Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > British Airways | Executive Club
Reload this Page >

Crew&Management Gossip [New route LHR-TPE-PER]

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Crew&Management Gossip [New route LHR-TPE-PER]

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 22, 2016, 5:37 am
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: London
Programs: BA GGL / GfL
Posts: 3,261
I'd be shocked if this routing came to fruition.
The number of aircraft tied up on such a route alone would make it questionable in terms of viability and with Qantas strongly rumoured to be looking at Perth > London direct once the B787's come on stream, BA would have to offer very competitive fares for the Perth contingent to consider going via TPE to reach London.

Pilot37
Pilot37 is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 5:43 am
  #17  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: London
Programs: Many. Too many. I came here to cut them down. I failed.
Posts: 2,999
Would be the oddest possible new route I would imagine BA could mention.

OK, there is no TPE-PER direct flight currently, but there is a daily LHR-BKK-TPE on Eva and China Airlines are relaunching their LHR services (non stop) when they get their new planes (350/787 - can't remember which).

A one stop to Perth on a very indirect routing? Nah. BA would be better plying their 787's non stop, or resurrecting the route that was more than just rumours - LHR-CGK-PER-CGK-LHR
Sam Bee is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 5:49 am
  #18  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: London
Programs: BAEC Silver
Posts: 772
Expect to hear of a new route soon, however. Although it definitely won't be TPE.

Last edited by Down Low; Sep 22, 2016 at 6:46 am
Down Low is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 5:55 am
  #19  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: UK
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 12,258
Originally Posted by Down Low
Expect to hear of a new route soon, however. Although it definitely won't be TPE.
Long haul - and not North America?????
mikeyfly is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 5:55 am
  #20  
Original Poster
Hilton Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: ±38,000 feet
Programs: LH HON, BA GGL, AF Plat, EK Plat
Posts: 6,428
Originally Posted by Down Low
Expect to hear of a new route soon, however. Although it definitely won't be TPE.
You naughty teaser
nufnuf77 is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 5:59 am
  #21  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,770
Well this is what I've heard...
Attached Images  
Ldnn1 is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 6:01 am
  #22  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: UK
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 12,258
I'd prefer LHR-TPE-OGG myself
mikeyfly is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 6:05 am
  #23  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Programs: BA Gold / Hilton Diamond / IHG Diamond Ambassador / Marriot Bonvoy Gold
Posts: 2,533
Is the great circle route not LHR TPE/SEL BNE SYD or MEL? I would have though that would be a better option?

I would not have though BA stood a cat in hells chance of eating into the QR EK and EY markets out of OZ.
binman is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 6:10 am
  #24  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gloucestershire
Programs: BA Gold (ex-GGL, maybe future Silver), Hilton Diamond
Posts: 6,199
Non-stop PER would work but it looks like QF will get there first.

A second daily KUL might work if MH scales back LHR when it's sold its A380s and BA tags on KUL-PER at the opposite end of the day from the MH flights.
Cymro is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 6:12 am
  #25  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Glasgow
Programs: BA Gold, QF NB
Posts: 675
On paper LHR-TPE-PER doesn't seem viable. As others have mentioned it is quite a bit of a diversion to the direct distance and there isn't a sizeable Taiwanese population in PER which would help the O&D numbers. Yes it would be a monopoly on the PER-TPE route but there just isn't enough demand between the two cities. There is LHR-PER demand and I assume for LHR-TPE also but without much demand for TPE-PER BA would be better off just serving LHR-TPE. If TPE-PER was a sizeable enough market it would already be served by either CI or BR who would be able to provide connections to North America and Asia as well as Europe. I'd say there is more chance of BA launching LHR-TPE-HNL (which certainly isn't going to happen!) than LHR-TPE-PER.

I do think one day PER will see BA service again but it will either be a non-stop LHR-PER or via SIN, KUL or CGK as they are more direct than TPE and even though there is already service from these cities to PER (8x daily SIN, 5x daily KUL, 4x weekly CGK) there is much more demand between the cities (from both ends).

Originally Posted by Cymro
Non-stop PER would work but it looks like QF will get there first.

A second daily KUL might work if MH scales back LHR when it's sold its A380s and BA tags on KUL-PER at the opposite end of the day from the MH flights.
It does seem more and more likely that QF will launch PER-LHR although I think the flight could originate in SYD or MEL first and the domestic sector depart from the SYD/MEL international terminal as even though there is enough O&D, QF would be relying on a decent amount of connecting passenger from the east coast and at the moment the domestic - international transfer at PER is quite time consuming as there is no airside transfer as QF domestic flights arrive into T3/T4 which is on the other side of the airport to the international T1 (so think of a landside T5 - T4 transit at LHR as a rough equivalent).

With your second point I agree with you - I think that would be the best case scenario for BA. If MH scaled back their LHR ops then a second daily LHR-KUL could work with a PER tag on. A midnight departure PER-KUL and a morning departure KUL-LHR could in theory provide feed from KUL for the evening east coast TATL flights - KUL-LHR-JFK is only 400 miles shorter than KUL-HKG-JFK.

Last edited by perthflyer; Sep 22, 2016 at 6:29 am
perthflyer is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 6:22 am
  #26  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Programs: QF Platinum & Lifetime Gold
Posts: 1,340
Originally Posted by mikeyfly
Wow great news if true - after years of reduced services to Oz. Am I right in thinking there used to be twice daily to SYD and once to MEL ? All 747s ?
There did.

I caught the last BA service out of MEL on 31 March 2006, more than 10 years ago.

I believe it was BA 17/18 but can't remember the flight number for sure.
QF Lad is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 6:22 am
  #27  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Programs: Mucci des Hommes Magiques et Magnifiques
Posts: 19,094
Some of us know when to keep our mouths shut.
Can I help you is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 6:43 am
  #28  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Programs: Some
Posts: 5,252
If BA were to launch LHR-TPE-PER over other Asia routes then I think it's a sign of the level of strategic thinking of the current management team rather than anything else...
lost_in_translation is online now  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 6:45 am
  #29  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK London / Salisbury
Programs: BA GGL, CCR, LTG
Posts: 542
Originally Posted by Can I help you
Some of us know when to keep our mouths shut.
Would me much more fun if you didn't (although potentially career limiting)
brentford77 is offline  
Old Sep 22, 2016, 6:49 am
  #30  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 1,076
Originally Posted by Ldnn1
It would be quite an odd one. LHR-TPE-MEL would seem to make more sense as it's much more 'on the way':

LHR-PER = 9,009 mi
LHR-TPE-PER = 10,027 mi = 11.3% diversion

whereas
LHR-MEL = 10,503 mi
LHR-TPE-MEL = 10,671 mi = only 1.6% diversion

ETA: Having said that, I see there are no existing TPE-PER flights, whereas China Airlines fly TPE-MEL (with QF codeshare), so I guess BA may be attracted by a monopoly route.
I think DXB-BKK-SYD on EK is also a significant diversion but it's been out there for many years.
mec72 is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.