Aviation Discussion

[packermac]

It sounds knackering once you factor in time zones, especially for entry level cabin crew who don't get paid a great amount?

If you ever travelled back on the fourth leg of a back to back from the East Coast of the USA you would see how knackering it was, most appeared to be somewhere else by then.
Day 1 UK-USA Nightstop
Day 2 USA-UK Overnight
Day 3 Hotel at LHR/LGW
Day 4 UK-USA Nightstop
Day 5 USA-UK Overnight

 

[FQTV]

Presumably to connect with all the trans stlantic flights to tourist destinations (Carribean, Mexico, etc) - there must be a couple of thousands BA seats flying out late morning each day, and some of the passengers are bound to be attracted to a Manchester connection. I assume that with the travails elsewhere in the travel industry that direct flights from Manchester to the Carribean by other operators have been reduced.

That's what the timings look like, though who knows how many flights there will actually be to any of those destinations next year. Thomas Cook did a lot of flights from Manchester to the Caribbean, but you'd think it BA were after that market they'd have done something sooner. Maybe they've just got nothing better to do with the slots now.

There's an element of slot usage, but BA appears to be increasing their Caribbean offering since most of the islands have done reasonably well at controling Covid, and are working to increase higher end UK tourism.

For example, Barbados has regularly scheduled LHR flights for the first time in about 20 years.

Most evenings a not insignificant portion of BA's B772 fleet is in the region. Typically 2x in Barbados, 1x in Jamaica, 1x in Antigua, 1x in St Lucia/Grenada, and 1x in the Caman Islands and/or the Turks and Caicos Islands.

There’s also the move from Heathrow to Gatwick of the Islamabad and Accra routes, at least for a while, so that’ll be another flow that may be being taken into account with reinstating Manchester > Gatwick.

 

[jfollows]

Gatwick - Manchester route making a comeback with British Airways

https://www.businesstraveller.com/business-travel/2020/12/15/british-airways-to-resume-manchester-gatwick-link/

Ben

Thank you for posting this, it's good to know.

After many years of travel, I've concluded that Manchester-London flights are not for me. Gatwick-Wilmslow is now so easy by train, walking from Saint Pancras to Euston, that it's not unpleasant at all. But I guess that people, maybe especially on holidays, will be seduced by the idea of connecting flights - to some extent that's understandable in that if things go wrong it's down to the airline to sort out, whereas I'm happy to take my risk with splitting my transport and getting a cheap advance rail ticket for the last leg, appropriately late enough to cater for some flight arrival delays of course.

So it'll be interesting to see if there's a market and a better service than this for Manchester-Gatwick. I suspect not, other than for people for whom a "connection" matters more than a lengthy wait between flights (potentially).

It seems that there's a market for Manchester-Heathrow, which I've done too many times. But I've been sat around at Heathrow too often waiting for my "connecting" flight home at the time I'd have arrived home already had I gone by train. For travellers on more expensive tickets who can change to earlier flights I guess it's less of an issue, but on cheaper flights I've certainly had many hour "connections" at Heathrow between arrival and departure. I never remember the long connection times outbound, into long-haul flights from Heathrow, being a problem, but there's something bad about arriving at Heathrow before 7am (say) but not getting home to Wilmslow until 3pm or so, which I've had to endure in the past.

 

[Bletchleyite]

After many years of travel, I've concluded that Manchester-London flights are not for me. Gatwick-Wilmslow is now so easy by train, walking from Saint Pancras to Euston, that it's not unpleasant at all. But I guess that people, maybe especially on holidays, will be seduced by the idea of connecting flights - to some extent that's understandable in that if things go wrong it's down to the airline to sort out, whereas I'm happy to take my risk with splitting my transport and getting a cheap advance rail ticket for the last leg, appropriately late enough to cater for some flight arrival delays of course.

Yes, that's the main reason to need connecting flights from e.g. Manchester to London, the secondary issue is that getting from Euston to Heathrow (in particular) is a right faff.

