Bristol Airport
fox1
Bristol Airport
Of course the majority of visitors from overseas will arrive at London
Heathrow or London Gatwick. From there one can reach Bath by train or coach
quite easily, but there is another possibility.
If you are lucky you may be able to get a flight to Lulsgate, the airport
of Bristol. This is a small pleasant facility -- and one can hope to pass
through the airport very quickly. From Lulsgate, the luxurious way to Bath
is by taxi. The journey time is about 40 minutes and, at the moment, the
fare is about £25. The cheap and cheerful way to Bath is to get a bus from
the airport direct to the Bristol Railway Station called Bristol
Templemeads. From there you can catch a train direct to Bath (= Bath Spa).
Then catch a number 18 Bus to the University from the Bus Station adjacent
to the railway station.
Transatlantic flights to Dublin sometimes connect with flights from Dublin
to Lulsgate. Here is a list of airports from which Lulsgate can be reached
by a direct flight. There are scheduled connections via these airports to
and from almost everywhere. Notice especially that Dublin, Edinburgh,
Frankfurt, New York and Paris are on the list. This information will be
updated as time goes by.
Airports offering direct flights to Bristol
* Aberdeen
* Amsterdam
* Belfast
* Boston
* Cork
* Dublin
* Edinburgh
* Frankfurt
* Glasgow
* Guernsey
* Isles of Scilly
* Jersey
* Derry/Londonderry
* Newcastle
* New York (JFK)
* Paris
* Plymouth
Alis...@dalhug.demon.co.uk
However, if you are going to Bristol Airport don't try
to follow the road signs through the city,they are
buggers to follow.
Malcolm Weir
On Sun, 19 Apr 1998 14:00:50 +0100, fox1 <fo...@edinburgh.airport.com> caused
to appear as if it was written:
>Bristol Airport
>Transatlantic flights to Dublin sometimes connect with flights from Dublin
>to Lulsgate. Here is a list of airports from which Lulsgate can be reached
>by a direct flight. There are scheduled connections via these airports to
>and from almost everywhere. Notice especially that Dublin, Edinburgh,
>Frankfurt, New York and Paris are on the list. This information will be
>updated as time goes by.
OK, I'll bite:
Who operates scheduled flights from Bristol to JFK?
Malc.
martin
On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 01:03:08 GMT, ma...@mci2000.com (Malcolm Weir)
wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Apr 1998 14:00:50 +0100, fox1 <fo...@edinburgh.airport.com> caused
>to appear as if it was written:
>
>>Bristol Airport
>
>
>OK, I'll bite:
>
>Who operates scheduled flights from Bristol to JFK?
Aer Fungus via Dublin (as they promote most UK regionals as a through
service with American Immigration done at Dublin)
>Malc.
Malcolm Weir
On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 07:48:22 GMT, and...@mcmail.com (martin) caused to
appear as if it was written:
>On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 01:03:08 GMT, ma...@mci2000.com (Malcolm Weir)
>wrote:
>>Who operates scheduled flights from Bristol to JFK?
>Aer Fungus via Dublin (as they promote most UK regionals as a through
>service with American Immigration done at Dublin)
Ah, as in "not from Bristol to JKF"! Got it!
Bristol-Dublin-JFK is hardly "direct", even by the bizarre airline behavior
of claiming that "same flight number, but any number of stops, is direct".
The EI flights are EI104/282, change of aircraft (A330->F50) at Dublin...
Malc.
martin
On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 18:15:07 GMT, ma...@mci2000.com (Malcolm Weir)
wrote:
>
>Ah, as in "not from Bristol to JKF"! Got it!
Got it before you did actually... but there and again with code share
now.. how many flights operate from where you want to go to where you
want to arrive?? AA Manchester-Frisco is via Chicago but doesnt
say so.. United from South America to Heathrow is via intermediate
points but doesnt say so. There are hundreds one could quote, so EI
are jumping on the bandwaggon.. you can fly to the states from your
local airport on EI.. at a cheap through fare!(direct or with a touch
down as the case may be)
martin
Malcolm Weir
On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 18:45:10 GMT, and...@mcmail.com (martin) caused to
appear as if it was written:
>On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 18:15:07 GMT, ma...@mci2000.com (Malcolm Weir)
>wrote:
>>Ah, as in "not from Bristol to JKF"! Got it!
>Got it before you did actually...
Cool. Have a medal.
