One reason for the LHR NZ/QF crew bases is to significantly reduce LON hotel costs. LON is notoriously difficult to negotiate crew rates as a) hotel quality is lower than the rest of the world at comparative rates, b) these rates are extremely expensive and c) the hotels themselves don't really want the crew business as it's too low yielding.
Then many years ago AZ had a strange set up where crew could volunteer to be based in BKK for 6 months and the only flying they did was BKK-SYD-MEL (1 or 2 nights)-BKK while the Rome based crews flew FCO-BKK-FCO.

Did UA fly LHR-DEL on the 747? I thought it was only operated by the 763

In regards to Qantas for example who allow international crew transfers, if a Oz based FA wants to relocate from say MEL base to LHR base and is married, does the airline assist in visas etc for both people or is the partner/spouse left to arrange this themselves? What if they can't get a visa for the UK?

Ionosphere wrote:

Did UA fly LHR-DEL on the 747? I thought it was only operated by the 763

UA 1 and UA 2 when designated as Around The World Service in the 1990s operated SFO-JFK-LHR-DEL-HKG-SFO.

The LHR-DEL and DEL-HKG segments were flown with a 767-300ER, as were the JFK-LHR flight.

United had 2 stints flying UA1 and UA2. Someone else will know the exact dates but in the mid-1990's UA1 & UA2 was not the same plane around the world. As mentioned a 767 flew from LHR-DEL-HKG and back, I believe there where restrictions on the number of seats that could be sold and traffic rights between DEL and HKG. The 767 actually swapped in London so the aircraft that arrived from DEL did not actually fly on to JFK. The trans-pacific portion was a 747.

The route was re-launched I think in 2001 was was a true same plane 747-400 service. For example on 1 August 2001 N199UA arrived from DEL and departed to IAD both as UA1. Going the other way N183UA arrived from IAD and departed to DEL as UA2 .As mentioned earlier 9/11 put an end to the round the world service.

amc737

eta unknown wrote:

Then many years ago AZ had a strange set up where crew could volunteer to be based in BKK for 6 months and the only flying they did was BKK-SYD-MEL (1 or 2 nights)-BKK while the Rome based crews flew FCO-BKK-FCO.

AZ had a similar arrangement for its deep South America routes back in the 80s. Italy-based crews would fly FCO-GIG-FCO (GRU was not operational yet). The GIG-EZE-GIG or GIG-EZE-SCL-EZE-GIG was flown with GIG & EZE based crews, transferred from Italy for 6 months. Iberia also had cabin crews based at EZE for 6 months/1 year to do the EZE-SCL-EZE segment 4 times/week in the 80s. The MAD base would only do the daily MAD-EZE-MAD rotation. Iberia called this arrangement "tripulacion destacada en Buenos Aires".

a36001 wrote:

In regards to Qantas for example who allow international crew transfers, if a Oz based FA wants to relocate from say MEL base to LHR base and is married, does the airline assist in visas etc for both people or is the partner/spouse left to arrange this themselves? What if they can't get a visa for the UK?

Not sure about the likes of United, but Qantas do not support Australian crew relocating to an overseas base. If an Australian flight attendant wants to be LHR based they need to resign, organise their own British visa, and be rehired on a UK contract.

RainerBoeing777 wrote:

United has reduced too much in London Heathrow (LHR), in 2000 it had more flights and capacity that today has been drastically reduced, while Delta and American have gained capacity and frequencies

https://airlineroutes.wordpress.com/2010/12/27/s00-ua/

Indeed a clear sign of what's been happening at LHR with regards to BA, BMI and VS in that time frame. Not exactly the changes I'd have liked to see...

dcajet wrote:

quiet1 wrote:

eagles94 wrote:

Well I didn’t think the process of someone transferring from a US Base would be as simple as just packing up and moving over

Actually it is pretty much as simple as just packing up and moving over. There are out-of-the-norm cases, like if UA closes a domicile and the F/A chooses to accept an involuntary transfer (versus resigning) there are some temporary provisions to provide assistance at the new domicile, but for anybody hired in, or voluntarily transferring to, a foreign domicile UA has no role in providing accommodations.

So, no UK working visa is needed? They just commute there and fly out of LHR then? I know this is ancient history by now, but when Pan Am transferred a US-based flight attendant to its London base, they needed a UK work visa (my Godmother was in the SFO base in the mid 70s and transferred there).

Whatever UK Immigrations may be in place must be satisfied, of course. It must not be a major hurdle as many US-based F/As have transferred over there.

My response above to @eagle94 was in the context of their previous posts about UA providing accommodation/hotels:

eagles94 wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

eagles94 wrote:

Do UA Crews based in London get provided with accommodation or hotac? Or do they have to pay the extortionate London prices for themselves.

