing at all. I think it will be much better for the airport to develop into a fine facility for the areas SE of London than to try to directly compete with LHR.
 
BAViscount
Posts: 1975
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 8:01 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:38 pm

Quoting aireuropef100 (Reply 20):
but lets stop the LGW knocking.

Agreed.

Let's hope the new owners can go some way to getting it to a modern day version of its glory days of the past. I still remember the days when you could see the likes of Eastern, Western, AA, Braniff, Delta, Piedmont, Continental, Northwest Orient, Cathay Pacific, Air New Zealand, British Caledonian, CP Air, ANA etc., etc. all parked at its gates. Granted some of the airlines I mentioned are no longer around, but there were times when a trip to the LGW viewing terrace could actually be more interesting than going to LHR!!   
Ladies & gentlemen this is Captain Tobias Wilcock welcoming you aboard Coconut Airways flight 372 to Bridgetown Barb
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 7:59 pm

Quoting apodino (Reply 14):
I would think that a 757 from AA to LGW would be ideal for such a service to take advantage of the JV. I think the issue though is would such a flight have enough O and D and/or premium traffic to justify.

O & D shouldn't be a problem on a 757. Not sure about the premium traffic, though.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
fly2yyz
Posts: 643
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 3:45 pm

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 8:32 pm

I just wanna jump in with ZX attempted JFK-LGW with horrendous loads and they were a low cost carrier. Could a carrier with connections on both ends make it work? Maybe? It would most likely be an American carrier IMO that could connect from JFK.
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 8:40 pm

Quoting aireuropef100 (Reply 20):
the main reason they actually left was aircraft shortage so they could start MAN flights......

Because going double daily on Manchester far outweighed the revenue brought in by LGW. To me that isn't an aircraft shortage, that's a financial decision based on income.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:16 pm

Quoting aireuropef100 (Reply 20):

I agree, having been through LGW a few weeks back its come on leaps and bounds and it has a great future but I think it will be just after I become the Pope that we will see the LGW - NYC back again. I just cannot think of any airline that would want to throw money at it. The money for that route is up the M25 at LHR.
 
User avatar
IrishAyes
Posts: 2144
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:04 pm

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 10:17 pm

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 13):
If anything came back I wonder if an AA operated 757 on JFK-LGW might work. Not too premium heavy, the right sized aircraft for the market, and would benefit from the AA/BA ATI deal. BA would offer some limited feed from the LGW network, though no where near what it could a decade ago. Still, perhaps more viable than DL or CO on the 757, who would pretty much have to count on O&D at the LGW end.

The funny thing is that AA has tried JFK-STN off and on throughout the decades and I'd heard reports that they did very well on these flights - they were attractive to premium fliers who did not want to put up with the hassel of LHR. And, not to mention, AA drove a lot of the premium-only carriers (Eos) out of business, so you'd think they would have stuck around...

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 10):
I think that is being a bit disingenuous to Gatwick. It is used by a lot of smaller national airlines as their London destination, think Malev, Adria, Ukraine, Montenegro, Rossiya etc etc. If there was space at LHR they would go there, as some once did, but it is still the second choice for London, even though the multitude of orange tails do make it seem like a low cost airport.

Would it be true to say that LGW has a lot more O&D traffic relative to LHR? Considering VS and BA operate a sizeable number of long-haul services out of LGW to leisure destinations, you could argue it is the preferred O&D airport (at least for VFR and leisure traffic)...
confidence is silent. insecurities are loud.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 3368
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 10:45 pm

AA tried ORD-STN when it was expanding into Europe, it was not a success. More recently they flew JFK-STN to kill off EOS and Maxjet, with that completed, they went back to making more money out of LHR.
 
TIA
Posts: 443
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 3:42 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 10:55 pm

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 9):
This rubbish comes up in every thread thread about LGW/LHR. Much less convenient than LHR? Because getting on a train for half an hour from one of six central London stations is much less convenient than getting on a tube for 45 minutes, or getting on a tube for 15 mins before sitting on another train for another 15 minutes (and paying through the roof for the privilege)?

