Aviation Discussion

[Crawley Ben]

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.

BA also shifting its Doha service from Heathrow to Gatwick.

Last flight from Heathrow is 27th March 2021, first flight from Gatwick is on 28th March 2021.

Ben

 

[gsnedders]

Vaguely related: I've always been surprised that BA nowadays (or rather, in The Before Times) only operate a single daily LHR-SYD service, given it is a route with a fair bit of custom as I understand. Too much of the market being taken up by Qantas and Emirates and the like?

 

[Speed43125]

Vaguely related: I've always been surprised that BA nowadays (or rather, in The Before Times) only operate a single daily LHR-SYD service, given it is a route with a fair bit of custom as I understand. Too much of the market being taken up by Qantas and Emirates and the like?

All flights on the kangaroo route have to stop anyway. So Asians carriers, anything from Emirates and Qatar to Singapore and Malaysia airlines can offer the same route and then some. For example, BA and Qantas would mean you have to fly LHR-SYD, Emirates could offer you EDI-SYD or MAN-MEL, and you still have the same number of take-off landings - ie similar flight time but far more flexible. Add in lower labour costs etc, and it's no wonder BA was the last Western European airline to fly to Australia.

 

[221129]

For example, BA and Qantas would mean you have to fly LHR-SYD, Emirates could offer you EDI-SYD or MAN-MEL, and you still have the same number of take-off landings - ie similar flight time but far more flexible.

BA and Qantas both codeshare out of the more regional airports. With Qatar and Emirates respectively.

 

[Speed43125]

BA and Qantas both codeshare out of the more regional airports. With Qatar and Emirates respectively.

Which effectively adds extra flights and time.
EDI-LHR-SIN-SYD on BA is going to take longer than EDI-DXB-SYD on Ek isn't it?

 

[221129]

Which effectively adds extra flights and time.
EDI-LHR-SIN-SYD on BA is going to take longer than EDI-DXB-SYD on Ek isn't it?

No... You would do EDI-DOH-SYD on QR as a BA codeshare...

Which effectively adds extra flights and time.
EDI-LHR-SIN-SYD on BA is going to take longer than EDI-DXB-SYD on Ek isn't it?

I can book with BA from Edinburgh to Sydney via Doha as a codeshare with Qatar.

Or the same with Qantas from Glasgow as a codeshare with Emirates. Going no where near Heathrow.

 

[Speed43125]

No... You would do EDI-DOH-SYD on QR as a BA codeshare...


I can book with BA from Edinburgh to Sydney via Doha as a codeshare with Qatar.

Or the same with Qantas from Glasgow as a codeshare with Emirates. Going no where near Heathrow.

In which case BA have effectively lost out, with the Asian carrier getting the traffic then? Sure you're flying with a BA flight number, but QR have operated the flight and received the revenue. Or am I missing something?

 

[221129]

In which case BA have effectively lost out, with the Asian carrier getting the traffic then? Sure you're flying with a BA flight number, but QR have operated the flight and received the revenue. Or am I missing something?

You're missing something. BA get a large cut of the revenue without the Costs.

 

[Speed43125]

THere may well be cost savings for the OneWorld carriers through closer integration like that, could you please provide something to substantiate the 'large cut' BA are getting though?

 

[najaB]

THere may well be cost savings for the OneWorld carriers through closer integration like that, could you please provide something to substantiate the 'large cut' BA are getting though?

That's the whole point of code shares. The airline whose code you book under gets the revenue, they then split that with the airline operating the flight. The exact percentage that they get to keep is harder to work out than ORCATS share, but can be anything from 5% up to 25% or more.

This can be achieved in a number of different ways. Sometimes the airline operating the flight sells a block of seats to the partner airline at a steep discount to the market price - meaning that they get the revenu for those seats regardless of if they're sold or not (this is why a flight could be full, but take off with empty seats), or if the integration is tighter they can each sell seats out of a common booking system. The discount will be less in this kind of arrangement, but the risk to to partner airline is lower.

 

[Chester1]

On a different note, what do people think the prospects are for Gatwick's second run way plans?

