[Anonymous]

[VintageKrug]

I guess they will be using an internationally configured aircraft for this route?

Looks like a two class (Business/Economy) 767-300. Business is 2-2-2 configuration.

Has anyone got a pic of the Business Class on those planes? Will certainly be more comfy than CE, but hardly worth it on such a short hop. Why not give Moscow to AA…now that would work very well!

Seems totally unfair that AA can launch an intra Europe flight, while BA is unable to offer intra-US services.

More info here:

http://www.americanairlines.co.uk/i18n/specialOffers/londonBrussels.jsp

Prices seem expensive and flight times are not great; probably just a slot minding exercise of some sort.

[Hess963]

It is quite astonishing that AA is launching such route. It would be better iif they keep the codesharing with BA and let BA operate it. It is a waste of time, money and resources which definitely can be used in other more urgent issues than this.

For such a short hop–I personally do not need an internat. C class seat–as such called new generation C seat from AA is one of the losers comparing to other C seats in its categories. As I have said before– it is a joke.

Regarding BA not opening a intra american route–I think it is far more wiser to keep it that way and concentrate first and foremost on the already existing ventures and more important issues at the moment than even thinking of such ostentations projects

[Baggageinhall]

UA are launching the same route too.

In both cases, I believe it is merely a convenient way of hanging onto a slot pair that would otherwise be unused and potentially have to be handed back to the pool.

[cityprofessional]

Calm down

As baggageinhall says, (a) it’s slot sitting, (b) it’s cheaper to park up in BRU than LHR (in the case of the UA flight which overnights in BRU), and (c) it provides a little extra feed into ex-LHR transatlantic flights

I don’t think AA cares if nobody flies it locally. And I don’t think BA is quaking in its boots

And, yes, BA can fly similar routes in North America – it used to fly YUL-PHL, YUL-DTW and similar routes with full international traffic rights

[VintageKrug]

I was not aware BA flew between Canada and the US in the past.

I know non US airlines are certainly not permitted to operate domestically in the US, viz. the historical need to have Braniff operate the Concorde service from Washington to Dallas, and more recently the very tight ownership controls for Virgin America.

Similarly, although Qantas *flies* New York to Los Angeles JFK-LAX it is not possible to purchase this ticket point to point (otherwise people would flock to it over the US legacy carriers, I am sure).

It is interesting that AA have chosen to put an explicit link about a LHR-BRU service, which suggests they are at least *trying* to market it point to point, though of course you are spot on this is a slot sitting exercise and the pricing of the point to point fares reflect that.

[dutchyankee]

As a matter of fact BA has frequently operated flights within the United States, no local traffic of course, but a number of routes, the latest being LHR-DTW-IAH as the other nonstop to Houston was at that time out of Gatwick, and now of course this is moved to LHR, and DTW has been withdrawn. During Winter BA often flew SEA-SFO, SEA-LAX, and SFO-LAX, but again no local traffic. There are many more examples including of course the Canada to US flights which are international (no matter how much I sometimes think Canada is another US state) and even a number of flights exit JFK to the Carribbean and Bermuda with full traffic rights. AF and IB both used to use MIA as a mini hub for flights to the French Carribbean and Central/South America respectively, again with full traffic rights. The Concorde example is actually a poor example as it was Braniff that wanted the DFW Concorde service, neither BA nor AF were keen on this, but as they say ‘if you’re paying’ which was the case for BN at the time. Concorde could not have made the journey nonstop in either direction, and no aircraft were available to purchase, hence it was an opportunity for BN who at the time were very media savvy and hungry to team up with both BA and AF. But the flight was always a BN domestic sold flight DFW-IAD. Let’s not forget when Pan Am was in their heyday their flights 101, 103, 121, and others also overnighted in BRU, AMS and FRA, and flew to LHR continuing to the US, these flights were operated sometimes by 747 thru service, or as 727/737 with change of plane at the time, even sometimes as A310’s later into the demise of PA. While I agree BA would give the US domestic market a great kick in the pants competition wise, I agree with the previous poster that said BA has a few more pressing issues to deal with before pushing to get into a market that is currently losing billions.

