Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
ADrum23 wrote:If I were flying from JFK, why would I want to go to LGW as opposed to LHR or LCY? They do not need to serve all three, JFK-LGW on BA never made any sense to me. LGW seems to be an airport more for leisure and LCC's.
bmacleod wrote:My point being that service was AA (BNA-LGW). This would be first truly international carrier (outside North America as AC and WS currently serve BNA) for BNA - correct?
Midwestindy wrote:Doesn't BA have a 788 that will be delivered by end of september, and others scheduled for delivery in 2018? Why would they need to free up an extra 788, or am I missing something...
dfwjim1 wrote:Slightly off topic but by what criteria is a city classified as first tier city or second tier city?
LAX772LR wrote:bmacleod wrote:Also 1st European route for BNA.
well that part certainly isn't true, AA flew nonstop BNA-LGW for years.
GSTBA wrote:Midwestindy wrote:Doesn't BA have a 788 that will be delivered by end of september, and others scheduled for delivery in 2018? Why would they need to free up an extra 788, or am I missing something...
Over the next year BA will take delivery of the following 787 aircraft:
22SEP17 - 787-8 (G-ZBJI)
26MAR18 - 787-9 (G-ZBKR)
08MAY18 - 787-9 (G-ZBKS)
29MAY18 - 787-8 (G-ZBJJ)
31JUL18 - 787-8 (G-ZBJK)
The 787-8 arriving this year will be used to operate 6 x weekly to GIG.
LHRFlyer wrote:Wasn't there a strong rumour last year that BA was going to launch Nashville that didn't come to fruition?
I'd be very surprised if BA announced a new route this early in August.
Midwestindy wrote:dfwjim1 wrote:Slightly off topic but by what criteria is a city classified as first tier city or second tier city?
Personal opinion for the most part, there is no set criteria. For example here is my list of 1st tier cities in the US: SEA, SFO(bay area), LAX, LAS, DEN, MIA, HOU, DAL, CHI, BOS, NYC, WAS, DEN, and ATL
I'd say MSP, SAN, PDX, DTW, BWI, MCO, PHX, CLT, AUS, SLC, RDU fall in between the two tiers, some being closer to 1st tier and some closer to 2nd tier
Then second-tier are mostly midwest cites: BNA, STL, CLE, CMH, CVG, MKE, IND, SMF, MSY, SAT, MEM, e.t.c
Then, after that there are few other tiers
I probably left some cities out but you get the gist.
ADrum23 wrote:Midwestindy wrote:dfwjim1 wrote:Slightly off topic but by what criteria is a city classified as first tier city or second tier city?
Personal opinion for the most part, there is no set criteria. For example here is my list of 1st tier cities in the US: SEA, SFO(bay area), LAX, LAS, DEN, MIA, HOU, DAL, CHI, BOS, NYC, WAS, DEN, and ATL
I'd say MSP, SAN, PDX, DTW, BWI, MCO, PHX, CLT, AUS, SLC, RDU fall in between the two tiers, some being closer to 1st tier and some closer to 2nd tier
Then second-tier are mostly midwest cites: BNA, STL, CLE, CMH, CVG, MKE, IND, SMF, MSY, SAT, MEM, e.t.c
Then, after that there are few other tiers
I probably left some cities out but you get the gist.
I'd argue DEN and LAS fall in between the first and second tier. They are similar sized to the cities you mentioned there.
southwest1675 wrote:As some know, BA is supposed to announce a new A380 route next week. It's already a route being flown now. Some have said it could be a 787 route that will be replaced with that A380, and hopefully that 787 would fly the rumored BNA flight.
airbazar wrote:The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.
AAvgeek744 wrote:Not sure I'd say 'for years'. 2 maybe 3 at most. .
Midwestindy wrote:airbazar wrote:The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.
That is not true.
LAX772LR wrote:AAvgeek744 wrote:Not sure I'd say 'for years'. 2 maybe 3 at most. .
...a rather nonsensical statement.
ADrum23 wrote:Midwestindy wrote:airbazar wrote:The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.
That is not true.
Exactly, BA owns LHR, they can do what they want. Plus, even if that were the case, they are cancelling LHR-BGO and LHR-SVG as well as shifting LHR-ORY to LCY. This leads me to believe that both IND and BNA will be announced this fall.
Cunard wrote:LAX772LR wrote:AAvgeek744 wrote:Not sure I'd say 'for years'. 2 maybe 3 at most. .
...a rather nonsensical statement.
