Flybe pull out of LBA - LGW route

Another one bites the dust..
n(
link

That stinks big time, Mike. Travel options out of LGW and LHR becoming evermore limited, prices from MAN going through the roof - it just makes life harder and harder for us lucky souls who reside in God's Own County (and thereabouts) to take advantage of the routes we'd like to fly.

Following on from the recent talk of flying via AMS, let's just hope the bods at Schiphol (unlike Gatwick) have the good sense to keep their fees at a competitive level.

Was the service using a Dash 8 or the Embraer jet aircraft?

Just thinking that this may have impacted upon the 'regional aircraft' fees.

Following on from the recent talk of flying via AMS, let's just hope the bods at Schiphol (unlike Gatwick) have the good sense to keep their fees at a competitive level.

Funny you mention this, as driving past the Kremlin in Leeds centre this morning a huge Billboard advert for KLM...
"Fly to over 20 destinations in the USA from Leeds.."

Me thinks they are targeting a wave of stranded pax... :w

Looks like it, doesn't it? Let's just hope that prices ex-AMS stay sensible.

LBA seems doomed to become nothing more than yet another budget airline hub, which seems a shame. No air-link from London to the largest financial centre outside of said capital? Crazy...

This country is crying out for a direct rail link to Heathrow from places like Leeds, Manchester, Nottingham and Birmingham.

[mitchja]

I just hope BA pick up on this and fill their gap in their timetables for departures ex LGW to MAN. There's nothing between 10:50 and 17:40 n(

That stinks big time, Mike. Travel options out of LGW and LHR becoming evermore limited, prices from MAN going through the roof - it just makes life harder and harder for us lucky souls who reside in God's Own County (and thereabouts) to take advantage of the routes we'd like to fly.

Correct, I just looked at going to Kansas in April from Manchester and it's a small fortune just in economy!

I thought the whole idea of a hub airport and lets face it LGW is a hub is that you have lots of smaller flights feeding into the big flights

[mitchja]

The afternoon I flew down to LGW from MAN before I went to Florida, there's where less than 40 pax on the BA2905 737 operated flight.

The mid-morning BA flight back up a week later, however, was nearly full.

Surely the only reason for them pulling out would be economic. If the route was profitable it would still be there.

The old adage "use it or loose it" comes to mind.

Miopyk 8D

[mitchja]

I was looking earlier today for connection flights to LGW. Total cost from BA.com was £76.00, taxes + extras where £72.00 so the base fare = £2 each way

The increase tax + extras part of domestic fares must be having an impact, especially when you pay APD twice for domestic flights unlike international flights.

Well We have two different trips booked to go down ( one booked and paid for last week n( ), one is economy and the other trip is business for the extra baggage. On top of that we intended to fly in from New York next June to LHR its a late arrival, so we needed to nip accross to LGW and stay at the Hilton ready for our flight up to Leeds, becuase we would get there so late I booked a King Suite for two nights so we could kip most of the next day, £450 non refundable. Then two entries for No1 lounge.

I am hoping they will refund me the £600 for flights and I can book a BA from LGW to MAN instead.

My trip to London next month was for my birthday so thats two return Gatwick Express tickets wasted and another No:1 lounge.

Anyway it would have been nice for Flybe to have let us know.

Lots of serious stuff going on in the world right now though and so many with disaster to cope with so I will suck it up and get something else sorted.

I'm not surprised by this given my only experience(s).

LBA-LGW 9 Mar
LGW-LBA 18 Mar

Less than 30 pax in total over the two flights.

Upon landing I asked the taxi driver if his firm got much from the flight as I couldn't see how it survives which is when we discovered they were pulling the route.

Such a shame but if it's not going to make money then it has to go.

Someone mentioned it before but a direct train Leeds (and other major cities) into LHR is really needed. It's such a ballache for us to get to LHR/LGW from Harrogate and with everyone trying to funnel us though these hubs it makes planning a trip awkward.

I am afraid that people are right, the decision will have been economical. If no one is using it, then the airline will pull the plug. I would be interested to see how many people use the flight to 'connect' to long haul flights versus a weekend down in London. The issue is that if the majority of users are going fo a weekend down south then I would imagine the plane is priced out of the market versus the car or train.

THe only other way this route would have survived is if someone, read a government quango or something.....isnt there a Yorkshire Development Agency...subsidised the route. Slight OT but this is exactly what the Maryland State Govt do with their direct BWI-LHR service by BA. It is hugely subsidised and as a result the service stays.

I'm not sure about the loads vs. day of the week willd but if I wanted to get to the centre of London from here then the train is the way to go. A flight the LGW doesn't help at all for that sort of trip. It was always going to be a struggle for this route. If BMI couldn't get LBA-LHR to work then this route had little chance. I remember years ago BA used to do LBA-LGW and that didn't last long.

Talk of LBA-LCY is rearing it's head again but as I say, versus the train into central London it's not worth the hassle of getting to airport, doing security etc. It's just as quick if not quicker to get the train.

It only a problem getting to a London airport from here! I've made the trip to LHR in a car in 3.5 hrs before but we timed it perfectly and the roads were nearly dead. (left Harrogate 7.30pm on a Friday night). Trouble is that left us overnighting which isn't always a viable option.