 

[najaB]

On a different note, what do people think the prospects are for Gatwick's second run way plans?

London is likely to get one new runway, I can't see two happening any time soon. So if Heathrow gets theirs it'll be 20 to 30 years before Gatwick gets one.

 

[TheBigD]

Doesn't Gatwick already have 2 runways but restrictions mean that only 1 is in regular use?

 

[221129]

Doesn't Gatwick already have 2 runways but restrictions mean that only 1 is in regular use?

No it only has the single runway

 

[FQTV]

Doesn't Gatwick already have 2 runways but restrictions mean that only 1 is in regular use?

Yes, it does.

No it only has the single runway

No, it doesn't.

The northern runway (08L/26R) can only be used when the main runway (08R/26L) is out of use.

So, it has two runways, but only one is operational at any one time.

 

[BananaRepublic]

Doesn't Gatwick already have 2 runways but restrictions mean that only 1 is in regular use?

One of the parallel taxiways, running alongside the runway, was widened and upgraded many years ago, to be used as an emergency runway.
This would be used if the “proper” runway is blocked or put out of action for a protracted period of time.
It’s also used at night time at various times of the year, to allow for runway maintenance or resurfacing to take place.

This runway is much shorter than the “proper” runway, has no instrument landing aids and minimal landing light provision.
When it is called into action, there are strict restrictions on airfield movements and increased separation between aircraft moving on the ground, as this emergency runway is not properly, or fully separated from adjacent taxiways and sections of the parking aprons.

It has been used, but rarely, due to main runway outages, because it takes time to bring it into operation and institute all the necessary airfield safeguarding procedures.
However it’s had lots of use over the years, for planned maintenance on the main runway.

Gatwick had hoped to build a new full length runway, located to the south of the present one, but after Heathrow was chosen, they are planning to submit an application to upgrade the emergency runway and to adjust (skew) the existing taxiway arrangements, so that it can be used at peak times, in conjunct with the main runway.
It’s a poor substitute for a new, properly separated, full length runway though.

 

[FQTV]

All flights on the kangaroo route have to stop anyway. So Asians carriers, anything from Emirates and Qatar to Singapore and Malaysia airlines can offer the same route and then some. For example, BA and Qantas would mean you have to fly LHR-SYD, Emirates could offer you EDI-SYD or MAN-MEL, and you still have the same number of take-off landings - ie similar flight time but far more flexible. Add in lower labour costs etc, and it's no wonder BA was the last Western European airline to fly to Australia.

It's more nuanced even than that. The point about the hub-and-spoke model is that operating costs are minimised when the company is based at the hub.

British Airways has strong business between the US and India, for example, because London sits between the two, and their fleet is able to operate non-stop to both. Singapore Airlines, Cathay Pacific, Thai Airways, Malaysia Airlines and, originally though to a lesser extent Garuda Indonesia, appreciated their position between Europe and Australasia, as well as further East Asia. The Emiratis of Dubai identified that they too could act as a bridgehead between Europe and Asia Pacific, and also between the USA and APac. They were closely followed by their Emirati neighbours in Abu Dhabi, and then the State of Qatar.

Although Singapore, Hong Kong, Thailand, Malaysia, Jakarta, Dubai, Abu Dhabi & Qatar enjoy lower employment costs (and employment rights), even if they were subject to the same costs and responsibilities as European carriers, they'd still enjoy certain advantages between (say) Europe and (say) Australasia, based purely on geography.

So, to circle back to the British Airways example of the Sydney route, the route may viable based on one flight a day each way, based on 777-300ER operation, with 'Mixed Fleet' crew and the cargo demand. However, the aircraft that leaves London on Day One does not return until Day Five. The cabin crew don't return until (IIRC) Day Seven and the Flight Crew aren't back until Day Eight. During this time, they all have allowances plus hotel costs. They're then not available for duty for another two calendar days.

This is vastly more costly in all regards as they're based at one end of the route, rather than in the middle.

