Another one bites the dust
 

So, yet another all 'business class' (closer to premium economy) service
between a secondary London airport and New York has folded:

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.c...ight-canceled/

This must be at least the fourth or fifth all 'business' class service to
New York from Luton or Stansted to fail.

Even the genuinely premium BA flight from LCY to JFK has been cut back to
one flight per day.

Another one bites the dust
 

On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 15:06:58 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

So, yet another all 'business class' (closer to premium economy)
service between a secondary London airport and New York has folded:

http://onemileatatime.boa
This must be at least the fourth or fifth all 'business' class
service to New York from Luton or Stansted to fail.

Even the genuinely premium BA flight from LCY to JFK has been cut
back to one flight per day.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY0WxgSXdEE

Another one bites the dust
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
So, yet another all 'business class' (closer to premium economy) service
between a secondary London airport and New York has folded:

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.c...ight-canceled/

This must be at least the fourth or fifth all 'business' class service to
New York from Luton or Stansted to fail.

It's a business model that just can't work

there isn't enough customers to support 4 or 5 flights a day

and business people, mined to pay business class fares, aren't keen to fly
on an airline that has one flight a day (or less) because if it gets
cancelled they have a very expensive lost day.

tim

Another one bites the dust
 

On 20.09.16 16:06, Recliner wrote:
So, yet another all 'business class' (closer to premium economy) service
between a secondary London airport and New York has folded:

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.c...ight-canceled/

This must be at least the fourth or fifth all 'business' class service to
New York from Luton or Stansted to fail.

Even the genuinely premium BA flight from LCY to JFK has been cut back to
one flight per day.


Doesn't surprise me as flights like that seem to drop like flies. If
people aren't using that service, then ...

Another one bites the dust
 

tim... wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
So, yet another all 'business class' (closer to premium economy) service
between a secondary London airport and New York has folded:

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.c...ight-canceled/

This must be at least the fourth or fifth all 'business' class service to
New York from Luton or Stansted to fail.

It's a business model that just can't work

there isn't enough customers to support 4 or 5 flights a day

and business people, mined to pay business class fares, aren't keen to fly
on an airline that has one flight a day (or less) because if it gets
cancelled they have a very expensive lost day.

The attraction with these services is that they're much cheaper than normal
business class flights. But there's really no other benefit. They're not as
good as proper business class, no frequent flyer programme, only one route,
with only one flight a day, etc.

But it also shows that the business market from London is primarily from
Heathrow, with a limited amount from Gatwick.

Another one bites the dust
 

On 20.09.16 16:55, Recliner wrote:
tim... wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
So, yet another all 'business class' (closer to premium economy) service
between a secondary London airport and New York has folded:

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.c...ight-canceled/

This must be at least the fourth or fifth all 'business' class service to
New York from Luton or Stansted to fail.

It's a business model that just can't work

there isn't enough customers to support 4 or 5 flights a day

and business people, mined to pay business class fares, aren't keen to fly
on an airline that has one flight a day (or less) because if it gets
cancelled they have a very expensive lost day.

The attraction with these services is that they're much cheaper than normal
business class flights. But there's really no other benefit. They're not as
good as proper business class, no frequent flyer programme, only one route,
with only one flight a day, etc.

But it also shows that the business market from London is primarily from
Heathrow, with a limited amount from Gatwick.

Well, that route is sort of going from Q to Z, when indeed you needed A
to B. Luton is a ways out, and Newark is not the closest to Manhattan.

Another one bites the dust
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
So, yet another all 'business class' (closer to premium economy) service
between a secondary London airport and New York has folded:

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.c...ight-canceled/

This must be at least the fourth or fifth all 'business' class service
to
New York from Luton or Stansted to fail.

It's a business model that just can't work

there isn't enough customers to support 4 or 5 flights a day

and business people, mined to pay business class fares, aren't keen to
fly
on an airline that has one flight a day (or less) because if it gets
cancelled they have a very expensive lost day.

