British Airways increases flights to six North American destinations

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

• Nick Pike says:

  14 Sep14 September 07:27

  BA is simply following the money. With the Gulf airlines decimating the market east of their home airports and the ban on overflying Russia, with the exception of flights to India don’t expect much east of there from BA for the foreseeable future. North America is, by contrast, a destination with which the Gulfies cannot compete for European connecting traffic as no one would fly London/Doha/New York. Indeed, BA provides excellent connectivity for Qatar customers seeking to connect to secondary US or Canadian cities to which Qatar does not fly directly. Ditto from other European cities.

  • Tom says:

    14 Sep14 September 08:23

    I can’t imagine that’s a huge market of people who want to take two connections in both DOH and LHR to get there. Even then, you could always take QR to US and connect at JFK/MIA/DFW etc onto an AA flight with a probably similar flight time / it’s not like BA flies to airports not served by US airlines.

  • AJA says:

    14 Sep14 September 09:13

    Your comment about BA providing excellent connectivity to QR customers works in the other direction too.

    BA is increasingly funneling passengers onto QR going east. Trouble is not everyone wants to do that.

    Tom notes that Qatari residents can still fly directly from DOH to the USA. Unfortunately for us in the UK the option to fly directly UK to Asia on BA has disappeared.

    • Rob says:

      14 Sep14 September 09:22

      Qatari residents already need the new £10 transit visa to go through Heathrow.

      • Matarredonda says:

        14 Sep14 September 12:06

        Reading something the other day LHR reckons they will loose 5m connecting passengers because of it which will “hammer” the shops as typically transit passengers spend the time buying goods!

      • AJA says:

        14 Sep14 September 16:55

        But Qatari residents have a choice – they can choose to fly directly to the US from DOH or they can choose to fly via LHR and pay that £10. I know which I’d do.

        Unfortunately because BA funnels everyone onto Qatar going east UK residents do not have a similar choice – I would prefer to fly on BA metal to my destination when I buy a ticket from BA. Likewise if I want to fly to South America I should have the option of flying directly or flying on IB via Madrid. I want the choice but BA seems to be removing choice.

        • Super Secret Stuff says:

          15 Sep15 September 02:46

          BA seems content leaving South America to Iberia via MAD and LATAM via American airports. It’s just a shame there both so London focused!

• Nico says:

  14 Sep14 September 08:21

  They could add flights to South America, before covid, there was a direct flight to lima in the summer. Guess the US are more profitable sadly and SA left to Iberia via Madrid.

  • JDB says:

    14 Sep14 September 08:33

    It seems quite sensible largely to leave SAm to Iberia given the geography which adds very little flying time via Madrid. BA has tried these routes including non stop flights to Buenos Aires and they don’t work well for the airline whereas Iberia can offer three daily flights on that route. I feel that’s actually a win for a UK passenger.

    • AJA says:

      14 Sep14 September 09:17

      No it’s not a win for UK passengers – it’s removing choice and it adds hours to the journey.

      How about IB routes some of it’s planes via LHR and allows passengers to board at LHR?

      It still gets the revenue but gives us the option of a direct flight or one going via MAD?

      • CJD says:

        14 Sep14 September 12:48

        IB to South America via Madrid would absolutely be a win for UK passengers not based in the South East if Iberia had better connections from the regions. EDI to MAD is seasonal and is non-existent from GLA.

    • AJA says:

      14 Sep14 September 09:21

      Or IB drops one of the flights on a route where it has multiple flights and instead routes passengers from Spain via LHR onto a BA South America service?

      Then Iberian customers still have a choice of a direct flight and so do UK BA customers.

      • JDB says:

        14 Sep14 September 10:40

        @AJA – if you look at the flight times eg to Buenos Aires it doesn’t add any extra time to fly via MAD as the BA flight stops in Rio. It also gives a passenger the option of two daytime flights to BsAs leaving at breakfast or lunchtime and an overnight one departing at midnight. There are similar multiple daily or daily IB flights to a raft of other destinations that BA could never support nor has the slots for. You happen also to save £200pp APD if you elect to stopover or have two tickets.

        Why would a pax travelling from Spain to Colombia, Uruguay etc. wish to fly via London as you suggest?? That really does increase the travel time unnecessarily.

