[Anonymous]

[VintageKrug]

So the end seems to like it’s going to be a long and painful on at bmi.

Not content with the humiliation of the new “British Midland International” logo, created using Mr Prich-Shower’s nephew’s CorelDraw programme during a rainy Tuesday Art lesson, it now looks like the domestic routes are now under threat:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/8261850/Airline-BMI-reviews-UK-domestic-flights-at-Heathrow.html

Makes sense to withdraw from domestic routes, which use valuable slots which could otherwise be used for higher margin longhaul flights, and for higher capacity aircraft.

[Hippocampus]

Although symbolically it is significant, in truth LON airports (as a whole) are well served in terms of domestic routes and with no expansion at LHR, it is not a sensible use of slots to fly small regional aircraft on domestic routes.

If this marks the end of bmi domestic, I wonder whether all of the domestic slots could be absorbed by new bmi routes/Star Alliance partners or whether they will end up on the market.

[Travellator]

Bmi currently serves LHR from Belfast City albeit with a reduced timetable and the end of Business Class.

LHR is the worldwide gateway for many people from Northern Ireland and the demise of this route would be devastating, even though EI serve LHR from Belfast International.

BA could easily take over this route and gain sales to other destinations from LHR due to the convenience of arriving and departing from one terminal ( 5 ) I would assume and also the ability to transline baggage.

I realise that domestic is probably not on the current BA route agenda but this would make sense.

[batraveller2]

I note that no mention is made of Aberdeen. I would be surprised if anyone pulls out of this route as flights are always busy (admittedly I only travel on BA) and fares are always at least twice that of GLA / EDI.

[JordanD]

batraveller2: In a word, oil (well, “and gas”). For that reason alone, BA and BMI will faithfully serve NE Scotland – I’m sure that if the runway was longer at ABZ, BMI would look to do direct flights from there to other parts of its oil & gas network of destinations.

[BusinessTraveller]

It’s also worth noting that the four remaining daily services between London and Manchester will be operated with 50-seater Embraer 145 jets, rather than the larger 150-seater Airbus A319/A320 aircraft which are currently used on two of the current daily flights.

Overall the number of daily seats available will drop from 500 to 200. More information on this can be read here:

http://www.businesstraveller.com/news/bmi-to-reduce-domestic-services

[Travellator]

BA still have 7/8 flights a day so if BMi ups it price too much even the 200 seats wont be sold – professional Hari Kari ?

[ScottWilson]

Meanwhile the taxpayer still props up the Virgin Trains service, and the government strangles runway capacity at Heathrow (which inevitably means lower value routes get dropped).

Less competition on London-Manchester services is the result, and then billions of taxpayers’ money will be sought to build a railway that will likely kill off the air service (and competition) altogether.

[VintageKrug]

To give a balanced perspective, the same government which stopped the third runway at LHR also developed the Channel Tunnel, significantly reducing the need to fly between London and Paris/Brussels and was the force behind the Docklands development which provides an additional runway in the heart of London for business people, and supports many domestic services.

These two activities in themselves have significantly developed transport capacity in the South East.

The Virgin Trains service to Manchester is incomparably better both in terms of speed and on board comfort since the upgrading of the line over the previous five + years (though I personally dislike the Pendolinos which make me feel unwell) and it doesn’t seem unreasonable to suggest that it is precisely because of this, as well as the advent of LCC service from regional airports direct to European destinations, and direct/via a hub to the rest of the world, thus bypassing the need to route through LHR which is causing a drop in demand for such services.

[Bucksnet]

“the same government which stopped the third runway at LHR also developed the Channel Tunnel, significantly reducing the need to fly between London and Paris/Brussels and was the force behind the Docklands development”

The same government? It is in no way the same government VK. The name of the ruling party is the same, but that party has been completely changed by Cameron and other Common Purpose lackeys.

[VintageKrug]

There is only one government and that is the Conservative Party.

Others are just interlopers.

[Bucksnet]

VK, you don’t get the point. The party has been changed from within by Common Purpose, only the name is the same!

[transtraxman]

VK.
How wrong you are. What is now in power is a coalition, and more green as a result, like it or not. The resulting miss-mash is a sop to voters, having its hands tied to nimbies´ interests thus being unable to tackle the great infrastructure problems of the 21st Century.
I personally think the prohibition of airport expansion in the SE is a nefarious subjection to manifesto pledges with the resulting detriment of air transport in the UK.
The present government and its components have nothing to do with the previous Labour Gov. and even less to do with the preceeding Major (bless his soul) Government.
We are now at a whole new ball game where the old rules and presumptions do not apply.
Bring back Lord Adonis who seems to be the only minister since the 19th Century who has had any idea what transport infrastructure means to the UK.

[Bucksnet]

“The present government and its components have nothing to do with the previous Labour Gov. and even less to do with the preceeding Major (bless his soul) Government”

Both of which have even less to do with the government VK was referring to, the Thatcher government.

[Author]

Posts