I've witnessed several Indian passengers onboard my BA transatlantic flights to/from JFK, BOS, SFO and even PHX. While I can't 100% say that they were connecting to/from DEL/BOM/MAA/HYD/BLR at LHR, I can't help but wonder if BA is a force in the NA <-> India traffic. My brother also told me an Indian friend of his will be taking BA JFK-LHR-DEL to attend a relative's wedding back home later this summer. Do Indians living in the US & Canada often consider BA as an option whenever they travel back to their native country?

Don't forget that there are large amounts of people of Indian descent living in the UK. A lot of the passengers you see could well be British Citizens! Or Americans for that matter.

Big Indian population in the UK so there are a lot flights to connect with from LHR especially provided by BA so they would probably get a significant amount of that traffic. Other options would be AMS and CDG with Skyteam.

AirStunt wrote:

Do Indians living in the US & Canada often consider BA as an option whenever they travel back to their native country?

And why wouldn't they ?

No, not from the west coast.

Absolutely. BA has one of the deepest networks in the United States and India. A significant number of people connect on BA. Their fares can be attractive. BA and LH still carry a significant amount of the US to India traffic even though the Middle East carriers took a significant pierce of the market.

BA and its predecessors have been carrying people from North America to India since the 1940s. BA has a large network in both country due to the strong British economic ties to both the US and India. While LHr slot restrictions make some of the flight schedules not have as smooth of connection times, overall you see huge numbers of connections in LHR.

Bear in mind that BA, incorporating its predecessor Imperial Airways, is so well established that many Indians will choose BA to fly around the world. It was Imperial that inaugurated the first scheduled London to Delhi service in December 1929 by a combination of various planes (including the Calcutta flying boat and DH66 Hercules) and train.

GoSharks wrote:

No, not from the west coast.

That's not true. West coast SEA/SFO/LAX-LHR-India is a very popular route with BA. BA and LH have lots of passengers flying them from US (incl west coast) to India.

Yes, BA has a decent market share on US/Canada-India

GoSharks wrote:

No, not from the west coast.

YVR-LHR-India and YYC-LHR-India are both very popular

Yes, having worked in India I can affirm that people travelling to the US choose between LH, BA and EK with connections, and lastly AI direct - no one I ever met (Indian or other) preferred Air India over the other options due to its dire service onboard and on the ground. How LH, BA and EK rank is an interesting question though - LH was very popular with Indian colleagues and often one of the most price competitive for one connection traffic to the US and *A miles collecting ...

Newbiepilot wrote:

Absolutely. BA has one of the deepest networks in the United States and India. A significant number of people connect on BA. Their fares can be attractive. BA and LH still carry a significant amount of the US to India traffic even though the Middle East carriers took a significant pierce of the market.

I understand your rationale, but can you point to any data, specifically compared to LH, EK, and AI services?

blrsea wrote:

GoSharks wrote:

No, not from the west coast.

That's not true. West coast SEA/SFO/LAX-LHR-India is a very popular route with BA. BA and LH have lots of passengers flying them from US (incl west coast) to India.

The question was "does BA capture a lot." They may capture some, but looking at google flights and pricing, BA is way down on the list in price and transit time to BOM/DEL.

BA doesn't even show up on the default view for a booking out spring next year, out of sfo and lax. LH is 50-75% of BA's pricing.

MIflyer12 wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

Absolutely. BA has one of the deepest networks in the United States and India. A significant number of people connect on BA. Their fares can be attractive. BA and LH still carry a significant amount of the US to India traffic even though the Middle East carriers took a significant pierce of the market.

I understand your rationale, but can you point to any data, specifically compared to LH, EK, and AI services?

Yes I have a source. BA is number 3 in the US to India market

The OAG traffic data also show that Emirates and Air India lead the total US-India market, each with around 60% more passengers than third placed BA, who is just ahead of United. Lufthansa is fifth, followed by the other two of the Gulf Big Three, namely Qatar Airways in sixth and Etihad in seventh place. The top ten for O&D traffic between India and the US is completed by number eight-ranked American Airlines, ninth placed Delta and Jet Airways at number ten.
https://centreforaviation.com/insights/ ... oom-201854

USA to India is one of the largest markets flown by airlines from neither country. Only United flies to India from Newark nonstop to Mumbai and Dehli. The ME3 and the Europeans have big market shares of the market. Asian airlines such as Singapore and Cathay serve the market too.