The attraction with these services is that they're much cheaper than
normal
business class flights. But there's really no other benefit. They're not
as
good as proper business class, no frequent flyer programme, only one
route,
with only one flight a day, etc.

But it also shows that the business market from London is primarily from
Heathrow, with a limited amount from Gatwick.

I think it does nothing of the sort

It shows that price isn't compelling enough for the other disadvantages
(which as you say, are many)

Consider the market for this type of service.

Is it people who are paying the fare themselves (which may include small
business owners), are they getting any benefit for the two, three times
(whatever) over booking economy with a major airline? All they seem to be
getting is a bigger seat and perhaps better food. Is this enough?

Business people whose companies have entitled them to buy business class
tickets. Are they getting anything back from (from their company) by
booking a business class fare that is half the price of a normal business
class fare? My guess - no.

Are there companies out there who will let their staff travel on these
business class only flights but not business class on a normal airline?
Perhaps, but as per my previous post, not once one of their staff has been
rendered inoperative by a flight cancellation, they will soon go back to
booking major airlines, with alternative flight options once that happens

tim




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Another one bites the dust
 

Well, that route is sort of going from Q to Z, when indeed you needed A
to B. Luton is a ways out, and Newark is not the closest to Manhattan.

Actually, Newark airport is closer to midtown than JFK is, and the bus
and train options work fine. La Guardia is even closer but it doesn't
handle international flights other than precleared ones from nearby
Canada.

I think the problem with these airlines is that they're chasing the
market of people who want a better than coach seat on an international
flight, but fly so infrequently that they don't care about the lack of
onwards connections or a frequent flyer program. That doesn't sound
like a very big market.

Also, if you want something better than coach on the relatively short
flights from the UK to the eastern US or Canada, several airlines
have a premium coach that is OK.

Another one bites the dust
 

On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 at 11:07:06 AM UTC-4, Recliner wrote:
Even the genuinely premium BA flight from LCY to JFK has been cut back to
one flight per day.

My understanding from reading Flyertalk is that it's a seasonal reduction which BA have done in the past.
--
Roy

Another one bites the dust
 

Roy wrote:
On Tuesday, September 20, 2016 at 11:07:06 AM UTC-4, Recliner wrote:
Even the genuinely premium BA flight from LCY to JFK has been cut back to
one flight per day.

My understanding from reading Flyertalk is that it's a seasonal reduction
which BA have done in the past.

It's not clear if it's going to be reinstated this year. Loadings are down,
and without US immigration at Dublin for the second flight, it's less
popular.

Another one bites the dust
 

wrote:
On 20.09.16 16:55, Recliner wrote:
tim... wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
So, yet another all 'business class' (closer to premium economy) service
between a secondary London airport and New York has folded:

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.c...ight-canceled/

This must be at least the fourth or fifth all 'business' class service to
New York from Luton or Stansted to fail.

It's a business model that just can't work

there isn't enough customers to support 4 or 5 flights a day

and business people, mined to pay business class fares, aren't keen to fly
on an airline that has one flight a day (or less) because if it gets
cancelled they have a very expensive lost day.

The attraction with these services is that they're much cheaper than normal
business class flights. But there's really no other benefit. They're not as
good as proper business class, no frequent flyer programme, only one route,
with only one flight a day, etc.

But it also shows that the business market from London is primarily from
Heathrow, with a limited amount from Gatwick.

Well, that route is sort of going from Q to Z, when indeed you needed A
to B. Luton is a ways out, and Newark is not the closest to Manhattan.

Huh? Luton is hardly any further out than Gatwick, and Newark is the
nearest trans-Atlantic airport to Manhattan.

Another one bites the dust
 

On 20/09/2016 23:07, Recliner wrote:

wrote:

Well, that route is sort of going from Q to Z, when indeed you needed A
to B. Luton is a ways out, and Newark is not the closest to Manhattan.

Huh? Luton is hardly any further out than Gatwick, and Newark is the
nearest trans-Atlantic airport to Manhattan.


Indeed. A friend who does this with some regularity prefers a Newark
arrival over JFK.

