TC957
Topic Author
Posts: 2045
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 pm

Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:32 pm

It seems all Garuda's flights from LGW have had the availability closed off, at least on Galileo, so seemingly they aren't taking any more bookings for this new forthcoming route.

Anyone know if they are having second thoughts about starting LGW ? The timetable entry still shows the flights 5 x weekly though.

Thanks.
 
behramjee
Posts: 4333
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 4:56 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:35 pm

Perhaps postponed till mid DEC only as they need as many B777s and B744s as possible to facilitate the return Hajj movement from JED/MED to Indonesia all throughout NOV.

Operating a 5 weekly LGW flight would take up 2 aircraft which rather be used on the KSA route instead of wet leasing additional capacity/aircraft from a 3rd party which is an expensive proposition !
 
jfk777
Posts: 5840
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Fri Jul 26, 2013 6:27 pm

Maybe the reservations they were able to book were not sufficient for the flight to be viable. Flying a 77W from Jakarta to London is a long way, an expansive long way if the feed from Australia doesn't happen. Garuda's 77W's are giving visions of Granduer, it should stick to flying to Amsterdam before flying to London, Paris, Roma and he rest of Europe.
 
TC957
Topic Author
Posts: 2045
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 pm

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:07 pm

No, reservations are blocked out for as far as systems go up to, not just for November.
 
MEA-707
Posts: 3666
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 1999 4:51 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:12 am

I also believe they should make Amsterdam-Jakarta nonstop first with their 77Ws. London will be a difficult market for them to start from scratch. I believe their current flight stopping in Dubai doesn't work well because it still has a dragged stopover. The first non stop option AMS-CGK would attract much more people who would happily pay more for the non stop option combined with connections to DPS, SUB, DRW, SYD, MEL
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
 
User avatar
airbuseric
Posts: 3560
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 1:24 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:16 am

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 4):
I believe their current flight stopping in Dubai doesn't work well because it still has a dragged stopover.

They stop in AUH instead  
Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 4):
I also believe they should make Amsterdam-Jakarta nonstop first with their 77Ws.

Afaik that was also on the planning with GA.
"The whole world steps aside for the man who knows where he is going"
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15253
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sat Jul 27, 2013 2:13 am

Quoting TC957 (Thread starter):
Anyone know if they are having second thoughts about starting LGW ?

I sure hope so--it was bound to lose zillions between the long stage, the super premium layout, and the low yield, Indonesia point-of-sale traffic. I'm really bullish on GA but they can do better things with a 77W than LGW.
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sat Jul 27, 2013 5:53 am

Quoting airbuseric (Reply 5):
They stop in AUH instead

AMS via AUH has been a lot better than via DXB. Garuda's traditional UAE market is AUH anyways.
The UAE-AMS segment is better filled now (with increasing number of EY pax).

The next market to target in Europe should be FRA. There is traditionally more pax between Indonesia and Germany than France, Italy, etc...

Would a CGK direct to these cities work? Apart from AMS, I'm not convinced... even direct AMS is stretching it in the market sense. LGW direct? Fat chance! CGK-AUH-LGW is probably more likely at the moment.
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 2799
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sat Jul 27, 2013 6:28 am

They seemed to be advertising their 77W flights to London at the Liverpool game in Melbourne on Wednesday.

It seems like they want to take risks by adding a 2nd destination, but I think many are right to say that they may be overstretching themselves with LGW.
 
factsonly
Posts: 2008
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sat Jul 27, 2013 6:54 am

History can teach useful lessons.

Two years ago, GA re-started CGK-DXB-AMS daily with A332 and quickly dropped the route back to 4x/week.

Today GA is running CGK-AUH-AMS at 6x/week with A332 and the route is now improving thanks to the change of intermediate stop from DXB -> AUH and extensive codesharing with EY.

With this route experience GA should take it step by step and move CGK-AUH-AMS up to B77W before attempting to run B77Ws non-stop to a new European destination in a highly competitive low-yield ultra-longhaul market OZ-CGK-UK.