I thought that I'd have a look at the options for the US west coast, e.g. DEL to SFO.

Fastest is AI's non-stop, taking 15h30m. For connecting flights, some may find it surprising that China Airlines is quickest via Taipei, with BA the slowest.

18h55m CI via TPE
19h20m AY via HEL
20h20m OZ via ICN
20h35m KL via AMS
21h18m AC via YYZ
21h50m NH via NRT
22h00m CA via PEK
22h15m EK via DXB
22h26m UA via EWR
22h40m LH via FRA
22h40m AF via CDG
22h45m TK via IST
23h05m EY via AUH
23h10m CX via HKG
24h15m SQ via SIN
25h00m BA via LHR

Another question... does AA carry a lot of Indian bound passengers to LHR who then transfer to BA?

Zero. The only US carrier with Indian flights is UA from EWR to DEL and BOM (daily to both).

Most upmarket desi's in the UK seem to prefer VS - atleast thats the case in my limited circle. All huge VS fans and big time BA bashers.

BA (Bleddy Awful) used to have a fair share of the India-NA market. But that has drastically reduced. Personally i find transferring at LHR is a PITA - and not the good kind.

AUH & even DEL are much much better.

Dfwjim1 was asking if AA carries Indian lax to LHR for connecting flights to India, not if AA carries them the whole way. The answer to Dfwjim1's question is yes, they do.

Please note that there are those older American-Indian citizens living in US who fly business will patronize LH or BA but not the ME3.Just don't like stopping in ME and the long US to ME leg.

I work in tech and up until last week I was based in head office near SFO. A very large number of my colleagues in head office originate from India.

Because I am curious, I query them on how they get "home". Nearly all of them opt for BA via LHR or LH via FRA. The ME3 are chosen only if it is significantly cheaper than the Euro carriers. Why? They say they are made to feel less than welcome on these carriers, particularly at the transit point. EK especially draws their ire in this regard.

vhtje wrote:

I work in tech and up until last week I was based in head office near SFO. A very large number of my colleagues in head office originate from India.

Because I am curious, I query them on how they get "home". Nearly all of them opt for BA via LHR or LH via FRA. The ME3 are chosen only if it is significantly cheaper than the Euro carriers. Why? They say they are made to feel less than welcome on these carriers, particularly at the transit point. EK especially draws their ire in this regard.

I haven't had any bad experience with EK crew or never felt unwelcome. Same goes for BA/LH/AF too. However, transit in LHR is a royal pain, and the people manning the security counters in LHR are worse than at any other airport, rude and condescending. With many of BA flights in the new terminal 5, it's still puzzling that when transiting through LHR, you are forced to go back to the main terminal taking the underground train, and then come back an hour before boarding to the same terminal. Not sure why this was done. This happened during both onwards journey to US and back. Happened a few years back though, Not sure whether this is still done.

blrsea wrote:

I haven't had any bad experience with EK crew or never felt unwelcome. Same goes for BA/LH/AF too. However, transit in LHR is a royal pain, and the people manning the security counters in LHR are worse than at any other airport, rude and condescending. With many of BA flights in the new terminal 5, it's still puzzling that when transiting through LHR, you are forced to go back to the main terminal taking the underground train, and then come back an hour before boarding to the same terminal. Not sure why this was done. This happened during both onwards journey to US and back. Happened a few years back though, Not sure whether this is still done.

I am glad your ME3 experience is different to my colleagues' reported experiences.

You CAN use Flight Connections in the T5B and T5C satellite terminals. Meaning you can transfer T5B to T5B or T5B to T5C (for example; work out the remaining combinations yourself!) without schlepping all the way to T5A. It is possible and the security in Flight Connections in T5B and T5C is a doodle. The exception is if you do not have the boarding pass for your onward flight - this would require you returning to T5A to the BA customer service desk.