Another one bites the dust
 

tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
So, yet another all 'business class' (closer to premium economy) service
between a secondary London airport and New York has folded:

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.c...ight-canceled/

This must be at least the fourth or fifth all 'business' class service
to
New York from Luton or Stansted to fail.

It's a business model that just can't work

there isn't enough customers to support 4 or 5 flights a day

and business people, mined to pay business class fares, aren't keen to
fly
on an airline that has one flight a day (or less) because if it gets
cancelled they have a very expensive lost day.

The attraction with these services is that they're much cheaper than
normal
business class flights. But there's really no other benefit. They're not
as
good as proper business class, no frequent flyer programme, only one
route,
with only one flight a day, etc.

But it also shows that the business market from London is primarily from
Heathrow, with a limited amount from Gatwick.

I think it does nothing of the sort

It shows that price isn't compelling enough for the other disadvantages
(which as you say, are many)

Consider the market for this type of service.

Is it people who are paying the fare themselves (which may include small
business owners), are they getting any benefit for the two, three times
(whatever) over booking economy with a major airline? All they seem to be
getting is a bigger seat and perhaps better food. Is this enough?

I think this was intended as the primary market, but as you say, it
probably wasn't enough. Also, some of the less obvious airlines (eg, Air
India) offer very cheap deals on business class seats on the well-served
LON-NYC route.


Business people whose companies have entitled them to buy business class
tickets. Are they getting anything back from (from their company) by
booking a business class fare that is half the price of a normal business
class fare? My guess - no.

I agree.


Are there companies out there who will let their staff travel on these
business class only flights but not business class on a normal airline?
Perhaps, but as per my previous post, not once one of their staff has been
rendered inoperative by a flight cancellation, they will soon go back to
booking major airlines, with alternative flight options once that happens

I think it's worse than that. Larger companies already have relationships
with favoured airlines, and if they offer flights on a particular route,
other airlines wouldn't even be considered. Through the magic of
code-sharing, most major airlines have a LON-NYC offering, so it's hard for
an outsider to get a look-in.

Another one bites the dust
 

On 2016-09-20 22:07:54 +0000, Recliner said:

Huh? Luton is hardly any further out than Gatwick, and Newark is the
nearest trans-Atlantic airport to Manhattan.

A lot of people are put off Luton by the bus connection, sufficiently
so that LBC are looking at building some kind of rail shuttle thing.
Which is actually counterintuitive, as to some gates at Gatwick you
walk almost as far as the bus goes (well, probably not quite, but it
feels like it), there's the inter-terminal train, and at Luton bags are
returned far, far quicker than any other significantly sized airport
(the reason for which is the simplicity of the baggage system - it just
involves two blokes and a flatbed Transit).

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

Another one bites the dust
 

On 2016-09-20 22:11:44 +0000, Mizter T said:

Indeed. A friend who does this with some regularity prefers a Newark
arrival over JFK.

And Luton is better connected to the City than Heathrow. Though the
perception of "rubbish charter airport" is hard to kill, particularly
at present as due to expansion work it is quite rubbish (be nice when
it's done though).

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

Another one bites the dust
 

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 08:35:52 +0100
Neil Williams wrote:
On 2016-09-20 22:07:54 +0000, Recliner said:

Huh? Luton is hardly any further out than Gatwick, and Newark is the
nearest trans-Atlantic airport to Manhattan.

A lot of people are put off Luton by the bus connection, sufficiently
so that LBC are looking at building some kind of rail shuttle thing.

LBC? Wow, Global Radio really are expanding their remit :)

Not sure how a rail shuttle would work unless its a cog railway given how
much higher the airport is compared to the MML.

feels like it), there's the inter-terminal train, and at Luton bags are
returned far, far quicker than any other significantly sized airport
(the reason for which is the simplicity of the baggage system - it just
involves two blokes and a flatbed Transit).

Last time I used Luton was 2013 and it seemed pretty well managed on the
way out. On the way back was a different story however - a mile long walk to
security up and down stairs from the gate, followed by no information at
baggage collection for about 15 mins followed by bags coming out in dribs and
drabs for the next 20 mins. And this IIRC was in April, hardly peak holiday
season.

