Aviation Discussion

[BananaRepublic]

As Virgin America has nothing to do with Virgin Atlantic, other than the shared Virgin branding and a percentage of both companies being owned by the Virgin Group (25% and 51% respectively), there is just as much chance of this aircraft coming from somewhere else.
As already mentioned, it's likely to be a wet lease, but not necessarily from one of the European leasing or charter companies.

 

[WestCoast]

I would have though they would want an aircraft registered within the EEA, otherwise an aircraft leased from Virgin America would have to be put on Virgin Atlantic's Air Operating Certificate with all the hassles and costs that brings?

I get the impression they'd rather not commit themselves too much to short-haul as this stage, so a wet lease from a carrier with full EEA flying rights makes the most sense.

In theory, it could be easyJet or Aer Lingus (doubt they'd touch BA!), but AFAIK those airlines have never done long term ACMI contracts before and it doesn't feature in their business plan. I know Flybe, Jet2, Monarch and Thomson have done wet/damp leases before, but none of them have A319s.

 

[flymo]

Apologies if this has been posted already but it is now possible to book the Virgin flights from Manchester to London Heathrow (and vice-versa). Looks like the aircraft will sleep in Manchester overnight.

Daily in an A319

VS3046 MAN 0650 - 0800 LHR
VS3042 MAN 1220 - 1330 LHR
VS3044 MAN 1750 - 1900 LHR

VS3041 LHR 0920 - 1020 MAN
VS3043 LHR 1610 - 1710 MAN
VS3045 LHR 2010 - 2110 MAN

Seen a price of £47 (£8 fare + £39 taxes hock:hock for the first flight on opodo.

Going to be an interesting tussle between BA/VS on this route....

 

[WestCoast]

Qantas forms Emirates alliance as it seeks turnaround

Qantas Airways has agreed to form a 10-year alliance with Emirates as it looks to turn around its loss-making international operations.
Under the terms of the agreement, the two carriers will collaborate on pricing, sales and flight scheduling.
However, there will be no equity investment on either side.

Qantas, which has been hurt by slowing demand, growing competition and higher fuel costs, said the alliance was key to reviving its international unit.
"A key objective is to make Qantas International strong and viable, and bring it back to profitability," said Alan Joyce, chief executive of Qantas.
"This partnership will help us do that."
Qantas will end its existing relationship with British Airways and also shift its hub for European flights to Dubai from Singapore.

Read More: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19498374

What do we think about Qantas terminating their 90 year old partnership with British Airways on the Kangaroo route (and their more recent joint venture on revenue). Are they 'selling their soul to the devil' by working so closely with Emirates or making a sensible move which will stem their losses?

The deal will mean that from next April, Qantas will ditch their Singapore - London/Frankfurt flights and channel all traffic through Dubai. BA will be left operating London - Singapore - Sydney on their own, will they continue with no partner? Qantas will fly London - Dubai - Sydney/Melbourne, with Emirates flights from all over Europe bringing more people to Dubai. Emirates and Qantas will fly 14 times daily between Dubai and Australia.

BA and Virgin Atlantic are the only European airlines that still fly to Australia. Most pulled out in the '90s when competition from Emirates and this airlines based in Asia picked up. It's costly for European airlines to operate into Australia as it ties up a single aircraft for three days.

 

[SwindonPkwy]

If BA fly a 747 to Singapore, much of the Business and First Class passengers, in particular, will not be traveling onwards. Without a codeshare arrangement, it is difficult to see them filling these cabins between Singapore and Sydney. They do have some options though.
1) Route more Australia flights through HKG or KUL and codeshare with fellow OneWorld members Cathay and Malaysian.
2) Switch some capacity to Perth, Brisbane or Adelaide where Qantas is weaker and passengers may not want to switch to Emirates.
3) Station a 767 in Singapore to do the Sydney leg.
I can see them trying 1) rather than pulling out immediately. 2) and 3) are less likely.
On the plus side, assuming they have enough capacity, they will be able to consolidate all of their long haul flights in T5. This is much better for their domestic and European transfers.
As for Qantas, getting into bed with Emirates does come with risks. Frequent flyers, accustomed to traveling through Singapore, may 'jump ship'. Even back packers may prefer to stick to the 'traditional' well worn paths through Asia.

 

[WestCoast]

As for Qantas, getting into bed with Emirates does come with risks. Frequent flyers, accustomed to traveling through Singapore, may 'jump ship'. Even back packers may prefer to stick to the 'traditional' well worn paths through Asia.

