Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Harshil9 · Fri May 26, 2017 9:23 pm

Starting October 29, Jet Airways will add a third daily direct flight between Mumbai and London, as well as adjusting the timings of the existing two non-stop daily services on the route.

New flight timings: Mumbai to London

Departure 0230, arrival 0700
Departure 0905, arrival 1335 - New flight
Departure 1310, arrival 1740
New flight timings: London to Mumbai

Departure 1005, arrival 0030
Departure 1530, arrival 0555 - New flight
Departure 2105, arrival 1125
The carrier’s B777 aircraft will continue to serve this sector.

I have travelled on this route regularly and is always full in J and Y. The new flight will help get a lot of connecting traffic on both ends.

My questions are:
How did 9W get slots at LHR?
DEL-LHR is still once daily and is also very full. Will this sector also be upgraded or will Jet reconsider direct flights to Chennai or Ahmedabad in the future?

TedToToe · Fri May 26, 2017 9:49 pm

Harshil9 wrote:
How did 9W get slots at LHR?

Likewise, no mention of where China Southern got its slots for a second daily LHR-CAN.

https://www.businesstraveller.com/news/ ... guangzhou/

ZeeZoo · Fri May 26, 2017 9:51 pm

I'm surprised there's not an extra LHR-DEL. The Punjabis I know love it, love the service and love the short stop at Delhi before going on to Amritsar (believe it's 1-1 1/2 hour whilst AI starts hitting 4+ hours).

vadodara · Fri May 26, 2017 9:58 pm

Harshil9 wrote:
My questions are:
How did 9W get slots at LHR?
DEL-LHR is still once daily and is also very full. Will this sector also be upgraded or will Jet reconsider direct flights to Chennai or Ahmedabad in the future?

^^
Wonder if there is data available for 9W-DL interconnectivity! 9W seems to have hit a jackpot with their AMS and now LHR flights.

Irehdna · Fri May 26, 2017 10:07 pm

Bad move for 9W. Should have started BOM-MAN, BOM-JNB, or BLR/MAA - SYD with this 77W. 9W will run out of planes fast, they already have BLR-AMS and MAA-CDG planned using up a couple A332s.

Anyways, interesting that they are making this (presumably 9W 125/126) a day flight to LHR and night to BOM. Won't this arrive a lot earlier than BA 199 flight though? Interested in how that pans out for business travellers.

Harshil9 · Fri May 26, 2017 10:12 pm

Last 2 times I flew to India (BHJ is my hometown airport which only has direct flights to BOM) I flew LHR-DEL-BOM-BHJ as it was a couple hundred quid cheaper in J than LHR-BOM-BHJ and instead of sitting around in BOM for 4 hrs you are taking a 2 hr flight. On the return both times I came back 1 stop via BOM. This tells me the LHR-BOM sector in J is a lot more in demand with much higher prices.

Rajahdhani · Fri May 26, 2017 10:18 pm

Irehdna wrote:
Bad move for 9W. Should have started BOM-MAN, BOM-JNB, or BLR/MAA - SYD with this 77W. 9W will run out of planes fast, they already have BLR-AMS and MAA-CDG planned using up a couple A332s.

They are using their largest aircraft, from one hub, to another (LHR has DL's presence, an extensive codeshare agreement with DL already in place, and potentially - close ties to VS via DL).

Standing past the point, that LHR has high yields, and that 9W has a competent decision making staff/process - there is also the issue that (apart from perhaps BOM-MAN), BOM-JNB and most certainly BLR/MAA-SYD cannot match the yields associated with a BOM-LHR routing. If anything, why not advocate using the lower risk of an A332, on these routes?

I share your frustration, albeit to a lesser degree. Its difficult to see that both MAA and BLR neglected at the hands of BOM (and further, to 'fatten' on the LHR route). That said, I do not for an instant blame 9W for placing their aircraft on the safest/greatest chance of return on investment. The DL/AF+KLM partnership did signal a shift in their priorities, and perhaps a more advantageous one than they had previously attempted. Let's not knock them for doing the smart thing, but rather advocate for other routings as well - understanding, though, that resources are finite and limited.

