This is the main V-Flyer Forum for general discussion of everything related to flying with Virgin-branded travel companies.
#962926 by David1946
29 Nov 2021, 17:13
Having flown MAN-ATL a number of times with DL & VS the flight has, as mentioned above, contained many business people who are flying on to other parts of the US. Have VS found that on the flights currently scheduled for early 2022 that fewer business people are travelling as they are WFH and using Zoom etc. This has caused them to re-think next years schedules with ATL being one they can suspend and 'hope' any business customers will use JFK.
#962927 by VS075
29 Nov 2021, 17:29
David1946 wrote:Having flown MAN-ATL a number of times with DL & VS the flight has, as mentioned above, contained many business people who are flying on to other parts of the US. Have VS found that on the flights currently scheduled for early 2022 that fewer business people are travelling as they are WFH and using Zoom etc. This has caused them to re-think next years schedules with ATL being one they can suspend and 'hope' any business customers will use JFK.


It depends where they are going and also if the same connections are available from JFK and if they connect with the VS127/128. Put it this way: if I want to get somewhere, I will either take a direct flight or, if that's not possible, take an indirect routing that works best. Hoping people will all take the VS127/128 will depend on the above plus factors such as loyalty, the latter which I think has been severely tested recently.

As others have mentioned, it's also an alternative routing for those wanting to travel to MCO or other parts of Florida and is also the best option for the southern and western states and certain places beyond the USA.
#962928 by 747G-VXLG
29 Nov 2021, 20:00
VS075 wrote:
David1946 wrote:Having flown MAN-ATL a number of times with DL & VS the flight has, as mentioned above, contained many business people who are flying on to other parts of the US. Have VS found that on the flights currently scheduled for early 2022 that fewer business people are travelling as they are WFH and using Zoom etc. This has caused them to re-think next years schedules with ATL being one they can suspend and 'hope' any business customers will use JFK.


It depends where they are going and also if the same connections are available from JFK and if they connect with the VS127/128. Put it this way: if I want to get somewhere, I will either take a direct flight or, if that's not possible, take an indirect routing that works best. Hoping people will all take the VS127/128 will depend on the above plus factors such as loyalty, the latter which I think has been severely tested recently.

As others have mentioned, it's also an alternative routing for those wanting to travel to MCO or other parts of Florida and is also the best option for the southern and western states and certain places beyond the USA.


Connections using the VS127/128 look to be a terrible option because of how late the flight gets into JFK. If this flight was used to connect to MCO, you would get there 3-4 hours later than what you would have done with ATL. So I highly doubt many people will use this to connect, they will probably just fly with another airline.
#962929 by mitchja
29 Nov 2021, 20:17
When VS bumped me from the 109 to the 127 for my FLL flights the other week, that pushed my arrival time into FLL from around 19:30 to 22:15.

For a connecting airport I would choose ATL every time especially over JFK as they have made it as simple as possible at ATL to connect between International and Domestic or vice versa. I've done a domestic to International connection in around 15 mins before now at ATL. International to domestic does take longer at ATL but it's still easier than JFK.

JFK can be hit and miss for connecting especially with DL using a mix of T4 & T2 there. It makes things worse when DL also has zero consistency to which destinations use which terminal at JFK. The same destination can and does depart or arrive into either terminal.

When I connected to/from FLL the other week, the departure flight was from T2 but arrival 5 days later was into T4.
#962933 by OCdreamin
30 Nov 2021, 13:50
Several contributors on this site, and Juha Jarvinen's own Tweet, specifically cite the reduction in VS fleet as the major reason for reigning back operations from MAN. I found the following in a saved item from Travel and Aviation, November 2020.

Smaller but more efficient
The Virgin boss admitted that the future fleet of the long-haul airline would come back somewhat smaller than it had been pre-COVID. However, he says that, through the improved efficiencies realized with the recapitalization plan, it will still be able to continue to fly just as much as it has before. Weiss said,

“What’s interesting is, despite the fact that we’ve shrunk from about 46 to around 36, 37 planes, the actual number of sectors that we can fly is exactly the same. That’s based on the efficiency of our operations, our concentration in airports … we’re 20% more efficient off the bat.”
#962935 by 747G-VXLG
30 Nov 2021, 22:00
OCdreamin wrote:Several contributors on this site, and Juha Jarvinen's own Tweet, specifically cite the reduction in VS fleet as the major reason for reigning back operations from MAN. I found the following in a saved item from Travel and Aviation, November 2020.