Yes when I'm working on the flights to/from India the majority of passengers are transferring to the US/Canada and we (BA) have crew bases in DEL, BOM, MAA, BLR.
There is no base in HYD but the BOM based crew work that route too.

vhtje wrote:

blrsea wrote:

I haven't had any bad experience with EK crew or never felt unwelcome. Same goes for BA/LH/AF too. However, transit in LHR is a royal pain, and the people manning the security counters in LHR are worse than at any other airport, rude and condescending. With many of BA flights in the new terminal 5, it's still puzzling that when transiting through LHR, you are forced to go back to the main terminal taking the underground train, and then come back an hour before boarding to the same terminal. Not sure why this was done. This happened during both onwards journey to US and back. Happened a few years back though, Not sure whether this is still done.

I am glad your ME3 experience is different to my colleagues' reported experiences.

You CAN use Flight Connections in the T5B and T5C satellite terminals. Meaning you can transfer T5B to T5B or T5B to T5C (for example; work out the remaining combinations yourself!) without schlepping all the way to T5A. It is possible and the security in Flight Connections in T5B and T5C is a doodle. The exception is if you do not have the boarding pass for your onward flight - this would require you returning to T5A to the BA customer service desk.

I agree with your colleagues. My only experience with EK was on a flight to Vienna and I swore off EK for life. I'd gladly pay LH or EY twice of EK to fly. Preferably LH due to *A

PS: I'm based out of BOM

vhtje wrote:

blrsea wrote:

I haven't had any bad experience with EK crew or never felt unwelcome. Same goes for BA/LH/AF too. However, transit in LHR is a royal pain, and the people manning the security counters in LHR are worse than at any other airport, rude and condescending. With many of BA flights in the new terminal 5, it's still puzzling that when transiting through LHR, you are forced to go back to the main terminal taking the underground train, and then come back an hour before boarding to the same terminal. Not sure why this was done. This happened during both onwards journey to US and back. Happened a few years back though, Not sure whether this is still done.

I am glad your ME3 experience is different to my colleagues' reported experiences.

You CAN use Flight Connections in the T5B and T5C satellite terminals. Meaning you can transfer T5B to T5B or T5B to T5C (for example; work out the remaining combinations yourself!) without schlepping all the way to T5A. It is possible and the security in Flight Connections in T5B and T5C is a doodle. The exception is if you do not have the boarding pass for your onward flight - this would require you returning to T5A to the BA customer service desk.

We had boarding passes for the onward flight as it was provided when we checked in. However, when we tried to go to the departure terminal, we were turned back by security and asked to come back 1 hour before the flight.

To me this is one of the big missed points on ANET. People think India is low yield VFR. In reality, India plays a big role in helping American and EU carriers maintain frequencies between the US and EU (especially during the winter which is peak to India). This is partly why US carriers have resisted nonstops to India (AI screwed things up by offering so many nonstops). BA absolutely gets a ton of traffic on the US/India routes. OW FF is the US are basically forced to use BA. In India, BA has a very good reputation with very affluent indians as well. Even CX had said a decade or so ago that they wouldnt launch another SFO-HKG flight until they could launch BLR from HKG. The 9W/DL/AF/KL/VS partnership is essentially giving cheap EU-US fares to be linked to EU-India fares. ITs a win win for everyone - 9W can offer US tickets cheap (and make money on the EU-India legs) while Eu/US carriers give their cheap seat quota between US-EU to India flights (hurting the ME3) and push prices for US-EU flights up.

CaliguyNYC wrote:

To me this is one of the big missed points on ANET. People think India is low yield VFR. In reality, India plays a big role in helping American and EU carriers maintain frequencies between the US and EU (especially during the winter which is peak to India). This is partly why US carriers have resisted nonstops to India (AI screwed things up by offering so many nonstops). BA absolutely gets a ton of traffic on the US/India routes. OW FF is the US are basically forced to use BA. In India, BA has a very good reputation with very affluent indians as well. Even CX had said a decade or so ago that they wouldnt launch another SFO-HKG flight until they could launch BLR from HKG. The 9W/DL/AF/KL/VS partnership is essentially giving cheap EU-US fares to be linked to EU-India fares. ITs a win win for everyone - 9W can offer US tickets cheap (and make money on the EU-India legs) while Eu/US carriers give their cheap seat quota between US-EU to India flights (hurting the ME3) and push prices for US-EU flights up.

