SkymonsterI think you’ll find that bmibaby is doing it. Although it is most likely that bmibaby has just taken over some bmi flights and slots. The flights may even be operated by bmi with just a bmibaby flight number or titles on the aircraft. Not perfectly sure how it is done.
No, there are NO bmibaby flights from LHR. All that has happened is that baby are selling “Tiny” fares on LHR services operated by bmi. This is essentially just a rebranding exercise designed to try to create a buyer perception that cheap fares are available ex-LHR. bmi is just selling their rear-most seats under a seperate and established brand – in most cases the “Tiny” fares are no cheaper or even in some cases more expensive than the cheapest fares bmi used to offer. LHR is not a low-cost airport and never will be.
A
SkymonsterI know there will always be passengers who prefer to pay extra and fly on a non low cost airline
The first mistake you’ve made is the classic one made by those sucked in by all the hype generated by Ryanair and easyJet – you’ve assumed that BA are more expensive than the low-fare operators, which is simply not always the case. It would be more correct to summise that there will always be passengers who want the ease and convenience of things like through connections and all the other extras that full-service airlines provide.
The major low fare airlines will never fly into LHR, because LHR is not a low cost airport. If you consider that a significant proportion of BA’s short haul business is on-line connections, then that continue to provide some top end business that go some way to allowing BA to offer competitively low fares to the leisure traveller. The BA short-haul hub at LGW may be more at risk.
Over the last few years, the most competitive damage inflicted on BA’s short haul operation has not come from low-fare carriers, its come from trains. Now that rail has recovered from Hatfield, LHR-MAN air travel is down a lot, LHR-GLA will start to slowly tail off now 125mph working is available all the way from London to Glasgow, and significant damage has been inflicted on LHR-CDG and LHR-BRU by the Eurostar who now have more market share than all air combined between those cities – as the channel tunnel connections get better and faster when St Pancras international opens, the train may start to affect some regional routes from north of London.
Sooner or later an airline will emerge offering long haul low cost travel, then the alarm bells will start ringing. !!!
There are a number of very good reasons why there are very few low-fare long-haul operations right now, and it won’t get easier for low-fare operators to break into the long haul market in the future either, because:
1. Lowest discounted economy fares on the full-service airlines are already not much higher than fares that could be offered by the low-fare sector, particularly given that…
2. The low-fare sector depends on charging high fares for last minute travel, which effectively subsidise the bargain basement high profile offers – sometimes Ryanair can be more expensive than BA if booked on the day of travel or the day before. Fewer last-minute travellers will be prepared to pay HIGH fares for no-frills long haul travel, so will gravitate towards the established carriers. This robs low-fare operators of their top-end market and margin on long haul.
3. It is impossible to achieve the high aircraft and crew utilisation required by low-fare operators to make money, on long-haul flights. A typical New York trip is 7 hours out, 6 hours back – more when realistically scheduled to avoid knock-on delays. It is practically impossible to turn a widebody in less than an hour. That means a round-trip to New York needs 15 hours utilisation at best. What happens to a high-capacity wide-body for the rest of the day – nine hours – as its unsuited to intra-European ops and longer haul ops can’t be squezed into the remaining nine hours.
A
SkymonsterI generally hate airports but enjoy flying. Airports are usually too busy, too many queues, too much hassle. Low-fare carriers have made things worse – far too many irregular travellers bimbling around, no clue, slowing things down, especially in lines like at security where they have no idea they’ve got to tell their cellphone out of their pocket, take their jacket off, etc, etc. And airports are regularly under-staffed for the number of people passing through them these days IMHO – another consequence of needing to cut costs because of the demands of low-fare carriers, I feel.
SkymonsterOn some European short-haul routes the difference between a fully flexible economy ticket and a business class ticket can be less than £10. At that price differential, the extra is easy to justify on the basis of better service, peace and quiet in the lounge before departure, priority baggage processing, fast-track through security at some airports, more frequent flyer miles, etc. However, some corporates have a policy of Y-class only and the full economy fare really does shaft those travellers. Note that I am talking about the difference between full economy and business on short-haul routes – the difference between discounted economy and business on short-haul, and between any economy fare and business on long-haul, is usually much greater and can be difficult to justify even given the extra frills available.
There has always been two types of travellers.
Type1: Doesn’t care about the service so long as the ticket is cheap
Type2: Values service and is ready to pay that little bit extra.
There is now a third type of passenger – those who are stupid or ignorant of airline pricing, and think or assume that a low-fare carrier will always be cheaper than a full-service/legacy carrier. (Case in point a few weeks ago I went to FRA for the day and Ryanair to Hhan was more expensive than BA to Frankfurt itself).
A
SkymonsterJust a question, is A6-EAM a low desnity three class A330 yes?
Yes it is.
Andy
SkymonsterNice pics! I was on that Emirates A330, seat 11A just obscured by the wing! 🙂
Back tonight on the evening arrival from DXB – suspect you won’t be there again though!
Andy
SkymonsterI was brought up on council estates and I laughed my a** off!
The “council estate” thing was just a joke based on the oft-used and well known Southwest version I also included later on – sorry if anyone was offended.
I don’t agree that LCC’s have been bad for passengers, but I don’t know anyone who has been within the industry for any length of time and who doesn’t think it has become a worse place to work as direct a result of LCC’s.
Absolutely! Although I still contend that low-fare carriers have made the flying experience less pleasant overall.