I hope that with HS2's easier connection to Heathrow via OOC codeshares will be in place with airlines to cover this (so you can buy one ticket that includes train Manchester-OOC, the connecting shuttle plus the flight to wherever), as they are in a number of other countries with high speed railway networks.

 

[jfollows]

Yes, that's the main reason to need connecting flights from e.g. Manchester to London, the secondary issue is that getting from Euston to Heathrow (in particular) is a right faff.

I hope that with HS2's easier connection to Heathrow via OOC codeshares will be in place with airlines to cover this (so you can buy one ticket that includes train Manchester-OOC, the connecting shuttle plus the flight to wherever), as they are in a number of other countries with high speed railway networks.

I agree, although the reality of getting between Heathrow and Euston is probably more intimidating in concept to someone not familiar with it than the reality .... but, fair enough, I've also used subway and train routes between JFK and New York in the past and, first time, was something of an aventure.

But in terms of a right faff, someone posted on the Business Traveller forum (https://www.businesstraveller.com/b...sh-airways-to-resume-manchester-gatwick-link/): "Great news! Waiting for this news for some time now. Up until now any flights from Gatwick would’ve required a flight into Heathrow, transfer by bus or train to Gatwick to catch BA long haul holiday destinations.". So some people presumably actually do this kind of transfer? Seems completely bonkers to me!

 

[Chester1]

Thank you for posting this, it's good to know.

After many years of travel, I've concluded that Manchester-London flights are not for me. Gatwick-Wilmslow is now so easy by train, walking from Saint Pancras to Euston, that it's not unpleasant at all. But I guess that people, maybe especially on holidays, will be seduced by the idea of connecting flights - to some extent that's understandable in that if things go wrong it's down to the airline to sort out, whereas I'm happy to take my risk with splitting my transport and getting a cheap advance rail ticket for the last leg, appropriately late enough to cater for some flight arrival delays of course.

So it'll be interesting to see if there's a market and a better service than this for Manchester-Gatwick. I suspect not, other than for people for whom a "connection" matters more than a lengthy wait between flights (potentially).

It seems that there's a market for Manchester-Heathrow, which I've done too many times. But I've been sat around at Heathrow too often waiting for my "connecting" flight home at the time I'd have arrived home already had I gone by train. For travellers on more expensive tickets who can change to earlier flights I guess it's less of an issue, but on cheaper flights I've certainly had many hour "connections" at Heathrow between arrival and departure. I never remember the long connection times outbound, into long-haul flights from Heathrow, being a problem, but there's something bad about arriving at Heathrow before 7am (say) but not getting home to Wilmslow until 3pm or so, which I've had to endure in the past.

Flying direct from Manchester or flying via an international hub is ussually better than using any of the London airports. Pre covid Manchester was doing really well with long haul routes, hopefully that will continue afterwards.

 

[najaB]

So some people presumably actually do this kind of transfer? Seems completely bonkers to me!

I've done it a couple of times - and now will avoid it whenever possible!

 

[jfollows]

I've done it a couple of times - and now will avoid it whenever possible!

Reminds me that I was once going to Montpelier on a business trip, nice place to go, but my colleague sent me details of his flights. I pointed out to him that he was arriving in Paris Charles de Gaulle with a "connection" leaving from Paris Orly after a few hours. He hadn't noticed, and it was only lucky that I did. He cancelled his flight from Orly and took the train from Charles de Gaulle instead and was very happy that I'd pointed the alternative option out.

I did kind of do this trip myself in 1968 when we arrived in Le Bourget from Manchester one day and left the following day for Lagos from Orly, but there was an overnight stay in a foreign country at the age of almost-7 so I quite enjoyed this particular variation.

 

[Aictos]

And today Wizz Air has launched its new London Luton to Gibraltar service, providing competition to easyJet and British Airways and also offers competition to London Gatwick and London Heathrow airports.

The local newspaper has a article and quotes from Wizz Air too: https://www.lutontoday.co.uk/news/transport/wizz-air-launches-flight-luton-gibraltar-3064957

Good news all around as long as Gibraltar stays on the travel corridor there is no requirement to self isolate when you re-enter the UK.

