posted without comment

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a9160851.html

tim... wrote:
posted without comment

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a9160851.html

Of course Tim Clark has an axe to grind, just as Willie Walsh does. For
quite different reasons, it would suit both of them if the runway is never
built.

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:
posted without comment

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a9160851.html

Of course Tim Clark has an axe to grind, just as Willie Walsh does. For
quite different reasons, it would suit both of them if the runway is never
built.

you need to explain that because that article says that he wants more slots
in Heathrow and wont get them without the new runway

On 20/10/2019 16:35, tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:
posted without comment

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a9160851.html


Of course Tim Clark has an axe to grind, just as Willie Walsh does. For
quite different reasons, it would suit both of them if the runway is
never
built.

you need to explain that because that article says that he wants more
slots in Heathrow and wont get them without the new runway


He actually wants bigger aircraft but Airbus won't make them.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:
posted without comment

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a9160851.html

Of course Tim Clark has an axe to grind, just as Willie Walsh does. For
quite different reasons, it would suit both of them if the runway is never
built.

you need to explain that because that article says that he wants more slots
in Heathrow and wont get them without the new runway

Heathrow is a hub that competes with Dubai, and he doesn't want it to be
strengthened.

With six A380 flights a day, EK has far more seats available on the LHR-DXB
route than all the other airlines combined. It also has three EK A380
flights a day to Gatwick, and two 777 flights to Stansted, so there are no
fewer than nine EK A380 and two 777 flights a day on the LON-DXB route. BA,
Virgin and Qantas combined only have a fraction of that capacity.

It also has direct flights from five regional UK airports — Birmingham,
Edinburgh, Glasgow, Manchester and Newcastle — and can easily get more
regional slots if it needs them.

EK has a competitive advantage by operating flights direct from five UK
regional and three London airports to its Dubai hub. For example, someone
from the UK regions can get to, say, Sydney with only one stop with EK, but
would need two stops using any European airline.

If LHR does get 50% more slots, preference will be given to new airlines
without an existing presence, probably followed by other local carriers.
It's hard to see EK being favoured in such an event. The net result is that
EK would lose some of its competitive advantage.

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 20/10/2019 16:35, tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:
posted without comment

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a9160851.html



Of course Tim Clark has an axe to grind, just as Willie Walsh does. For
quite different reasons, it would suit both of them if the runway is
never
built.

you need to explain that because that article says that he wants more
slots in Heathrow and wont get them without the new runway


He actually wants bigger aircraft but Airbus won't make them.

Yup. Even worse, from his point of view, Airbus and RR won't even produce
an enhanced, more efficient version of the 388, as they believe not enough
would be sold to justify the investment. Both would rather produce enhanced
versions of the bigger-selling, much more modern, A350.

Is that because Boris promised to lie (or is that lay) in front of the
bulldozers? A man of many last ditches.
--
Roland Perry

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 20/10/2019 16:35, tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:
posted without comment

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a9160851.html

Of course Tim Clark has an axe to grind, just as Willie Walsh does. For
quite different reasons, it would suit both of them if the runway is
never
built.

you need to explain that because that article says that he wants more
slots in Heathrow and wont get them without the new runway


He actually wants bigger aircraft but Airbus won't make them.

As the 380 was a financial disaster, that's hardly a surprise

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


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:
posted without comment

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a9160851.html

Of course Tim Clark has an axe to grind, just as Willie Walsh does. For
quite different reasons, it would suit both of them if the runway is
never
built.

you need to explain that because that article says that he wants more
slots
in Heathrow and wont get them without the new runway

Heathrow is a hub that competes with Dubai,

Really

People fly from e.g. SE Asia via London to other parts of Europe in droves?
Don't see it personally.

I can see that they will use London for East Coast USA, but I don't see that
option needs any strengthening. It's already strong enough

West Coast USA is usually better reached Trans-Pacific

and he doesn't want it to be
strengthened.

