Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Beatyair wrote:For a business person, what is the cost difference of flying out of London City to JFK vs. taking a cab to Heathrow and catching a flight (with many more time options) to JFK? I would think the business traveler, by and large, would be flying into Heathrow. Virgin Atlantic cater to the business traveler and they don't fly into London City.
skipness1E wrote:Willie Walsh said if LCY-JFK was dropped they would reconfigure the aircraft to short haul. Seemingly not, this route's a goner IMHO
CRJ900 wrote:A pity if they close LCY-JFK now that the CS100 is certified for LCY. I think maybe a 20J/25Y-configured CS100 would be a nice option LCY-JFK non-stop. They'll have to clear immigration at JFK but they'll save 60-90 minutes by flying non-stop westbound instead of stopping at SNN. And the aircraft can serve other select destinations too, DME, LCA etc.
b747400erf wrote:CRJ900 wrote:A pity if they close LCY-JFK now that the CS100 is certified for LCY. I think maybe a 20J/25Y-configured CS100 would be a nice option LCY-JFK non-stop. They'll have to clear immigration at JFK but they'll save 60-90 minutes by flying non-stop westbound instead of stopping at SNN. And the aircraft can serve other select destinations too, DME, LCA etc.
Another airline should give it a go, either a British or American airline. Although continued uncertainty of financial markets after Brexit might make this a money losing route even if a C-series can get better economics.
GSTBA wrote:Titan Airways will be the new owner/leaser of G-EUNB. I
TheGeordielad wrote:GSTBA wrote:Titan Airways will be the new owner/leaser of G-EUNB. I
Are they? Have there been any announcements?
Cunard wrote:[url]v[/url]TheGeordielad wrote:GSTBA wrote:Titan Airways will be the new owner/leaser of G-EUNB. I
Are they? Have there been any announcements?
It is already confirmed by both British Airways and Titan Airways, G-EUNB is currently at Marshalls Cambridge.
CRJ900 wrote:A pity if they close LCY-JFK now that the CS100 is certified for LCY. I think maybe a 20J/25Y-configured CS100 would be a nice option LCY-JFK non-stop. They'll have to clear immigration at JFK but they'll save 60-90 minutes by flying non-stop westbound instead of stopping at SNN. And the aircraft can serve other select destinations too, DME, LCA etc.
Cunard wrote:[url]v[/url]TheGeordielad wrote:GSTBA wrote:Titan Airways will be the new owner/leaser of G-EUNB. I
Are they? Have there been any announcements?
It is already confirmed by both British Airways and Titan Airways, G-EUNB is currently at Marshalls Cambridge.
Luxair747SP wrote:Does anyone know what Titan will do with the aircraft?
Reconfigure it to a standard Y cabin, keep it like it is as executive charter with the occasional lease to BA?
Andy33 wrote:Luxair747SP wrote:Does anyone know what Titan will do with the aircraft?
Reconfigure it to a standard Y cabin, keep it like it is as executive charter with the occasional lease to BA?
Everything I've heard says it will be kept as an executive charter aircraft, with occasional leases to cover maintenance on BA's remaining A318. Titan is BA's go-to ACMI airline.
It's difficult to see who would want to lease or spot-hire a shorthaul A318 in Western Europe, apart from Air France, but there's definitely a market for 32-seat all business planes for executive charter.
LAX772LR wrote:Be interesting to see what becomes of the BA001/002 flight numbers if this ends.
Personally, I wished they'd retired them in 2003 in honor of Concorde. Wonder what they'll do now: another JFK service?
Andy33 wrote:It's difficult to see who would want to lease or spot-hire a shorthaul A318 in Western Europe, apart from Air France, but there's definitely a market for 32-seat all business planes for executive charter.
b747400erf wrote:CRJ900 wrote:A pity if they close LCY-JFK now that the CS100 is certified for LCY. I think maybe a 20J/25Y-configured CS100 would be a nice option LCY-JFK non-stop. They'll have to clear immigration at JFK but they'll save 60-90 minutes by flying non-stop westbound instead of stopping at SNN. And the aircraft can serve other select destinations too, DME, LCA etc.
Another airline should give it a go, either a British or American airline. Although continued uncertainty of financial markets after Brexit might make this a money losing route even if a C-series can get better economics.
LAX772LR wrote:Be interesting to see what becomes of the BA001/002 flight numbers if this ends.
Personally, I wished they'd retired them in 2003 in honor of Concorde. Wonder what they'll do now: another JFK service?
TheGeordielad wrote:I believe in a year or 2 this service will be discontinued just because I've heard load factors aren't that good.
mwhcvt wrote:I regularly see and it's been raised in this thread about a CS100 taking over from the A318 on the route and then being able make the route non stop in both directions, but as range isn't the limiting factor for the a318 on the route but ability to take of with enough fuel out of LCY would a CS100 really be able to take off from LCY with enough fuel to make JFK?
Menzenski wrote:mwhcvt wrote:I regularly see and it's been raised in this thread about a CS100 taking over from the A318 on the route and then being able make the route non stop in both directions, but as range isn't the limiting factor for the a318 on the route but ability to take of with enough fuel out of LCY would a CS100 really be able to take off from LCY with enough fuel to make JFK?
Bombardier demonstrated the CS100 flying LCY-JFK earlier this year.
Andy33 wrote:Well, certainly until 2020, a few months after Crossrail/Elizabeth Line opens in 2019. At that point BA will find out if there is enough leakage of passengers currently using LCY-JFK to flights from LHR to make the route non-viable. Of course the leakage could be towards the LCY-JFK service instead, but the almost hourly AA/BA JV service out of LHR is a powerful draw.
vv701 wrote:.
However on this evidence my GUESS is that G-EUNA, effectively backed up by 'NB, will be operating LCY-SNN-JFK-LCY for several years yet.
Clydenairways wrote:The only way i can see this route remaining is if BA outsourced it to another operator in their behalf.... With only one A318 left it is nearly gone anyway. Either Titan could operate the whole route for them, with the two A318's.... and then a CS100 operator could be sourced to take over with a non stop operation..... Maybe someone like Privat Air, who specialize in this premium market already.
SelseyBill wrote:.......yes, 'Crossrail' will have an impact on LCY; but at present there is the small problem that currently LCY will not have a railway station on 'Crossrail/ 'ElizabethLine'.
Don't know what the latest news is, but I doubt when 'Crossrail' opens LCY will be served. Rail users transferring from LCY to LHR will have to change trains at Canary Wharf I guess, probably until the mid 2020's....... train journey time from Canary Wharf to LHR is projected at 40 minutes
JannEejit wrote:
That sounds like BA have a special deal with Titan to lease 'NB' when required, would that be the case, or are we simply talking about normal ad-hoc cover when required ?
vv701 wrote:JannEejit wrote:.
Cover for unscheduled maintenance and other problems impacting 'NA would be a different matter. But it is likely that Titan would give BA priority wherever 'NB was needed and available. .
APYu wrote:vv701 wrote:JannEejit wrote:.
Cover for unscheduled maintenance and other problems impacting 'NA would be a different matter. But it is likely that Titan would give BA priority wherever 'NB was needed and available. .
Cover for unscheduled maintenance would be pretty much impossible / pointless for Titan. Whilst they could soon probably get the a/c and crew to LCY to operate an outbound - they would have no crew in JFK to operate the more popular return service until the following day