 

[Chester1]

And today Wizz Air has launched its new London Luton to Gibraltar service, providing competition to easyJet and British Airways and also offers competition to London Gatwick and London Heathrow airports.

The local newspaper has a article and quotes from Wizz Air too: https://www.lutontoday.co.uk/news/transport/wizz-air-launches-flight-luton-gibraltar-3064957

Good news all around as long as Gibraltar stays on the travel corridor there is no requirement to self isolate when you re-enter the UK.

Gibraltar won't get added to the list. There was a point when the Government was red listing countries with case rates of 30 to 40 per 100,000 and Gibraltar was on 140 and still on the green list. Its clearly being treated as an unofficial part of the Common Travel Area.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Gibraltar won't get added to the list. There was a point when the Government was red listing countries with case rates of 30 to 40 per 100,000 and Gibraltar was on 140 and still on the green list. Its clearly being treated as an unofficial part of the Common Travel Area.

I think anything that would have anyone suggest they weren't treating it as part of the UK would be likely to have political ructions. So I agree, unlikely.

 

[Bald Rick]

Haven’t seen this posted yet: BA dropping 15 long haul routes, including (surprisingly to me) Sydney and Bangkok.

BA drops 15 long-haul routes including Seoul and Seychelles

The news comes as many airlines cut staff and drop routes as passengers cut travel amid the pandemic.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Bletchleyite]

Haven’t seen this posted yet: BA dropping 15 long haul routes, including (surprisingly to me) Sydney and Bangkok.

BA drops 15 long-haul routes including Seoul and Seychelles

The news comes as many airlines cut staff and drop routes as passengers cut travel amid the pandemic.

www.bbc.co.uk

Does Thai still do Bangkok from the UK (much nicer planes than BA, including 777s with 9 across and 34" pitch), or is there now no direct flight?

I think the traditional "Kangaroo route" has long been dying off, with the likes of Emirates winning out. Qantas have stopped it as well, haven't they?

 

[najaB]

Haven’t seen this posted yet: BA dropping 15 long haul routes, including (surprisingly to me) Sydney and Bangkok.

BA drops 15 long-haul routes including Seoul and Seychelles

The news comes as many airlines cut staff and drop routes as passengers cut travel amid the pandemic.

www.bbc.co.uk

Australia is keeping it's borders largely closed to foreigners through the middle of next year.
Not sure about Thailand, but I suspect they are going to do the same.

So it's no surprise that BA aren't selling flights that aren't likely to ever operate.

 

[Bald Rick]

Does Thai still do Bangkok from the UK (much nicer planes than BA, including 777s with 9 across and 34" pitch), or is there now no direct flight?

Currently weekly with an A350

Australia is keeping it's borders largely closed to foreigners through the middle of next year.
Not sure about Thailand, but I suspect they are going to do the same.

So it's no surprise that BA aren't selling flights that aren't likely to ever operate.

Ah, yes, that makes sense.

 

[Chester1]

Qantas is still planning to launch direct London to Sydney and Melbourne flights but delayed ordering modified A350-1000s because of the pandemic. Its London - Perth direct service was extremely successful until the pandemic hit (94% load factor in 2019). BAs business model seems to be milking its Heathrow landing slots and not taking risks. They will likely just surrender the market if Qantas launches direct flights. Between cheap flights from Middle Eastern carriers and direct Qantas flights there won't be much left for them.

 

[Bald Rick]

Qantas is still planning to launch direct London to Sydney and Melbourne flights

Sydney, yes, but hadn’t heard about Melbourne. The Perth non-stop flights go on to Melbourne of course, so thabload factor has Perth and Melbourne punters on. Before it switched to Perth, it was an A380 via Dubai.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Qantas is still planning to launch direct London to Sydney and Melbourne flights but delayed ordering modified A350-1000s because of the pandemic. Its London - Perth direct service was extremely successful until the pandemic hit (94% load factor in 2019). BAs business model seems to be milking its Heathrow landing slots and not taking risks. They will likely just surrender the market if Qantas launches direct flights. Between cheap flights from Middle Eastern carriers and direct Qantas flights there won't be much left for them.