I do admire your replies, they are short and sweet and to the point with a good helping of sarcasm thrown in, you do make these threads interesting along with your huge wealth of knowledge
Midwestindy wrote:ADrum23 wrote:Midwestindy wrote:
Personal opinion for the most part, there is no set criteria. For example here is my list of 1st tier cities in the US: SEA, SFO(bay area), LAX, LAS, DEN, MIA, HOU, DAL, CHI, BOS, NYC, WAS, DEN, and ATL
I'd say MSP, SAN, PDX, DTW, BWI, MCO, PHX, CLT, AUS, SLC, RDU fall in between the two tiers, some being closer to 1st tier and some closer to 2nd tier
Then second-tier are mostly midwest cites: BNA, STL, CLE, CMH, CVG, MKE, IND, SMF, MSY, SAT, MEM, e.t.c
Then, after that there are few other tiers
I probably left some cities out but you get the gist.
I'd argue DEN and LAS fall in between the first and second tier. They are similar sized to the cities you mentioned there.
Well I wasn't basing it off solely population...
airbazar wrote:southwest1675 wrote:As some know, BA is supposed to announce a new A380 route next week. It's already a route being flown now. Some have said it could be a 787 route that will be replaced with that A380, and hopefully that 787 would fly the rumored BNA flight.
It doesn't work that way. If BA has no new planes coming in and they take an A380 off of one route to put it somewhere else, what plane would they use on the route that they took the A380 from? The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.
ADrum23 wrote:and LHR-SVG
AAvgeek744 wrote:Cunard wrote:LAX772LR wrote:...a rather nonsensical statement.
I do admire your replies, they are short and sweet and to the point with a good helping of sarcasm thrown in, you do make these threads interesting along with your huge wealth of knowledge
Equal opportunity purveyor of saecasm, he nitpicks everyone, even when they are correct.
msycajun wrote:At this point, they are starting to look desperate for clicks. There's nothing of substance here and they're talking as if it is already official. How many articles are they going to run before it is officially announced?
LAX772LR wrote:ADrum23 wrote:and LHR-SVG
Still so tough to understand how that one couldn't be made to work.AAvgeek744 wrote:Cunard wrote:I do admire your replies, they are short and sweet and to the point with a good helping of sarcasm thrown in, you do make these threads interesting along with your huge wealth of knowledge
Equal opportunity purveyor of saecasm, he nitpicks everyone, even when they are correct.
"Sarcasm" sweetie... and those who apparently can't spell and clearly can't count, are best served not admonishing anyone else.
msycajun wrote:At this point, they are starting to look desperate for clicks. There's nothing of substance here and they're talking as if it is already official. How many articles are they going to run before it is officially announced?
AAvgeek744 wrote:msycajun wrote:At this point, they are starting to look desperate for clicks. There's nothing of substance here and they're talking as if it is already official. How many articles are they going to run before it is officially announced?
I did have a chat with a friend on mine who works at BNA in a non-airline role. He says there is a lot of chatter about this. I choose to believe its true. If not, it's not exactly going to help the the reputation of The Tennessean, which isn't all that great since Gannet cleaned house when they bought it.
southwest1675 wrote:Some lady tweeted BA asking when it starts, and they replied with something like, "Can't tell you now, it'll ruin the surprise."
777PHX wrote:Assuming this is true, I'm guessing the route isn't going to start until next spring, yeah?
AAvgeek744 wrote:777PHX wrote:Assuming this is true, I'm guessing the route isn't going to start until next spring, yeah?
Not sure when BA's "summer schedule" begins, it varies by airline. The expanded FIS facility should be done by then. The permanent FIS building a couple more years down the read.
LuxuryTravelled wrote:Apparently, LGW-JFK could also be axed (again!)
sevenfeet wrote:I live in BNA and I talked to a friend of mine this evening who commutes to London regularly since she's British and travels frequently for work and to visit family. The mayor's office called her to ask if she would appear at the announcement endorsing the new route and her response was "Are you kidding???" She is thrilled to shave off many hours of her trips.
Midwestindy wrote:GSTBA wrote:Midwestindy wrote:It doesn't seem like aircraft will be as big of a limitation to expansion by BA as some people have suggested, considering that by the end of 2018 they will have 2 more 788s, and 2 A321neos available (G-NEOP, and G-NEOR). That's without any potential upgauging they will more than likely do between now and the end of 2018.
ADrum23 wrote:DLHAM wrote:Adipasquale wrote:My first guess would be 787s from LHR, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it served by 777s from LGW.
Pretty sure it would be a 787-8 from LHR. Could work, I think a 777 from LGW could fail due to plane size, fuel efficiency vs 787 and lack of a proper number of connections at LGW.
It seems BA from LGW is only interested in serving US leisure destinations (with the exception of OAK and JFK, the latter of which might be cut). Other than those two, the other BA LGW destinations to the US are FLL, MCO and TPA (thought I'm not sure why BA out of MCO goes to LGW instead of LHR).
ayoungblood2 wrote:TWFlyGuy wrote:ayoungblood2 wrote:
My guess is that this construction is being made with a very long term future in mind. There is a growing white collar population in the Nashville metro area, and those people will be able to afford to travel more. I wouldn't be surprised to see increased service to the Caribbean, and maybe at some point in the future a flight to CDG, LGW, or FRA operated by a carrier like Norwegian or Condor. After all, Southwest is starting a Cancun flight in November in addition to the Delta and American flights.
