Gatwick-3
As far as Cyprus Airways is concerned I am not sure if they will be starting services soon from Gatwick. Both BA Euroflyer and easyjet operate throughout the winter to Paphos. Both airlines will be operating daily to Larnaca this winter as BA Euroflyer is resuming services from Gatwick on November 4th. In addition BA mainline is up to 4 daily from Heathrow.
A few flights a week into one of the London Airports is certainly required not the least to generate revenue if not profitability.
They're going to need more aircraft confirmed on order to go back to LGW, so not anytime soon IMHO. A stand alone Virgin Holidays Caribbean operation might make sense at LGW but is a 2-3 aircraft base worth the additional cost? JetBlue's seasonal retreat from LGW this winter shows the relative ability to fill seats year round out of both London airports.
Branson doesn't make these kind of decisions anymore, he's publicaly piling on some pressure to get his own way. "I am going to have to twist arms." and "These things matter" is heart over head interference from the man who built an A380 hangar at LHR....
They're going to need more aircraft confirmed on order to go back to LGW, so not anytime soon IMHO. A stand alone Virgin Holidays Caribbean operation might make sense at LGW but is a 2-3 aircraft base worth the additional cost? JetBlue's seasonal retreat from LGW this winter shows the relative ability to fill seats year round out of both London airports.
They're going to need more aircraft confirmed on order to go back to LGW, so not anytime soon IMHO. A stand alone Virgin Holidays Caribbean operation might make sense at LGW but is a 2-3 aircraft base worth the additional cost? JetBlue's seasonal retreat from LGW this winter shows the relative ability to fill seats year round out of both London airports.
And if so is their an expiration date attached .
A consideration may also be influenced by if any of the 333 frames have their leases further extended .
Could also be predicated on reactivation the dormant Virgin International business .
The situation with the current Virgin slots at Gatwick may be as follows. Of the original 11 slot pairs 4 have been returned and a further 7 slot pairs
have been retained but are currently leased to other airline(s) (Easyjet may be the current holder of these leased slots.) Although Delta may be using one of the slot pairs for the summer seasonal to New York.
Easyjet have a further 140 weekly slots to return to BA by the beginning of next summer (70 weekly pairs or 10 slot pairs per day). If Virgin were to want their 7 daily pairs back , that could mean the equivalent
of 17 daily slot pairs easyjet would have to return in the next year or so.
have been retained but are currently leased to other airline(s) (Easyjet may be the current holder of these leased slots.) Although Delta may be using one of the slot pairs for the summer seasonal to New York.
Easyjet have a further 140 weekly slots to return to BA by the beginning of next summer (70 weekly pairs or 10 slot pairs per day). If Virgin were to want their 7 daily pairs back , that could mean the equivalent
of 17 daily slot pairs easyjet would have to return in the next year or so.
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Italy
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there and I hope you're well my friend and always good to see you here.
So from the 01 July, we will see several airlines using the Airbus A350 into LGW.
Air China
Air Mauritius
China Southern Airlines
Ethiopian Airlines
Singapore Airlines
My question is... who will the next airline to use the Airbus A350 into LGW, could it start with a C?
So from the 01 July, we will see several airlines using the Airbus A350 into LGW.
Air China
Air Mauritius
China Southern Airlines
Ethiopian Airlines
Singapore Airlines
My question is... who will the next airline to use the Airbus A350 into LGW, could it start with a C?
Regarding who could be the next A350 operator to Gatwick is anyone's guess at this point. You mentioned that it could start with a C, and I too am hoping that we will see the reopening of non-stop flights to Hong Kong with Cathay Pacific. I know that Travel 24 use to be a regular contributor to the thread and did mention a couple of months ago that CX would supposedly be announcing an October return in the coming months, but haven't heard anything since then.
