HFHFFlyer

I assume that, if Israel and Iran end up exchanging direct and unconstrained hostilities, there will be some immediate impact on BA and OW operations:

Abu Dhabi
Amman
Bahrain
Dubai
Doha
Kuwait
Riyadh
Tel Aviv

could all be unsafe to fly to. There will be knock on effects for SIN (already difficult because of Russia)

In extremis QR may have to stop operations.

What level of contingency planning is currently going on?

This is a situation that could explode at any moment. Aside from the terrible human cost, its effect on aviation will be very significant.

jmd

I think you’ve been reading too many breathless articles in the media (many of whom have been predicting world war 3 every other week for the past 6 months).

MJA

Qantas have announced that the PER-LHR direct flight will start routing through SIN to have the legs to avoid the area.

lost_in_translation

I've tried this argument with the Risk department at work that has been blocking connecting in the entire Middle East since last year. Sadly it didn't work...

BahrainLad

Having lived through Gulf Wars I & II, BA maintained service to Bahrain throughout all bar about 2-3 days. As a result of what happened in KWI in 1990, in 2003 crew slipped in LCA and flights down to the Gulf were done as a return trip with a new crew. Aircraft took a very southerly route down the Red Sea and then across Saudi. A lot more fuel used yes, but nothing really to worry about.

LondonAussie

QF9 (PER-LHR) will now stop in Singapore for refuelling due to the longer flight path. The return flight QF10 from LHR to Perth is still able to fly non-stop.

HFHFFlyer

The only person who’s mentioned WW3 on this thread is you. FWIW I don’t think the conflict will escalate beyond a limited exchange of pre warned hostilities. It will be largely performative. But anyone who takes the trouble to read modern history will recognise the marginal risk of things escalating out of control. In such circumstances a larger regional conflict is a possibility.

But hey, don’t worry about such nuances.

orbitmic

I think the question is legitimate, but also impossible to answer. I think FT overwhelmingly overestimates the role of airlines in deciding how to deal with such situations. The most likely constraints will come from states (either in the form of public decisions or quite possibly as part of close door discussions between airline reps and government officials who will tell them in fairly specific terms what they can or cannot do. Airlines then retain the possibility to go beyond such advice but not really to be bolder than they are asked.

same will apply to many other trade and transport sectors, not least maritime.

jmd

It was not intended to be a childish or crass comment. I have family connections in Israel and am acutely familiar with the situation. I also have a history degree. Armed with that knowledge, I do not think there is any remotely realistic possibility of a shooting war between Israel and Iran at present, not least because it is patently clear that both sides are treading a familiar and well worn path here (as you yourself acknowledge) and there is much going on in the background. My point is that in October lots of people were quick to predict a regional conflict, potentially spiralling into something worse. Thankfully that hasn’t happened, and if anything it is hopefully clearer now that no-one wants one. But we are probably veering way into OMNI territory.

ExGGLer

To be fair to the OP, he was not (and did not as far as I am aware from his posting history) make any comments of this nature last October. I’m not sure anyone did.

You don’t need relatives in Israel or a degree in history to understand that an Israeli Iranian conflict has risks attached to it which are different (and potentially but not necessarily far more dangerous) than an Israel Hamas one.

aks120

This thread has an OMNI flavour at the moment. Please don’t make me lock the thread for that reason.

aks120
Moderator: BAEC Forum

davidcamp6

I am sure there are contingencies. and although today's terrorist take over of the vessel in the Gulf doesn't help, the likelihood of an escalation is medium. Israel has stated it will not respond directly unless there is an attack from within the Iranian border. There was a drone attack on Eilat, that caused the response on the consulate in Syria.
If there is an issue and it has a knock on effect, just book LY.

father_ted

As far as I understand it, BA (and others) had been avoiding the Ukrainian airspace in which MH17 was shot down for some time before that incident, yet MH was under no obligation to avoid the area.

I don't think airlines can wash their hands and say "no law against it, we're flying".

While I think the prospect of an unrestricted regional conflict unlikely, if I ran BA the contingency plan would be frequently updated.

flarmip

My background in planning makes me curious (but I can't be the only one wondering) how that works from a logistical standpoint with unbalanced stops?

The non-stop flight is already right at the margins of what can be done in one go, so there must be a crew swap in SIN. So do crew position empty from PER to SIN, the night before operating to LHR? Must be rather a squeeze on PER-SIN seat capacity if so!

BA6501

For the first few flights, yes. After that, the crew can cycle through (PER-SIN, sleep, SIN-LHR, sleep, LHR-PER, etc). This pattern is generally true across the board (look at BA LHR-LCA-TLV-LHR right now).
QF specifically does have lots of options in this case though - they have crew based both in Australia and London. London crew usually only go as far as SIN (rather than continue onto MEL/SYD). For a (currently) few days disruption, they'll probably go the easy way and have crew position to SIN. It helps with last minute changes of plans.