However, if you then look at the Qantas non-stop strategy, the economics change again. This is particularly the case with flight crew, who can't help but find themselves in London the 'day' after they leave Perth. And, as in the other direction, they don't incur any hotel or allowance costs en route.

 

[BananaRepublic]

......based on 777-300ER operation, with 'Mixed Fleet' crew .....
......The cabin crew don't return until (IIRC) Day Seven and the Flight Crew aren't back until Day Eight. During this time, they all have allowances plus hotel costs. They're then not available for duty for another two calendar days......

The Cabin crew are away on a 9 day tour and return to LHR on day 9.

Outbound day 1, evening departure, overnight flight arriving SIN early evening day 2.
2 nights in SIN
Day 4 evening departure SIN- SYD overnight flight.
Arrive early morning day 5
1 night in SYD
SYD-SIN on day 6 (late evening arrival)
2 nights in SIN
day 8 late night departure SIN- LHR overnight
arrive LHR day 9

Mixed fleet cabin crew are on minimal allowances and have to buy their own food while away.
Only the hotel accommodation is provided. Nice hotels though.

A far cry from the 70’s when there were more stops on the way, with additional layovers and the crews were away for almost 3 weeks, on full allowances.
z

z

 

[TheBigD]

However, if you then look at the Qantas non-stop strategy, the economics change again. This is particularly the case with flight crew, who can't help but find themselves in London the 'day' after they leave Perth. And, as in the other direction, they don't incur any hotel or allowance costs en route.

Unless it has changed, the Perth-Heathrow flight is crewed with just London based flight attendants. No idea about the flight deck crew.
A friend of a friend works for qantas and she would either spend 1 night in Perth, or 2 nights with the second night on standby. She would then have 5 days off after returning to Heathrow.

 

[FQTV]

The Cabin crew are away on a 9 day tour.

Cabin crew return to LHR on day 9.
Outbound day, overnight.
2 nights in SIN
SIN- SYD overnight day 4
Arrive early morning day 5
1 night in SYD
SYD-SIN on day 6 (late evening arrival)
2 nights in SIN
day 8 late night departure SIN- LHR overnight
arrive LHR day 9


z

Just checked; you’re quite right, it’s a nine day trip even for Mixed Fleet (as was). Then four days off. Definitely proves the point that it’s labour heavy to crew from one end.

Unless it has changed, the Perth-Heathrow flight is crewed with just London based flight attendants. No idea about the flight deck crew.
A friend of a friend works for qantas and she would either spend 1 night in Perth, or 2 nights with the second night on standby. She would then have 5 days off after returning to Heathrow.

That’d be about right at a guess; the economics of the route (and also one of the reasons for restarting QF1 via Singapore rather than Dubai) are I think based on using new hires in London, on new terms, rather than legacy Australia-based crews.

I seem to recall that those on the Perth route from London originally had only one night rest in Perth, but petitioned that it wasn’t acceptable. They’re now on two nights, I think, probably eased from the company side by how well the route was performing.

 

[gsnedders]

Just checked; you’re quite right, it’s a nine day trip even for Mixed Fleet (as was). Then four days off. Definitely proves the point that it’s labour heavy to crew from one end.

---

That’d be about right at a guess; the economics of the route (and also one of the reasons for restarting QF1 via Singapore rather than Dubai) are I think based on using new hires in London, on new terms, rather than legacy Australia-based crews.

I seem to recall that those on the Perth route from London originally had only one night rest in Perth, but petitioned that it wasn’t acceptable. They’re now on two nights, I think, probably eased from the company side by how well the route was performing.

Ah, so this makes a lot of sense as to why it's so labour heavy to crew from one end. Which leads to the question, if QF1 is using London crews for the ex-UK leg, what stops BA from having Australian crews? Presumably in part because Qantas operate more flights to London, whereas the BA flights are spread across destinations in Australia?

(Also, I realise there are advantages for the Middle Eastern carriers from regional airports, but I was specifically asking about the ex-London market, given BA's losses there.)