This is a great opportunity for the US3 to team up with their EU alliance partners to take on the ME3. While the laptop ban has hurt the ME3, if the US3 can match the service levels and food (Indian options) of the ME3 and LH/SQ the can dent ME3 in a big way and probably cut them to size.

Am I the only one that finds that BA's network in India is quite small for the its potential? It serves 5 destinations with a total of 7 flights per day. BA's lunch in the Indian market is being eaten multiple times a day by other carriers. LHR-DEL and LHR-BOM should be markets BA serves 5 x daily.

incitatus wrote:

Am I the only one that finds that BA's network in India is quite small for the its potential? It serves 5 destinations with a total of 7 flights per day. BA's lunch in the Indian market is being eaten multiple times a day by other carriers. LHR-DEL and LHR-BOM should be markets BA serves 5 x daily.

There has always been a UK-India bilateral which imposed restrictions on the number of flights and Indian destinations in order to protect AI. Indeed, the reason why VS was able to inaugurate twice-weekly flights from LHR to DEL was because AI was too disorganised and/or incompetent to utilise its right to fly 19 times a week, so the unutilised route entitlement was granted to VS.

However, in in February 2017 there was another easing of the restrictions which abolished limits to cities such as Chennai and Kolkata. Welcome though this is, BA just can't make a big increase in flights due to competition from AI, 9W and VS, not to mention the perennial issue of how to best utilise valuable LHR slots.

This is just my personal observation from a recent trip. I recently flew BOS-LHR-India and back with BA, in J. I can tell you that at my company that is the route most people fly. However, on the LHR-India routes, looking around the J cabin I would guess that most passengers were UK based.

sq421 wrote:

This is a great opportunity for the US3 to team up with their EU alliance partners to take on the ME3. While the laptop ban has hurt the ME3, if the US3 can match the service levels and food (Indian options) of the ME3 and LH/SQ the can dent ME3 in a big way and probably cut them to size.

I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. 9W is Delta's biggest partner to India. Are saying it's just a matter of Indian meal catering to LHR/CDG/AMS with 9W taking it from there? How much does catering change purchase decisions vs. price and total travel time?

It's already been mentioned that UK-India service is stunted by bilateral rights. Is LH any better off?

Newbiepilot wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Newbiepilot wrote:

Absolutely. BA has one of the deepest networks in the United States and India. A significant number of people connect on BA. Their fares can be attractive. BA and LH still carry a significant amount of the US to India traffic even though the Middle East carriers took a significant pierce of the market.

I understand your rationale, but can you point to any data, specifically compared to LH, EK, and AI services?

Yes I have a source. BA is number 3 in the US to India market

The OAG traffic data also show that Emirates and Air India lead the total US-India market, each with around 60% more passengers than third placed BA, who is just ahead of United. Lufthansa is fifth, followed by the other two of the Gulf Big Three, namely Qatar Airways in sixth and Etihad in seventh place. The top ten for O&D traffic between India and the US is completed by number eight-ranked American Airlines, ninth placed Delta and Jet Airways at number ten.
https://centreforaviation.com/insights/ ... oom-201854

Thanks for the link and citation.

MIflyer12 wrote:

sq421 wrote:

This is a great opportunity for the US3 to team up with their EU alliance partners to take on the ME3. While the laptop ban has hurt the ME3, if the US3 can match the service levels and food (Indian options) of the ME3 and LH/SQ the can dent ME3 in a big way and probably cut them to size.

I'm not sure what you're suggesting here. 9W is Delta's biggest partner to India. Are saying it's just a matter of Indian meal catering to LHR/CDG/AMS with 9W taking it from there? How much does catering change purchase decisions vs. price and total travel time?

It's already been mentioned that UK-India service is stunted by bilateral rights. Is LH any better off?