        Equally, going to Australia, it’s no added journey time to fly via DOH as BA can’t operate non-stop to Australia and personally stretching my legs and enjoying Qatari hospitality in DOH works much better than BA’s flight timings.

        • AJA says:

          14 Sep14 September 12:20

          @JDB the advantage of flying BA to BsAs is that it is one plane and you don’t have to disembark and wander through MAD airport or potentially have to endure that T4 to T4S transit rubbish. Or potentially lose your luggage en-route.

          You ask why a passenger from Spain should wish to fly via London – how about to break the trip with a night or weekend in London? You offer Madrid as a stopover as a reason to fly on IB. What’s the difference?

          Also why should passengers from the UK be forced to fly via MAD to fly to Colombia, Uruguay etc? As I said above I suggest IB relinquish one of their multiple daily departures to allow BA to make their flights pay. That means that if Spanish passengers want to fly directly to South America they still have the choice to do so but it also means UK passengers would also have the choice to fly directly to South America.

          You are happy as you want to fly via Madrid but that doesn’t mean everyone wants to.

  • Richie says:

    14 Sep14 September 10:03

    The BA day time LGW-LIMa flight was very long, IB’s overnighter from MAD worked better for me.

  • Throwawayname says:

    14 Sep14 September 10:18

    I don’t really see IB making any effort to gain traction in the UK – outside of LHR, they only send Iberia Express planes and even then BHX and NCL have been scrapped, MAN isn’t even daily, and EDI is seasonal. In that context, the BA/IB London – Latin America connections feel more like a bog standard codeshare arrangement than a coherent strategy to funnel traffic through MAD.

  • Paul says:

    14 Sep14 September 17:22

    Why, IB dominate that market and IAG benefit from keeping competition away from those routes.

• BA Flyer IHG Stayer says:

  14 Sep14 September 08:28

  How shocking that a commercial company decides to change its operations so it makes the most profit!

  I’m sure BA would love to fly to all sorts of places (including returning to some) but if the passenger and cargo demand isn’t there then it’s going to drop routes. Unless another nation’s government is going to subsidise them to operate that is.

  • John says:

    14 Sep14 September 10:47

    Well said. Can’t believe all the moaning on here. How dare a company fly to profitable destinations and not those the minority want it to fly to

• pigeon says:

  14 Sep14 September 09:19

  What this really shows is the relative strength of the US (vs UK and major European) economy. Clearly the Americans are doing well enough to drive demand in longhaul travel, especially premium travel.

  BA is now yet another offshore service provider, flying Americans to Europe with a lower cost base than US carriers.

  • Tom says:

    14 Sep14 September 09:40

    Indeed, BA and AA increasingly operate as a single carrier. BA is the internal part that flies to Europe, AA is the domestic part (AA has the best domestic coverage of the US big 3 but by far the poorest international network, outside of LatAm they have far fewer flights and destinations than UA and DL).

    • Tom says:

      14 Sep14 September 09:41

      International part*

  • John says:

    14 Sep14 September 10:46

    Wtf. I fly to America with ba. It’s not only flying Americans this way. What a stupid comment to make.

    • Tom says:

      14 Sep14 September 12:05

      Lol. I think the stupid comment is not the one you think it is.

• Martin says:

  14 Sep14 September 09:19

  They didn’t answer my prayers – I would rather we had a proper world wide carrier – more the way of the BA of the 70’s and 80’s rather than a second US focussed airline along with Virgin Atlantic

  • JDB says:

    14 Sep14 September 10:44

    @Martin – BA was essentially bust in the 70’s and 80’s and wasn’t properly commercially managed while owned by the government, so yes it operated all sorts of routes for reasons of prestige and politics. That’s no way to run an airline. Fortunately Lord King and Sir Colin Marshall were brought in to sort out the mess.

    • executiveclubber says:

      14 Sep14 September 11:44

      Ah yes Lord King…

    • Paul says:

      14 Sep14 September 17:27

      They were profitable from 85 having got rid of 20 thousand staff. They also served 5 cities in Japan, almost every Asian capital from Taiwan to Indonesia and Korea to Thailand. They also served 5 cities in Australia and 2 in New Zealand.