Perhaps LGW should start as CGK-AUH-LGW with A332, but that would not be very competitive in the Australia - UK market. But then, low start-up fares can establish a first market presence.

As an after thought.........with the new MEDAN airport now open may we see a return on CGK - Medan - Europe flights?
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:05 am

Quoting factsonly (Reply 9):
History can teach useful lessons.

Unfortunately, lobbysts and politicians ignore history, or even facts. When it comes to airlines... it's ego ego ego...

Quoting factsonly (Reply 9):
As an after thought.........with the new MEDAN airport now open may we see a return on CGK - Medan - Europe flights?

Oh, don't get me started on this. As it stands the airport is dangerous! There are no nearby hospitals (it's therefore not really suitable for a sudden medical diversion). The ILS is offset up to 2 degrees variably, the list goes on... I'd like to elaborate but am about to go for a meet in CGK T3...  
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sun Jul 28, 2013 6:02 am

I think this explains it all...

British Airways And Others To Return To Jakarta (by HB-IWC Jul 27 2013 in Civil Aviation)

Competition from BA...
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
HB-IWC
Posts: 4033
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2000 1:09 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sun Jul 28, 2013 6:52 am

The entire Garuda venture to London has failure written all over it, and the airline would be well advised to think of something better to do with its valuable and costly B77W assets.

Garuda seems to somehow believe it will be able to compete in the London market with just 5 weekly flights from a less desirable Gatwick gateway, while all competition in the region is offering multiple daily flights from London's prime Heathrow airport. That leaves GA with an advantage in the London to Jakarta market only, because it will be the only nonstop service there, but even then the service will not be daily.

To add to the airline's predicament, British Airways is about to launch its own London to Jakarta service, but from Heathrow albeit as a one-stop direct service.

In all its wisdom, GA also seems convinced that it will be able to offer a competitive alternative on the Kangaroo Route, again with just 5 weekly services, and with the likes of SQ, MH, TG, CX, EK, QR, EY, BA, VS and QF all able to offer multiple daily departures.

The situation for the newly retimed CGK to SYD and CGK to MEL services, which are an inherent part of the new London service, is even worse than that of the Gatwick route. With an 8 am departure out of CGK and an 11 pm return into CGK, these services will need to be supported by local traffic and connecting traffic from London only. Not a single domestic flight and neither the Amsterdam flight will connect to these services in either direction. How will Garuda fill a B77W to SYD and an A332 to MEL like that?

The airline would be better off thinking about a more valuable deployment of its B77W resources. Tokyo, Incheon, Shanghai and Sydney all seem much better bets than the proposed Gatwick services. A premium configured B77W on the only nonstop flight to Europe may seem very prestigious, but it is bound for a financial bloodbath that the airline can ill afford.
 
factsonly
Posts: 2008
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sun Jul 28, 2013 8:28 am

Another option open to GA is to consider re-opening European routes based on the airlines historic DC-10/MD11 routings, but dropping the former intermediate stop.

This would result in non-stop B77W flights to Europe in a following manner:

- CGK-FRA-AMS
- CGK-CDG-AMS
- CGK-LGW-AMS

AMS would remain one-stop service as is currently operated by GA and KLM.

or

- CGK-FRA-AMS
- CGK-CDG-LGW

Operating cost and crewing would certainly not be ideal, but at least it would be an entry back into the marketplace.

Vietnam Airlines operates along this route pattern as well from SGN and HAN to FRA-LGW.
 
HB-IWC
Posts: 4033
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2000 1:09 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sun Jul 28, 2013 8:58 am

I believe the only viable venture for Garuda is a nonstop Amsterdam route in combination with an extensive code share agreement with KLM, a future Skyteam partner. At AMS, GA could then benefit from both the substantial local traffic and the European feed offered by the KLM code share or interline.

