WestJet Announces London Gatwick

YYCFlyer · Tue Jun 16, 2015 4:16 am

"CALGARY, June 16, 2015 /CNW/ - WestJet today announced it has selected London, England as the first transatlantic destination from Canada for its wide-body Boeing 767-300 aircraft. Service from Canada to London will be through London Gatwick."

http://westjet2.mediaroom.com/index....43&item=1000#.VX-gxW3TeKA.facebook

kdonohue · Tue Jun 16, 2015 4:29 am

It will be interesting to see how far they expand into Europe and elsewhere. So far their expansion into Europe has been cautious, which is a good thing. I remember interviewing Clive Beddoe, the founder and former CEO of the airline for an article back in 1997 when they had three old hand-me-down Boeing 737s, and served a handful of destinations in western Canada.

ek241yyz · Tue Jun 16, 2015 4:32 am

here's the video they posted about it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH7VyZ-rQZQ&feature=youtu.be

I'm personally happy for 'em

Byrdluvs747 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 4:59 am

Cute video!!!

So many questions.

- Is this also a statement that YYC is officially their intl hub?

- What are the chances of WS selling onward connections via BA since VS has no EU routes ex-LGW?

- Could this be a temporary "toe in the water" trial until they see the numbers and a LHR slot becomes available?

adamblang · Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:03 am

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 3):
- What are the chances of WS selling onward connections via BA since VS has no EU routes ex-LGW?

Probably low:

Quote:
We love Gatwick as a convenient airport with great ... access to other low-cost airlines flying to points in Europe and beyond.

Miami · Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:05 am

Whoa! That's great! Good luck to them!

Noise · Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:09 am

The first girl in the video didn't know what she was reading - poor girl.

Interesting, so no word on which cities will be served from LGW. I'm assuming it's going to be from YYZ and YYC.

connector4you · Tue Jun 16, 2015 6:42 am

Quoting Miami (Reply 5):
What are the chances of WS selling onward connections via BA since VS has no EU routes ex-LGW?

Besides BA and other European legacies, at LGW are quite a few other low-cost airlines (similar to WJ, if not cheaper), operating a comprehensive array of leisure and business destinations trough-out continental Europe, EasyJet, Norwegian, Thomson, just to name a few. Interline agreements with any of these operators could be lucrative to Westjet.

Quoting Noise (Reply 6):
I'm assuming it's going to be from YYZ and YYC.

I guess it depends on available capacity, Air Transat is currently operating into Gatwick from Calgary, Halifax, Montreal, St John's. Toronto, Vancouver !

aerolimani · Tue Jun 16, 2015 6:47 am

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 3):
Is this also a statement that YYC is officially their intl hub?

Nothing I could glean from either the video or the press release actually suggests this. However, I am certainly hoping this is a possibility. YYC could certainly deal with the traffic. Plus, there's the new international facilities coming on line in the not-too-distant future.

I think there's an opportunity for WS to appeal to Alberta/Saskatchewan leisure travelers. Right now, the Alberta/Saskatchewan transatlantic prices are well on the high side. USA, Mexico, and the Caribbean are soooo much cheaper. As a result, I think a lot of Albertans choose that over Europe. I think there's an opportunity for WS to offer Albertans a more reasonable price, and to increase the number of passengers traveling to the UK and Europe.

gkirk · Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:05 am

Quoting connector4you (Reply 7):
Besides BA and other European legacies, at LGW are quite a few other low-cost airlines (similar to WJ, if not cheaper), operating a comprehensive array of leisure and business destinations trough-out continental Europe, EasyJet, Norwegian, Thomson, just to name a few. Interline agreements with any of these operators could be lucrative to Westjet.

Thomson do not do interlining, they are a pure charter airline.

trav110 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:26 am

I wonder if their 767s will be as horribly cramped and uncomfortable as their 737s.

Clipper101 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:33 am

So they are slowly expanding into Europe, that means they are encouraged with what they saw from their first two European destinations. Will they be exploring France soon?

skipness1E · Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:39 am

Flying 737s to Ireland and Scotland is a little different from tanks on someone's lawn entering the London market. I doubt Air Canada and BA will be losing sleep but Air Transat won't be happy, price war ahead? As to interlining with BA, why would they?