• NorthernLass says:

  14 Sep14 September 09:23

  But BA still can’t put on a single international route from MAN, or even increase the always rammed and (often) insanely expensive MAN-LHR services (let alone reinstate LGW or LCY)!

  Also, having taken an economy flight from LHR yesterday with no lounge access I wasn’t minded to consider it for future trips. It was packed to the gills – there were queues into the terminal for the toilets and lounges and it was genuinely difficult to actually move given the sheer number of passengers, and this was out of the main summer travel period!

  • NorthernLass says:

    14 Sep14 September 09:24

    Also, after having experienced the delightful GLA lounge yesterday, which was servicing a whole 6 flights that afternoon/evening, I’m even more unimpressed with the facilities at MAN T3!

  • Nico says:

    14 Sep14 September 09:32

    Heathrow was also super busy yesterday, which I found weird outside of school holidays

    • gumshoe says:

      14 Sep14 September 10:16

      Not weird at all. There’s a vast market of people who actively avoid leisure travel during school holidays and hold off until flights and accommodation are cheaper and there are far fewer kids around.

      That, combined with the resumption of business travel after the summer, makes September a very busy month to fly.

  • Richie says:

    14 Sep14 September 10:54

    I do think a LCY-MAN-night stop-MAN-LCY service would work.

  • JDB says:

    14 Sep14 September 10:55

    As ever @NorthernLass, if there were a commercial case for it, BA works be doing it particularly given LHR capacity constraints which is also a reason for limited domestic flights. EI has a different operating model and cost base so can offer a few long haul routes from MAN. France is a much bigger country but AF also doesn’t offer flights from major cities other than Paris any more than Iberia offers long haul mainline flights from Barcelona (or even to London). Two hub operations have bankrupted Alitalia, SAS and Swissair. LH with its FRA & MUC is quite specific to the circumstances of the DACHIT model.

    • Mike Fish says:

      14 Sep14 September 11:30

      France has high speed rail for internal travel. The UK does not.

      • numpty says:

        14 Sep14 September 16:06

        Spain too, and great value. I have a train journey from Valencia to Madrid, 2 hours non stop, cost 15 euros!

      • Lady London says:

        14 Sep14 September 23:16

        Illegal there to fly domestic flights less than 2 hours unless to connect onto another flight I think. Daft but I think they’ve actually put it into law there. This may be part of why Easyjet has just announced closure of a French hub.

    • CJD says:

      14 Sep14 September 12:52

      I can’t believe there isn’t a commercial case for international flights direct from Manchester given the catchment area and number of passengers the airport serves annually.

      • Mikeact says:

        14 Sep14 September 17:29

        Are you joking…you are spoilt for choice.

  • Mutley says:

    14 Sep14 September 11:31

    Agree, Man -LHR is ridiculously expensive, I welcome Hotel indigo in Leeds, but given its Britain’s 4th largest urban area, no LBA to London flights at all. Shameful for “the flag carrier”

  • Mikeact says:

    14 Sep14 September 17:28

    @NorthernLass But, you do have over 190 destinations to choose from, and over 50 scheduled airlines….yet you want more ?

• Nico says:

  14 Sep14 September 09:23

  @AJA – I took the direct BA flight to EZE in august doing a stop in Rio and even if a little longer, I agree little nicer and faster not to change plane

  • JDB says:

    14 Sep14 September 11:10

    @Nico – it’s a personal thing but as a regular travellers to Argentina 16+ hours with BA, even with Club suite, isn’t something we like! It was fine via São Paulo when in the nose of the 747 in an era when BA service was better.

    Also the BA timings aren’t good – you are woken up before 6am for landing in Rio and it’s then another four hours plus before you arrive in BsAs at 11.50 thus wasting most of the day as one does on the return with a lunchtime departure. With Iberia you can arrive early evening in time for dinner in the city, or after dinner or at 08.30 in time to get to your hotel, shower and have lunch. Likewise on the return, you can have a full day in the city.

    Thrown into the bargain is service, food and wine that is vastly superior on Iberia.

• BSI1978 says:

  14 Sep14 September 09:25

  Ref those 2 new Hyatt’s in Leeds, I have 3 bookings across various dates for next year (earliest is March).

  • Rob says:

    14 Sep14 September 09:48

    Thanks. I only checked until next January and it wasn’t accepting anything.

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.