As Garuda makes its Amsterdam service nonstop, it can also turn AUH into a terminator service in cooperation with EY, so as to provide further options into the Middle East, Europe, Africa and the Americas.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 2799
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sun Jul 28, 2013 10:11 am

How about 3 X weekly GA 77W CGK-AMS non-stop, supported by the flights via AUH (GA) and KUL (KL)?

Another option could be that some of the AUH flights go to CDG. That would open up a new destination for GA, whilst leveraging off AF's network to give additional feed.

I can't see LON being a viable option for a while to come, especially if BA make a move back into the CGK market.
 
MEA-707
Posts: 3666
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 1999 4:51 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Sun Jul 28, 2013 11:52 am

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 15):

How about 3 X weekly GA 77W CGK-AMS non-stop, supported by the flights via AUH (GA) and KUL (KL)?

  
In the Netherlands many (older/richer) people complain about the lack of nonstop flights to Indonesia, they would rather have 3 non stops then daily one stop flights, I firmly believe that's the only way they can develop a decent market share with many willing to pay a few hundred more for this.
It will also be a viable one/two stop option to tens of markets around Indonesia and Europe.
Say Jakarta-Manchester or Jakarta-Hamburg would so far go to EK and such, but with these flights it could be more attractive to fly GA/KL instead. Same with say Surabaya-Amsterdam or Menado-Amsterdam, on which SQ/MI now is the best connection.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
 
User avatar
dirktraveller
Posts: 708
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2011 1:37 pm

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:28 am

Hi everyone.

Maybe this article give some light about why they are having this "second thoughts".

According to a local media, GA is announcing to push the start of the LGW service to May 2014, as the CEO mentioned the current runway at CGK did not allow them to operate a B77W at full load. He mentioned that CGK does not have the certified pavement classification/PCN of 132 to perform take-off and landings of fully loaded B77W.

This means that for now, GA could do the flight in one-stop, which he declined to do so, noting that the flight would not be competitive anymore with one stop. Due to the delay in starting of LGW, GA planned to deploy the 77W on PVG,ICN, and NRT.

I'm sorry that the article is only in Bahasa Indonesia (for now). Thanks.

http://indo-aviation.com/2013/08/01/...aruda-tunda-penerbangan-ke-london/

Regards,
Dirktraveller.
 
ZKOJH
Posts: 1450
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:51 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:31 pm

Garuda Indonesia has postponed the launch of its Jakarta-London flights to May 2014, a delay of six months from the previously-planned date of November 2 this year.

However, Garuda says that the 28 year-old runway and apron at Jakarta's Soekarno-Hatta Airport are not strong enough to carry the Boeing 777 if the aircraft was to operate with a full load of passengers, cargo and fuel sufficient for the 7,300 mile flight.
The airport's operating surfaces are rated to handle only 120 tons while at full capacity the Boeing 777-300ER would require a rating of 132 tons.

http://www.ausbt.com.au/garuda-postp...don-boeing-777-service-to-may-2014
Vietnam time..
 
BlueShamu330s
Posts: 2565
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 3:11 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:11 pm

So I drive a 4x4. So what?! Tax the a$$ off me for it...oh, you already have... :-(
 
jupiter2
Posts: 956
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2001 11:30 am

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:28 pm

How can you plan for, take delivery of an aircraft, planning to use it at near max weights, but your primary hub and planned departure port can't handle the weights of the aircraft ? I just don't get that.
At least it's still planned to come to SYD for 6 weeks before being pulled before coming back for the through service to LGW.
 
factsonly
Posts: 2008
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

RE: Garuda Having Second Thoughts About LGW?

Fri Aug 02, 2013 7:21 am

Quoting jupiter2 (Reply 20):
How can you plan for, take delivery of an aircraft, planning to use it at near max weights, but your primary hub and planned departure port can't handle the weights of the aircraft ? I just don't get that.

  

It says much about the state of Indonesian aviation and the GA planning department.

Indonesian aviation is certainly making progress....fast, but the number of incidents and planning booboos is a telling sign that there is still room for improvement.