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Italy
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sir Richard Branson has claimed that VS will eventually return to Gatwick. I wonder if this news comes as a surprise to VS management:
https://www.thetimes.com/life-style/...view-lfl9dspwz
https://www.thetimes.com/life-style/...view-lfl9dspwz
I have to admit, I am surprised to see this now, given what the current CEO said not long ago about effectively ruling out a return to LGW given the supposed lack of connectivity versus LHR. Saying that, we would all welcome VS' return to Gatwick, however unlikely and surprising that may be if it does happen. From a leisure route point of view, I could see it making sense in terms of re-establishing a beach/holiday network at LGW, while allowing Virgin to free up slots at LHR for business route expansion. I guess the issue would be whether or not the airline has enough slots at Gatwick to be able to shift leisure back there? With more 330-NEOs arriving, they could decide to extend lease agreements on some of the existing 333s and shift these to LGW to enable the beach destinations to be served from LGW.
Just finished reading the article, thanks for sharing! I have to admit, I am surprised to see this now, given what the current CEO said not long ago about effectively ruling out a return to LGW given the supposed lack of connectivity versus LHR. Saying that, we would all welcome VS' return to Gatwick, however unlikely and surprising that may be if it does happen. From a leisure route point of view, I could see it making sense in terms of re-establishing a beach/holiday network at LGW, while allowing Virgin to free up slots at LHR for business route expansion. I guess the issue would be whether or not the airline has enough slots at Gatwick to be able to shift leisure back there? With more 330-NEOs arriving, they could decide to extend lease agreements on some of the existing 333s and shift these to LGW to enable the beach destinations to be served from LGW.
I have to admit, I am surprised to see this now, given what the current CEO said not long ago about effectively ruling out a return to LGW given the supposed lack of connectivity versus LHR. Saying that, we would all welcome VS' return to Gatwick, however unlikely and surprising that may be if it does happen. From a leisure route point of view, I could see it making sense in terms of re-establishing a beach/holiday network at LGW, while allowing Virgin to free up slots at LHR for business route expansion. I guess the issue would be whether or not the airline has enough slots at Gatwick to be able to shift leisure back there? With more 330-NEOs arriving, they could decide to extend lease agreements on some of the existing 333s and shift these to LGW to enable the beach destinations to be served from LGW.
Exactly, I was thinking the same.
Other than Cathay Pacific Airways and China Eastern Airlines, how many other long-haul carriers starting with a C who operate the Airbus A350 don't currently use the type into LGW?
I can only think of three long haul airline's who operate the A350 that start with a C, one of which already uses the type into LGW.
Cathay Pacific Airways
China Eastern Airlines
China Southern Airlines
I would assume that at some point, China Eastern Airlines will utilise the A350 into LGW. Hopefully, at some point, LGW will also see the return of Cathay Pacific Airways with an A350.
On a side note... I wouldn't take it too seriously what other posters have mentioned about a definite return of Cathay Pacific to LGW in September. The person you quoted in my opinion shouldn't be taken too seriously. There was nothing to back the claim. I got the impression that it was just wishful thinking on their behalf 😒
Nothing is confirmed until it's confirmed 👌
Other than Cathay Pacific Airways and China Eastern Airlines, how many other long-haul carriers starting with a C who operate the Airbus A350 don't currently use the type into LGW?
I can only think of three long haul airline's who operate the A350 that start with a C, one of which already uses the type into LGW.
Cathay Pacific Airways
China Eastern Airlines
China Southern Airlines
I would assume that at some point, China Eastern Airlines will utilise the A350 into LGW. Hopefully, at some point, LGW will also see the return of Cathay Pacific Airways with an A350.
On a side note... I wouldn't take it too seriously what other posters have mentioned about a definite return of Cathay Pacific to LGW in September. The person you quoted in my opinion shouldn't be taken too seriously. There was nothing to back the claim. I got the impression that it was just wishful thinking on their behalf 😒
Nothing is confirmed until it's confirmed 👌
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not so many places currently
Age: 60
Posts: 3,891
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
I can only think of three long haul airline's who operate the A350 that start with a C, one of which already uses the type into LGW.
Cathay Pacific Airways
China Eastern Airlines
China Southern Airlines
I would assume that at some point, China Eastern Airlines will utilise the A350 into LGW. Hopefully, at some point, LGW will also see the return of Cathay Pacific Airways with an A350.