Rajahdhani · Fri May 26, 2017 10:20 pm

Harshil9 wrote:
Last 2 times I flew to India (BHJ is my hometown airport which only has direct flights to BOM) I flew LHR-DEL-BOM-BHJ as it was a couple hundred quid cheaper in J than LHR-BOM-BHJ and instead of sitting around in BOM for 4 hrs you are taking a 2 hr flight. On the return both times I came back 1 stop via BOM. This tells me the LHR-BOM sector in J is a lot more in demand with much higher prices.

How was the connection process in India? Not challenging your assertion at all, just wondering how the trip went, and how hassle-free (or, rather, -fraught) it was.

Irehdna · Fri May 26, 2017 10:23 pm

Another thing 9W could have done with this 77W is to deploy it on BOM-CDG-BOM. 3x LHR 77W and 1x CDG A333 doesn't seem right, especially given Skyteam at CDG and required usage of the A330 for MAA-CDG and BLR-AMS.

Harshil9 · Fri May 26, 2017 10:35 pm

Rajahdhani wrote:
Harshil9 wrote:
Last 2 times I flew to India (BHJ is my hometown airport which only has direct flights to BOM) I flew LHR-DEL-BOM-BHJ as it was a couple hundred quid cheaper in J than LHR-BOM-BHJ and instead of sitting around in BOM for 4 hrs you are taking a 2 hr flight. On the return both times I came back 1 stop via BOM. This tells me the LHR-BOM sector in J is a lot more in demand with much higher prices.

How was the connection process in India? Not challenging your assertion at all, just wondering how the trip went, and how hassle-free (or, rather, -fraught) it was.

The international to domestic transfer at DEL involves reclaiming your bag and rechecking. I knew of this and signs were clear and it was a quick process with flights being in the same terminal.
An hour connection can be made with an escort which I was initially given but then left behind at reclaim as there were 2 other connecting passengers with much tighter connections.

Jet previously ran a service DEL-BOM-BHJ which was one flight number and one aircraft with it being in BOM for about 30 mins where passengers got on and off. A week before my flight the route was changed. I had a 25 min connection in BOM and a car took me from the arriving gate and dropped me off at the rear staircase of the BHJ flight. Great experience didnt even have to step foot in the terminal.

In summary, if you have a tight connection there is always customer service staff on hand to help you out and guide you through the process quickly.

DobboDobbo · Fri May 26, 2017 10:53 pm

Its a surprise that no direct BOM-MAN route exists, but that applies to a handful of airlines not just 9W. You can't knock them for grabbing a slot at LHR if one has become available.

Irehdna · Sat May 27, 2017 1:30 am

With 3x 9W and 2x BA, will AI 131/130 survive? The AI BOM-LHR-BOM is poorly timed (3AM arrival and 6AM departure at BOM) when compared to all three 9W and two BA flights, not to mention 9W and BA are much better regarded among the general consumer (and especially business travel/high-yielding customers) than AI. Additionally, AI does not have a real hub at BOM, so well-timed connections are sparse, especially considering BA flies to MAA/BLR/HYD and AI flights connect very well at DEL to AI 111/112 DEL-LHR-DEL.

Perhaps the only saving grace of this flight would be lower fare price or *A interline. However, while some UA flights connect well to AI's BOM-LHR-BOM at LHR, wouldn't UA's own UA 49/48 BOM-EWR-BOM work much better for these people than the AI flight? Not only is this the same airline (more awards will be transferred here), but UA BOM-EWR-USA will have much better timings than AI/UA BOM-LHR-USA.

I think 9W may have defeated AI for good on the BOM-LHR-BOM sector. And I think AI need not to worry as they will naturally keep on adding long-haul routes from only DEL anyways.

airzona11 · Sat May 27, 2017 1:49 am

Irehdna wrote:
Bad move for 9W. Should have started BOM-MAN, BOM-JNB, or BLR/MAA - SYD with this 77W. 9W will run out of planes fast, they already have BLR-AMS and MAA-CDG planned using up a couple A332s.

Anyways, interesting that they are making this (presumably 9W 125/126) a day flight to LHR and night to BOM. Won't this arrive a lot earlier than BA 199 flight though? Interested in how that pans out for business travellers.