Interesting points. I am of the opinion that Qantas needed to do something. Their long-haul operation to Europe has been losing a large sum of money year after year, whereas Emirates has been doing extremely well on their routes to Australia and New Zealand. For BA, Australia is now a small market (didn't used to be that way), but it's the heart of Qantas's business.

The real benefit I think comes from the 1-stop connections against 2-stop. Qantas at the moment is only available to offer flights from London or Frankfurt, which for many will mean a connecting flight on one of their partners before you've even left Europe. However, over 30 cities in Europe are linked directly to Dubai, including six airports here in the UK. This facilitates a 1-stop connection to all the major cities in Australia. So while Qantas may lose some passengers wanting to route through Asia, they could gain many more from those wishing to travel to/from cities other than London or Frankfurt.

 

[WatcherZero]

Emirates rivals already responded to Qantas overtures, Etihads increased its share of Virgin Australia by from 5% to the maximum permitted10% in the last couple of weeks.

 

[Ascot]

Big changes at Shannon coming up with the pre-clearance facilities being cut short. Here's an email that has come through regarding the BA flights, knocks the shine off of BA3 a bit.

Dear ,

We wanted to let you know about a couple of changes to our business class-only service between London City (LCY) and New York (JFK) starting on 28 October 2012.

Flight schedule changes

a) London City (LCY) - Shannon (SNN) - New York (JFK):
• Flight BA001 is now leaving London at 09:50 and arriving in New York at 14:20 local time
from Monday to Thursday. The short stop at Shannon is from 11:05 to 11:50.
• On Fridays, flight BA001 departs at 12:50 from London and arrives in New York at 17:15
local time. The short stop at Shannon is from 14:05 to 14:50.
• Flight BA003 is leaving London at 16:00 and arriving in New York at 20:30 local time from
Monday to Thursday. The short stop at Shannon is from 17:15 to 18:00. This flight
operates Monday to Friday and Sunday.

b) New York (JFK) - London City (LCY):
• Flight BA002 is leaving New York at 18:55 and arriving in London at 07:15 on the following
day as a direct service. This flight operates Monday to Friday and Sunday.
• Flight BA004 is leaving New York at 21:55 and arriving in London at 10:05 on the following
day as a direct service. This flight operates Monday to Thursday and Sunday.

US Pre-clearance changes
In addition to the above schedule changes, if you are travelling on flight BA003 we are no longer able to offer you the ability to complete US Pre-clearance during our short refuelling stop in Shannon (SNN). This is due to shortened opening times of the US Customs and Border Protection at Shannon airport. However, if you are travelling on flight BA001 you will continue to pass through US Customs and Immigration.

We will continue to work with the US authorities to look at ways to speed you through US Customs and Immigration in New York if you are travelling on flight BA003.

Shannon stop changes
If you are travelling on flight BA003, the crew will offer you refreshments and snacks whilst you are onboard during the short refuelling stop in Shannon. We will also provide you with an iPad that you can use during this time.

Discover Club World London City

We look forward to welcoming you onboard soon.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

If I was flying from Heathrow to Sydney I would very much prefer to do it non-stop. Considering how much more range the current generation of 747s etc have compared to the earlier versions, and considering that one of the mid-generation variants did the distance non stop ( albeit without passengers or cargo on board ) I would expect that an SP version of the latest variations should be capable of managing the range with a full load...

 

[jon0844]

With the huge taxes, who will want to fly from London? First stop Amsterdam and even then it can't be booked straight through can it?

Now you effectively need to split tickets!

 

[starrymarkb]

If I was flying from Heathrow to Sydney I would very much prefer to do it non-stop. Considering how much more range the current generation of 747s etc have compared to the earlier versions, and considering that one of the mid-generation variants did the distance non stop ( albeit without passengers or cargo on board ) I would expect that an SP version of the latest variations should be capable of managing the range with a full load...

I believe the 777-200LR and A340-500 can do it, but Ultra Long Haul is difficult to make profitable because of the sheer amount of fuel you need to carry all that way.

Edit: The A345 can't quite do it. It can make the West coast of Australia from London but not Sydney. It would need about 200t of fuel to do so though

 

[WestCoast]

With the huge taxes, who will want to fly from London? First stop Amsterdam and even then it can't be booked straight through can it?

Now you effectively need to split tickets!

The UK Treasury taxes the journey right through to Australia anyway, it doesn't matter how many stops you make or where you make them. Split tickets and stopovers over 24 hours (possibly more?) are the only ways to stop them doing so.

The UK - Australia market is very large, but it's mostly lower yield leisure travellers and those visiting relatives. Add that to the high cost of fuel and other operating expenses, it's easy to see why a direct flight with a special long-range aircraft doesn't make much sense.