Anyway, I have LBA-AMS-LHR-LAS to try out in a few weeks, that (LBA-AMS-LHR) is just about the quickest way into LHR for me now anyway

Just did a quick check on the 2010 pax. totals.
LBA-London 50,769
LBA-AMS 223,470

Could it be that northern residents have realised that London airways have been ripping them off?

Just did a quick check on the 2010 pax. totals.
LBA-London 50,769
LBA-AMS 223,470

Could it be that northern residents have realised that London airways have been ripping them off?

For us Northerners I think it's more that AMS is a city break destination you would fly to from LBA. If you wanted a city break in London the train is far easier for most.

Two airlines fly LBA-AMS.

Obviously it has easier connections for those to/from the Far East who need to be in the Leeds area (something I witness a lot on KLM flights is the connections from the East).

Result for me got full refund £1100 as on trip was Econ plus for extra luggage. Decided on train in 1st for my Birthday London trip. For my trip stateside a train down, we land in LHR really late on the way back so I booked two nights at LGW Hilton in a king suite non refundable so decided to fly BA in EC plus £28 extra luggage to MAN and an exec transfer home to Harrogate. Turns out although I lost my lounge access money at LBA and Gatwick express returns I made a total saving of £480.

I switched from trains to planes because of the diabolical service on NatExpress trains and twice having to sit on the floor in 1st and having to wear my coffee part of the trip home.

Anyway all resolved its just lucky I actually love travelling.

Just did a quick check on the 2010 pax. totals.
LBA-London 50,769
LBA-AMS 223,470

Could it be that northern residents have realised that London airways have been ripping them off?

That's sobering statistic Bill and one our politicians should read. They keep their heads up their a***s on this matter, believing trains work, but the numbers show the truth and that is we're losing business overseas.

I still hope this current shower realize that transport is important and do something other than the promise of a hugely expensive slightly faster train that doesn't even go near Heathrow in twenty years is actually necessary!

Just did a quick check on the 2010 pax. totals.
LBA-London 50,769
LBA-AMS 223,470

Could it be that northern residents have realised that London airways have been ripping them off?

That's sobering statistic Bill and one our politicians should read. They keep their heads up their a***s on this matter, believing trains work, but the numbers show the truth and that is we're losing business overseas.

I still hope this current shower realize that transport is important and do something other than the promise of a hugely expensive slightly faster train that doesn't even go near Heathrow in twenty years is actually necessary!

Sorry Slinky but I totally disagree. To get from Leeds to Amsterdam it's fly or boat. To get to London there's a multitude of rail services.
I'd say these figures clearly show that where there are good rail connections over 1hour ish flight routes there is next to no appetite for flying.
Like it or not, but for domestic or near neighbour travel the transport mode worldwide is inexorably heading towards high speed rail. This is even starting to encringe on longer distance travel. Have a look at the high speed railway opening between Shanghai and Beijing in June. This will make the journey sub-4 hour compared to a flight time of around 2 hours and at an average speed of 200MPH.
Personally I believe it's now time to embrace high speed rail where possible.

Sorry Slinky but I totally disagree. To get from Leeds to Amsterdam it's fly or boat. To get to London there's a multitude of rail services.

NP - I'd be interested to know whether AMS traffic is O&D or connecting - that is closer to my point. I don't disagree that if you want to visit London the train is better, but if you're travelling long haul, would you train to London, hike to Heathrow and then fly, or just go to AMS?

Unfortunately the stats. collected by CAA do not give final destinations. They are only sector figures. But why would vast numbers from LBA be taking city breaks in AMS rather than say Rome (traffic only 35,000).
Paris figures are reasonably high at 73359 - but that could also include connecting.

Of course it's not just LBA - there are other large numbers flying from regionals to AMS:

Code: Select allLONDON CITY     367217
LUTON           234411
STANSTED        278137
ABERDEEN        247354
BELFAST INTER    89909
BIRMINGHAM      427004
BRISTOL         223878
CARDIFF WALES   125118
DONCASTER SHEFF  40692
DURHAM TEES VAL 101592
EAST MIDLANDS   101119
EDINBURGH       494852
EXETER           35010
GLASGOW         260097
HUMBERSIDE      113714
LEEDS BRADFORD  223470
LIVERPOOL       346134
MANCHESTER      437279
NEWCASTLE       243886
NORWICH         121308
SOUTHAMPTON      91923

The London AMS figures could also include onward/return transits:

Code: Select allGATWICK         548352
HEATHROW       1333124

(Is there an easier way to tabulate a list? - a [tab] code perhaps?)

I'm not sure comparing LBA-LGW against LBA-AMS is fair. LGW is well known for mostly being used for leisure routes and compared to AMS I'm certain it has less long haul connections especially East bound.
If it was a comparison LBA-LHR against LBA-AMS then fair enough. Personally I think BMI screwed that route up with pricing that was just crackers, they really tried to take the pee.

The original figure I gave was LBA-London (combined number of LBA-LHR & LBA-LGW) but only a small number was LHR.
Perhaps the lack of a viable service to LHR resulted in much greater use of AMS