Seems like a great move to capture this large O/D market and higher fare connecting passengers. This is another example of where frequency matters and chasing higher yieldin / O+D. The other SkyTeam hubs no doubt are better for funneling more connecting passengers.

You mention business travelers, now they have a choice of 3 flights across 3 different times. Great way to compete against the ME3 1-stop options.

anshabhi · Sat May 27, 2017 2:34 am

AI 130/131 also offers convenient early morning connections to South India and Kolkata- a good choice for corportates, who can put their entire day to use.

This flight will only absorb the increasing demand. I think the last BOM-LHR flight was added over 10 years ago..

The real threat to 9W, AI and ME3 is from SG's low cost long haul plan.

LHR01 · Sat May 27, 2017 2:45 am

Loads have been very full. That also includes more connecting passengers transiting to BOM.

That includes first, Business and Economy. On the other hand 9w have also improved there service along side with there on time departures.

As for the slot I've been told 2 answers. AZ and KU

aemoreira1981 · Sat May 27, 2017 2:54 am

Given the connections through Heathrow for passengers bound through India, I wonder what this will mean for Amsterdam, and Paris, as Jet Airways and Air France/KLM (and Delta also) are in a JV. The first two flights---including the new flight---look excellent for transfer options between 9W and DL/VS. Will a smaller plane be put on AMS-BOM to replace the 77W used on that route and re-configuring A330s as 3-class planes? (To Paris, 9W uses a mix of A332s and A333s.) Might 9W also try to get any available planes from partner EY that EY is retiring for the interim, such as EY's A346s, as temporary lift to expand long haul and launch a BOM-MAN service? (For a time, 9W did lease in A340s from SA). I don't blame 9W for adding a third daily service as LHR slots are gold.

Irehdna · Sat May 27, 2017 3:17 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
Will a smaller plane be put on AMS-BOM to replace the 77W used on that route and re-configuring A330s as 3-class planes? (To Paris, 9W uses a mix of A332s and A333s.)

What I meant to say in an earlier post was that 9W should have replaced the A330 operating BOM-CDG-BOM with a 77W, so the A330 could be used on MAA-CDG and BLR-AMS. This may have worked better than making this 77W do another BOM-LHR-BOM. (Paris is a high-yielding market like London, and they can get the 77W to work on BOM-AMS, so why not BOM-CDG-BOM?) Where the A330s for the BLR/MAA routes come from?

As for BOM-AMS, I would imagine they will keep it 77W, but they may have to downgauge as KLM is starting their own BOM-AMS flight.

atal17 · Sat May 27, 2017 5:01 am

Double post.

atal17 · Sat May 27, 2017 5:15 am

Irehdna wrote:
Another thing 9W could have done with this 77W is to deploy it on BOM-CDG-BOM. 3x LHR 77W and 1x CDG A333 doesn't seem right, especially given Skyteam at CDG and required usage of the A330 for MAA-CDG and BLR-AMS.

They are switching it to B77W from W17

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... t-changes/

Irehdna wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
Will a smaller plane be put on AMS-BOM to replace the 77W used on that route and re-configuring A330s as 3-class planes? (To Paris, 9W uses a mix of A332s and A333s.)

What I meant to say in an earlier post was that 9W should have replaced the A330 operating BOM-CDG-BOM with a 77W, so the A330 could be used on MAA-CDG and BLR-AMS. This may have worked better than making this 77W do another BOM-LHR-BOM. (Paris is a high-yielding market like London, and they can get the 77W to work on BOM-AMS, so why not BOM-CDG-BOM?) Where the A330s for the BLR/MAA routes come from?

As for BOM-AMS, I would imagine they will keep it 77W, but they may have to downgauge as KLM is starting their own BOM-AMS flight.

The A330s will be coming from the Gulf/Domestic runs being replaced by B737s from Winter.

And no, 9W does not intend to downgauge BOM-AMS either. There are enough B777s to go around.

Irehdna wrote:
Bad move for 9W. Should have started BOM-MAN, BOM-JNB, or BLR/MAA - SYD with this 77W. 9W will run out of planes fast, they already have BLR-AMS and MAA-CDG planned using up a couple A332s.

No - THAT is the worse move for 9W, IMHO.