>but there and again with code share
>now.. how many flights operate from where you want to go to where you
>want to arrive?? AA Manchester-Frisco is via Chicago but doesnt
>say so..
Well, actually you're wrong. AA55 MAN-ORD connects with AA83 ORD-SFO. AA55
only operates the MAN-ORD stage, and certainly does indicate that there is a
connection in ORD.
In fact, AA's CRS has recently become MUCH more honest about listing the old
bogus direct flights: it used to be that AA46 (SFO-ORD-LHR) was listed as a
1-stop "direct" flight, even though there was a change of plane in Chicago.
Now, SABRE lists two other flights ahead of it (via JFK and Boston), and
AA46 is shown as a connection, AA46 SFO-ORD connecting with AA46 ORD-LHR.
The old system, still used by many CRS's, is to show flights like UA931 as a
2-stop flight from Brussels via London and San Francisco to Phoenix, which
happily ignored the fact that you changed aircraft twice en route! In fact,
I remember taking UA930 SNA-SFO and on disembarking there were agents
seeking out passengers who had missed their onward flights to London, which
had been booked as UA930... Yup, UA930 misconnected with UA930!
>United from South America to Heathrow is via intermediate
>points but doesnt say so.
Sure does on SABRE. You need a new CRS...
>There are hundreds one could quote, so EI
>are jumping on the bandwaggon.. you can fly to the states from your
>local airport on EI.. at a cheap through fare!(direct or with a touch
>down as the case may be)
No. EI lists a connection in Dublin and has a change of flight number.
This is NOT "direct" service, by any stretch of the imagination or any
definition. It may be convenient...
>martin
Malc.
martin
On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 19:05:39 GMT, ma...@mci2000.com (Malcolm Weir)
wrote:
>Sure does on SABRE. You need a new CRS...
Take a look at your Heathrow Arrivals and departures board which is
live on the net. It will show you UA from Buenos Aires and
Galilleo still does show it as does Worldspan. and MAN Arrivals
board was showing A54 from San Fransisco too when I was there.
and not everyone in the world uses or has access to Sabre ! The fact
remains that airlines are still advertising flights between two cities
as through services when they are not. I was talking to an American
recently who flew Virgin to LHR and was onward with Virgin to Kuala
Lumpur only to find it was a Malaysian flight with three Virgin
stewardesses on board - he did NOT like it!! and no - he had not been
warned in advance that it was such a service. There are a lot of
people out there that dont know they are changing not only aircraft,
but airlines as well!
martin
martin
On Wed, 22 Apr 1998 15:25:27 GMT, XXXY...@no-spam.demon.co.uk (High
Flier) wrote:
>On Wed, 22 Apr 1998 07:52:02 GMT, and...@mcmail.com (martin) wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 19:05:39 GMT, ma...@mci2000.com (Malcolm Weir)
>>wrote:
>>
>
>It is a legal requirement, that at the time of making a booking the
>passenger is told that it is a code-share flight and not operated by
>the selling airline, but by the operating airline. ie, if a passenger
>booked with VS, say JFK - LHR - KUL, that pax must be told that the
>LHR - KUL route is not operated by VS, but by MS !
Hope it wasnt Egyptair!
and the American I was talking to was not advised by his corporate
agent at that side that it was an mH flight operated aircraft - he
advised!!!!
martin
Malcolm Weir
On Wed, 22 Apr 1998 15:25:25 GMT, XXXY...@no-spam.demon.co.uk (High Flier)
caused to appear as if it was written:
>On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 19:05:39 GMT, ma...@mci2000.com (Malcolm Weir)
>wrote:
>>The old system, still used by many CRS's, is to show flights like UA931 as a
>>2-stop flight from Brussels via London and San Francisco to Phoenix, which
>>happily ignored the fact that you changed aircraft twice en route! In fact,
>>I remember taking UA930 SNA-SFO and on disembarking there were agents
>>seeking out passengers who had missed their onward flights to London, which
>>had been booked as UA930... Yup, UA930 misconnected with UA930!
>How can an airline have the same flight number operating on different
>aircraft, serving different city pairs ?
>
>That doesn't make sense !
Since when does THAT have anything to do with it? <Grin>
I have no idea how they get away with it, but it is quite common for
airlines to use the same flight number for a "tag end" or continuing
service. Possibly one of the best examples is UA001: JFK-LAX on a 767-200,
LAX-HKG on a 747-400, then HKG-DEL on a 767-300, then to London and on to
JFK.