What I intend to say is, there's a huge potential for US based airlines to up their game. Catering of Indian/vegetarian and Jain food is a very important factor for a large number of Indians specially the Gujarati and Marwari communities who have a large disposable income and a significant diaspora in the US.

9W would obviously be Delta's biggest partner to India, who else would they team up with? KLM doesn't cover all destinations in India. Heck they're just restarting AMS-BOM.

LH is much better off in terms of the product as well as the service (which includes catering and Indian nationality crews). Off late they have been marketing themselves in India as a "more Indian airline than you think". This definitely adds to the perception.

CaliguyNYC wrote:

OW FF is the US are basically forced to use BA.

Not at all. There are plenty of oneworld frequent flyers in the U.S. - I know many of them - who regularly use Qatar to travel to/from India. I'm not questioning that BA itself does, indeed, carry significant volume between the two countries - the carrier unquestionably does - but it is by no means the the only option for oneworld-aligned/captive frequent flyers.

incitatus wrote:

Am I the only one that finds that BA's network in India is quite small for the its potential? It serves 5 destinations with a total of 7 flights per day. BA's lunch in the Indian market is being eaten multiple times a day by other carriers. LHR-DEL and LHR-BOM should be markets BA serves 5 x daily.

No. As said - India is really two markets, it's both business/yield and VFR/volume. BA has a natural, structural advantage among European carriers (and, frankly, western carriers writ large) given the enormous economical, cultural and political ties between the two countries that persist to this day. But even with that, BA has - over the years - smartly evolved its India network, much like the rest of its network to/from LHR, to be tailored towards the yield as opposed to volume segment. Could BA fill five daily widebodies to DEL and BOM? Sure, of course. The problem would be that filling that many seats would necessitate yields far, far below that required for BA to dedicate a precious LHR slot pair. BA happily lets lower-cost competitors like Air India, Jet and the Gulf carriers soak up that excess, lower-yielding demand.

From DEL, no, given AI's nonstop flights. From outside DEL, maybe, but I think even this traffic has definitely shrinked in recent years due to ME3 competition.

Don't get be wrong, BA is still doing well from BOM/BLR/MAA, but a majority of this traffic (especially BOM traffic) is UK-based rather than US based. If you fly India to US, today most will choose LH, AI, or ME3 over BA due to greater convenience/service and/or lower fares.

commavia wrote:

BA happily lets lower-cost competitors like Air India, Jet and the Gulf carriers soak up that excess, lower-yielding demand.

I wouldn't call Jet a lower-cost alternative than BA these days; their fares are actually similar, and many people, especially Indians, will find 9W's 77W more welcoming/modern than BA's B77E. For example, 9W is the #1 player on the BOM-LHR route, which is one of the most premium sectors out of BOM.

I do, however, agree with you that Gulf Carriers get more of the lower-cost demand, and even AI to some extent. Now DEL-LHR is priced reasonably high, but on BOM-LHR sector AI is nearly always the cheapest, non-stop or otherwise, given that BOM is not AI hub, poor timings especially on the BOM side, and competition from 9W/BA.

MIflyer12 wrote:

It's already been mentioned that UK-India service is stunted by bilateral rights. Is LH any better off?

I thought part of the reason LH used the 748 to BLR rather than larger 388 with it's larger premium cabins (this is the big shuttle run through FRA from SFO for highend IT firms) was that the German/India bilateral specified that the biggest Aircraft that could be used was a 747 (type not specified, but this bilateral would have been introduced long before the -800i was even launched, so likely designed to have been a -400)

I do, however, agree with you that Gulf Carriers get more of the lower-cost demand, and even AI to some extent. Now DEL-LHR is priced reasonably high, but on BOM-LHR sector AI is nearly always the cheapest, non-stop or otherwise, given that BOM is not AI hub, poor timings especially on the BOM side, and competition from 9W/BA.

AI's BOM-LHR flights depart at the ugly time of 0630, hardly worth going to bed if you need to get up five hours before departure. The return flights arrive at 0230, another bad time. I'm wondering if these times are determined by AI's arrival and departure slot times at LHR, namely 1130 and 1315.

Bhoy wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

It's already been mentioned that UK-India service is stunted by bilateral rights. Is LH any better off?

I thought part of the reason LH used the 748 to BLR rather than larger 388 with it's larger premium cabins (this is the big shuttle run through FRA from SFO for highend IT firms) was that the German/India bilateral specified that the biggest Aircraft that could be used was a 747 (type not specified, but this bilateral would have been introduced long before the -800i was even launched, so likely designed to have been a -400)

The Germany-India bilateral agreement restricts airlines of both countries to operating "Any aircraft (capacity not exceeding B747)", so LH could not use anything bigger than its 747-8s . LH and other airlines have requested a change to the agreements to permit the use of A380s, but the Indian government refused these requests as Indian carriers were not fully taking up their full entitlement.

However, there was a loosening of the restriction, so Emirates and Singapore started to operate their A380s to DEL from DXB and SIN, followed by LH in October 2014 from FRA.

Hi guys,

I thought I'd use my lunch break to get some quick numbers from Sabre (2017 up to date, all connecting traffic between USA & CAN and India, Hubs exceeding 50 PPDEW).

HUB , PPDEW (Pax per day each way)
DXB 1678
LHR 732
AUH 786
DOH 679
DEL 483
FRA 476
AMS 396
BOM 301
EWR 288
CDG 253
HKG 226
ORD 216
JFK 184
YYZ 181
IST 126
MUC 104
BOS 103
KWI 102
DFW 96
PEK 95
SIN 92
ZRH 89
PVG 80
LAX 74
SEA 73
ICN 70
CAN 63

And, to answer the question of the topic, by marketing airlines (you'll see that BA has significantly fewer PPDEW than LHR in total because of AI, Virgin, AA etc., see below)

Airline , PPDEW
EMIRATES 1660
ETIHAD AIRWAYS 739
QATAR AIRWAYS 678
AIR INDIA LIMITED 649
BRITISH AIRWAYS P.L.C. 461
DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA AG 454
UNITED AIRLINES INC. 345
AIR CANADA 313
JET AIRWAYS (INDIA) LIMITED 278
DELTA AIR LINES INC. 200
CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD.189
AIR FRANCE 132
TURKISH AIRLINES INC.124
KLM ROYAL DUTCH AIRLINES 119
KUWAIT AIRWAYS 102
AIR CHINA LIMITED 95
SINGAPORE AIRLINES LIMITED 92
CHINA EASTERN AIRLINES 78
CHINA SOUTHERN AIRLINES 63
SWISS INTERNATIONAL AIR LINES LTD 58
VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIRWAYS LIMITED 44
ASIANA AIRLINES INC. 41
AMERICAN AIRLINES INC. 38
CHINA AIRLINES 33
ALL NIPPON AIRWAYS CO. LTD. 19
JAPAN AIRLINES CO. LTD. 15
SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES 15
KOREAN AIR LINES CO. LTD. 14

If we take a closer look at just LHR by marketing airline:

BRITISH AIRWAYS P.L.C. 460
AIR INDIA LIMITED 130
VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIRWAYS LIMITED 41
JET AIRWAYS (INDIA) LIMITED 29
AMERICAN AIRLINES INC. 26
AIR CANADA 11

and to round up, direct services by airlines (note that these, too, are O&D numbers, so the 121 PPDEW on UA are those who fly EWR-DEL/BOM as O&D pax without connecting at either hub)

Airline , PPDEW
AIR INDIA LIMITED 333
AIR CANADA 277
UNITED AIRLINES INC. 121

Hope this helps, best regards from hot MUC.
PL

WorldspotterPL, thanks for this, I used Sabre many years ago but never knew that this kind of information was obtainable.

My initial thoughts are that the traffic through DXB is in line with what I believed to be true as EK has 10 Indian destinations and 185 flights a week (this was in 2016, haven't got anything more recent). What has surprised me is how much EY carries vai AUH, I did a bit of digging and it's 175 weekly flights to 11 Indian destinations in 2016.

And if I understand these figures, it looks as if UA carried 345 of which 121 were direct, so the connecting traffic was 224 at EWR.

My wife has worked over the years with a number of people who have relatives in India, and people from her office travel to India now and then for business (her last two employers have Indian offices).