This is something that always surprises me. LGW is made out to be like it's so less covenient than LHR, but that's simply not the case. I work in Canary Wharf and the majority of my flights are usually straight out of work. Getting to LHR is such a pain and it takes longer than LGW or STN and obviously LCY. Never flown out of LTN so can't comment on that one. And considering most business travellers in London work in either Canary Wharf or City, I simply don't see how LHR is the most convenient for them.

Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 13):
What LHR has is the better range of flights, and London to New York via LGW on a once daily flight isn't that attractive for the business traveller when you look at the frequencies that VS, BA/AA, CO and DL all offer from LHR.

That is exactly it. A once daily or two daily flight can hardly work out of LGW because of the frequency offered out of LHR. When I travel to the US, I have a limited preferred time window for departure and arrival. I need to leave after 5pm at the earliest. So I would never pick a morning flight out of LGW when I can pick one that leaves at 6pm out of LHR. A limited schedule might work out of smaller market where alternatives are scarce, but not out of London where flights to NY out of LHR are more frequent than the tube.

Quoting aireuropef100 (Reply 20):
Some parts are unrecognisable, there is over £1bn being spent bringing it up to the standard being required by airlines and passengers.

I don't know. It still looks quite rundown, but then again LHR is not any better, unless you're flying BA.
 
babybus
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 5:07 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 10:57 pm

Quoting planesarecool (Reply 9):
Much less convenient than LHR? Because getting on a train for half an hour from one of six central London stations is much less convenient than getting on a tube for 45 minutes

You are right. For a lot of London getting to LGW is actually easier to get to than LHR. A lot of tube lines connect at Victoria then it's just a 30 min non stop jaunt to the airport.

That Piccadilly line is so slow and it takes forever even from central London to LHR. Not everyone lives in central London.

Zoom was doing LGW-JFK if I remember correctly and they couldn't make the route work even with a low-cost model.

There needs to be more active advertising for LGW and probably a few more long haul routes worth connecting to.

I have to fly from LHR mostly but I'd rather be flying from LGW for my work trips.
and with that..cabin crew, seats for landing please.
 
skipness1E
Posts: 3368
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:18 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Wed Sep 14, 2011 11:35 pm

You're missing the wood for all the trees. It's not about which airport is easy to get to. Airlines use LHR as historically it was BOAC's crossroads from empire to Americas, hence the network spanned the globe. It did become London's main airport but the sheer connectivity that became available meant it achieved a critical mass and became a hub for BA, PA, AC and other legacy world carriers. Hence any new entrant can tap into that crossroads and connectivity, allowing LHR to support seven direct daily flights to Hong Kong alone whereas LGW has none. Choosing to fly my Boeing or Airbus long haul into London makes more yield at LHR, less at LGW and less still at STN as they lack critical mass for cobnections. To the fellow that pointed out that LGW has legacies like Malev, that's true, however only due to impending insolvency and a kick from BA saw them sell their LHR slots in a short term survival decision.
 
User avatar
MillwallSean
Posts: 859
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 3:07 pm

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:04 am

LHR has the names and is the natural choice for many flagship carriers. Its Londons primary airport and will always remain that. Some airlines want to consolidate there and only serve one airport in the London region. I fully understand the financial logic behind that.

With that said and with me being a Londoner.
LGW is easier to get to for most Londoners. And it's not perceived far away or difficult to get to by people living in the London region. Almost all Londoners knows public transport and how to utilise it. It happens to be the mode of transport for blue and white collar workers. With LGW seeing service from virtually every big train station (underground connecting station) LGW is the easier option to get to for most. Tourists maybe doesn't know or understand but that's rather irrelevant.

For me and most other Londoners getting on the underground to Paddington and then catching the Heathrow express just isn't smooth or convenient.
So when I use Heathrow it's either a cab or getting a ride to the airport.
Driving for me means paying 10 pound in congestion fee since I have to go through the city so I prefer to avoid that. (Would love to see that one introduced in some US cities and listen to the endless whining)

LGW isn't a regional and small alternative. Its a big airport that holds it own in many ways and sees more international traffic from more continents than most airports. Emirates shows this very well. I see more and more European airlines starting service there. If London would have been like New York with several airlines competing I am sure we would have seen someone set up a hub at LGW and turning it into an alternative to LHR.
As it is now Easyjet hubs there and that is the end of that.