Mumbai-Manchester may have worked, but the yields would've been complete rubbish in the face of heavy competition from the ME3, WY, TK. If any, it makes sense to funnel Manchester traffic via their partners at Paris, Amsterdam and Abu Dhabi instead of losing money hand over first by launching Manchester.. OTOH, Delhi-Manchester is a perfect route for AI and their 787s

I'm surprised that you even think Bengaluru/Chennai-Sydney/Melbourne is worth considering given according to this CAPA article -> https://centreforaviation.com/insights/ ... ces-300004, a whopping 40% of India-Australia traffic originates from Delhi. Mumbai is a distant 15%, while Chennai and Bengaluru are even lower with 8% and 9% respectively.

It makes absolute sense for Air India to keep their services out of Delhi, and serve Sydney and Melbourne with roughly the same number of flights, than for Jet to even consider flying to Australia from South India.

Mumbai-London Heathrow makes sense when you see how much closer VS and DL have gotten to 9W in the recent years. Add to that, a strong premium traffic that will overwhelming prefer a nonstop option to London, it makes sense for 9W to add another daily to London instead.

Irehdna · Sat May 27, 2017 10:10 am

atal17 wrote:
No - THAT is the worse move for 9W, IMHO.

Mumbai-Manchester may have worked, but the yields would've been complete rubbish in the face of heavy competition from the ME3, WY, TK. If any, it makes sense to funnel Manchester traffic via their partners at Paris, Amsterdam and Abu Dhabi instead of losing money hand over first by launching Manchester.. OTOH, Delhi-Manchester is a perfect route for AI and their 787s

I'm surprised that you even think Bengaluru/Chennai-Sydney/Melbourne is worth considering given according to this CAPA article -> https://centreforaviation.com/insights/ ... ces-300004, a whopping 40% of India-Australia traffic originates from Delhi. Mumbai is a distant 15%, while Chennai and Bengaluru are even lower with 8% and 9% respectively.

It makes absolute sense for Air India to keep their services out of Delhi, and serve Sydney and Melbourne with roughly the same number of flights, than for Jet to even consider flying to Australia from South India.

Mumbai-London Heathrow makes sense when you see how much closer VS and DL have gotten to 9W in the recent years. Add to that, a strong premium traffic that will overwhelming prefer a nonstop option to London, it makes sense for 9W to add another daily to London instead.

Oh wow, thanks for the info. I always thought there was a decently-sized S. Indian population in SYD, and for some reason SQ's success made me believe this more as well.

BOMRPR · Sat May 27, 2017 6:06 pm

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 864374.cms

Mumbai - London spot fares have seen the largest hike in recent times, this probably explains the haste behind 9W adding an additional flight on this sector.

Depreciating Sterling Pound and relaxation in issuing tourist Visa post Brexit is certainly driving more tourists to UK, Based on my personal experience in getting a UK Visa, as long as your income is reasonable they just give you a visa, whereas schengen countries requires a firm itinerary with hotel reservations receipts and a whole lot of documents before you can even apply for a Visa.

9W is certainly the preferred carrier of HNI Indians, and they have been luring their Gold and Platinum members with generous upgrades at check-in to prompt them to even use their LHR flights to put them across the atlantic with their Code Share agreements.

DTWLAX · Sun May 28, 2017 12:51 am

Irehdna wrote:
Another thing 9W could have done with this 77W is to deploy it on BOM-CDG-BOM. 3x LHR 77W and 1x CDG A333 doesn't seem right, especially given Skyteam at CDG and required usage of the A330 for MAA-CDG and BLR-AMS.

AF flies a daily CDG-BOM using a mix of 777 and 77W.

DTWLAX · Sun May 28, 2017 12:53 am

Irehdna wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
Will a smaller plane be put on AMS-BOM to replace the 77W used on that route and re-configuring A330s as 3-class planes? (To Paris, 9W uses a mix of A332s and A333s.)

What I meant to say in an earlier post was that 9W should have replaced the A330 operating BOM-CDG-BOM with a 77W, so the A330 could be used on MAA-CDG and BLR-AMS. This may have worked better than making this 77W do another BOM-LHR-BOM. (Paris is a high-yielding market like London, and they can get the 77W to work on BOM-AMS, so why not BOM-CDG-BOM?) Where the A330s for the BLR/MAA routes come from?