--
Spud

Another one bites the dust
 

wrote:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 08:35:52 +0100
Neil Williams wrote:
On 2016-09-20 22:07:54 +0000, Recliner said:

Huh? Luton is hardly any further out than Gatwick, and Newark is the
nearest trans-Atlantic airport to Manhattan.

A lot of people are put off Luton by the bus connection, sufficiently
so that LBC are looking at building some kind of rail shuttle thing.

LBC? Wow, Global Radio really are expanding their remit :)

Not sure how a rail shuttle would work unless its a cog railway given how
much higher the airport is compared to the MML.

https://www.theguardian.com/business...rack-rail-link

Another one bites the dust
 

On 2016-09-21 08:24:37 +0000, d said:

LBC? Wow, Global Radio really are expanding their remit :)

Luton Borough Council, the owners of the airport (though they
subcontract its operation).

Not sure how a rail shuttle would work unless its a cog railway given how
much higher the airport is compared to the MML.

It will most probably be a rubber tyred people mover of some kind, like
the Gatwick or Birmingham ones.

Last time I used Luton was 2013 and it seemed pretty well managed on the
way out. On the way back was a different story however - a mile long walk to
security up and down stairs from the gate, followed by no information at
baggage collection for about 15 mins followed by bags coming out in dribs and
drabs for the next 20 mins. And this IIRC was in April, hardly peak holiday
season.

Sounds like a particularly bad day. The walk from some gates can be a
*bit* long but it's nothing on Gatwick, nor have I ever known any
airport as slow with bags as Gatwick (or Stansted).

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

Another one bites the dust
 

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 08:39:02 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 08:35:52 +0100
Neil Williams wrote:
On 2016-09-20 22:07:54 +0000, Recliner said:

Huh? Luton is hardly any further out than Gatwick, and Newark is the
nearest trans-Atlantic airport to Manhattan.

A lot of people are put off Luton by the bus connection, sufficiently
so that LBC are looking at building some kind of rail shuttle thing.

LBC? Wow, Global Radio really are expanding their remit :)

Not sure how a rail shuttle would work unless its a cog railway given how
much higher the airport is compared to the MML.

https://www.theguardian.com/business...ds-bus-transfe
s-fast-track-rail-link

"a £200m light rail link"

"The 1.3-mile link will be funded by Luton borough council"

Where exactly is a local council going to find 200m from these days? Either
they've got some private investment lined up or its pie in the sky BS.o

Also its somewhat iconic given how luton couldn't wait to rip up the railway
to Dumpstable and install some mickey mouse busway in its place. I'm guessing
the leadership must have changed.

--
Spud

Another one bites the dust
 

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:23:02 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 08:39:02 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 08:35:52 +0100
Neil Williams wrote:
On 2016-09-20 22:07:54 +0000, Recliner said:

Huh? Luton is hardly any further out than Gatwick, and Newark is the
nearest trans-Atlantic airport to Manhattan.

A lot of people are put off Luton by the bus connection, sufficiently
so that LBC are looking at building some kind of rail shuttle thing.

LBC? Wow, Global Radio really are expanding their remit :)

Not sure how a rail shuttle would work unless its a cog railway given how
much higher the airport is compared to the MML.

https://www.theguardian.com/business...ds-bus-transfe
s-fast-track-rail-link

"a £200m light rail link"

"The 1.3-mile link will be funded by Luton borough council"

Where exactly is a local council going to find 200m from these days? Either
they've got some private investment lined up or its pie in the sky BS.o

I assume it'll be externally funded, with the cost being repaid from
the airport's revenues or fares on the rail link.

Another one bites the dust
 

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 08:39:02 on Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Recliner
remarked:
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 08:35:52 +0100
Neil Williams wrote:
On 2016-09-20 22:07:54 +0000, Recliner said:

Huh? Luton is hardly any further out than Gatwick, and Newark is the
nearest trans-Atlantic airport to Manhattan.