Don't Qantas and BA have some sort of partnership deal anyway, meaning if only one of them was running through then all the connections are still available to passengers seamlessly? If one was running non-stop, that one would have the advantage ( I, for one, would be far more likely to visit Sydney if I could do so non-stop as opposed to having to get off and re-board at some point along the route ).

 

[Jamesrob637]

Sydney, yes, but hadn’t heard about Melbourne. The Perth non-stop flights go on to Melbourne of course, so thabload factor has Perth and Melbourne punters on. Before it switched to Perth, it was an A380 via Dubai.

Still rather do A380 via Dubai than Dreamliner for 18 hours! Perth maybe but definitely Melbourne.

 

[Chester1]

Sydney, yes, but hadn’t heard about Melbourne. The Perth non-stop flights go on to Melbourne of course, so thabload factor has Perth and Melbourne punters on. Before it switched to Perth, it was an A380 via Dubai.

Opening routes would be Sydney to London and New York. Qantas have proposed Melbourne to London and New York next. Melbourne and Sydney to Paris too. They have suggested Brisbane would be added to the network. Melbourne is of comparable size to Sydney but Brisbane isn't. London and Paris are comparable but Australia has many more links to the UK than France. Qantas were about to order 12 modified A350-1000s when the pandemic hit and that gives a real indication of the ultra long haul market. Sydney/Melboune to London/New York are probably the only viable new routes this decade. Melbourne to London would force a reduction in frequency of direct Perth services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Don't Qantas and BA have some sort of partnership deal anyway, meaning if only one of them was running through then all the connections are still available to passengers seamlessly? If one was running non-stop, that one would have the advantage ( I, for one, would be far more likely to visit Sydney if I could do so non-stop as opposed to having to get off and re-board at some point along the route ).

I'm not aware that anyone does, or has ever done, a non-stop London to Australia commercial flight. It's a bit beyond what aircraft can do for now in terms of the amount of fuel needed.

BA typically did it with a stop for fuel at either KL or Bangkok (hence those going too).

Personally (a bit like the change at New St when using LNR from Euston to Liverpool) I would want a stop - 24 hours sat on a plane is a long time.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I'm not aware that anyone does, or has ever done, a non-stop London to Australia commercial flight. It's a bit beyond what aircraft can do for now in terms of the amount of fuel needed.

BA typically did it with a stop for fuel at either KL or Bangkok (hence those going too).

Personally (a bit like the change at New St when using LNR from Euston to Liverpool) I would want a stop - 24 hours sat on a plane is a long time.

Qantas were running non stop from Heathrow to Perth for some time pre-coronavirus and were doing very well with it:

Qantas is still planning to launch direct London to Sydney and Melbourne flights but delayed ordering modified A350-1000s because of the pandemic. Its London - Perth direct service was extremely successful until the pandemic hit (94% load factor in 2019).

It also wouldn't be 24 hours precisely because it would be non-stop. It'll be about 19 or 20 hours; the Perths were 19 hours I think.

 

[Chester1]

Qantas were running non stop from Heathrow to Perth for some time pre-coronavirus and were doing very well with it:



It also wouldn't be 24 hours precisely because it would be non-stop. It'll be about 19 or 20 hours; the Perths were 19 hours I think.

I think it was 17 and a half hours. I weighed up booking it for a now cancelled holiday. London to Sydney and Melbourne would be about 20 hours. The Perth service will be quickly reintroduced once the pandemic ends. It was run by normal 787-9 while Sydney and Melbourne requires Qantas to order modified A350-1000s and fill more seats per flight.

 

[Ted633]

I'm not aware that anyone does, or has ever done, a non-stop London to Australia commercial flight. It's a bit beyond what aircraft can do for now in terms of the amount of fuel needed.

BA typically did it with a stop for fuel at either KL or Bangkok (hence those going too).

Personally (a bit like the change at New St when using LNR from Euston to Liverpool) I would want a stop - 24 hours sat on a plane is a long time.