Cathay Pacific Airways
China Eastern Airlines
China Southern Airlines
I would assume that at some point, China Eastern Airlines will utilise the A350 into LGW. Hopefully, at some point, LGW will also see the return of Cathay Pacific Airways with an A350.
How the hell did I miss China Airlines from the list of A350 operators starting witha C?
I had totally overlooked China Airlines as being an Airbus A350 operator. But I wasn't even thinking of China Airlines when I made my post. As you have rightly pointed out I too don't forsee China Airlines ever returning to LGW.
Sotonsean: So which of the three airlines you quote is currently using the A350 into Gatwick?
China Southern's flights are all B787s thus far
China Eastern have used A332s and B77Ws
Of the Chinese carriers, only Air China currently uses A350s on Gatwick flights
China Southern's flights are all B787s thus far
China Eastern have used A332s and B77Ws
Of the Chinese carriers, only Air China currently uses A350s on Gatwick flights
I'll put my ✋️ up and declare that I made a mistake
Virgin's potential return to Gatwick
1. Virgin taking over Delta's seasonal summer operation from Gatwick to JFK, replacing the old-clapped-out, 30+ years old Delta 767s with something more modern like an A330-900 neo.
2. Virgin taking over the Gatwick operation of Fly Norse together with their core fleet of nine 787-9s (they'd probably not want the additional three, smaller 787-8s Fly Norse operates for reasons of fleet commonality with Virgin's existing 16 787-9s).
Option 1 would be relatively easy to agree to for the Virgin management as it wouldn't involve a huge investment in a second London station and would grant RB his sentimental wish to see the airline return from where it started before completely retiring from "his baby". IMO, this option wouldn't even require reopening a Club House lounge at Gatwick, using another third-party lounge instead, such as the Emirates Gatwick lounge if Virgin were to resume operations from the North Terminal.
Option 2 would be an opportunistic investment, giving Virgin a sizeable Gatwick slot portfolio plus the aircraft to relaunch a proper, all-year round Gatwick operation of sufficient scale to be profitable, accommodating both a returning beach operation and selected other routes from the current Norse Gatwick route portfolio, such as JFK, MIA and LAX for example, with JFK and MIA probably served year-round and LAX in summer, replaced with something like CPT/ DUR / MRU / SEZ / CMB or even BKK / HKT in winter, i.e., to anywhere where there is sufficient P2P traffic in the Greater London area and the wider South-east, obviating the need for connecting traffic. And if Virgin still wants connecting traffic for beach traffic from other parts of the UK, they could always funnel this via Manchester as MAN actually flies to more places within the UK and the Republic of Ireland than LHR. Further in this connection, an acquisition of Fly Norse with their core 787-9 fleet could also assist streamlining Virgin's fleet as follows:
LHR all-Airbus
LGW&MAN all-Boeing.
Lastly, IMO, option 2 actually wouldn't even require re-opening a Clubhouse lounge as Virgin has no Clubhouse in MAN either despite their year-round presence there.
Other than a return of the traditional Virgin beach routes and associated aircraft to Gatwick, I can think of two very different ways this could be accomplished:
1. Virgin taking over Delta's seasonal summer operation from Gatwick to JFK, replacing the old-clapped-out, 30+ years old Delta 767s with something more modern like an A330-900 neo.
2. Virgin taking over the Gatwick operation of Fly Norse together with their core fleet of nine 787-9s (they'd probably not want the additional three, smaller 787-8s Fly Norse operates for reasons of fleet commonality with Virgin's existing 16 787-9s).
Option 1 would be relatively easy to agree to for the Virgin management as it wouldn't involve a huge investment in a second London station and would grant RB his sentimental wish to see the airline return from where it started before completely retiring from "his baby". IMO, this option wouldn't even require reopening a Club House lounge at Gatwick, using another third-party lounge instead, such as the Emirates Gatwick lounge if Virgin were to resume operations from the North Terminal.