A lot of people are put off Luton by the bus connection, sufficiently
so that LBC are looking at building some kind of rail shuttle thing.

LBC? Wow, Global Radio really are expanding their remit :)

Not sure how a rail shuttle would work unless its a cog railway given how
much higher the airport is compared to the MML.

https://www.theguardian.com/business...port-ends-bus-
transfers-fast-track-rail-link

"He said Luton was working closely with the Department for Transport to
remove barriers to rail travel to the airport,"

That's odd, it's the DfT which would have insisted on installing
barriers in the first place.

--
Roland Perry

Another one bites the dust
 

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On 2016-09-20 22:07:54 +0000, Recliner said:

Huh? Luton is hardly any further out than Gatwick, and Newark is the
nearest trans-Atlantic airport to Manhattan.

A lot of people are put off Luton by the bus connection, sufficiently so
that LBC are looking at building some kind of rail shuttle thing. Which
is actually counterintuitive, as to some gates at Gatwick you walk almost
as far as the bus goes (well, probably not quite, but it feels like it),
there's the inter-terminal train, and at Luton bags are returned far, far
quicker than any other significantly sized airport (the reason for which
is the simplicity of the baggage system - it just involves two blokes and
a flatbed Transit).

That is the advantage of not having much (any) in the way of connecting
passengers to handle

tim

Another one bites the dust
 

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On 2016-09-21 08:24:37 +0000, d said:

LBC? Wow, Global Radio really are expanding their remit :)

Luton Borough Council, the owners of the airport (though they subcontract
its operation).

Not sure how a rail shuttle would work unless its a cog railway given how
much higher the airport is compared to the MML.

It will most probably be a rubber tyred people mover of some kind, like
the Gatwick or Birmingham ones.

Last time I used Luton was 2013 and it seemed pretty well managed on the
way out. On the way back was a different story however - a mile long walk
to
security up and down stairs from the gate, followed by no information at
baggage collection for about 15 mins followed by bags coming out in dribs
and
drabs for the next 20 mins. And this IIRC was in April, hardly peak
holiday
season.

Sounds like a particularly bad day. The walk from some gates can be a
*bit* long but it's nothing on Gatwick, nor have I ever known any airport
as slow with bags as Gatwick (or Stansted).

I first started to always try to work with carry on only after a trip on the
Manchester shuttle to LHR.

I waited 45 minutes for my bag to appear and when it did it was one a a
total of 3 that the flight had carried!

tim

Another one bites the dust
 

On 2016-09-21 11:52:21 +0000, tim... said:

That is the advantage of not having much (any) in the way of connecting
passengers to handle

Indeed so.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

Another one bites the dust
 

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:56:32 +0100
"tim..." wrote:
I first started to always try to work with carry on only after a trip on the
Manchester shuttle to LHR.

I waited 45 minutes for my bag to appear and when it did it was one a a
total of 3 that the flight had carried!

By implication that means a lot of people on that flight were actually
visiting London. Going through all the airport hassle and stress to take a
flight that including transit time is probably slower than taking the train
just seems utterly insane to me.

--
Spud

Another one bites the dust
 

On 21/09/2016 09:48, Neil Williams wrote:
[...]
Sounds like a particularly bad day. The walk from some gates can be a
*bit* long but it's nothing on Gatwick, nor have I ever known any
airport as slow with bags as Gatwick (or Stansted).

Last time I collected a hold bag at Gatwick it was quick, it wasn't a
particularly quiet time either. I think Gatwick had some particular
problems with their baggage handlers - and not having enough of them - a
while back, but that got sorted out. (Responsibility of the handling
company, and ultimately the airline, but it reflects badly on the airport.)

Another one bites the dust
 

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 13:09:54 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:56:32 +0100
"tim..." wrote:
I first started to always try to work with carry on only after a trip on the
Manchester shuttle to LHR.

I waited 45 minutes for my bag to appear and when it did it was one a a
total of 3 that the flight had carried!