Why would they? Does UA pay for EWR/SFO rooms for EWR/SFO-based crew?

Well I didn’t think the process of someone transferring from a US Base would be as simple as just packing up and moving over

RyanairGuru wrote:

a36001 wrote:

In regards to Qantas for example who allow international crew transfers, if a Oz based FA wants to relocate from say MEL base to LHR base and is married, does the airline assist in visas etc for both people or is the partner/spouse left to arrange this themselves? What if they can't get a visa for the UK?

Not sure about the likes of United, but Qantas do not support Australian crew relocating to an overseas base. If an Australian flight attendant wants to be LHR based they need to resign, organise their own British visa, and be rehired on a UK contract.

With the current UA domiciles, US-based F/As are free to transfer to any existing overseas domicile if/when vacancies occur (which isn't often.) I guess I should temper that statement with "providing they meet the Immigrations requirements of the overseas domicile country" since it may be possible that some Green Card holder might have a passport from a country that does not meet the Immigrations requirements for a potential transfer, but off hand, I can't think of any.

In the past, UA had "RFA" (Regional F/A) domiciles in BKK and SIN whose workers did not work under the AFA union contract which covers all other domiciles' F/As. The BKK & SIN domiciles have been closed for some time now. If a US-based F/A had wanted to work out of one of the RFA domiciles, they would have had to meet the Immigrations requirements to live and work in Singapore or Thailand and then apply as a new-hire RFA F/A, though they *might* have retained company seniority. I'm not sure about the company seniority, but they would have started at the bottom of the RFA seniority list.

UA and QF may be approaching foreign bases with a different viewpoint. From a QF perspective, you need a UK passport to transfer to the LHR base and that base has different working conditions. whereas the US carriers probably treat an overseas base similar to working in the US.

RyanairGuru wrote:

a36001 wrote:

In regards to Qantas for example who allow international crew transfers, if a Oz based FA wants to relocate from say MEL base to LHR base and is married, does the airline assist in visas etc for both people or is the partner/spouse left to arrange this themselves? What if they can't get a visa for the UK?

Not sure about the likes of United, but Qantas do not support Australian crew relocating to an overseas base. If an Australian flight attendant wants to be LHR based they need to resign, organise their own British visa, and be rehired on a UK contract.

Qantas actually do offer Australian based crew temporary transfers (generally 2 years) to the LHR base, visas and relocation assistance included. At the conclusion of the transfer, the crew return to their original base in Australia.

If an Australian crew member wishes to stay in the LHR base permanently, then they must organise (or already have) their own visas/passports etc.

smi0006 wrote:

mats wrote:

Air New Zealand also has a London/Heathrow crew base.

The carriers must be doing the math about recruitment, staffing coverage, taxes, unions, benefits, etc.

NZ LHR crew only operate LHR-LAX
QF crews operate all the way to AU; LHR-PER, and LHR-SIN-MEL/SYD. QF also has an AKL base and they fly ever where from Asia, to JNB, to JFK... not sure the Kiwis to LHR though.

Jetstar 787 crew are mostly offshore based - with only the CSM being AU based. BKK, Phuket based,NRT base. Thai crew will often operate some lengthy 8-12 day trips HKT-MEL-HNL-MEL-DPS-MEL-HKT some really rough conditions too.

How would the UA ratio of mixing crews be? 2-3 offshore majority onshore? Or 50/50 or no set ratio?

QF also have a WLG crew base (pilots and F/A's). I don't think the F/A's operate anything other than the Tasman 737 services though (unlike AKL). A leftover from the Jetconnect days.

dcajet wrote:

eta unknown wrote:

Then many years ago AZ had a strange set up where crew could volunteer to be based in BKK for 6 months and the only flying they did was BKK-SYD-MEL (1 or 2 nights)-BKK while the Rome based crews flew FCO-BKK-FCO.

AZ had a similar arrangement for its deep South America routes back in the 80s. Italy-based crews would fly FCO-GIG-FCO (GRU was not operational yet). The GIG-EZE-GIG or GIG-EZE-SCL-EZE-GIG was flown with GIG & EZE based crews, transferred from Italy for 6 months. Iberia also had cabin crews based at EZE for 6 months/1 year to do the EZE-SCL-EZE segment 4 times/week in the 80s. The MAD base would only do the daily MAD-EZE-MAD rotation. Iberia called this arrangement "tripulacion destacada en Buenos Aires".

NZ also had a LAX basing for pilots and F/E's until the early 90's. Crews were based in LA for a 6 month stint (IIRC) and operated the LAX-LGW-LAX (and possibly LAX-FRA-LAX) sectors.

I feel like it would be considerably harder for BA or VS to set up a U.S crew base considering the rules around crew visas, than it is for a U.S carrier over here