With six A380 flights a day, EK has far more seats available on the
LHR-DXB
route than all the other airlines combined. It also has three EK A380
flights a day to Gatwick, and two 777 flights to Stansted, so there are no
fewer than nine EK A380 and two 777 flights a day on the LON-DXB route.
BA,
Virgin and Qantas combined only have a fraction of that capacity.

It also has direct flights from five regional UK airports — Birmingham,
Edinburgh, Glasgow, Manchester and Newcastle — and can easily get more
regional slots if it needs them.

Yes, I know all that I did read the article (and in any case DXB is a
popular routing for people who join me on my holiday choices from non-London
starting points, and I'm doing it myself on the next but one holiday -
because I've added in the stop over - but only the once).

EK has a competitive advantage by operating flights direct from five UK
regional and three London airports to its Dubai hub. For example, someone
from the UK regions can get to, say, Sydney with only one stop with EK,
but
would need two stops using any European airline.

So how is a bigger hub at LHR going to change that?

If LHR does get 50% more slots, preference will be given to new airlines
without an existing presence, probably followed by other local carriers.

you think?

You really think that there will be enough new (to the airport) carriers who
want slots?

I see them being handed out (well presumably sold to) already established
airlines with few slots each.

It's hard to see EK being favoured in such an event. The net result is
that
EK would lose some of its competitive advantage.

EKs advantage is its reputation for quality, both in the air and, I presume
at the stop over.

For Central Asia my most recent experience is with Turkish and Ukrainian.
The first was passable and the second awful (it was the connection that made
it so, not the point to point flight). I don't think I'll be trying
connecting via a second string airline again.

Of course, where it is competing with the established SE Asian airlines, who
also have a high reputation, most of that competition is going to with a
direct flight. Sunday I was expected to go to BKK via SIN. I said to the
TA, don't be silly, find me a direct flight! Which they did for 30 pounds
more (in 700).

tim

On Sun, 20 Oct 2019 19:47:07 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



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


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:
posted without comment

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-a9160851.html

Of course Tim Clark has an axe to grind, just as Willie Walsh does. For
quite different reasons, it would suit both of them if the runway is
never
built.

you need to explain that because that article says that he wants more
slots
in Heathrow and wont get them without the new runway

Heathrow is a hub that competes with Dubai,

Really

People fly from e.g. SE Asia via London to other parts of Europe in droves?
Don't see it personally.

That used to be the Qantas model: they flew people into LHR, from
where they flew all over Europe on BA. EK snatched that deal, moving
Qantas's hub from London to Emirates.


I can see that they will use London for East Coast USA, but I don't see that
option needs any strengthening. It's already strong enough

West Coast USA is usually better reached Trans-Pacific

Only from East Asia. South Asia is better through Europe.


and he doesn't want it to be
strengthened.

With six A380 flights a day, EK has far more seats available on the
LHR-DXB
route than all the other airlines combined. It also has three EK A380
flights a day to Gatwick, and two 777 flights to Stansted, so there are no
fewer than nine EK A380 and two 777 flights a day on the LON-DXB route.
BA,
Virgin and Qantas combined only have a fraction of that capacity.

It also has direct flights from five regional UK airports — Birmingham,
Edinburgh, Glasgow, Manchester and Newcastle — and can easily get more
regional slots if it needs them.

Yes, I know all that I did read the article (and in any case DXB is a
popular routing for people who join me on my holiday choices from non-London
starting points, and I'm doing it myself on the next but one holiday -
because I've added in the stop over - but only the once).

EK has a competitive advantage by operating flights direct from five UK
regional and three London airports to its Dubai hub. For example, someone
from the UK regions can get to, say, Sydney with only one stop with EK,
but
would need two stops using any European airline.

So how is a bigger hub at LHR going to change that?

If LHR does get 50% more slots, preference will be given to new airlines
without an existing presence, probably followed by other local carriers.

you think?

That's the stated plan. It's why IAG is so against the third runway.


You really think that there will be enough new (to the airport) carriers who
want slots?

Of course! What an amazing question to ask!


I see them being handed out (well presumably sold to) already established
airlines with few slots each.

You can see whatever you like, but that's not the stated plan.