[Bullfrog]

I had not read VK’s response of 02.55 GMT when I posted my earlier comment about BA’s lack of progress with new routes.

It is useful having VK’s input on this forum.

As openfly rightly says, posting BA information here prior to official BA Press release is controversial. VK always denies a link to BA but perhaps VK’s partner is more closely linked.

[RichHI1]

It probably depends on your interpretation of the word link…
In any event I find the insights valuable and the grammatical corrections complete with typos amusing..
I bet IAG never thought they would face most criticism on the lesser requirement for fewer points …

[Tete_de_cuvee]

Although VK’s mission to boost the IAG/BA share value by any means available can be tiresome at times, I vacillite between amusement and genuine sympathy for someone whose life appears to be defined by trawling, trolling and posting here and on other sites.
VK’s comment concerning the Adios announcement “was worth staying up for” …. would have evoked a cynical titter of amusement if posted by anyone else, by VK it evoked a mixture of sympathy and get a life.

[dutchyankee]

Just a point of reference as the runway at FLL has been able to handle for a number of years aircraft the size of a 777. It is not the runway that would cause BA to put a derelict 767 on the route instead of a 777. A number of years ago South African Airways scheduled an A340-600 into FLL continuing to ATL. This stopped when flights shifted to IAD Star Alliance hub. Still today, fully laden cargo/courier re-engined DC-8’s, which require length, operate from FLL. FLL’s main runway is only 380 feet shorter than San Diego, which seems to accommodate BA’s nonstop to/from LHR without a problem.

[Scandinavian]

Excellent news about BA at LGW if it is true.

@Tete

I often read your comments with amusement too. It would seem that you have a serious chip on your shoulder about two people: Willy Walsh and VK. You generally cannot post a message on this site without attacking one of them.

[pixelmeister]

For what it’s worth, the main runway (09L) at FLL is 9000ft long. That is large enough to take a 747-400B at max payload and still have close to 2000ft to spare. In addition there were plans in place to increase the length of 09R to a similar size as 09L. Following the collapse of local protests earlier this year the work is expected to move ahead quickly with completion scheduled for 2014 including expansion of Terminal 4. So, no problem with aircraft at FLL, just have to contend with the odd hurricane 🙂

[VintageKrug]

I re-iterate for those with short attention span that I am not connected with BA, never have been, and nor is my partner (for the avoidance of doubt, never has been, either) or family connected with BA.

I have no material interest in the BA share price; to post information on a public forum with the express objective of boosting the share price would be illegal. I didn’t see the “expose” thread which was lopped, but from hearing second hand from others what it said, it couldn’t have been more wrong.

Fort Lauderdale can indeed take a 747, and its runway extension is starting construction late 2011 (remember San Diego requires considerably more fuel that FLL would do). I would question whether it could take a 777 fully loaded, but it all depends when the runway extension will be completed.

[dutchyankee]

VK, my point exactly. If a fully loaded 777 can takeoff from SAN with far more fuel than required from FLL, and all else being equal (altitude, temperature, etc.) then logic would dictate a 777 would have no problem from FLL as their main runway (there are 3 at FLL) is 9000 ft long, only 380 ft shorter than SAN. The runway that has been approved for extension is the second most utilised at FLL, and will be equal in length to their main runway. KLM 747-400’s have been diverted to FLL en route to AMS from SXM when for operational reasons they could not take on a full fuel load to compensate for the pax load at SXM. Also, as I already mentioned, South African had a scheduled flight JNB-FLL-ATL with an A340-600. So no need for you to question if a 777 can be handled by FLL, only question is why would BA (if in fact this happens) put their worst long haul aircraft on the route, 767-300’s. Whilst undoubtedly a leisure route, definitely a very wealthy catchment area including Ft. Lauderdale, Palm Beach, Boca and Pompano, so such a poor product as BA’s 767 would mean those wanting comfort would continue to fly via MIA, and BA’s FLL service would attract the Thomson and TUI crowd!

[NewBAexec]

VintageKrug

May I ask where did you find this information re new routes Seychelles, Goa, Fort Lauderdale and Phuket?

It is no where to be seen published on any BA website. Also if you have no whatsoever connections with BA, how can you be so certain about the number of aircrafts move from LHR to LGW?

Many thanks.

[NewBAexec]

I know for a fact with the current business plan in place, BA is focusing more on renewing their shorthaul fleet at LGW with brand new airbus A320s and A321s. We should see the 737s retire from the company very soon.

[NewBAexec]

Hippocampus

You mentioned above four new longhaul routes is quite a lot to launch in one go at LGW…

The last time BA introduced new routes, they were Montego Bay, Male, Punta Cana and Sharm El Sheik. That’s four and they were all announced in one go!

[wmflyer]

VK, not sure who your source for new routes was, but according to an internal memo on the BA intranet, the LGW fleet for Summer 2012 will remain at 9 777-200s. There are no new routes, some adjustments to frequencies and Montego Bay is being dropped from March 25th.
The total number of LGW longhaul departures per week increases by just 1 over Summer 2011 to 57.

[Hippocampus]

I think this is a surprise as there have been rumours of new routes at LGW for a long time.

So how will the extra capacity from deliveries of new 777s and 747s returned from storage be utilised?

If there are no new routes from LGW, there must be new routes coming at LHR.

[VintageKrug]

Yes, seems my source got this one wrong, though there has to be something in it as Hippo states.

The Fat Lady has yet to sing IMHO….!

[NewBAexec]

Well let’s not lose hope!

Since the Montego Bay is being dropped as from March 25th, the summer season doesn’t start until April, so this a/c will be used on another route, maybe a new route or two!

If you look closely at the summer frequencies, there are a few adjustments and reductions. This means the two extra 777s will be used somewhere else.

Also around four or five 737s are retiring from the LGW fleet next summer allowing brand new planes to take over, type and quantity unknown at this time.

Fingers crossed for at least a new route for summer 2012. I hope it’s going to be Havana or Colombo! 🙂

[Author]

Posts