Smaller but more efficient
The Virgin boss admitted that the future fleet of the long-haul airline would come back somewhat smaller than it had been pre-COVID. However, he says that, through the improved efficiencies realized with the recapitalization plan, it will still be able to continue to fly just as much as it has before. Weiss said,

“What’s interesting is, despite the fact that we’ve shrunk from about 46 to around 36, 37 planes, the actual number of sectors that we can fly is exactly the same. That’s based on the efficiency of our operations, our concentration in airports … we’re 20% more efficient off the bat.”


He’s clearly only talking about LHR. Next summer they will only have 35 planes - we all know how that’s turned out. From 46, they’ve basically lost a quarter of the fleet which has resulted in quite a number of routes being cut - mainly from MAN and at least one from LHR that I know of. So for him to say they can fly the same number of sectors is complete rubbish. They should change that tag line to smaller and more cuts.
#962936 by Janeclar
30 Nov 2021, 22:47
We have a house in South West Florida and we have always travelled MAN to RSW via ATL. During the Winter of 2019/20 the MAN to ATL flights had a large number of passengers linking to cruises - maybe the reduction in cruises has had an impact on the decision?

We travelled to RSW on 9 November via JFK - due to the late flight time MAN to JFK we had to spend a night at JFK. This was inconvenient and expensive and definitely something that we will not repeat.

We are already looking at Aer Lingus. A sad day as we have been VS customers for 30 years.
#962938 by OCdreamin
01 Dec 2021, 10:19
Our MAN-LAX flights were moved back July > Aug (early) > Aug (later) before we accepted LHR departure in December as most likely & convenient. VS have no fewer aircraft right now than at the beginning of this year, during which they were scheduled to ATL, LAX etc. So, in 2022, VS are actually allocating more planes to LHR than in 2021. It is a conscious choice based on prioritisation, not necessity driven by a shortage of planes.
#962941 by VS075
01 Dec 2021, 13:45
747G-VXLG wrote:
OCdreamin wrote:Several contributors on this site, and Juha Jarvinen's own Tweet, specifically cite the reduction in VS fleet as the major reason for reigning back operations from MAN. I found the following in a saved item from Travel and Aviation, November 2020.

Smaller but more efficient
The Virgin boss admitted that the future fleet of the long-haul airline would come back somewhat smaller than it had been pre-COVID. However, he says that, through the improved efficiencies realized with the recapitalization plan, it will still be able to continue to fly just as much as it has before. Weiss said,

“What’s interesting is, despite the fact that we’ve shrunk from about 46 to around 36, 37 planes, the actual number of sectors that we can fly is exactly the same. That’s based on the efficiency of our operations, our concentration in airports … we’re 20% more efficient off the bat.”


He’s clearly only talking about LHR. Next summer they will only have 35 planes - we all know how that’s turned out. From 46, they’ve basically lost a quarter of the fleet which has resulted in quite a number of routes being cut - mainly from MAN and at least one from LHR that I know of. So for him to say they can fly the same number of sectors is complete rubbish. They should change that tag line to smaller and more cuts.


When I mentioned resources, I'm not on about just planes. To fly said planes, you obviously need pilots and cabin crew and it's worth remembering VS made a lot of people redundant or placed on furlough last year. I'm convinced the recent cutbacks both now and for summer 2022 is partly being driven by not having insufficient pilots and cabin crew and nor will there be enough in place come next summer.

Pilots and cabin crew can't just be recruited "off the street" right now and expected to be able to start work on Monday, it takes months to train them up and no doubt longer for any who aren't type rated or have to start from scratch. I also suspect some people who worked as cabin crew prior to COVID-19 have probably decided to leave the industry for good in search of a more stable career or better pay (the starting rates of pay for cabin crew at many airlines nowadays aren't great, something BA knows too well in their battles over the years to get their crew on 'Mixed Fleet' rates and away from the legacy rates of pay). Pilots are a different story, though I follow one ex-Thomas Cook pilot on Twitter who is still not flying over 2 years later and had the bad luck of not being able to start a new flying job he had lined up with BA due to COVID-19.
#962942 by OCdreamin
01 Dec 2021, 15:38
To VS075: I am puzzled why you re-emphasise this as a pure resource matter, which I and other contributors reject.

Of course trained crew are required. You are convinced, but have you any data, or inside information suggesting that all those previously let go have been re-employed by other airlines (unlikely) or found alternative or more rewarding careers? On the lunchtime news a farmer had had applications from pilots for agricultural work.

The point which I've already laboured is Virgin has quit routes from Manchester, including long established ones, to prioritise LHR. That is fact.
And done so without VS co-owner DL, many of its long-haul aircraft currently parked, stepping in to support or protect routes and passengers in the coming year. I don't understand how you can maintain a 'It's not their fault' position.
#962943 by VS075
01 Dec 2021, 17:21
OCdreamin wrote:To VS075: I am puzzled why you re-emphasise this as a pure resource matter, which I and other contributors reject.

Of course trained crew are required. You are convinced, but have you any data, or inside information suggesting that all those previously let go have been re-employed by other airlines (unlikely) or found alternative or more rewarding careers? On the lunchtime news a farmer had had applications from pilots for agricultural work.

The point which I've already laboured is Virgin has quit routes from Manchester, including long established ones, to prioritise LHR. That is fact.
And done so without VS co-owner DL, many of its long-haul aircraft currently parked, stepping in to support or protect routes and passengers in the coming year. I don't understand how you can maintain a 'It's not their fault' position.


I think you've misunderstood me. In no way am I believing it's their fault or they're the innocent party. Far from it! After all, I am one of those that have been affected by the recent changes to the planned 2022 schedule, so why would I willingly swallow the official line?

No, I do not have any inside info and nor did I suggest former employees let go have gone on to work for other airlines, though I did speculate that some may have decided to not return to the industry altogether, and I can understand why. However, I also like to think I'm a bit more informed on how these things work compared to your typical passengers and can read between the lines as to why certain things are happening or not happening.

My beef is that we have seen flights go on sale along with new routes only to then be taken off sale one-by-one, some with more publicity than others. When the CCO openly admits on Twitter within the last week that they don't have enough aircraft to fulfil their planned schedule as originally intended, that confirms my suspicions that they weren't going to have the resources to deliver...or at least not confident of being able to deliver.

My personal view is that it was wrong for VS to open bookings for the routes initially advertised for 2022 only to then pull them citing the reasons they did. If they knew there was going to be a problem, why did they open up for bookings? At what point did it become clear they couldn't fulfil their full schedule as originally advertised?

I must also admit that in my case, if it wasn't for the fact I intended to use points for my trip next April I'd have been very tempted to cancel and go with TUI instead. I bet others have done just that instead of going to LHR.

So yes, you're correct in saying that they are giving priority to LHR and I'm not disputing that as it's plain to see. However, I'm also correct in saying that the cutbacks at MAN and elsewhere are also being driven by resources, otherwise MAN would still be seeing flights to BGI, ATL and LAX next summer. As a MAN regular, I do fear about what messages this sends to the market and the impact the cutbacks will have on consumer confidence.
#962957 by Weaver33
03 Dec 2021, 10:11
According to Travel Weekly, Virgin are set to announce a new US route from Heathrow for summer 2022.

So there is enough capacity to start a new Heathrow route, but not enough capacity to keep Manchester to Los Angeles, Bridgetown or Atlanta? Aircraft are not immovable objects, if they have enough capacity for a new route, they could have kept one of the above routes from Manchester, even if at a temporarily reduced frequency.

