Sri Lanka Aviation

**4R-ALA** · 29-08-2013, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by Banuthev

Do we have even sufficient passenger demand on this route?

this is utter bullshit, our president just visits some random place with a political motive and at the end suggests that the two nations should establish direct flights, honestly in which country does the national airline have to wait until the president says which route to launch?

why on earth then does UL have a chairman and CEO?, wait maybe just to warm a chair the entire day!!!!!!!

**Azamh** · 29-08-2013, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by Banuthev

Small correction, Malaysia Airlines operates 10 flights a week not double daily. As far as I know only SriLankan Airlines and Malaysia Airlines serving the KUL-CMB market.

Do we have even sufficient passenger demand on this route?

FYI where ever our president flies he says they are going to have a airlink but nothing is viable if iam mistaken please correct as i know following Destination they plan when ever he fly,
1.) Vietnam
2.) Philipines
3.) Kenya
4.) Tanzania
5.) Seychells
6.) Nepal
7.) Palestine
8.) Iran
Now Belarus - If he goes to Moon then will have direct link to promote better people to people contact......

**Serendib** · 29-08-2013, 07:54 PM

‘THAI Smile’ launches direct flights between Bangkok and Colombo.. THAI Smile, a new THAI business unit, will initially operate four Bangkok-Colombo roundtrip flights a week and will increase to daily flights a week, effective 01 December 2013.. (The Island)

**SKYBUCK729** · 29-08-2013, 08:48 PM

Originally posted by Serendib

‘THAI Smile’ launches direct flights between Bangkok and Colombo.. THAI Smile, a new THAI business unit, will initially operate four Bangkok-Colombo roundtrip flights a week and will increase to daily flights a week, effective 01 December 2013.. (The Island)

WHAT a pity , that Thai ( the full service airline ) had to disconnect CMB, from its network.

**SKYBUCK729** · 29-08-2013, 08:52 PM

Originally posted by CalgaryLankan

I remember during previous President's time, UL used to detour aircraft to drop off President and his entourage and then continue the flight to its final destination. On completion of the state visit again UL aircraft will fly to same location as a diversion and pick them.

YEAH, I remember when President Premadasa , flew to Harare , to attend the non-aligned summit, he flew on an Europe -bound Air Lanka b747.

**SKYBUCK729** · 29-08-2013, 08:57 PM

Originally posted by dramirez

I also think LGW wasn't the right move. LGW is touted as a holiday airport, but by having a LHR-CMB route BA could have tapped into expat markets in UK/USA/Canada and connecting tourists from North America and other parts of Europe... as well as catering for UK-based tourists.

AND passengers , who have recently flown on the route complains , of very poor service.Added to that is the unfriendly attitude of ticket office staff at CMB.

**Praetorian** · 29-08-2013, 09:26 PM

Originally posted by SKYBUCK729

AND passengers , who have recently flown on the route complains , of very poor service.Added to that is the unfriendly attitude of ticket office staff at CMB.

The real question is will SL allow BA to fly the LHR-CMB route?

And the answer is no. Why? Because we need " to preserve the national carrier". Hikz.

CMB will never grow as a hub (the GoSLs much loved catchphrase for many things) because of idiot restrictions and roadblocks thrown up like this. SL needs an open skies program. If UL sinks because it can't deal with competition that is the fault of UL and it's poor management for offering a poor product (that is also regularly abused by those in power).

**UL-L10** · 29-08-2013, 10:15 PM

BA should be able to fly the LHR-CMB route, why not ?, and by UL joining One World soon it will NOT be able to stop BA flying that route should it wish to.
I heard recently that BA pax loads were not good on it's current Gatwick-Male-Colombo routing, what would happen should BA decide that it is not economic to continue that and go for a LHR-CMB instead, will UL or government of SL refuse that?, highly risky if they tried.., anyway UL are not making a huge amount on the LHR-CMB, so why not pull out and give it to BA, would free up aircraft for ULs more lucrative routes ?

Originally posted by Praetorian

The real question is will SL allow BA to fly the LHR-CMB route?

And the answer is no. Why? Because we need " to preserve the national carrier". Hikz.

CMB will never grow as a hub (the GoSLs much loved catchphrase for many things) because of idiot restrictions and roadblocks thrown up like this. SL needs an open skies program. If UL sinks because it can't deal with competition that is the fault of UL and it's poor management for offering a poor product (that is also regularly abused by those in power).

**Praetorian** · 29-08-2013, 11:00 PM

Originally posted by Dave

BA should be able to fly the LHR-CMB route, why not ?, and by UL joining One World soon it will NOT be able to stop BA flying that route should it wish to.
I heard recently that BA pax loads were not good on it's current Gatwick-Male-Colombo routing, what would happen should BA decide that it is not economic to continue that and go for a LHR-CMB instead, will UL or government of SL refuse that?, highly risky if they tried.., anyway UL are not making a huge amount on the LHR-CMB, so why not pull out and give it to BA, would free up aircraft for ULs more lucrative routes ?

Because this is SL where we have an airline named after the president thats a total failure but kept on life support by the State.
Where business decisions are over ridden by political ones (UL decides to cancel flights to Rome as its not profitable but Preso intervenes to save the link to the holy land because Malcom Ranjith asks for it).

So what do you think will happen?

I’m all for BA, Virgin carrying out the LHR-CMB route.