Out of Chicago, the choices were either the AA non-stop (before it was dropped), Air India, BA/AA with the LHR connection, or CO/UA with the EWR connection. I'm not sure how things have changed, since Qatar and EK have both started service out of ORD. For purely personal travel, it seemed that things used to skew towards BA/AA, with the connection at LHR.

Some very good, well thought-out responses here. Yes, travel between Britain and India has come a long way since the days of the R-101 . . . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R101

gunnerman wrote:

And if I understand these figures, it looks as if UA carried 345 of which 121 were direct, so the connecting traffic was 224 at EWR.

Thanks! Not totally correct, the total of 345 (may) include pax that fly on UA as marketing airline via Star hubs such as ORD, FRA or DEL with one or even all legs on the Star partner. Sabre data take some getting used to, I know. Marketing airline is the airline that purely sold the ticket, as opposed to the operating airline.

By the way, 2004 figures:

Hub , PPDEW
FRA 642
CDG 529
LHR 465
AMS 386
HKG 252
ICN 166
ORD 151
TPE 142
YYZ 132
KWI 114
DTW 94
SVO 93
EWR 92
LAX 60
JFK 56

Airline , PPDEW
AIR INDIA LIMITED 590
DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA AG 458
NORTHWEST AIRLINES INC. 258
SINGAPORE AIRLINES LIMITED 248
AIR CANADA 162
DELTA AIR LINES INC. 154
AIR FRANCE 146
BRITISH AIRWAYS P.L.C. 138
CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD. 126
KUWAIT AIRWAYS 125
AEROFLOT RUSSIAN AIRLINES 93
KLM ROYAL DUTCH AIRLINES 85
KOREAN AIR LINES CO. LTD. 82
CHINA AIRLINES 58
UNITED AIRLINES INC. 57
ASIANA AIRLINES INC. 41
CONTINENTAL AIRLINES INC. 38
SWISS INTERNATIONAL AIR LINES LTD 30
ALITALIA-COMPAGNIA AEREA ITALIANA S.P.A 29
VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIRWAYS LIMITED 29
MALAYSIA AIRLINE SYSTEM BERHAD 24
AUSTRIAN AIRLINES AG DBA AUSTRIAN 23
JAPAN AIRLINES CO. LTD. 18
AMERICAN AIRLINES INC. 17
UZBEKISTAN HAVO YULLARY - 17
THAI AIRWAYS INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC 14
AEROSVIT AIRLINES 14

LHR numbers:

AIR INDIA LIMITED 225
BRITISH AIRWAYS P.L.C. 134
KUWAIT AIRWAYS 46
VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIRWAYS LIMITED 25
AIR CANADA 13
SRILANKAN AIRLINES LIMITED 7
UNITED AIRLINES INC. 4
EMIRATES 3

Are UA's direct flights lightly loaded? It looks as if 121 is a small number bearing in mind that it operates daily from EWR to both DEL and BOM using 777-200s.

commavia wrote:

No. As said - India is really two markets, it's both business/yield and VFR/volume. BA has a natural, structural advantage among European carriers (and, frankly, western carriers writ large) given the enormous economical, cultural and political ties between the two countries that persist to this day. But even with that, BA has - over the years - smartly evolved its India network, much like the rest of its network to/from LHR, to be tailored towards the yield as opposed to volume segment. Could BA fill five daily widebodies to DEL and BOM? Sure, of course. The problem would be that filling that many seats would necessitate yields far, far below that required for BA to dedicate a precious LHR slot pair. BA happily lets lower-cost competitors like Air India, Jet and the Gulf carriers soak up that excess, lower-yielding demand.

You make an excellent and well informed point. Given its available resources - including limited slots at LHR, BA has a strategy that probably maximizes their return on its investment in the Indian market. Still, I do wonder if this is the best strategy in the long run. In the nonstop markets from London BA has an incredible advantage. But beyond London, in comparison BA does not have a very attractive schedule anymore. While competitors, like you said, attract volume, they also attract India traffic that is high-yield. Emirates in particular is very successful at filling their J cabin.