skipness1E

There are wayyyyyy more conveninent ways to fly GLA/EDI-NYC than via a two stop slow service!

Kumulani

LGA is undergoing a huge redevelopment right now. It's getting a brand new terminal to replace the dump that is there now, and an AirTrain that will connect it to the subway. Even putting that aside though, the whole idea of LGA is that you're not spending much time at the airport, you're just getting there when you need to for your flight so crappy facilities shouldn't be a huge deal. LGA is quicker by taxi to Manhattan than JFK and EWR, and are that many people on BA1 connecting to public transit or partner airlines? In my experience most New Yorkers prefer to use LGA when possible over the other airports due to its compactness and proximity to Manhattan.

Is NJ Transit from EWR really that much better than LIRR from JFK? I can't say I've noticed much of a difference myself, and I love the discount opportunities coming from JFK (10-trip AirTrain MetroCard, LIRR CityTicket fare on weekends).

Nicoolio

Foreign airlines can fly into LGA -- Both AC and WS do.

Interestingly the perimeter rule doesn't apply to private aircraft, Saturdays or flights to DEN.

chornedsnorkack

And that Saturday exception... LCY also has a closed time in weekend.
When, if ever, can a plane legally fly LCY-LGA? Vice versa?
Can a CS100 with, say, 36 Club World seats at 2-2 also fly Toronto island to LCY?

makin'miles

Perhaps a Saturday morning LCY-SNN-LGA, and then a Saturday evening LGA-LCY. However, Saturday flights likely aren't ideal for business travellers.

The runway at Toronto Island is not long enough to accommodate jets, and jet traffic at the airport has been strongly opposed by a lot of residents in the area... LGA is probably more likely (although not that likely at all, IMO).

My guess is that BA either can the service, or move it from LHR to a location with strong premium demand, but a limited number of economy travellers. I'd think they could fill a daily service from somewhere like White Plains-HPN, but if they'd do that, they'd really have to ensure that corporate customers know that its an option.

Its also possible that, even if its just breaking even on the current route, its important enough to major corporate clients that they'll maintain it.

UKtravelbear

The earliest a flight can land and LCY on a Sunday is 12.30 PM. The latest it can take off on a Saturday is 1pm - And a departure time would have to also fit in with the operating times of the SNN pre clearance otherwise what would be the point.

As to Billy Bishop Airport - there was a proposal from Porter to use CS100 Jets (the same as earlier mentioned that can and does operate from LCY) but that needed a 5-600m lengthening of the runway and Porter went about proposing that in such a cack handed way that it basically sunk it's own proposal.

And as for suggestions to have it land ot LGA or other NY State airports - why would BA want to open yet another base for a single flight a day with all the costs associated with that and likely making it an even less premium service.

email2markt

Love the idea of this flight and have always wanted to fly it, but I feel it is increasingly a quirky/eccentric choice of travel (not knocking it, i love quirky!). However, I would imagine BA would rather that BA1 was aspirational with broad appeal.

I'd like BA1 for a newer unique service. I'd love BA to go experimental green, maybe in a few years when technology has caught up... even something very small, zero emissions, business only, eg LCY to Paris/Amsterdam, Cambridge to Gothenburg, or domestic, even if it was a massive loss leader. Perhaps the successor to the Zunum Aero (pre Airbus E-Thrust). I would think electric would be quieter, and corporates lap up anything green at the moment.

mec72

+1 for LGA - it is convenient, and I think a lot of the current BA1 traffic is point to point.

LHR-SNN-JFK would have zero appeal for me.

cvm0093

To OP I don't think many people will like seeing the Concorde Name associated with the A318, it's already one heck of a downgrade on a sentimental point of view.