Andy33 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:44 am

Quoting connector4you (Reply 7):
EasyJet, Norwegian, Thomson, just to name a few. Interline agreements with any of these operators could be lucrative to Westjet.

But none of these airlines actually interline at all. Technically EasyJet does, but only in Moscow, and only to Transaero, and only because the Russian government imposed it as a condition of being one of the two UK carriers allowed under the UK-Russia bilateral. Anywhere else they don't even connect to their own flights.
Norwegian has its own transatlantic flight network already and does connect to other Norwegian flights, but nobody else's.
Thomson is a package holiday charter airline, and doesn't interline for that reason.
If we run through other European airlines at Gatwick with more than a handful of flights that aren't already part of OneWorld, SkyTeam or Star or subsidiaries of one of their members: Aer Lingus (almost certain to be taken over by IAG), Monarch (doesn't interline), Ryanair (doesn't interline), and a load of holiday charter airlines many of which don't sell seats direct at all.

GCT64 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 8:24 am

Why would they need to interline or worry about connections from/to LGW? London is a massive O&D market and can more than likely fill the plane on its own. In addition, from observation of pax behaviour many leisure travellers on EU LCCs "self-connect" despite the inherent risks (especially at the big bases such as LGW or STN) and I would expect pax to do the same onto and off this service.

SKAirbus · Tue Jun 16, 2015 8:41 am

Gosh... If Toronto gets the flight the YYZ to London market is going to be pretty saturated.

4 x AC YYZ-LHR-YYZ (3 x 77W, 1 x 763)
2 x BA LHR-YYZ-LHR (777, 744)
1 x TS YYZ-LHR-YYZ (A330)

IndianicWorld · Tue Jun 16, 2015 8:46 am

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 15):
Gosh... If Toronto gets the flight the YYZ to London market is going to be pretty saturated.

4 x AC YYZ-LHR-YYZ (3 x 77W, 1 x 763)
2 x BA LHR-YYZ-LHR (777, 744)
1 x TS YYZ-LHR-YYZ (A330)

Certainly will be a busy route, but I can't see WS not choosing to fly this route from Canada's biggest city.

YYC and YYZ are my picks for service to London.

Andy33 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 8:51 am

Quoting SKAirbus (Reply 15):
1 x TS YYZ-LHR-YYZ (A330)

That's actually YYZ-LGW-YYZ and there are also three further flights per week on this route, 2 x A310 and 1 x A333

by738 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 9:56 am

How is the GLA-YHZ route performing? Certainly has a great ontime performance.

cornishsimon · Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:49 am

Good for LGW to attract new longhaul business.

Its almost a shame that BE no longer operate (except NQY) ex LGW as im sure they would of jumped at another codeshare partner.

However I suppose in future WestJet could look at MAN and use that to access BE via codeshares and onto the extensive BE route network at MAN.

cs

kdhurst380 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 11:15 am

Quoting GCT64 (Reply 14):
Why would they need to interline or worry about connections from/to LGW? London is a massive O&D market and can more than likely fill the plane on its own. In addition, from observation of pax behaviour many leisure travellers on EU LCCs "self-connect" despite the inherent risks (especially at the big bases such as LGW or STN) and I would expect pax to do the same onto and off this service.

These were my first thoughts.

People might actually fly somewhere to, you know, stay for a while!

Otherwise, whilst not the conventional way of doing things, LGW has masses of short haul European and UK domestic routes that people can self connect onto. Worth bearing in mind that Gatwick operate their own connections assistance service. It won't help you if you miss a connection but it may help to speed things up. http://www.gatwickairport.com/at-the...light-Connections/gatwick-connect/

SpaceshipDC10 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 11:33 am

London flights are no surprise, they were even expected. I'm curious to see from where in Canada though.

Thenoflyzone · Tue Jun 16, 2015 11:40 am

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 21):

London flights are no surprise, they were even expected. I'm curious to see from where in Canada though.

Its most likely the standard. YYC, YYZ with the first slot pair, and if they get a second, they will make YYC daily and add YVR.