But it’s also ULs most lucrative (and pride) route. If BA is allowed the LHR-CMB route (in direct competition with UL) and UL starts feeling the bite, it won’t be long before the Government throws spanners in the works to “save” UL.

**dramirez** · 30-08-2013, 06:57 AM

Originally posted by Praetorian

Because this is SL where we have an airline named after the president thats a total failure but kept on life support by the State.
Where business decisions are over ridden by political ones (UL decides to cancel flights to Rome as its not profitable but Preso intervenes to save the link to the holy land because Malcom Ranjith asks for it).

So what do you think will happen?

I’m all for BA, Virgin carrying out the LHR-CMB route.

But it’s also ULs most lucrative (and pride) route. If BA is allowed the LHR-CMB route (in direct competition with UL) and UL starts feeling the bite, it won’t be long before the Government throws spanners in the works to “save” UL.

Since UL don't care about making money, it seems unlikely they will drop CMB-LHR since they have slots at LHR.

BA have limited available slots at LHR so they will look to add capacity to their key profitable routes. I know they have been trying to add services to LAD for years but there is pushback from the Angolan govt since they want to promote TAAG's LAD-LHR-LAD route... sounds familiar?!

**Serendib** · 30-08-2013, 08:16 PM

SriLankan Airlines is to increase its weekly flights from India from 48 to 60 till the year end by adding new destinations, the Airline has said.

Asia particularly India is a very important destination for the airline and it gives top priority to the region, the Airline Chairman Nishantha Wickremasinghe said in an exclusive interview to PTI yesterday.

Wickremasinghe was here on the sidelines of a reception hosted to him by Sri Lankan Permanent Representative to United Nations Ambassador Palitha Kohona.

“We now fly 48 flights a week from India and they will go up to 60 in 2014 and peak with 70 flights by 2015.

“The travellers come to Colombo for onward connection to West Asia and Far East as we plan to make Colombo an important hub,” he said.

World News Today, International News Headlines

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/international/srilankan-airlines-to-add-more-flights-from-india/article5074911.ece

World News Today: Get all latest International news headlines & live updates around the globe on World Politics, International Economy, and Current Affairs.

**Traveller** · 30-08-2013, 08:17 PM

Originally posted by Serendib

SriLankan Airlines is to increase its weekly flights from India from 48 to 60 till the year end by adding new destinations, the Airline has said.

It is not clear to which cities the airline intends to add flights to.. Mr Wickremasinghe needs to get his math right. They are already operating more than 48 flights per week, going by what they have said

**banuthev** · 30-08-2013, 08:46 PM

Originally posted by Traveller

It is not clear to which cities the airline intends to add flights to.. Mr Wickremasinghe needs to get his math right. They are already operating more than 48 flights per week, going by what they have said

Wrong article

My calculation says SriLankan operates 80 flights to India with only UL metals

It will be more flights if you add also the codeshare flights.

Bengaluru - 10 weekly on A320 (New flight operating three weekly as UL173/174 - 01:05-2.25-03:25-04:45 - WE.FRI.SA)
Chennai - 21 weekly on A320/A332/A343 (MAA flights reduced from 28 to 21 weekly. UL125/126 cancelled as per UL web)
Delhi - 7 weekly on A320
Kochi - 14 weekly on A320
Mumbai - 7 weekly on A320
Trichy - 14 weekly on A320
Trivandrum - 7 weekly on A320

I would suggest SriLankan to add Goa in it's network! SriLankan better tap only the profitable destinations in India. What do you think guys?

**AirCeylon** · 30-08-2013, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by Praetorian

Because this is SL where we have an airline named after the president thats a total failure but kept on life support by the State.
Where business decisions are over ridden by political ones (UL decides to cancel flights to Rome as its not profitable but Preso intervenes to save the link to the holy land because Malcom Ranjith asks for it).

So what do you think will happen?

I’m all for BA, Virgin carrying out the LHR-CMB route.

But it’s also ULs most lucrative (and pride) route. If BA is allowed the LHR-CMB route (in direct competition with UL) and UL starts feeling the bite, it won’t be long before the Government throws spanners in the works to “save” UL.

I must tell that UL management has decided to CXL FCO last year and to keep only CMB-MXP-CMB which was going good than Rome. Even passengers and cargo were higher than FCO, but something happend... then they said that they are going to CXL MXP and to keep FCO. I'm agree with you Praetorian....

**lordvader** · 31-08-2013, 12:51 AM

Originally posted by Banuthev

Wrong article

My calculation says SriLankan operates 80 flights to India with only UL metals

It will be more flights if you add also the codeshare flights.

Bengaluru - 10 weekly on A320 (New flight operating three weekly as UL173/174 - 01:05-2.25-03:25-04:45 - WE.FRI.SA)
Chennai - 21 weekly on A320/A332/A343 (MAA flights reduced from 28 to 21 weekly. UL125/126 cancelled as per UL web)
Delhi - 7 weekly on A320
Kochi - 14 weekly on A320
Mumbai - 7 weekly on A320
Trichy - 14 weekly on A320
Trivandrum - 7 weekly on A320

I would suggest SriLankan to add Goa in it's network! SriLankan better tap only the profitable destinations in India. What do you think guys?

What about Kolkata, Hyderabad and Ahmedabad for UL? Although MJ could also be used to serve a lot of second tier destinations in India as well

Sri Lanka Aviation

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment