Cancelled A340-600 Orders

Originally posted by VS045
There is a fair bit of growth planned this year routewise - ORD, MRU, GLA, Nairobi.

VS.

There must be some slack in the fleet at the moment because of the charters discussed in another thread and also the question of the returning 300's but on the other hand, we all know how well the fleet is utilised at LGW (lack of downtown for repairs)... but will there be enough for the above expansion or to quote from another thread, are they getting used 747's from somewhere to cover in the short term ?

David [?]

I think bringing the A343 back on line is a good move, i am 100% sure they are on a very competitive lease deal. Any slack in the fleet will be taken up by the new routes although the returning A343's will level this out again.

New aircraft would be 120% speculation now, it's time to increase income NOT spend on new aircraft. There's a lot on offer from Airbus & Boeing.

Yeh the 343's are excellent route proving a/c so it is a right move- regardless of what VPort fans believe- to have them back in the fleet.

Not sure just how much connecting traffic VS has at LHR- if it is the LHR factor then carriers such as BA, BD/UA, SQ, QF, AA and so on must all be having the same problem. That would mean the only airline doing really well would be CO with its niche market routes.

Lets be honest- VS has expanded rapidaly in the last couple of years on routes such as SYD, MBY, Havana, NAS, DXB and so on. When you consider the size of VS and the fact that it doesnt recieve any governement funding like the American carriers do- they have done a fantastic job.

[Scrooge]

Originally posted by willd
Yeh the 343's are excellent route proving a/c so it is a right move- regardless of what VPort fans believe- to have them back in the fleet.

Yes they are and in that respect it is good to have the 343 come back.

Not sure just how much connecting traffic VS has at LHR- if it is the LHR factor then carriers such as BA, BD/UA, SQ, QF, AA and so on must all be having the same problem. That would mean the only airline doing really well would be CO with its niche market routes.

For the most part you are talking about apples and oranges

BD has enough problems already.
UA has pulled out of the JFK/LHR market.
SQ and QF do not serve that route either.
Which leaves BA/AA, both of which have massive contracts with major companies, a huge FF base in both cities and both are improving their products both in business and first. VS used to be able to capture the budget business pax with lower prices in UC, but those days are long gone.

CO, yep they went for the smaller markets with direct flights using 752's and it is paying off fo them very well.

Originally posted by Scrooge


For the most part you are talking about apples and oranges

BD has enough problems already.
UA has pulled out of the JFK/LHR market.
SQ and QF do not serve that route either.
Which leaves BA/AA, both of which have massive contracts with major companies, a huge FF base in both cities and both are improving their products both in business and first. VS used to be able to capture the budget business pax with lower prices in UC, but those days are long gone.

CO, yep they went for the smaller markets with direct flights using 752's and it is paying off fo them very well.

I was meaning in general terms. So I wonder if airlines that have a large amount of connecting pax at LHR are seeing droping numbers due to the security issue.

So have QF/NZ/SQ/AA/BA/BD numbers drop on LHR transit as pax select other European airports to transit through. In the case of QF are they seeing an increase in pax from the UK transiting thru Frankfurt instead of LHR.

Edited by Scrooge to clean up the quote.

[Scrooge]

A very good question, one I don't have any info on I am afraid, I guess looking at EF would show part of the story.

The CAA stats would show you actual passenger figures, but nothing on yield. Unless the individual airlines make specific reference to the effect BAA, government policy and business airlines are having on their LHR operations, it will be very difficult to find out.

With LHR actually accounting for a small percentage of their total traffic for the likes of QF/NZ/SQ/AA/UA/CX etc versus VS, it will be difficult to tell from their actions what effects LHR is having on them. BD, as has already been mentioned, is a basket case at the moment and not a clear indication of reductions in transfer traffic changes (for example, I always used to fly BD when connecting, through LHR, but now when I have to connect through LHR I choose KLM instead). And BA has so many problems from strikes, lost T4 baggage issues, reduction in baggage allowances etc, that drops in traffic for them would not necessarily indicate it was LHR related, just general BA incompetence.

AF

Guess what would be interesting would be to see the numbers transfering at LHR (regardless of carrier) prior to security restrictuons and post.

The A343s are perfect for a lot of the expansion and thinnner routes at the moment(if only they could be fitted with newer products;)). However, with a lot of other carriers upgrading their product now, VS could be left behind in a couple of years (bar LHR 744s/A346s).

VS.