flatlander

All that crap I am ordering from Amazon that comes from outside the UK for 1-2 day delivery has to get here somehow

tjcxx

It's 3 flights most days now, 2 with passengers, one cargo only. AA has one passenger flight, and occasionally (as today) a cargo one too.

EF should give a fairly good picture if you check shortly before departure. All those non-status passengers should have a seat by then.

I've wondered what percentage cost increase there is running a full-service passenger carrying flight over a cargo only flight. I imagine it's not huge, given that ground-handling, flight crew costs, etc. are there for cargo flights just the same. It could be that the passenger load doesn't have to be very big to pay its way, if the flight were going anyway with cargo.

u01sss3

I had a look at the loadings on a VS flight the other day. 26 pax to JFK on an A350, none in the front.

Swanhunter

Based on the cargo prices, would imagine they are profitable on a variable cost basis at the very least.

districtRich

On my IAD-LHR-IAD flights a couple of weeks ago I was in premium economy both ways and there were about 5 of us in that cabin on the way to LHR and maybe 7 or 8 on the way back to IAD. Looked like maybe 30 or so people in Y and only single digits in J and this was on the A350. Service by the crew was fantastic and tons of empty space around you!

itsmeitisss

Fiancee of a very good friend of mine flew from Boston to LHR on a BA A350 and he was the only passenger.

Farringdon

I flew JFK-LHR a couple of weeks ago and there were about 60 pax. The crew said that about average for that route. I thought it was pretty good, all things considered, although they were only running 1 flight a day at that point. Perhaps those sort of numbers (plus cargo) get them to the point where they decided to add a second flight.

CKBA

Avoiding the "been there, done that" - yes, the loads are light (about 30 on my TATLs - mostly in Y), and as noted it's the cargo that makes the money now. Prices rose from about $2.50/Kg to $7.50/Kg for cargo at the start of the pandemic - not sure what they are now, but take an average pax and luggage, that's and equivalent of $750 for 100Kg one way... somewhat lucrative.

Jagboi

Having few passengers actually helps in some ways, as there are no passenger bags that need to be carried, so that space can be used for paying cargo. The amount of cargo that can be carried per flight is much greater now there is little checked luggage.

allturnleft

I wonder what crystal ball experts think about the loosening of arrival conditions in the US. Given its crazy handling of the pandemic I am surprised it hasn’t happened already.

It must be very few people who can cope with the restrictions on both sides of the pond to be able to make the trip

Sounds like empty A350s are a pleasure to fly!

Farringdon

Mostly expat families with young children on my flight. Zero (or virtually zero) tourism, and no business travel either.

Flying Doctor

Nothing going to happen I think to the ability to go to and from the USA until 4th November (cannot think why......) and even then I think it will be slow. The trunk routes will survive on cargo (which are the main ports that US nationals can currently travel into within the USA) but the other destinations are much more dependent on actual passengers. They are not coming back any time soon.
If we took LHR JFK as the most profitable route on BAs network and said how long to get back to 10 flights a day (even as 787's not 777-300's or equivalents) then you are looking at a very long time to get back there......
FD.

dynamiteReady

Was on a BA flight, LHR to VCE yesterday... It was rammed. One of the busiest flights I can remember taking. Just about every seat was taken. It was like a Ryanair flight. A summary can be found here, if your interested:
​​​​https://quixical.com/channel/66056c1...c82ed/messages

They're probably operating at a loss overall, but if airlines have to book slots at certain airports to avoid losing them (which I'd read was a common practice, somewhere), and are making more money than usual on other flights (packed flights in Europe), then there might be some logic in doing what the OP has observed.

Pure speculation though, I'll admit.

GF2B

Speaking only anecdotally, the Saturday evening JFK-LHR on a 12F 777 was reasonably busy upfront. F looked just about half full, 40/48 in J, but much lighter down the back.

13901

The flights per se, as mentioned by Willie and Luis Gallego in the last H1 call, are cash positive - ergo they are making money.

However, overall the situation is of course in the red. BA is flying roughly 1/3 of the passengers they used to fly: let's assume that this translates to revenue (it doesn't, but let's assume). This would mean that, instead of making £100, they'll be earning £33. Unfortunately costs haven't declined by as much - from memory they declined by 55% as there are some fixed costs that are hard to wriggle out of (and the fuel hedging fiasco). So, if before BA spent £85 (giving a margin of roughly £15), nowadays they'll spend somewhere around £38, which yields a net loss of £5. And this is assuming that their unit revenue is the same as it was in 2019, which clearly it won't be as they're flying mostly short hauls. And the (unfairly harsh IMHO) quarantine policy enacted by HMG will just worsen things.

Bottom line: H2 2020 and 2021 will be even harder, in my view, than H1 2020.