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 22):

The whole point of a regional airport is to be an easily accessible, lower-cost way to get to major destinations.

Now what does regional airports have to do with the second largest airport in one of the few metropolises of this world?
No One Likes Us - We Dont Care.
 
canyonblue17
Posts: 385
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 12:22 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:52 am

How about ISP to LGW on a WN 737-800?
negative ghostrider the pattern is full
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13173
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:36 am

Quoting heebeegb (Thread starter):
CO of course had an LGW-EWR link before open skies, DC10s then 772, 764 etc

Actually 747-100s, 747-200s then DC-10-30s, then 777s and 757s. I don't believe the 767-400 ever operated EWR-London.

Quoting Vasu (Reply 3):
Surely LGW is to LHR what EWR is to JFK... right?

Not exactly, in London the largest hub is at LHR with BA. In New York the largest hub is at EWR with CO/UA. As mentioned LGW has almost no trans-Atlantic routes to the US anymore now that LHR has been opened up, where at EWR there are many international airlines that choose to serve both EWR and JFK such as:

BA, VS, SQ, AF, LH, Alitalia, Swiss, El Al etc..

Quoting klwright69 (Reply 16):
I know for some time CO operated flights to LHR and LGW simultaneously.

As did Virgin Atlantic.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4920
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:45 am

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 33):
Now what does regional airports have to do with the second largest airport in one of the few metropolises of this world?

It's hardly a unique situation. HND, LIN, SHA, and to a certain extent ORY are all comparable. Even in the US, airports like HOU and DCA fill broadly similar roles.

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 32):
It did become London's main airport but the sheer connectivity that became available meant it achieved a critical mass and became a hub for BA, PA, AC and other legacy world carriers.

   It's not which one is easier to get to (as the examples above amply demonstrate), it's which one better serves a given market.
 
BAViscount
Posts: 1975
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 8:01 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:59 am

Quoting STT757 (Reply 35):
Actually 747-100s, 747-200s then DC-10-30s, then 777s and 757s.

Yep, I flew a CO 742 EWR-LGW back in 1991 - here's a pic of me taken at the EWR gate waiting to board that bad boy, September 1991! :



Edited as I got the year out by one!

[Edited 2011-09-14 19:06:39]
Ladies & gentlemen this is Captain Tobias Wilcock welcoming you aboard Coconut Airways flight 372 to Bridgetown Barb
 
RyanairGuru
Posts: 6554
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:11 am

Quoting STT757 (Reply 35):
I don't believe the 767-400 ever operated EWR-London.

I think it did post 9/11. If I remember right EWR-LGW dropped from 2x777 to a 777 and a 764
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
cslusarc
Posts: 553
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 2:29 pm

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Sun Sep 18, 2011 6:42 pm

LGW-NYC will only work for the right airline. The best bet today is either UA (with its hub at EWR) or U2 (with its base at LGW). No other airline is likely to make the route work because they lack the connecting feed required at one end.
--cslusarc from YWG
 
LondonCity
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:57 pm

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:25 pm

Quoting TIA (Reply 30):
A once daily or two daily flight can hardly work out of LGW because of the frequency offered out of LHR.

That seems logical ... but on the other hand, BA's twice daily (fewer flights at weekends) all-J class NYC service seems to the thriving ex-LCY. Maybe that's because LCY better serves the capital's business community than does LGW ?
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Sun Sep 18, 2011 7:37 pm

Quoting LondonCity (Reply 40):
on the other hand, BA's twice daily (fewer flights at weekends) all-J class NYC service seems to the thriving ex-LCY. Maybe that's because LCY better serves the capital's business community than does LGW ?

LCY is indeed a very special exception. I believe at least one financial organisation has contracted a certain number of seats per day/flight, and others are basically a given during the course of a week in the city.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
beeweel15
Posts: 890
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2003 12:59 am

RE: LGW-NYC Link?

Sun Sep 18, 2011 8:24 pm

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 29):
ore recently they flew JFK-STN to kill off EOS and Maxjet, with that completed, they went back to making more money out of LHR.

I agree with you 100%. That was the only reason they flew that route.