Having said that, I stick by my comments about low-fare carriers. Whilst they may be good for most of the travelling public, the drive for lower and lower fares has been at the expense of the staff who work in the industry. Erosion in terms and conditions that low-fare carriers have applied to their own staff (and by consequence of needing to compete, the staff of other airlines), has turned the airline industry overall into a far less pleasant place to work.
Think of all the complaints from farmers over the price reduction demands made by companies like Tesco – Tesco want to give customers low prices for items like meat and milk, so they make demands on farmers that result in it being difficult for them to make money. Same principal applies with low fare-carriers. Next time you buy a flight for next to nothing, remember its the staff who “handle” you through your journey who have a less pleasant working life than was the case before the low-fare sector caught on.
This latest innovation by FlyBe will be another change than impinges on staff for the worse – there will be far more arguments at checkin over paying for baggage, and far more problems for cabin crew who will inevitably be forced to work out how to stow all the extra carry-ons in the limited cabin storage space on a packed DHC-8. Remember its not the poor sods who have to deal with irate customers who have brought in these innovations. Nothing, repeat NOTHING, like this would be introduced unless those at the top of the tree believe that they can either (a) save money/decrease costs or (b) make more money, as a result of the change. It is they who make the decisions, but it is the staff at the sharp end who have to deal with the fall out and the crap.
Andy
SkymonsterNo, but I hate low fare carriers and all that they have done to ruin the airline business for both regular travellers and (at least as importantly) airline staff over the last few years.
For what its worth, my comments are a *******isation of a common saying in the US a few years back – “Another full Southwest flight, another deserted trailer park!”
Andy
SkymonsterXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Double
SkymonsterWell you know what they say:
“Pay peanuts, get treated like monkeys”
“Another full Ryanair/easyJet/Jet2/bmiBaby/FlyBe* flight, another deserted council estate!” 😉
* delete as appropriate
All very sad… 🙁
Andy
SkymonsterSQ are stopping one of their three daily SIN flights in FRA for fuel, QF are stopping two of their four daily flights in STN, and CX are tech stopping some flights in AMS for fuel. Not heard of any others, although I’m sure there will be some… Some people are saying that there will be limits to fuel supply to LHR for six months.
Andy
SkymonsterFor further clarification of the LHR situation, the following NOTAM is currently in effect:
AGA : Q)EGTT/QFULT/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5129N00028W005
FROM 05/12/14 18:36 TO 05/12/31 23:59 EST A2715/05
E)HEATHROW AIRPORT IS EXPERIENCING REDUCED DELIVERIES OF JET FUEL.
IN ORDER TO ENSURE CONTINUANCE OF OPS, THE ARRANGEMENTS AGREED IN THE
DRAFT HEATHROW FUEL CONTINGENCY PLAN (HFCP) WILL APPLY WIE.
THERE ARE SOME RESERVE STOCKS, BUT THESE NEED TO BE BEST USED IN
ORDER TO SAFEGUARD OPS.
ALL INBOUND ACFT WILL MAXIMISE TANKERING OPPORTUNITIES. IN ADDITION
TO TANKERING, FUEL RESTRICTIONS WILL ALSO APPLY.
USING THE HFCP, EACH CARRIER WILL, ON A DAILY BASIS, BE ALLOCATED A
PERCENTAGE OF THE PREVIOUS WEEKS TOTAL UPLIFT. THIS ALLOCATION CAN BE
USED AT AIRLINES DISCRETION.
ALL DEPARTING ACFT WILL RECIEVE FUEL, BUT ON A REDUCED BASIS –
(REFLECTING NORMAL CONTINGENCY PRACTICE WORLDWIDE). THE FOLLWING
RESTRICTIONS APPLY:
VISITING CARRIERS
FLTS UP TO 5 HR DURATION WILL RECIEVE 40 PER CENT OF NORMAL UPLIFT
FLTS OVER 5 HR DURATION WILL RECIEVE 64 PER CENT OF NORMAL UPLIFT
BASE CARRIERS
IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE OPERATIONAL INTEGRITY OF THE AIRFIELD AND
ENSURE STAND AVAILABILITY THE 3 BASE CARRIERS WILL HAVE THE FOLLOWING
ALLOCATION:
FLTS UP TO 5 HR DURATION WILL RECIEVE 64 PER CENT OF NORMAL UPLIFT
FLTS OVER 5 HR DURATION WILL RECIEVE 85 PER CENT OF NORMAL UPLIFT
CONSIDERATION WILL BE GIVEN TO LONG RANGE AIRLINES WHO NEED TO
ESTABLISH INTERIM OPERATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS. AIRLINES IN THIS CATEGORY
SHOULD CONTACT THE AIRSIDE BUSINESS RECOVERY TEAM ON 0208 745 7582 TO
ESTABLISH AN AGREEMENT.
THE SITUATION WILL BE MONITORED DAILY AND AIRLINES PERFORMANCE
MEASURED, WITH NOTAM ISSUED AS REQUIRED.
WE APPEAL TO ALL OPERATORS TO WORK WITH US TO MAINTAIN THE HEATHROW
OPERATION
SkymonsterSo we believe AlphaOne didn’t operate at all yesterday then?
What now…? I guess that the entire farce has now officially lost all credibility and the file can indeed be passed to Watchdog to let them decide whether the whole things was indeed a scam from the outset?
Andy
SkymonsterK9 is a good code for AlphaOne – because they’ve made a right DOG’s dinner of it!
Andy
SkymonsterActually, I know… The “new” nine-seater is a DeHavilland DHC-3 Otter float plane and they’re operating off the river! 🙂
Andy
Sign In
