Edinburgh

[Clive]

They used to serve both airports and as demand is high I don’t see why not.

[Bearsden]

They used to serve both airports and as demand is high I don’t see why not.

The problem is that both United and Delta have built sizeable operations at EDI at least in the summer months (UAL B757 2 x EWR, 1 x IAD & 1 x ORD and DAL B767 1 x JFK, 1 x BOS & 1 x ATL) supported no doubt by 'exclusive' deals and now by traffic volumes which give them substantial buying power in handling, crew accommodation, transport etc plus some flexibility if an aircraft goes unserviceable

The only change on the horizon is the aircraft choice after the B757 & B767

[hads]

It seems to some that talking about Edinburgh is the same as me talking about Celtic. I despise them but they exist. They won the league last year. They need to be removed from top spot.
In any walk of life you need to know and understand who the enemy or biggest threat to your KPI s are.
Edinburgh is no longer a threat to GLA. That horse has bolted and is lying on a Beach drinking Tequila.
We should discuss Edinburgh because its actions will continue to have an adverse affect on Glasgow.
PIK is the vennue where every one of you should be throwing custard pies at.

[Clive]

They used to serve both airports and as demand is high I don’t see why not.

The problem is that both United and Delta have built sizeable operations at EDI at least in the summer months (UAL B757 2 x EWR, 1 x IAD & 1 x ORD and DAL B767 1 x JFK, 1 x BOS & 1 x ATL) supported no doubt by 'exclusive' deals and now by traffic volumes which give them substantial buying power in handling, crew accommodation, transport etc plus some flexibility if an aircraft goes unserviceable

Being well aware of all that I still said I don’t see why not.

[Darren10]

They used to serve both airports and as demand is high I don’t see why not.

The problem is that both United and Delta have built sizeable operations at EDI at least in the summer months (UAL B757 2 x EWR, 1 x IAD & 1 x ORD and DAL B767 1 x JFK, 1 x BOS & 1 x ATL) supported no doubt by 'exclusive' deals and now by traffic volumes which give them substantial buying power in handling, crew accommodation, transport etc plus some flexibility if an aircraft goes unserviceable

Being well aware of all that I still said I don’t see why not.

Is there a reason UAs flights are all operated on 752s yet DL can support widebody 767s on all of their flights? I'm aware that distance becomes an issue for ATL but I am genuinely unsure of any further reasons. It could be that UAs flights don't often require bigger equipment. I always assumed that Chicago and Washington were served with 767s. Just goes to show how little I know!

[jetblue497]

The problem is that both United and Delta have built sizeable operations at EDI at least in the summer months (UAL B757 2 x EWR, 1 x IAD & 1 x ORD and DAL B767 1 x JFK, 1 x BOS & 1 x ATL) supported no doubt by 'exclusive' deals and now by traffic volumes which give them substantial buying power in handling, crew accommodation, transport etc plus some flexibility if an aircraft goes unserviceable

Being well aware of all that I still said I don’t see why not.

Is there a reason UAs flights are all operated on 752s yet DL can support widebody 767s on all of their flights? I'm aware that distance becomes an issue for ATL but I am genuinely unsure of any further reasons. It could be that UAs flights don't often require bigger equipment. I always assumed that Chicago and Washington were served with 767s. Just goes to show how little I know!

Its the smallest a/c DL has for Transatlantic. The 757s are now dedicated to US transcons.

[Darren10]

Being well aware of all that I still said I don’t see why not.

Is there a reason UAs flights are all operated on 752s yet DL can support widebody 767s on all of their flights? I'm aware that distance becomes an issue for ATL but I am genuinely unsure of any further reasons. It could be that UAs flights don't often require bigger equipment. I always assumed that Chicago and Washington were served with 767s. Just goes to show how little I know!

Its the smallest a/c DL has for Transatlantic. The 757s are now dedicated to US transcons.

Ah that makes lots of sense, thanks for the speedy reply! DL must be filling them regardless.

[VS71]

Just read a post on another rather popular airline forum claiming that there was some serious congestion issues at EDI today. 5 737s waiting on the taxiway for a stand at one point. One of Uniteds flights was also severely impacted waiting a reported 40 mins for a stand. As much as I applaud the meteoric rise of EDIs offerings, it also seems that the busy summer season has overtaken EDIs infrastructure and is now causing major issues.

I do wonder if the US Legacies in particular will be asking questions.

This would tie up with our experience.

Landing from Orlando on the 15th, there was a Westjet 787 on the taxiway with another aircraft in front. We had a 15 minute wait for a stand.

The inbound aircraft to operate our flight July 1st had 30 minute wait for a stand. Other aircraft did too from keeping an eye on adsb, but I didn't pay attention to any wait they had.

[Bearsden]

They used to serve both airports and as demand is high I don’t see why not.

The problem is that both United and Delta have built sizeable operations at EDI at least in the summer months (UAL B757 2 x EWR, 1 x IAD & 1 x ORD and DAL B767 1 x JFK, 1 x BOS & 1 x ATL) supported no doubt by 'exclusive' deals and now by traffic volumes which give them substantial buying power in handling, crew accommodation, transport etc plus some flexibility if an aircraft goes unserviceable

Being well aware of all that I still said I don’t see why not.

Because the airlines' accountants will say no - only two things will change the outcome (a) EDI's next 'exclusive' deals aren't so generous and/or (b) GLA 'buy' the business hoping to make returns out of ancillary income streams

[Clive]

The problem is that both United and Delta have built sizeable operations at EDI at least in the summer months (UAL B757 2 x EWR, 1 x IAD & 1 x ORD and DAL B767 1 x JFK, 1 x BOS & 1 x ATL) supported no doubt by 'exclusive' deals and now by traffic volumes which give them substantial buying power in handling, crew accommodation, transport etc plus some flexibility if an aircraft goes unserviceable

Being well aware of all that I still said I don’t see why not.

Because the airlines' accountants will say no - only two things will change the outcome (a) EDI's next 'exclusive' deals aren't so generous and/or (b) GLA 'buy' the business hoping to make returns out of ancillary income streams

Hoping to? This is what all airports do, and no doubt GLA bosses will have deals ready to strike.

The airlines’ accountants will say no? So you’re saying there is no business case for a GLA-NYC hub service. That’s quite sad to be honest.