But all of the above is boring and rehashed!

I hope they go YWG-LGW as well.

SpaceshipDC10 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 12:00 pm

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 22):
I hope they go YWG-LGW as well.

That would indeed be great to have it, since YWG traffic grew +5,3% last year and +4,1% for Q1 2015.

[Edited 2015-06-16 05:02:11]

FighterPilot · Tue Jun 16, 2015 12:03 pm

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 23):

Quoting thenoflyzone (Reply 22):
I hope they go YWG-LGW as well.

That would indeed be great to have it, since YWG traffic grew +5,3% last year.

I would love to have some Trans-Atlantic flights from out of YWG. I figure it's just a matter of time.

Cal

SpaceshipDC10 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:26 pm

Quoting FighterPilot (Reply 24):
I would love to have some Trans-Atlantic flights from out of YWG. I figure it's just a matter of time.

Couldn't a flight like (either one) YYJ/YVR/YXX/YEG/YYC-YWG-LGW or YWG-(either one) YYZ/YUL/YHZ-LGW work ?

marktci · Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:39 pm

Quoting ek241yyz (Reply 2):

here's the video they posted about it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH7VyZ-rQZQ&feature=youtu.be

I'm personally happy for 'em

I had to laugh at the first woman "Tornado... grrrrr 4?"

Noise · Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:43 pm

Quoting marktci (Reply 26):
I had to laugh at the first woman "Tornado... grrrrr 4?"

I know, right? What's so complicated about saying GR4?? Poor woman.

q120 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:01 pm

Quoting ek241yyz (Reply 2):

here's the video they posted about it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH7VyZ-rQZQ&feature=youtu.be

I just threw up in my mouth.

osiris30 · Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:46 pm

According to Westjet via twitter; the decision about which cities will be used in Canada to LGW will be made in September.

TS-IOR · Tue Jun 16, 2015 8:36 pm

Winnipeg as being the longitudinal center of Canada

yeah why not, but i would prefer Saskatoon :-P

It's Calgary for sure, and then they may expand. Feeding from BC and the Prairies will be adjusted accordingly. YYZ may get a MAN in the future, if am not overestimating the market!

Thenoflyzone · Tue Jun 16, 2015 11:18 pm

Quoting TS-IOR (Reply 30):
Winnipeg as being the longitudinal center of Canada yeah why not, but i would prefer Saskatoon :-P

Yeah, it's gonna be hard enough for YWG to land LGW. YXE will be even harder. Winnipeg metro is 3x larger than that of YXE. But one can always dream....

SpaceshipDC10 · Thu Jun 18, 2015 10:28 am

"Canadian travellers to London are likely to see lower airfares across the board beginning next spring."

How much lower? WS is not TS.

"The analyst suggested the London route as well as WestJet’s two other transatlantic routes (to Dublin and Glasgow) represent “the tip of the iceberg” for WestJet, which appears to be pursuing a broader push into airports in Europe."

I'm curious to lean how large is that iceberg.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2059558/lo...move-signals-discounts-on-horizon/

EK413 · Thu Jun 18, 2015 11:02 am

Quoting trav110 (Reply 10):
I wonder if their 767s will be as horribly cramped and uncomfortable as their 737s.

Depends if they'll maintain the QF configure of either 25J204Y or 30J222Y.

EK413

columba · Thu Jun 18, 2015 11:09 am

Hopefully Berlin will be next

YXXMIKE · Thu Jun 18, 2015 11:12 am

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 32):
How much lower? WS is not TS.

That's an interesting point; WS hasn't been a LCC in many years so as long as they are able to maintain the appearance of being a LCC then the traveling Canadian public will fly them.

I am curious as to what their focus Canadian cities will be as that will also impact how they market on the other end. Should be interesting to hear what they actually come up with in June!

A couple of interesting route's (in the future if they decide to run them of course) could be:

YWG - YUL - CDG
YXX - YEG - LGW
HNL - YYC - LGW (No idea if that is even possible to do but just as a thought?)

by738 · Thu Jun 18, 2015 12:32 pm

LGW-GLA-YVR? in a Zoom style?