By implication that means a lot of people on that flight were actually
visiting London. Going through all the airport hassle and stress to take a
flight that including transit time is probably slower than taking the train
just seems utterly insane to me.

As always, it depends on the starting and finish points. Not everyone
is visiting an office next door to Euston. For example, if someone who
lives in Wilmslow is visiting an office in Stockley Park or Uxbridge,
flying would be much better than taking the train.

Another one bites the dust
 

On 20.09.16 23:11, Mizter T wrote:

On 20/09/2016 23:07, Recliner wrote:

wrote:

Well, that route is sort of going from Q to Z, when indeed you needed A
to B. Luton is a ways out, and Newark is not the closest to Manhattan.

Huh? Luton is hardly any further out than Gatwick, and Newark is the
nearest trans-Atlantic airport to Manhattan.


Indeed. A friend who does this with some regularity prefers a Newark
arrival over JFK.
I stand corrected.

Another one bites the dust
 

On 21.09.16 14:26, Mizter T wrote:

On 21/09/2016 09:48, Neil Williams wrote:
[...]
Sounds like a particularly bad day. The walk from some gates can be a
*bit* long but it's nothing on Gatwick, nor have I ever known any
airport as slow with bags as Gatwick (or Stansted).

Last time I collected a hold bag at Gatwick it was quick, it wasn't a
particularly quiet time either. I think Gatwick had some particular
problems with their baggage handlers - and not having enough of them - a
while back, but that got sorted out. (Responsibility of the handling
company, and ultimately the airline, but it reflects badly on the airport.)

I find that T5 is very quick and efficient in terms of baggage
collection. I can usually be out of the airport within minutes after
disembarking; I just go through the electronic passport gates, do
downstairs and I find that my luggage is normally there.

Having said that, however, last time I was at T5 I found that the queues
to the electronic gates were longer as the luddites had caught onto them.

Another one bites the dust
 

wrote in message ...
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:56:32 +0100
"tim..." wrote:
I first started to always try to work with carry on only after a trip on
the
Manchester shuttle to LHR.

I waited 45 minutes for my bag to appear and when it did it was one a a
total of 3 that the flight had carried!

By implication that means a lot of people on that flight were actually
visiting London.

actually

going home from a trip to Manchester :-)

Going through all the airport hassle and stress to take a
flight that including transit time is probably slower than taking the
train
just seems utterly insane to me.

well yes

but I didn't expect such sloppy service from what was billed (at the time)
as a premium service - this was during the era when occasionally they would
fly concord on this route

tim

Another one bites the dust
 

In message , at 13:09:54 on Wed, 21 Sep
2016, d remarked:
I first started to always try to work with carry on only after a trip on the
Manchester shuttle to LHR.

I waited 45 minutes for my bag to appear and when it did it was one a a
total of 3 that the flight had carried!

By implication that means a lot of people on that flight were actually
visiting London.

The exact opposite. Most of the people on the flight will have been
connecting to another, with their bags checked through. That's the main
purpose of the Manchester flights.
--
Roland Perry

Another one bites the dust
 

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 19:06:59 +0100
"tim..." wrote:
as a premium service - this was during the era when occasionally they would
fly concord on this route

Eh?? Was the concord maintenance base in manchester or something?

--
Spud

Another one bites the dust
 

In message , at 08:30:46 on Thu, 22 Sep
2016, d remarked:

as a premium service - this was during the era when occasionally they would
fly concord on this route

Eh?? Was the concord maintenance base in manchester or something?

Filton, more likely.

I expect a trip to Manchester would be a positioning move for a charter
flight later in the day.
--
Roland Perry

Another one bites the dust
 

On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:49:21 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 08:30:46 on Thu, 22 Sep
2016, d remarked:

as a premium service - this was during the era when occasionally they would
fly concord on this route

Eh?? Was the concord maintenance base in manchester or something?

Filton, more likely.

No, I don't think the BA Concordes were maintained at Filton. You
could see them parked at the Heathrow hangars (where one still lives).