The direct flight would also fly Heathrow - Sydney, a sizeable proportion of Australia bound traffic from the UK isn't business focused, doesn't originate in the South East and isn't necessarily heading to Sydney either. So, that's already one stop for passengers coming from Manchester, Newcastle, Glasgow e.t.c. You can fly from those airports to Dubai and then onwards to multiple points in Australia and New Zealand. It makes sense for the customer and the airlines.

 

[jon0844]

How do they know if you split the tickets? I mean completely separate - not even necessarily with the same airline.

(I realise there are many ways to work it out, but I'd like to know exactly how).

I have dual-nationality. Perhaps it's time for me to fly to Amsterdam with a British passport and then on to Australia on another, although being 'caught' with two passports might take some explaining, especially if I did that to the US!!

 

[WestCoast]

How do they know if you split the tickets? I mean completely separate - not even necessarily with the same airline.

They don't and as above, you don't pay the UK tax all the way through in this case. Not many people are willing to risk split ticketing on such a journey, in case of delays.

It's worth pointing out that just because the UK has high air taxes, it doesn't actually necessarily make average air fares higher.

The Irish Government has much lower air tax rates (€10 vs. £92 on a flight over 6000mi) but in my experience fares to e.g. Australia aren't substantially cheaper from Dublin than they are from Heathrow or Manchester. The airlines match final fares to demand and the competition, taking into their costs. It affects the airline's margins more than anything.

 

[Nym]

As for Qantas, getting into bed with Emirates does come with risks. Frequent flyers, accustomed to traveling through Singapore, may 'jump ship'. Even back packers may prefer to stick to the 'traditional' well worn paths through Asia.

Aye, there's also some of us that refuse to fly on Emerates on moral grounds due to the country they're based in, and owned by.

Split ticketing seems to be an intresting option though, how would one go about completing this to dodge tax?

 

[Ascot]

Split ticketing seems to be an intresting option though, how would one go about completing this to dodge tax?

The best one I find is ex-EU fares to the USA. Buy a cheap Ryanair flight to EU then purchase a BA EU to USA via LHR for a price cheaper than LHR-USA. The logic of this is to entice EU passengers to fly BA indirect than fly direct with their national airline. (Works with other airlines too).

Another way, which isn't as effective as the above but does work, cheap Ryanair flight to EU then pick up the long haul from outside the UK. (This eliminates the long haul tax and replaces it with the short haul tax, you may get lucky, you may not so just have a play with fares).

Be careful as the airlines won't care too much about your connection. *Where Ryanair means the cheapest airfare*


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Heinz57]

So today is the last day of bmibaby, the last flight is due to arrive at about 22:45 at East Midlands, from Malaga.

In a way, its quite good how the last flight is to East Mids from Malaga when EMA-Malaga was the first route by the airline.

Its sad to see them go, I found bmibaby to be a good airline. Good prices, good service and reasonably on time.

So another one bites the dust. At my count (and including bmi which won't officialy cease until October) we've lost at least twelve airlines so far this year. Thats almost an average of two per month. And I fear they arn't the last, and that there will be more to go this year.

 

[WestCoast]

The Ryanair curse strikes again, for the third time. It's been reported that the bmibaby division was not a loss making part of the Bmi Group, but BA was not prepared to run another low-cost airline and decided to suspend operations when the airline couldn't be sold.

East Midlands is really the true home of British Midland, so it's a highly significant day for aviation. British Midland was founded as Derby Aviation in 1949.

Thankfully, British Midland lives on at EMA (for now) as bmi Regional was sold to Sector Aviation Holdings and will continue services to Brussels and Frankfurt using Embraer 135s/145s.

Hopefully, staff at bmibaby will able to find work with the expanding operators at EMA; Jet2, Monarch, Flybe and (maybe) bmi Regional.

 

[starrymarkb]

I see Helvectic have pulled out of Cardiff... Can't say I'm surprised as if this picture on A.net of the load on Push Back was anything to go by

Pic by LXM83 (original Trip Report here)

They will continue flying to Bristol but the onward hop to Cardiff will cease

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-19555380

 

[BananaRepublic]

....It's been reported that the bmibaby division was not a loss making part of the Bmi Group, but BA was not prepared to run another low-cost airline and decided to suspend operations when the airline couldn't be sold.....

Where was that reported, because it completely contradicts all reports over several years about the viability of BMI Baby?
BMI Baby are reported to have lost £100 million over the last 4 years of operation up to the BA take-over.