Option 2 would be an opportunistic investment, giving Virgin a sizeable Gatwick slot portfolio plus the aircraft to relaunch a proper, all-year round Gatwick operation of sufficient scale to be profitable, accommodating both a returning beach operation and selected other routes from the current Norse Gatwick route portfolio, such as JFK, MIA and LAX for example, with JFK and MIA probably served year-round and LAX in summer, replaced with something like CPT/ DUR / MRU / SEZ / CMB or even BKK / HKT in winter, i.e., to anywhere where there is sufficient P2P traffic in the Greater London area and the wider South-east, obviating the need for connecting traffic. And if Virgin still wants connecting traffic for beach traffic from other parts of the UK, they could always funnel this via Manchester as MAN actually flies to more places within the UK and the Republic of Ireland than LHR. Further in this connection, an acquisition of Fly Norse with their core 787-9 fleet could also assist streamlining Virgin's fleet as follows:
LHR all-Airbus
LGW&MAN all-Boeing.
Lastly, IMO, option 2 actually wouldn't even require re-opening a Clubhouse lounge as Virgin has no Clubhouse in MAN either despite their year-round presence there.
1. Virgin taking over Delta's seasonal summer operation from Gatwick to JFK, replacing the old-clapped-out, 30+ years old Delta 767s with something more modern like an A330-900 neo.
2. Virgin taking over the Gatwick operation of Fly Norse together with their core fleet of nine 787-9s (they'd probably not want the additional three, smaller 787-8s Fly Norse operates for reasons of fleet commonality with Virgin's existing 16 787-9s).
Option 1 would be relatively easy to agree to for the Virgin management as it wouldn't involve a huge investment in a second London station and would grant RB his sentimental wish to see the airline return from where it started before completely retiring from "his baby". IMO, this option wouldn't even require reopening a Club House lounge at Gatwick, using another third-party lounge instead, such as the Emirates Gatwick lounge if Virgin were to resume operations from the North Terminal.
Option 2 would be an opportunistic investment, giving Virgin a sizeable Gatwick slot portfolio plus the aircraft to relaunch a proper, all-year round Gatwick operation of sufficient scale to be profitable, accommodating both a returning beach operation and selected other routes from the current Norse Gatwick route portfolio, such as JFK, MIA and LAX for example, with JFK and MIA probably served year-round and LAX in summer, replaced with something like CPT/ DUR / MRU / SEZ / CMB or even BKK / HKT in winter, i.e., to anywhere where there is sufficient P2P traffic in the Greater London area and the wider South-east, obviating the need for connecting traffic. And if Virgin still wants connecting traffic for beach traffic from other parts of the UK, they could always funnel this via Manchester as MAN actually flies to more places within the UK and the Republic of Ireland than LHR. Further in this connection, an acquisition of Fly Norse with their core 787-9 fleet could also assist streamlining Virgin's fleet as follows:
LHR all-Airbus
LGW&MAN all-Boeing.
Lastly, IMO, option 2 actually wouldn't even require re-opening a Clubhouse lounge as Virgin has no Clubhouse in MAN either despite their year-round presence there.
To be totally honest with you I somewhat agree with more or less everything you have mentioned.
Loads of opportunities quoted in your post I had not even given a second thought. Especially option 2 regarding Norse. I like your thoughts on that one.
I won't elaborate any more regarding your post but I honestly enjoyed reading it ☺️
Originally Posted by Skipness One Foxtrot;11672658
JetBlue's seasonal retreat from LGW this winter shows the relative ability to fill seats year round out of both London airports.
[url=https://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=11672658
JetBlue's seasonal retreat from LGW this winter shows the relative ability to fill seats year round out of both London airports.
[url=https://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=11672658
Quote].
The original strategy devised by Hays focused on all-year round transatlantic flying, incl. LGW. The new strategy incl. a lot of seasonal, summer only flying, with a big reduction in winter capacity on some year-round routes as well, such as CDG for example. In this context, I believe that under Robin Hays' original transatlantic strategy, JetBlue would have been reluctant to go into EDI and DUB (both of which were launched under the revised strategy as seasonal routes).