Whiteguy · Thu Jun 18, 2015 2:54 pm

Quoting EK413 (Reply 33):

Quoting trav110 (Reply 10):
I wonder if their 767s will be as horribly cramped and uncomfortable as their 737s.

Depends if they'll maintain the QF configure of either 25J204Y or 30J222Y.

EK413

262 seats total, 24/232 is the break down....

osiris30 · Thu Jun 18, 2015 3:18 pm

Biased but:

I'd love to see them use YHM as a hub for their across the pond stuff. It's easier to get to than YYZ for more than half the YYZ catchment area, has tons of room for expansion and is dirt cheap in comparison to YYZ.

q120 · Thu Jun 18, 2015 3:26 pm

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 38):
I'd love to see them use YHM as a hub for their across the pond stuff. It's easier to get to than YYZ for more than half the YYZ catchment area, has tons of room for expansion and is dirt cheap in comparison to YYZ.

yeah it would be nice to see them operating out of YHM.

SpaceshipDC10 · Thu Jun 18, 2015 3:28 pm

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 38):
I'd love to see them use YHM as a hub for their across the pond stuff. It's easier to get to than YYZ for more than half the YYZ catchment area, has tons of room for expansion and is dirt cheap in comparison to YYZ.

Biased indeed. WS started ops in the area at YHM before moving to YYZ a decade or so ago. With all the traffic they have there, I don't see why they would start, at the moment, flights out of YHM to Europe.

FighterPilot · Thu Jun 18, 2015 3:44 pm

Could be why they're waiting till Sept. to announce where they will be flying to LGW from.

Cal

Thenoflyzone · Thu Jun 18, 2015 5:14 pm

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 40):

Exactly.

Besides, the words "YHM " and " hub" don't even belong in the same sentence. WS only flies from YHM to YYC year round. All the rest is seasonal and limited to only YEG, YQM and YHZ domestically. They would need to up their domestic feed if they will base a 763 or two at YHM, especially year round. Either way, YHM is not designed to operate as a hub. It is a spoke airport with a tiny little spoke terminal.

Quoting columba (Reply 34):
Hopefully Berlin will be next

Maybe. I think WS will follow the trend set by TS and RV. Think Italy, Spain, Greece, UK, etc.

That being said, TS gave up on Germany altogether last year. So maybe there might be an opportunity for WS to operate into MUC or TXL. We'll see.

Quoting FighterPilot (Reply 41):
Could be why they're waiting till Sept. to announce where they will be flying to LGW from.

They are waiting till September because they don't want to divulge the entirety of their routes too early. TS and/or RV might plan their course of action if they already knew which Canadian cities WS will be operating form.

They announced LGW because they are obligated to when they acquired the slot pair. The 136th IATA slot conference is in YVR next week. They would have had to do it by then anyways.

[Edited 2015-06-18 10:55:22 by thenoflyzone]

osiris30 · Thu Jun 18, 2015 7:45 pm

Quoting SpaceshipDC10 (Reply 40):
Biased indeed. WS started ops in the area at YHM before moving to YYZ a decade or so ago. With all the traffic they have there, I don't see why they would start, at the moment, flights out of YHM to Europe.

Well there's a lot of very questionable history in the move to YYZ, but we'll leave that all in the past. The reason I would think YHM would make a good location is:

They already have several flights heading out west from YHM. There is a lot of gate space available cheaply out of YHM. There is not near the customs/immigration nightmare in YHM. There is far less hassle parking, etc., at YHM.

It's much more convenient, especially for non-commuter travel. YYZ is a great airport, but it can be a real pain for any long-term travel. YHM would allow them to offer lower fares, and also sell the lower costs of parking, etc., for anyone needing to go overseas.

FighterPilot · Thu Jun 18, 2015 7:55 pm

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 43):

Would be interesting if they elected to do their longhaul flights from YHM as opposed to YYZ.

Cal

YYZatcboy · Thu Jun 18, 2015 9:00 pm

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 43):
Well there's a lot of very questionable history in the move to YYZ, but we'll leave that all in the past. The reason I would think YHM would make a good location is:

They already have several flights heading out west from YHM. There is a lot of gate space available cheaply out of YHM. There is not near the customs/immigration nightmare in YHM. There is far less hassle parking, etc., at YHM.

