BA to start LCY-JFK

In message <WSh*MGw6r@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 11:08:08 on Sun,
3 Feb 2008, Theo Markettos <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
>> http://www.britishairways.com/travel/bapress/public/en_gb
>> and
>> http://www.londoncityairport.com/index.php?mode=news&action=showStory&sId=1074
>
>Using all-business class A318s. Interesting. Are they leasing them from
>someone else, as they don't seem to have any in their fleet?

They bought two, being delivered this year presumably.
--
Roland Perry
 >> Stay informed about: BA to start LCY-JFK 

"Theo Markettos" <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in message
news:WSh*MGw6r@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...
> Graham Harrison <edward.obvious.harrison1.RemoveThis@btinternet.obvious.com> wrote:
>> http://www.britishairways.com/travel/bapress/public/en_gb
>> and
>> http://www.londoncityairport.com/index.php?mode=news&action=showStory&sId=1074
>
> Using all-business class A318s. Interesting. Are they leasing them from
> someone else, as they don't seem to have any in their fleet?

And they are too big to take off from the short runway at LCY with a full
load.

So they are going to have to land at SNN or PKI [1] to refuel.

Doesn't seem very sensible to me

tim

[1] This is my guess, as I assume that other airports are going to be too
busy for such a move.
 >> Stay informed about: BA to start LCY-JFK 

In message <60pek0F1s55foU1 DeleteThis @mid.individual.net>, at 22:31:58 on Mon, 4
Feb 2008, "tim (not at home)" <tims_new_home DeleteThis @yahoo.co.uk> remarked:
>> Using all-business class A318s. Interesting. Are they leasing them from
>> someone else, as they don't seem to have any in their fleet?
>
>And they are too big to take off from the short runway at LCY with a full
>load.
>
>So they are going to have to land at SNN or PKI [1] to refuel.

BA says they are going to refuel at Shannon, so the question is really
whether or not the flight time is especially sensitive, or is the draw
the fact that you don't have to haul yourself all the way to Heathrow or
Stansted and also avoid all the checkin/security hassle at those places
(BA are saying 15 minute checking at LCY).
--
Roland Perry
 >> Stay informed about: BA to start LCY-JFK 

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 06:15:42 +0000, Roland Perry <roland.TakeThisOut@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>(BA are saying 15 minute checking at LCY).

Which will be easy to achieve without any additional work. Clever.

(VLM's standard checkin at LCY is 15 minutes, and the security queue
is never IMX long enough for that to be an issue)

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.
 >> Stay informed about: BA to start LCY-JFK 

"Roland Perry" <roland.TakeThisOut@perry.co.uk> wrote in message
news:np0Id1AO8$pHFApm@perry.co.uk...
> In message <60pek0F1s55foU1.TakeThisOut@mid.individual.net>, at 22:31:58 on Mon, 4 Feb
> 2008, "tim (not at home)" <tims_new_home.TakeThisOut@yahoo.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Using all-business class A318s. Interesting. Are they leasing them
>>> from
>>> someone else, as they don't seem to have any in their fleet?
>>
>>And they are too big to take off from the short runway at LCY with a full
>>load.
>>
>>So they are going to have to land at SNN or PKI [1] to refuel.
>
> BA says they are going to refuel at Shannon, so the question is really
> whether or not the flight time is especially sensitive, or is the draw the
> fact that you don't have to haul yourself all the way to Heathrow or
> Stansted and also avoid all the checkin/security hassle at those places
> (BA are saying 15 minute checking at LCY).
> --
> Roland Perry

The time penalty of the stop is likely to be about 1 hour. With the LHR 2
hour check in plus the time it takes to get to Heathrow if (yes, IF) you
work in the city and, more particularly, Canary Wharf the time taken to get
to LHR and the check in requirement compared to the 1 hour stopover means
(in my view) that LCY has a serious time advantage. Now, if they get
*really* clever and choose Shannon they have a permanent US immigration
facility so during the refuelling you can get that bit out of the way and
arrive in New York without having to join the immigration queues - even more
time saving.

I reckon BA have really got a potential winner here.
 >> Stay informed about: BA to start LCY-JFK 

On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 20:09:07 -0000, "Graham Harrison"
<edward.obvious.harrison1 RemoveThis @btinternet.obvious.com> wrote:

>The time penalty of the stop is likely to be about 1 hour. With the LHR 2
>hour check in plus the time it takes to get to Heathrow if (yes, IF) you
>work in the city and, more particularly, Canary Wharf the time taken to get
>to LHR and the check in requirement compared to the 1 hour stopover means
>(in my view) that LCY has a serious time advantage. Now, if they get
>*really* clever and choose Shannon they have a permanent US immigration
>facility so during the refuelling you can get that bit out of the way and
>arrive in New York without having to join the immigration queues - even more
>time saving.

Indeed. TBH, I would go for a longer journey if I could use LCY
instead of LHR. Long-haul via AMS from LCY is already attractive.

>I reckon BA have really got a potential winner here.

Agreed.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.
 >> Stay informed about: BA to start LCY-JFK