I wonder if BA's expansion (AUS, MSY and now possibly BNA) is to fend off Norwegian to some degree. That's a lot of second tier cities in a short time frame to be added. Keeping in mind that for each city added, that takes some pax off of AA's flights that are connecting to AA/BA TATL metal.
I would assume so. However, I think its very safe to say that DY appeals much more to leisure travelers and BA would carry more business travelers. With that said, however, I do think that BA feels threatened by DY and rightfully so. After all, DY offers direct service to multiple cities from destinations in the US. For example, out of FLL DY flies direct to six European destinations, whereas BA only has service to LGW. Some passengers are willing to sacrifice comfort and luxury in order to arrive at their destination sooner. I think that BA is trying to compensate for this by beating DY into some of those second tier cities and establishing presence and brand loyalty there before DY comes in.
airbazar wrote:The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.
SelseyBill wrote:If BA wanted to launch 6 or more new n/s TATL destinations from LHR in the next 18 months, they easily could.
southwest1675 wrote:Could hear something this Wednesday.
SelseyBill wrote:airbazar wrote:The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.
What complete tosh......
BA have always had more than enough slots @ LHR since the BD take-over; what they have been short of it suitable L/H aircraft to utilize those slots.
BA have some room for movement now, with 787 deliveries, and revised retirement schedules to look at totally new destinations. They will also be able to access recent-decent 777's coming into the 2nd hand market soon. I could even see BA lengthen their 744 retirement plan to provide additional aircraft to address expansion/ Norweigian. BA also have access to hired resources from UK airlines like 'Titan', and have hired aircraft from QR recently too.
BA have just cancelled LHR-Stavanger/Bergen and have shifted ORY flights to LCY freeing up more slots. I also understand they are looking to fly to just one Milan airport from LHR in the future, so either MXP or LIN flights could shift to LCY and/or LGW creating more LHR slots.
If BA wanted to launch 6 or more new n/s TATL destinations from LHR in the next 18 months, they easily could.
ADrum23 wrote:southwest1675 wrote:Could hear something this Wednesday.
How do you know?
CrawleyBen wrote:LuxuryTravelled wrote:Apparently, LGW-JFK could also be axed (again!)
I've heard it *could* be dropped to summer only, with Cape Town replacing it during the winter months. Nothing confirmed so won't read anything in to it until the airline announces otherwise.
Cheers
Ben
SelseyBill wrote:airbazar wrote:The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.
What complete tosh......
[...]
If BA wanted to launch 6 or more new n/s TATL destinations from LHR in the next 18 months, they easily could.
airbazar wrote:SelseyBill wrote:airbazar wrote:The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.
What complete tosh......
[...]
If BA wanted to launch 6 or more new n/s TATL destinations from LHR in the next 18 months, they easily could.
Either you completely misunderstood my post or you quoted the wrong post. My comment was with respect to BA launching LHR-BNA this year (not in 18 months), and the lack of aircraft to do it. It was never about the slots.
Sure I admit that my statement was not 100% correct. Another way to find the equipment to start LHR-BNA could be by reducing some frequencies on a different route or routes to free up an airplane. But my point was that adding an A380 to another route isn't going to magically free up the right equipment to start LHR-BNA this year.
airbazar wrote:SelseyBill wrote:airbazar wrote:The only way to find a plane to operate this new BNA route would be to cancel an existing route.
What complete tosh......
[...]
If BA wanted to launch 6 or more new n/s TATL destinations from LHR in the next 18 months, they easily could.
Either you completely misunderstood my post or you quoted the wrong post. My comment was with respect to BA launching LHR-BNA this year (not in 18 months), and the lack of aircraft to do it. It was never about the slots.
Sure I admit that my statement was not 100% correct. Another way to find the equipment to start LHR-BNA could be by reducing some frequencies on a different route or routes to free up an airplane. But my point was that adding an A380 to another route isn't going to magically free up the right equipment to start LHR-BNA this year.
ADrum23 wrote:I really hope they announce the route within the next 72 hours so we can end this thread
AAvgeek744 wrote:msycajun wrote:At this point, they are starting to look desperate for clicks. There's nothing of substance here and they're talking as if it is already official. How many articles are they going to run before it is officially announced?
I did have a chat with a friend on mine who works at BNA in a non-airline role. He says there is a lot of chatter about this. I choose to believe its true. If not, it's not exactly going to help the the reputation of The Tennessean, which isn't all that great since Gannet cleaned house when they bought it.