Although it's losing maybe it might be worth a second cabin and reducing the 'club' that they on it. Maybe WTP or something similar but enhanced. Although the Shannon is quite good maybe route via another country to fill up the plane but all had it's ups and downs whicever way you think about it.

frb98mf

It wouldn't be via SNN - the only reason it currently goes that way is because the A318 can't get out of LCY with a full enough fuel tank to make it over the Atlantic. As some have mentioned, the benefit of the pre-clearance is minimal for frequent travellers who have Global Entry, and now most ESTA-users also have a much faster experience. At some point there is talk of adding a pre-clearance area at LHR (either T5C or when they get round to building it, T5D/T3A), which coupled with Crossrail, will kill off CWLCY for good, if that hasn't already done the job.

APUBleed

Can I just say I have posted on many different forums over the years (mostly around other interest/topic areas) and I'm definitely impressed/surprised at the extensive and thoughtful discussion that has taken place in this thread. I didn't expect it to receive the response it has.

Will be interesting to see what BA do with this run going forward. They've nearly got 10 years out of it so I have to give some acknowledgement for it - and I will remain one of the most memorable flights I've ever taken - but with light passenger loads (I believe the publicly accessible numbers have it at about 50%) and reason to believe it might further decline in future (e.g., as others have mentioned new rail infrastructure; decreased value of SNN pre-clearance) it feels like the service might be slowly reaching the end of its life.

If some of the suggestions in this thread keep the service viable in the future (e.g., CS100 so it is a direct flight or reducing the schedule with the A318) then that would personally be my first preference because for some the airport location and quick transit do seem very important. I only would suggest it heads to LHR (with some tweaks) if this market is now too small and the alternative is it being completely canned. While slots are an issue, a high load factor of J could lead to more revenue (not sure about margin on such a long and thin route) than a short European or Domestic route (i.e., BA could stand to make more money with this service than with an existing slot).

I guess you (or BA) could think "why bother?" - why not just have the BA1 market fill in the empty J or F seats from LHR. I suppose my thoughts about the differentiation/purpose of this service (besides the emotional attachment/novelty as an av-geek and potential marketing value of having such a service) is that it is meant to truly provide the best J service between London and New York such that those who might be eyeing competitors think twice (i.e., I would hope and expect this service to bring some business from VA/DL LHR services rather than just have people switch from other BA LHR services).

Concorde was about speed, yes - but the way people describe the experience flying this aircraft it wasn't just about speed. It was about the on-board dining experience, and it was about the people you met on the plane/exclusivity of the service. I'm sure BA would do their due diligence about whether it's appropriate to use the Concorde brand (or maybe not - I can't say the "Concorde Breakfast Room" is anything particularly special). But personally I don't see it as that cheap of a move because a 32J direct service to New York in 2018 (and beyond) could actually provide a better service on almost every level than Concorde except speed.

OpenSky

I won't be horrid for much longer. Renovation in progress. It may take 3-5 years, but the old airport will essentially be torn down Work going on presently. Project approved just before T took office with Obama infrastructure funds.

I personally avoid flying to LGA, but wouldn't mind when the work is all done. Its currently a construction zone.

Lolbert

I used to do BA1/2 once or twice a month but I no longer do because:

1. Global Entry takes the stress out of the JFK arrival so no need to spend an extra hour getting there
2. TPs the same as LHR>JFK
3. The automated immigration machines at T5 means less likelihood of queues vs the certainty of quick immigration at LCY
4. I found that BA2 was invariably very bumpy such that a good night's sleep was unlikely. A 747 from JFK is a better ride
5. No chance of getting a diversion to LGW on the JFK>LHR which is more than a total PITA!

WorldLux

+ having another outstation

And how likely is it for the BA1/2 to still be attractive to the Canary Wharf Crowd in two years time when Heathrow is just one crossrail journey away?

Alfie007

I’ve flown on the LCY/NYC service only twice. The first time was not that long after it had first been launched. It definitely felt a step up from regular Club. Remember the meals from top London Borough Market restaurant, Roast? The service on board was amazing and I really enjoyed the whole experience as a leisure passenger. Without the noticeable enhancements over Club, it makes it a difficult expense to justify - for those who pay for their ticket. For everyone else (the majority), maybe it’s just not so convenient any more.