It's much more convenient, especially for non-commuter travel. YYZ is a great airport, but it can be a real pain for any long-term travel. YHM would allow them to offer lower fares, and also sell the lower costs of parking, etc., for anyone needing to go overseas.

Have you actually flown through YHM? It's a cramped little terminal, with no jet bridges. Customs is in a makeshift shed with 6 desks open. There are only two Xray/Metal detectors at security. Checkin has 4 podiums. And you want to use that as a major transatlantic hub for wide body aircraft cramming 4 767s worth of passengers, and all of the connecting traffic you will need to support the wide bodies through there? The vast majority of the traffic has clearly told the airlines years ago that they want YYZ?

You would have a traffic jam just trying to get onto the ramp.

laughable.

Heck even AC has killed the YHM flight before it even started on RV.

fly_yhm · Thu Jun 18, 2015 9:26 pm

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 45):

Actually YHM has been able to handle 767 flights in the past while running along side 737 flights and CRJ flights. The rouge flights have been
pushed back to 2016 due to Air Canada Mainline loosing an aircraft to the incident at YHZ. Also I bet you could load
and off load at YHM just as fast as YYZ.

The infrastructure isn't as grand however there also aren't a million flights coming in at once at YHM.
I recently had to pick up two different people at YYZ coming from over seas
at yyz and it was well over an hour from aircraft touchdown to me seeing them come out the doors at YYZ.
it wouldn't be anyway close to that long at YHM.

Anyway as much as they would probably be successful at YHM basically having no competition its not going to happen.

WestJet really isn't a LCC anymore. you can't be a LCC and have your main hub at one of the most expensive airports
in the world.

oh and BTW if Canadian was till around WestJet would still be hubbed at YHM and at airport would look much different.

osiris30 · Thu Jun 18, 2015 9:27 pm

Quoting YYZatcboy (Reply 45):
Have you actually flown through YHM? It's a cramped little terminal, with no jet bridges. Customs is in a makeshift shed with 6 desks open. There are only two Xray/Metal detectors at security. Checkin has 4 podiums. And you want to use that as a major transatlantic hub for wide body aircraft cramming 4 767s worth of passengers, and all of the connecting traffic you will need to support the wide bodies through there?

I have flown through YHM. Yes it's not an enormous multi-billion dollar terminal like YYZ. There is also a slush fund available to clean up many of the short comings you listed in relatively short order at YHM should they land decent traffic. Clearly we have our home allegiances, so I won't get into a pissing match about who pays for what etc., in all of these... I'm tempted to, but I won't

YYZatcboy · Thu Jun 18, 2015 9:53 pm

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 47):
Clearly we have our home allegiances,

LOL I'm not in YYZ anymore. Moved to YYC years ago now. Ahh the memories.

Quoting fly_yhm (Reply 46):
The infrastructure isn't as grand however there also aren't a million flights coming in at once at YHM.

Thats the thing. There would be if the 767 ops were in YHM. You would have a massive arrivals bank of 737s about 2 hours before the 767s depart, and then the 767s would go and come back, and then a massive departure bank of 737s.

Throughout the day the congestion would be manageable, but when you had those spikes around the 767s going it would be chaos.

Quoting fly_yhm (Reply 46):
it wouldn't be anyway close to that long at YHM.

Until you factor in the drive into the city. Say you are going down town, thats at least 40 minutes. European arrivals come in in the morning so probably more like an hour 20 or more at that point. If you were the last off the plane and the line at customs was huge as it would be, it could conceivably be longer than at yyz to get to your destination. YHM also does not have great highway access either.

Not to mention YHM does not capture most of the YYZ catchment area. YHM has been tried by many airlines, and time and again unless you are from Bulington/Oakville or Hamilton Niagara YYZ is where people want to fly from.

thekorean · Thu Jun 18, 2015 9:57 pm

BTW can any of the 737 do YYZ-LON nonstop without payload restrictions?

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net