Interview RH had with Bloomberg yesterdayhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmG8Ua5SFrY
Their LHR slots is temporary until end of March. So, they are going to have to look for permanent slot solutions at that time.
They consider LHR/LGW to be separate markets and intend to serve both going forward. Their plan to stay in LHR is by showing they can significantly lower premium cabin pricing.
They think travel restriction will loosen between US and UK.
Keep in mind that airlines that had been serving JFK-LGW are no longer doing so. DY actually had a good thing going at JFK-LGW. JetBlue should do well on its LGW service. I think LHR will be tougher due to slot availability. The key is getting more slots. I'm looking at their initial flights. inaugural flight on 11th is sold out (very few seats released for sales)., 12th only has 8 J open, 13th has 9 J open, 14th has 13 J open and 15/16/17th has 19 J open. So, they are off to a good start. I think the J cabin will sell out faster than the Y cabin.
A couple of other announcements to watch out for:
- lounge? Seems like it might happen based on some of the reports that have come out
- onward connection from LGW? Seems like a partnership with EZ or someone else would make sense.
It's a bummer that us Bostonians have to wait, but maybe it will come with extra stuff like DUB or CDG. How many A321LRs will they have next year?
They got 3 LRs coming next year which should allow them to add 3 R/T flights. I'd expect 3 JFK-LON and 2 BOS-LON by Q4 2022.
I think Paris and Dublin is probably 2023.
Calculus has changed a little bit due to reduced TATL demand. There is more focus on domestic flying with their updated order book.
Considering the possibility of JetBlue customers and/or fans in this thread who don't reside within a relatively immediate proximity to JFK, I think it's that this is not so much doubting whether they can fill A321s between New York and London, but moreso that there are also users who aren't JFK O/D among those willing to buy seats on these flights.
But I'm just an SFO-based poster excitedly following this news, and also hoping to fly JetBlue between the northeastern US and London at some point.
I totally agree with you. While JetBlue has always been and O&D focused airline, this pandemic showed it can't just rely on NYC/Boston O&D. Having connection options on TATL flights will not only help them fill planes, but also attract loyalty outside of NYC/Boston. That's why I think they will adjust schedules and add short flights to add connections to London.
If I'm searching for an Oct trip right now, I can see options from SFO to both LGW/LHR, but only LGW to SFO on the way back. I'm sure they are trying to get better slot times, but that's hard to do at LHR. As they add flights from both BOS/NYC, I think you will see more options and better pricing on JetBlue from SFO to LON. And same for other cities. The question for me is whether they can find people willing to fly 1-stop itineraries from places like LAX or SFO where they have at least some interest to buildup. I don't think they can undercut legacies on Y fare. They can undercut N/S options in J fare, but not by like 50%. Would people like mint service enough to take the 1-stop option vs flying US3 N/S.
Both airports are not a similar distance from Central London at all. Where Gatwick does well is it can get you into London Bridge or Victoria by fast train in a half hour and then people change onto the tube. From Heathrow the Tube into Green Park is about 40mins so a bit slower and many people are going West London and get off before town. But Gatwick is in West Sussex, most of the way to Brighton and there's a whole load of green space between there and the M25 whereas Heathrow is on the M25 and on top of the M4 corridor which is partly why yields tend to be way higher. But for visiting American leisure, Gatters works fine, just don't think it's in or closer to London than Heathrow.
Truthfully if you can stand Gatwick which is a relic of the 1980's for the most part, the train to Victoria is for me much more practical than the Heathrow trains into Paddington. Easy to connect to the tube at Victoria or even walk to places from there though mostly tube for me - granted that's for me on business. But I also assume for tourists given the proximity of Victoria to Westminster, etc it also works better than Paddington.
Once the Elizabeth line is fully operational in 2022, i believe it will connect LHR to central london much better than gatwick. the Elizabeth line will provide a direct link between the airport and central London destinations including Bond Street, Liverpool Street and Canary Wharf.
A total of six Elizabeth line trains per hour will serve Heathrow Terminals. Four will go to Terminals 2, 3 and 4 and two will go to Terminals 2, 3 and 5.
The high-speed Elizabeth Line will cut most journey times by half and some journeys will be five times quicker. Currently rail from Canary Warf to LHR is 55 min and with the Elizabeth Line it will only be 39 min.
LGW to Victoria currently with regular rail is 47 min travel time.
Even with this, the travel time from LHR/LGW is comparable. I think most US side travelers prefer LHR, but LGW is also on their radar. There have been service on JFK-LGW for many years. Plenty of New Yorkers flew into LGW. I know that I would search for both if I was visiting London. STN/LTN would not have worked since people just don't know about it over here.