Lufthansa couldn't find a buyer for BMI Baby (although there was interest from a German investment group) and airlines interested in buying BMI and its Heathrow landing slots, were not prepared to include the Baby operation in the deal.
It has since been reported that BA bought the BMI group at a reduced price for also taking BMI Baby and BMI Regional off Lufthansa's hands.

BA would have found a buyer for BMI Baby, had it been a potentially viable operation; but there were no takers. Hence the close down.

 

[radamfi]

Can someone explain the economics of business class fares? Why would the company pay several thousand pounds for a flight when an economy seat would be a few hundred? Especially when there is little or no difference in seat or service. If a lot of people are doing this on a regular basis this is bound to hit the bottom line. And maybe some employees would prefer the company to pay the extra cost of a business class into his bank account as extra salary rather than an airline?

 

[starrymarkb]

Can someone explain the economics of business class fares? Why would the company pay several thousand pounds for a flight when an economy seat would be a few hundred? Especially when there is little or no difference in seat or service. If a lot of people are doing this on a regular basis this is bound to hit the bottom line. And maybe some employees would prefer the company to pay the extra cost of a business class into his bank account as extra salary rather than an airline?

I can't speak for short haul but with a lot of companies if flying long haul business you are expected to work immediately on arrival . I know with the BBC if you are going straight to work upon arrival they will pay for business, otherwise it will be economy.

Also with business fares they tend to be more flexible in terms of changes and refunds. Ask for a flexible 'Y' ticket (basically a Standard Anytime Return in rail terms) and expect the price to be a lot more then the cheap £400 'Advance' ticket.

I remember looking at Virgin Atlantic for an upgradeable 'Y' fare (full price economy) to LA it was about £2000 - Each way! Not far off the business fare

 

[Ascot]

Can someone explain the economics of business class fares? Why would the company pay several thousand pounds for a flight when an economy seat would be a few hundred? Especially when there is little or no difference in seat or service. If a lot of people are doing this on a regular basis this is bound to hit the bottom line. And maybe some employees would prefer the company to pay the extra cost of a business class into his bank account as extra salary rather than an airline?

1. Priority Check-in & Security - Spend less time queueing and more time working.

2. Lounges - No extra credit card receipts for drinks and WiFi. Equates to more work.

3. Morale - Why would someone want to be dragged half way across the globe stuck behind screaming kids vertically sleeping to earn someone millions. Plus the food and service is much better.

4. Sleeping - Sleeper flights across the Atlantic mean you can work until 5pm in America, get to the airport and sleep through until you arrive in the UK to start work at 9. You can't do it 3 times a week in Y without your performance dropping.

5. Air Miles Bonus - That little tax free gem for your next years holiday and keeps staff flying.

 

[radamfi]

I am aware of the benefits of business class and I could understand it if the fare difference was a few hundred pounds, but we are talking about thousands!

 

[Ascot]

I am aware of the benefits of business class and I could understand it if the fare difference was a few hundred pounds, but we are talking about thousands!

£3,000 isn't much to companies who send employees in J.

 

[starrymarkb]

Looks like the Berlin Brandenburg epic SNAFU is still on going. I've just booked flights to Berlin Schönefeld in May - so BBI Airport has missed the March opening date (and is now due to open in October 2013 as the building apparently needs a complete re-wire!)

 

[Sun!]

October 2013 is looking a bit optomistic- some reports state it may not open until 2014. That's a nightmare for Air Berlin and to an extent Luftahnsa who have hubs which transfer people in their current Berlin airports.

So much for German efficiency ;P

 

[Butts]

Sorry if this has been raised before, but can anyone explain why on UK Domestic Flights you do not have to show ID on BA but do on all the others I have been on.

 

[WestCoast]

October 2013 is looking a bit optomistic- some reports state it may not open until 2014. That's a nightmare for Air Berlin and to an extent Luftahnsa who have hubs which transfer people in their current Berlin airports.

So much for German efficiency ;P

As nice as I can put it, Berlin still runs on the old eastern time/mentality in some respects, it's only been a couple of decades after all. The city's aviation infrastructure is comparatively unimportant against Frankfurt and Munich for Lufthansa and perhaps to a lesser extent Duesseldorf for Air Berlin. It's certainly not a good thing for either airline, but far from a nightmare. It's nothing like, for example, BA being unable to access Heathrow. The greatest impact will be on commerce in the city of Berlin itself and the surrounding regions.

 

[starrymarkb]

Sorry if this has been raised before, but can anyone explain why on UK Domestic Flights you do not have to show ID on BA but do on all the others I have been on.

Airline Policy rather then any legal requirement. I presume its to stop cheap seats being bought in bulk and sold on by dodgy travel agents