 

[Bald Rick]

Ah, so this makes a lot of sense as to why it's so labour heavy to crew from one end. Which leads to the question, if QF1 is using London crews for the ex-UK leg, what stops BA from having Australian crews? Presumably in part because Qantas operate more flights to London, whereas the BA flights are spread across destinations in Australia?

(Also, I realise there are advantages for the Middle Eastern carriers from regional airports, but I was specifically asking about the ex-London market, given BA's losses there.)

BA are only in Sydney.

 

[Airline Man]

It always surprises me how busy these short flights can be with connecting passengers.

It varies but on BA between 40-50% of shorthaul passengers are transferring between flights.

 

[FQTV]

It varies but on BA between 40-50% of shorthaul passengers are transferring between flights.

It’s actually been up to 80% on domestic routes to and from Heathrow.

 

[eoff]

It’s actually been up to 80% on domestic routes to and from Heathrow.

This is why BA had to add another class to the LHR-EDI 'shuttles'. People with expensive international tickets were far from amused about having to pay for a drink on the domestic leg.

 

[FQTV]

This is why BA had to add another class to the LHR-EDI 'shuttles'. People with expensive international tickets were far from amused about having to pay for a drink on the domestic leg.

Club Europe was introduced on all domestic routes in April 2017, but there were a few reasons for this, not just the move to Buy On Board catering on mainline routes some months earlier.

It also meant that those connecting to and from longhaul World Traveller Plus flights actually lost out slightly with the launch of Club Europe on domestics, as is often the case with the law of unintended consequences.

 

[TravelDream]

Incredibly difficult to make money on the Kangaroo route due to massive amount of competition. Pre-covid, it wasn't unheard of the airlines like China Southern, China Eastern and Vietnam Airlines to offer the route return for the £400 mark. No way BA or Qantas can compete at those levels. It's part of the reason why BA only have the one daily flight to Sydney and Qantas the one from Sydney and one Perth. Compare that to the 90s when all major Oz cities were connected to London. Air NZ recently cancelled their Auckland to London route too.

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!

Back in the day, a connection between Gatwick and Heathrow actually included a bus transfer between the two. You wouldn't touch your luggage either as BA had a van that ran between the two carrying luggage. I want to say it ended some time after 9/11.
Numbers are quite small, but people definitely do do it. I imagine a fair few do it inadvertently on top of that as well not realising they have to change airports. It's the same in Paris and Berlin amongst many others.

 

[najaB]

I imagine a fair few do it inadvertently on top of that as well not realising they have to change airports.

Certainly the last time I had to switch between Heathrow and Gatwick I only realised during online check-in.

It was quite annoying as it definitely was listed as an "x hour connection at Heathrow" while I was booking it, and I didn't actually look at the specific flights was I normally do.

 

[Chester1]

Incredibly difficult to make money on the Kangaroo route due to massive amount of competition. Pre-covid, it wasn't unheard of the airlines like China Southern, China Eastern and Vietnam Airlines to offer the route return for the £400 mark. No way BA or Qantas can compete at those levels. It's part of the reason why BA only have the one daily flight to Sydney and Qantas the one from Sydney and one Perth. Compare that to the 90s when all major Oz cities were connected to London. Air NZ recently cancelled their Auckland to London route too.

My preferred route would probably be transiting through Dubai and making use of its airside transit hotel. £160 is worth it for a double or twin room that allows you to break your journey without passing through immigration.

 

[TravelDream]

My preferred route would probably be transiting through Dubai and making use of its airside transit hotel. £160 is worth it for a double or twin room that allows you to break your journey without passing through immigration.

It's a tough one. Part of me would want to get the journey over and done with and part of me have a break in the middle. £160 is madness though. If you stop off in HCMC or Hanoi, you could hire a Mercedes E-Class to take you to stay in the most luxurious 5 star hotel in town and get a nice spa treatment for less.

I don't get the thing some have with Emirates. Only flown them once and found them mediocre. You can get better service on South East Asian airlines. I think Dubai is a bit close to us as well. I'd rather stop off closer to Oz. Perhaps in Singapore or Hong Kong.