BA and Qantas used to have an agreement (may of been a codeshare) on the kangaroo route until a few years ago, when Qantas setup a deal with Emirates. Not sure if that is still 'on' either though.
A correction on the fuel stop, all of BA's Sydney flights now stop (or did for the time being) at Singapore.

As an aside, a London to Australia flight non stop has been technically possible for years (B777-200LR), but the payload restrictions make it commercially unviable

 

[najaB]

A correction on the fuel stop, all of BA's Sydney flights now stop (or did for the time being) at Singapore.

Yeah, they made fuel stops so that they could carry more cargo.

 

[telstarbox]

When BAA was established, why were Birmingham and Manchester airports not nationalised as part of it?

From Wikipedia:

The British Airports Authority was established by the Airport Authority Act 1965, to take responsibility for four state-owned airports from the Ministry of Aviation – Heathrow Airport, Gatwick Airport, Prestwick Airport and Stansted Airport. In the following few years, the authority acquired Edinburgh Airport (1971), Glasgow Airport (1975) and Aberdeen Airport (1975).

 

[FQTV]

BA and Qantas used to have an agreement (may of been a codeshare) on the kangaroo route until a few years ago, when Qantas setup a deal with Emirates. Not sure if that is still 'on' either though.
A correction on the fuel stop, all of BA's Sydney flights now stop (or did for the time being) at Singapore.

As an aside, a London to Australia flight non stop has been technically possible for years (B777-200LR), but the payload restrictions make it commercially unviable

BA and Qantas have a fairly unique relationship; BA used to have an equity stake in Qantas and, for a long time, merger/acquisition was actively discussed. The stake was disposed of some time ago.

The two carriers both remain members of the oneworld alliance, and there are codeshares on certain routes.

However, and more recently, Qantas entered into its joint-venture with Emirates, and revenue-shares with them on set routes. Emirates is non-aligned (ie not part of any alliance) and IIRC, longhaul Qantas flights which revenue-share with Emirates do not offer codeshares with BA.

By contrast, Qantas domestics and Trans-Tasman routes don't revenue share with Emirates, but can and do operate as BA codeshares with BA flight numbers.

As an aside, the Emirates JV is one of the reasons that Qantas keeps announcing extensions to suspension of longhaul ops; the demand is more than catered for with Emirates aircraft operations, so they just draw the revenue from those instead.

As a further aside, and point of uniqueness, an Emirates-operated flight booked under a Qantas codeshare (ie ticketed on Qantas 081- stock) actually permits the accrual of Avios and Tier Points in the British Airways Executive Club. It's the only time that a flight operated by a non- or mis-aligned third party is eligible for Executive Club earning.

You're quite right that the only BA route to Australia for quite some years now has been the BA15/BA16 rotations through Singapore. Bangkok hasn't operated a continuation since Sydney went once daily, and Kuala Lumpur was suspended completely, let alone the continuation, for quite a number of years, too.

The BA15/BA16 has been commercially sound since the move to B777-300ER operations, helped in part by good basic operating costs and also the strong cargo demand for BA between Sydney and Singapore - and the B777's enormous payload beneath the floor.

You're also quite right that the -200LR can do Australia non-stop, and indeed a British Airways one has done London to Perth before, as part of a Commonwealth Conference in Perth, taking the Queen. As you say, the 777s op costs don't work for a commercial service, but that's where the 787 and A350 come in.

The Qantas London to Perth direct has been a success for them, and a lot of the behind-the-scenes work on 'Project Sunrise', which is the A350 associated plan for Sydney/Melbourne to New York and London, has actually continued apace during Covid. Test flights have operated, with crew and volunteers wired up to monitor them physiologically, and test different catering protocols, hydration effects etc.

Qantas apparently sees non-stop services aimed at the highest-yield customers as being potentially even more commercially viable post-Covid, as it takes out any risks associated with a transit.