I expect a trip to Manchester would be a positioning move for a charter
flight later in the day.

No, it was one of the Shuttle goodies (which British Midland couldn't
offer). If they needed an extra Shuttle flight, Concorde was sometimes
the backup aircraft. For obvious reasons, this wasn't usually
advertised in advance, but I wonder if some people heard on the
grapevine. I once just missed travelling on one.

From BA's point of view, it was probably a useful way for pilots to
get extra take-off/landing practice.

Another one bites the dust
 

In message , at 13:20:29 on
Thu, 22 Sep 2016, Recliner remarked:
as a premium service - this was during the era when occasionally they would
fly concord on this route

Eh?? Was the concord maintenance base in manchester or something?

Filton, more likely.

No, I don't think the BA Concordes were maintained at Filton. You
could see them parked at the Heathrow hangars (where one still lives).

Not for routine maintenance, but there indications that Filton was where
major spares were kept, and perhaps the aircraft flew there rather than
the spares being flown to Heathrow.
--
Roland Perry

Another one bites the dust
 

On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 13:20:29 +0100
Recliner wrote:
No, it was one of the Shuttle goodies (which British Midland couldn't
offer). If they needed an extra Shuttle flight, Concorde was sometimes
the backup aircraft. For obvious reasons, this wasn't usually
advertised in advance, but I wonder if some people heard on the
grapevine. I once just missed travelling on one.

Given concordes fuel economy especially at sub sonic speeds, they must have
made a heavy loss on those short flights.

--
Spud

Another one bites the dust
 

wrote in message ...
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 13:20:29 +0100
Recliner wrote:
No, it was one of the Shuttle goodies (which British Midland couldn't
offer). If they needed an extra Shuttle flight, Concorde was sometimes
the backup aircraft. For obvious reasons, this wasn't usually
advertised in advance, but I wonder if some people heard on the
grapevine. I once just missed travelling on one.

Given concordes fuel economy especially at sub sonic speeds, they must
have
made a heavy loss on those short flights.

probably

it was a marketing gimmick, nothing more

tim

Another one bites the dust
 

wrote:
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 13:20:29 +0100
Recliner wrote:
No, it was one of the Shuttle goodies (which British Midland couldn't
offer). If they needed an extra Shuttle flight, Concorde was sometimes
the backup aircraft. For obvious reasons, this wasn't usually
advertised in advance, but I wonder if some people heard on the
grapevine. I once just missed travelling on one.

Given concordes fuel economy especially at sub sonic speeds, they must have
made a heavy loss on those short flights.

No doubt, but it helped persuade people to use the BA Shuttle. Also, fuel
was much cheaper in those days (this was around 1980-85).

Another one bites the dust
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:20:29 on
Thu, 22 Sep 2016, Recliner remarked:
as a premium service - this was during the era when occasionally they would
fly concord on this route

Eh?? Was the concord maintenance base in manchester or something?

Filton, more likely.

No, I don't think the BA Concordes were maintained at Filton. You
could see them parked at the Heathrow hangars (where one still lives).

Not for routine maintenance, but there indications that Filton was where
major spares were kept, and perhaps the aircraft flew there rather than
the spares being flown to Heathrow.

It would probably be a lot cheaper to bring the spares to Heathrow by road.

Another one bites the dust
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 13:09:54 on Wed, 21 Sep
2016, d remarked:
I first started to always try to work with carry on only after a trip on
the
Manchester shuttle to LHR.

I waited 45 minutes for my bag to appear and when it did it was one a a
total of 3 that the flight had carried!

By implication that means a lot of people on that flight were actually
visiting London.

The exact opposite. Most of the people on the flight will have been
connecting to another, with their bags checked through. That's the main
purpose of the Manchester flights.

Not really

Back in the day it was definitely a point to point route.

Companies would buy carnets of tickets and you just turned up with one at
the desk 20 minutes before and walked on (well in theory, anyway).

I guess that this MO got killed by the need to add on an extra hour for
security clearance meaning that the time saving over the train to London
disappeared for all but a small number of final destinations.

tim