If anyone was still defending Virgin and asking for understanding, how do you defend this. It really is the case now that it isn’t that they *cant* operate the routes, they just don’t *want* to.
#962969 by VS075
03 Dec 2021, 13:49
Weaver33 wrote:According to Travel Weekly, Virgin are set to announce a new US route from Heathrow for summer 2022.


Article in question: https://travelweekly.co.uk/news/air/vir ... estination

I'll see what happens. If it does get launched, I'll be disappointed but not surprised.

As for autumn 2022 being back to 2019 capacity, I can see the VS109 on 30/10/2022 is open for bookings, but again I'll believe it when I see it along with the claim in general. If I remember rightly, autumn 2019 (Nov onwards) was MCO, JFK, ATL and BGI, with BOS, LAS and LAX being seasonal.

Also note the article claims MAN-MBJ started last month when the reality was the route didn't start and won't be starting at all this winter. Is there any word yet whether it will start at all next winter?
#963194 by Janeclar
18 Dec 2021, 10:02
For anyone wanting to fly to RSW from the North of England from March 2022 onwards, the Lufthansa (Eurowings) flight via FRA is looking good in terms of timing and price! And it is also available to book earlier than VS.
#963217 by sjp13
20 Dec 2021, 20:41
I have a two leg flight MAN-ATL-FLL return booked for April next year. Obviously, having read here, I am sure this will not happen (and thanks to everyone as I have learned some really useful stuff here!).

I logged on to my booking this evening and notice the first leg has been moved to exactly 24 hours earlier. I cannot see any availability for this or my date now for rebooking so can only assume they have been taken off sale.

When I originally read about MAN-ATL being cancelled for 2022 I thought they may reroute us via JFK or MCO. It would have been our first time in upper and we were really looking forward to it.

Is it official yet that the route is cancelled? If not, there is no point me contacting customer services as they will only deny any knowledge. What are my options as it stands? I got the flights at a good price and would prefer to be re-routed if possible as I doubt I would get such a good price again if I asked for a refund or voucher. Am I being cynical in thinking this is a deliberate move, hoping I would cancel before they were forced to cancel the flights, as they have moved me to a date that also stands no chance of getting off the ground.

Sorry for rambling but thanks in advance for any help ;-)
#963269 by G3FEL
26 Dec 2021, 16:07
Have been flying this route at least twice a year for 5 years now and like many people on here I am frustrated with VA management for their lack of communication about what is going on. We have a trip booked for April 30th - May 21st (MAN-ATL return). The flight still shows as scheduled to fly on my FC App and via my booking ref #, but I know it won’t be going. I decided to join this forum to share what I have found out.

By searching the VA website, I have discovered that the direct MAN-ATL route begins again on January 4th and ends on March 26th but no longer on a daily basis, they will be flying it 3 x times a week (Tues, Thurs, Sat). It begins again on October 30th (increasing to 4 x times per week, Tues, Thurs, Sat, Sun). Probably explains why some people have been bumped to VS127 or back 24/48 hours from original date?

So it would seem that they are effectively suspending the route from April through September 2022 and have known this since my flight disappeared from sale in September 2021. However, on speaking with CS several times and because they have not been informed of the route suspension themselves, even though they can see it is no longer for sale, they cannot/will not move us to another route without charging change fees etc , until the cancellation has been made official.

This is my real bug bear with VA because we have airport parking in the UK and hire car and accommodations in the USA booked that will all need some kind of rearranging due to arrival time(s). On top of this, you would surely think that customers who have already booked and paid for their seats would be the first on the list to choose their best available alternative route!

I can see that the route that we would choose (MAN-JFK-ATL) will be sold out in Premium by the time they get around to telling us, judging by other peoples experience on this forum!!!

As a customer I forgive any Company for unforeseen changes they need to make provided that they communicate quickly and effectively and do their utmost to limit the damage. In VA case, not only are they frustrating and alienating their loyal customers, they are placing their CS employees in the direct line of fire of very unhappy and disgruntled people…….irresponsibility of the highest order on all counts me thinks!!!

If anybody can confirm, help, advise with our situation, then I would be grateful for your help.
Virgin Atlantic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

Itinerary Calendar