 

[Bald Rick]

Perhaps I’ll pull this together:

BA used to fly to Sydney and Melbourne, with intermediate stops at one of KL, Bangkok, or Singapore. I don’t know when the Melbourne flight stopped - 2000s I think - and since then the Sydney flight has been via Singapore. I’ve stopped at each of the three on direct flights to / from Sydney. They had to stop somewhere for fuel, as no commercial passenger aircraft had that range that could work commercislly, until recently.

Qantas used to fly similar routes (my Sydney - London flight on QF1 called at Bangkok); about a decade ago they swapped to A380s from each of Sydney and Melbourne, both routed via Dubai. A couple of years ago they diverted the Sydney flight (QF1) to run via Singapore, and the Melbourne flight (QF9) to run via Perth, using a Dreamliner.

BA and QF definitely codeshared, my trip on QF1 was on a BA code.

 

[BananaRepublic]

BA and Qantas used to have an agreement (may of been a codeshare) on the kangaroo route until a few years ago, when Qantas setup a deal with Emirates. Not sure if that is still 'on' either though.

The BA Qantas codeshare agreement lasted for a very long time.
I flew to Singapore and back with BA many years ago, where the LHR-SIN leg was on a Qantas flight.
Qantas ended their arrangements with BA and switched their codeshare arrangements to Emirates, possibly 8 to maybe 10 or 11 years ago.

The Emirates tie-up was part of Qantas’ efforts to stem heavy losses and involved Qantas withdrawing all flights west of the Gulf to Europe, apart from the London route. Their 2 flights a day between Aus - London, were also switched to route via Dubai, instead of SE Asian cities.
In the last couple of years, Qantas have since switched back to routing their London flights via Singapore.
As an aside, we flew LHR to Mauritius via Dubai, with Emirates (2015) and the LHR-Dubai outbound leg was on a Qantas A380.

......A correction on the fuel stop, all of BA's Sydney flights now stop (or did for the time being) at Singapore....

BA cut back on its Australia flights a number of years ago.
For at least the last 5 years, they’ve only routed via SIN with a daily LHR-SIN-SYD using a B777-300 (BA15/16).
The LHR-SIN leg forms part of BA’s 2x daily flights to SIN. The other being an A380, which terminates at SIN.
They carried quite a lot of passengers destined for SIN and have 5th freedom rights to sell tickets on the SIN-SYD leg.
One of my sprogs flies for BA and reports the SIN-SYD leg always having pretty full passenger loads.

....As an aside, a London to Australia flight non stop has been technically possible for years (B777-200LR), but the payload restrictions make it commercially unviable

When Qantas introduced the B747-400, they flew a special, non-stop publicity/ press/demo flight from LHR to SYD, taking 20hrs 8 mins.
Non-stop being totally non-viable in commercial operation.
At the time they declared their intentions to fly non-stop at some point in the future, when it would be technically and economically viable to do so.
A couple of things I remember being cited as a hurdles to overcome, were the fuel load required to carry the extra fuel needed....and the extra weight and fuel necessary to carry the additional consumables, such as extra fresh water, food, drink etc, etc.

p.s. FQTV has put it al rather more eloquently. Thanks.

z

 

[berneyarms]

Perhaps I’ll pull this together:

BA used to fly to Sydney and Melbourne, with intermediate stops at one of KL, Bangkok, or Singapore. I don’t know when the Melbourne flight stopped - 2000s I think - and since then the Sydney flight has been via Singapore. I’ve stopped at each of the three on direct flights to / from Sydney. They had to stop somewhere for fuel, as no commercial passenger aircraft had that range that could work commercislly, until recently.

Qantas used to fly similar routes (my Sydney - London flight on QF1 called at Bangkok); about a decade ago they swapped to A380s from each of Sydney and Melbourne, both routed via Dubai. A couple of years ago they diverted the Sydney flight (QF1) to run via Singapore, and the Melbourne flight (QF9) to run via Perth, using a Dreamliner.

BA and QF definitely codeshared, my trip on QF1 was on a BA code.

BA also flew to Brisbane, Perth and Auckland in the more distant past. The latter was an additional leg from Australia.