[NTarrant]

Does anyone remember the PA001 and PA002 which circled the globe? I recall it went LHR-NYC-LAX/SFO not sure after that, I think HKG-ROM-LHR and you could travel on each sector, even in the US.

I never travelled on it but know people that did and they always refered to it as the Pan Am “Around the World Dustbin” apparently because the planes just kept going around the world and rarely cleaned properly!

[dutchyankee]

The RTW service of PA was historic and iconic of the formally great airline. The routing varied in certain parts of the world but the first thing I must tell you is that you could never buy a ticket on any domestic USA portion of the flight prior to deregulation as PA was purely positioning the aircraft. Flights 1 and 2 originated in different cities, JFK and SFO, and between the two PA was not allowed traffic rights. The route always included JFK-LHR and then it did change continuing on to FRA or FCO, then sometimes to ATH or IST, sometimes calling in at DAM but on almost all days landing at TEH during the days of the Shah and good relations with the USA, from there it either went to KAR, BOM, DEL, and then to BKK-HKG-NRT-SFO or NRT-HNL-SFO. As PA started her slow death, and US foreign policy changed flights 1/2 during the 80’s were quite more straight forward being JFK-LHR-FRA-BOM or DEL-BKK-HKG-NRT-LAX (replacing SFO as there was nonstop service between HKG and SFO then) and of course then traffic was allowed onward to JFK. The flight of course also routed the same way in the other direction. Originally 1/2 was on the classic 707, and then in the 70’s changed to the 747’s and as we all know, PA being the first operator of the type, these craft certainly started to show their wear and tear. The RTW flights ended in the mid 80’s as PA started to sell routes and could no longer provide same plane RTW service.

[AMcWhirter]

Yes, it was an historic route.

I remember that during the 1970s (when these RTW flights were operated by B747s) that PA1 started in New York JFK and flew to Heathrow and on to Frankfurt, Istanbul, Beirut, Teheran, Delhi, Bangkok and Hong Kong. From Hong Kong, PA1 operated across the Pacific to San Francisco and am not sure whether it made a stop in Honolulu or not.

Flight PA2 made the same trip but instead it started in San Francisco.

Both these RTW flights secured traffic rights on most if not all sectors. So, for example, passengers could use PA1 to fly New York-London or simply London-Frankfurt or London-Istanbul or Delhi-Bangkok and so on.

Passengers willingly booked PA1 and PA2 in the 1970s for the kudos of flying the B747.

In the late 1970s, PA used these RTW flights as a basis for starting an RTW fare. PA was the instigator of this popular and useful ticket and its reasoning at the time was to offer passengers a loyalty bonus if they were to circumvent the globe using the same airline throughout.

But in the 1970s there was no air fare liberalisation and the trade body IATA (which controlled prices) disallowed the RTW deal. In protest at IATA’s commercial interference in its affairs, PA terminated its membership of the trade body for a number of years and placed its RTW deal on the market.

[dutchyankee]

Exactly right. Beirut was often a stop, as was Damascus on different days. It was during the heyday of the 747, when PA had the dining room on the upper deck, and the crew changed into Tuxedos for meal service, etc. The RTW always continued from HKG to Tokyo however, and from there transatlantic either nonstop or stopping in HNL as the early 747’s could not make HKG to the west coast nonstop.. In the mid to late 70’s with the introduction of the 747SP, one of the flights specifically for this aircraft was PA 5/6 which originated in JFK or SIN and Routed JFK-SFO-HKG-SIN and reverse, having the range to fly HKG to SFO nonstop (often needing technical stops due to winds). Great to be talking about such a great historic carrier! The bygone days of when flying from a to b was exciting and truly part of the vacation or journey!

[Author]

Posts