SN schedules for new route BRU-LGW-BRU

OO-VEX · Post by **OO-VEX** » 16 Aug 2003, 12:56

SN2121 is operated with an AVRO RJ85
SN2129 is operated with an AVRO RJ100
This is what i found on the SN Brussels online timetable.
The BIAC timetable mentions that SN2121 is operated with an A319.

Is British Airways codesharing on this BRU-LGW route? The only connection i found on their site were 2 flights: BRU-MAN and MAN-LGW. That could be a nice routing for spotters but business passengers won't like that.

OO-VEX

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 16 Aug 2003, 16:26

The BIAC timetable mentions that SN2121 is operated with an A319.

I think biac is wrong, because it wouldn't be good management to operate the A319 on that route. We don't have to forget that BA stopped the route because it couldn't fill its B737-400.

Ciao
Chris

Sabena_690 · Post by **Sabena_690** » 16 Aug 2003, 16:41

SNBA will only operate the A319 to/from LGW in very rare occassions.

Regards
Frederic

Comet · Post by **Comet** » 16 Aug 2003, 19:39

I don't think that LGW-BRU will really catch on, the London airports are saturated with flights to Brussels and other parts of Belgium offered by several airlines - LHR has BA and BD, STN has FR, LCY has VLM. The LCY route would have been a good one for SNBA if VLM hadn't jumped in there as soon as Sabena went into bankruptcy, trust me, that is one popular route (LCY-BRU, I don't know how busy the ANR service is yet). SNBA only did that one in codeshare with VG, but now that flight is coded with Virgin Express. I personally think that LGW is a bad choice, it's not that sort of airport, it's more geared up to charter airlines and the type.

Sabena_690 · Post by **Sabena_690** » 16 Aug 2003, 20:02

demol: yesterday I read on the BA site that a codeshare between SN and BA is still pending.

What do you just mean with SN not having good management?

Regards
Frederic

Post by **sn26567** » 16 Aug 2003, 21:18

Avro wrote:
The BIAC timetable mentions that SN2121 is operated with an A319.
I think biac is wrong

BIAC is wrong indeed. The OAG online also mentions an ARJ85 for the morning flight and an ARJ100 for the afternoon flights.

And no mention of BA...

Post by **sn26567** » 16 Aug 2003, 21:22

Comet wrote:I don't think that LGW-BRU will really catch on, the London airports are saturated with flights to Brussels and other parts of Belgium offered by several airlines - LHR has BA and BD, STN has FR, LCY has VLM. The LCY route would have been a good one for SNBA if VLM hadn't jumped in there as soon as Sabena went into bankruptcy, trust me, that is one popular route (LCY-BRU, I don't know how busy the ANR service is yet). SNBA only did that one in codeshare with VG, but now that flight is coded with Virgin Express. I personally think that LGW is a bad choice, it's not that sort of airport, it's more geared up to charter airlines and the type.

I basically agree with you, Comet. Don't forget also the competition of Eurostar with 6-7 trains per day capable of transporting hundreds of passengers each, and a city-to-city time of 2.40 hours, being reduced to 2.20 hours in September with the inauguration of the first high speed track in the UK.

As for Gatwick, there are still a lot of scheduled flights, especially to Southern Europe, starting there. It might not be a bad choice after all, as long as the capacity of the plane is adapted to the demand. When will there be an ERJ145 at SN BA?

Comet · Post by **Comet** » 16 Aug 2003, 22:45

I wouldn't have thought that over two hours on Eurostar could seriously compete with around 50 minutes (at the outside, that is by F50) by air between London and Brussels, except for those on a tight budget (and then there is Ryanair, though I hate to say so!!) and those who are too scared to fly. Gatwick is a difficult airport to explain correctly, it is like secondary to Heathrow, that is where the BA DC10 was based rather than at LHR, it is still largely a charter and less-fashionable scheduled destination market there. STN is almost purely low cost these days, now that many full service operators pulled out because they didn't like the image the airport was getting.

Comet · Post by **Comet** » 17 Aug 2003, 12:14

demol - your post just repeated what I had already said in my post, you wasted your time and energy with that post!! But then again, being a girl means that my views on aviation matters are always going to be ignored.
For the business and commuter market, the best London airport to get an opening at is LCY, why do you think VG were so fast setting up the BRU route before SN had a chance? LCY has a very fast aircraft-city centre time, you don't have to wait ages for a Tube train, you don't have to wait hours whilst your luggage is brought from the aircraft to the arrivals hall (it is usually there before you are!!) That is the route that SNBA should have tried to get, not LGW.

Sabena_690 · Post by **Sabena_690** » 21 Aug 2003, 09:12

demol: a lot of flights change EVERY time a new season starts.

First schedules are for the remaining of the summer season, from than starts the winter schedule.

So this is very logic.

Regards
Frederic

Avro · Post by **Avro** » 21 Aug 2003, 11:33

This change is probably due to the new destinations, SNBA will serve. They probably need those planes at 10:50 and 19:30.

Ciao
Chris
8)

Sabena_690 · Post by **Sabena_690** » 21 Aug 2003, 12:51

The schedules are even better than the one BA currently has: you can leave earlier and return later.