As for BOM-AMS, I would imagine they will keep it 77W, but they may have to downgauge as KLM is starting their own BOM-AMS flight.

KLM starting AMS-BOM? When was this announced? Can you provide a link?

Irehdna · Sun May 28, 2017 1:18 am

DTWLAX wrote:
KLM starting AMS-BOM? When was this announced? Can you provide a link?

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... hlight=klm

LJ · Sun May 28, 2017 6:32 am

LHR01 wrote:
As for the slot I've been told 2 answers. AZ and KU

AZ won't be possible unless they reduce or fold. If AZ folds (very likely) all slots will go back to EY and thus not so strange that 9W will get to use them (I doubt EY needs 3 daily LHR slots at the moment).

Irehdna wrote:
As for BOM-AMS, I would imagine they will keep it 77W, but they may have to downgauge as KLM is starting their own BOM-AMS flight.

Initially 9W planned BOM - AMS to be double daily with A330. However, they never took the evening slots. It's a pity that KL didn't take up that schedule (21:00 departure ex AMS) as it would spread both flights over the day (though for US bound traffic the current KL schedule is better). Moreover, the KL flight is 3 weekly only (at the moment).

behramjee · Sun May 28, 2017 7:56 am

In 2016, P2P demand between BOM/DEL-UK was as follows:

BOM-LHR-BOM 440,000
DEL-LHR-DEL 515,000
BOM-MAN-BOM 59,000
DEL-MAN-DEL 37,000

BOM-LHR being increased to triple daily is better than BOM-MAN because the latter maximum deserves an A332 operated 5 times per week nonstop provided connections both ways via BOM are also available for SE Asia/DAC/KTM/CMB for feeder support. BOM-MAN does not have the yields to support a daily B77W but it does have the cargo demand though!

Via LHR through DL code sharing, 9W can access more U.S. points and it is just a matter of time before they get VS code sharing in place for LHR-USA-LHR too.

Has anyone taken up Arik Air's daily evening slot of 1830arr/2130dep UTC in S17?

DobboDobbo · Sun May 28, 2017 8:18 am

MAN-BOM p2p: up to 147,000 as follows

Excluding Sydney [which cannot be reached in one sector], Mumbai is the second largest unserved market from Manchester [Bangkok being the biggest],” confirms Smith. In 2016, the market witnessed 74,000 indirect passengers, plus 73,000 surface leakage to Mumbai from Manchester’s two-hour catchment area (IATA Airport IS and CAA Survey 2016). This figure has grown by 12% since 2015.

http://www.anna.aero/2017/04/12/manches ... -the-week/

Nimish · Tue May 30, 2017 11:13 am

This is great news from 9W - consolidate their BOM operations. With the integrated terminal at BOM, transfers are now a breeze (compared to the rickety bus earlier).

CaliguyNYC · Tue May 30, 2017 12:56 pm

I think even 4 times a week BOM-MAN by 9W with a VS codeshare should be launched soon. 9W is cementing its place on key routes. I would say the three easiest things to add are (1) BOM-MAN, (2) evening departure from wither CDG or AMS to give EU pax the option to return to India at a different time and (3) BOM-NBO on a 737 - why would 9W let AI fly this route????

DobboDobbo · Tue May 30, 2017 2:39 pm

If transfer traffic with VS is important to 9W it may be helpful to route passengers through MAN rather than LHR where possible. Frees up seat capacity into LHR and helps the viability of 9W new route plus VS flying from MAN.

Issue for 9W is Etihad. I gather this may not be a problem for much longer but until that time Etihad will most likely prevent 9W from opening up MAN.

vadodara · Tue May 30, 2017 5:23 pm

Etihad might do itself a favor by selling 9W to DL.

On other hand, ME3's reason to exist is Indian market. They might as well as throw-in more money and get a piece of it.

DobboDobbo · Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:36 pm

Well,there has been a call (locally at the MAN end) for a direct link to India (as opposed to Mumbai specifically).

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... --13262781

Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Re: Jet Airways adds third daily Mumbai-London service

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net