The ultimate reason for the shift in JetBlue's transatlantic strategy is the airline's failed merger with Spirit, where it had underestimated both the determination of the US Justice Department to have the courts block it and the opposition of the Biden administration, resulting in JetBlue having to pay Spirit high break-up fees which in turn led to a further significant deterioration of an already poor financial performance. This, of course, was also the backdrop to the airline being taken over by one of Carl Icahn's private equity vehicles, with Icahn ultimately controlling JB's purse strings now and essentially telling Joanna Geraghty what to do. LGW was unfortunately just a low-hanging fruit in this wider scheme.
The following users liked this post:
JetBlue's seasonal retreat from LGW is part of a much wider strategic shift at the airline since the departure of Robin Hays from the top job at the airline and its preceding change of ownership from publicly listed to privately held.
LGW was unfortunately just a low-hanging fruit in this wider scheme.
LGW was unfortunately just a low-hanging fruit in this wider scheme.
JetBlue's seasonal retreat from LGW is part of a much wider strategic shift at the airline since the departure of Robin Hays from the top job at the airline and its preceding change of ownership from publicly listed to privately held.
The original strategy devised by Hays focused on all-year round transatlantic flying, incl. LGW. The new strategy incl. a lot of seasonal, summer only flying, with a big reduction in winter capacity on some year-round routes as well, such as CDG for example. In this context, I believe that under Robin Hays' original transatlantic strategy, JetBlue would have been reluctant to go into EDI and DUB (both of which were launched under the revised strategy as seasonal routes).
The ultimate reason for the shift in JetBlue's transatlantic strategy is the airline's failed merger with Spirit, where it had underestimated both the determination of the US Justice Department to have the courts block it and the opposition of the Biden administration, resulting in JetBlue having to pay Spirit high break-up fees which in turn led to a further significant deterioration of an already poor financial performance. This, of course, was also the backdrop to the airline being taken over by one of Carl Icahn's private equity vehicles, with Icahn ultimately controlling JB's purse strings now and essentially telling Joanna Geraghty what to do. LGW was unfortunately just a low-hanging fruit in this wider scheme.
The original strategy devised by Hays focused on all-year round transatlantic flying, incl. LGW. The new strategy incl. a lot of seasonal, summer only flying, with a big reduction in winter capacity on some year-round routes as well, such as CDG for example. In this context, I believe that under Robin Hays' original transatlantic strategy, JetBlue would have been reluctant to go into EDI and DUB (both of which were launched under the revised strategy as seasonal routes).
The ultimate reason for the shift in JetBlue's transatlantic strategy is the airline's failed merger with Spirit, where it had underestimated both the determination of the US Justice Department to have the courts block it and the opposition of the Biden administration, resulting in JetBlue having to pay Spirit high break-up fees which in turn led to a further significant deterioration of an already poor financial performance. This, of course, was also the backdrop to the airline being taken over by one of Carl Icahn's private equity vehicles, with Icahn ultimately controlling JB's purse strings now and essentially telling Joanna Geraghty what to do. LGW was unfortunately just a low-hanging fruit in this wider scheme.
And actually I'd take the win that they'll be back at all.
JB LHR competitiveness
Utter codswallop. No harm in batting for your local airport fella but this is delusional PR nonsense. If LGW had performed, if loads had been good enough and yields high enough, in a huge high yield market like NYC-LON, it wouldn't have been axed. So, like Delta, LGW has a seasonal mop-up operation while the London focus remains on LHR. At some point, people need to stop being surprised by this.
And actually I'd take the win that they'll be back at all.
And actually I'd take the win that they'll be back at all.
Unless JB will strike it lucky and enter into a full-fledged TATL alliance with both BA and AA incl. codesharing with BA/ AA between LHR and JFK and LHR and BOS - something not envisaged as part of their currently proposed TATL alliance with BA due to high regulatory hurdles, IMO, JB's long-term TATL presence - incl. their continued presence at LHR must surely be in doubt. One can actually even go further and question JB's continuation as an independent airline.
So, far from being "twaddle", the link between JB's recent ownership change, the fall-out from the failed Spirit merger, the resulting strategic shift and changes to their LGW operations AS WELL AS to their CDG and other European operations I highlighted in my previous comment is a very valid point as these things shouldn't be viewed in isolation.