Originally SABRE, before they acquired SOME vestiges of honesty, and most
other CRS's, would list this flight as being a rather length 3 stop flight
from JFK to LHR (the wrong way round), even though there are at least three
different aircraft involved.
And, as Martin has posted, UA976 appears, in some CRS/GDS displays, as a
one-stop flight from EZE to LHR. SABRE shows it as a connection in JFK to
the same flight number (i.e. shows the thing relatively honestly as a two
aircraft trip).
Personally, I think SABRE looks at the aircraft type, and (reasonably)
refuses to display same-flight number, change of aircraft *type*, but it
can't spot same-flight number, change of aircraft to another of the same
type.
This was, of course, all an effort to get to billing in the available flight
displays: people prefer non-stop to one-stop, one-stop to change of plane.
Malc.
Andrew Cruickshank
High Flier wrote:
>
> How can an airline have the same flight number operating on different
> aircraft, serving different city pairs ?
>
> That doesn't make sense !
>
Don't know if it's that common now but it was very common
in the 80's with TWA - lots of 727s feeding into LHR T3 from
all over Europe and connecting on with trans-atlantic
services with same flight number.
--------------
Andrew.
Malcolm Weir
On Wed, 22 Apr 1998 21:17:08 +0100, Andrew Cruickshank <and...@openkast.com>
caused to appear as if it was written:
>High Flier wrote:
Was that TWA or Pan Am?
Certainly, one of the most infamous flight numbers in history left Germany
as a B727, transformed itself into a B747 "Clipper Maid of the Skies" at
LHR, and, well, didn't make it past Lockerbie. PA103.
>Andrew.
Malc.
Andrew Cruickshank
Malcolm Weir wrote:
>
>
> >Don't know if it's that common now but it was very common
> >in the 80's with TWA - lots of 727s feeding into LHR T3 from
> >all over Europe and connecting on with trans-atlantic
> >services with same flight number.
>
> Was that TWA or Pan Am?
>
> Certainly, one of the most infamous flight numbers in history left Germany
> as a B727, transformed itself into a B747 "Clipper Maid of the Skies" at
> LHR, and, well, didn't make it past Lockerbie. PA103.
>
Both. I'd sadly forgotten about Pan Am being there at the
same time.
-----------------
Andrew.
Phil Layton
On Thu, 23 Apr 1998 19:06:12 GMT, XXXY...@no-spam.demon.co.uk (High
Flier) wrote:
>How on earth do they get away with that. What about the problems
>whilst inflight and talking to ground control. Three different
>aircraft using the same flight number operating different routes.
Only recently I saw UAL001 coming off LAM to land at LHR, while UAL001
took of LHR enroute to JFK.(at the same time!)
It is possible for us as we identify an aircraft through a 'computer
identificaton number' assigned to each flight so that
UAL1 Delhi-LHR would be say 015
UAL1 LHR-JFK would be say 754
and then we would activate/update 015 or 754 as required.
If the aircraft involved were to pass through the same sector, then we
would request that they add a suffix to the callsign (or whatever)
On the subject of callsign confusion, we do ask airlines to alter
callsigns if two companys flights with the same numbers regularly
conflict.
What all this has got to do with Bristol Airport beats me!
Phil Layton. Terminal Control. LATCC.
ANNA Warman
and...@mcmail.com (martin) put digits to keyboard and typed:
>ma...@mci2000.com (Malcolm Weir) wrote:
>
>>Who operates scheduled flights from Bristol to JFK?
>
>Aer Fungus via Dublin (as they promote most UK regionals as a through
>service with American Immigration done at Dublin)
If the Americans allow Immigration to be done at Dublin, why not also
at LHR and LGW? Considering the hellishness of Immigration at JFK in
terms of queues, etc, it would be an absolute godsend.
ANNA
Visit my inflight safety site at:
http://www.plsys.co.uk/~anna/inflight.htm
To reply by email, first remove .MY_BRA.
Malcolm Weir
On Sat, 25 Apr 1998 05:28:18 GMT, an...@warman.de.MY_BRA.mon.co.uk (ANNA
Warman) caused to appear as if it was written:
>and...@mcmail.com (martin) put digits to keyboard and typed:
>>Aer Fungus via Dublin (as they promote most UK regionals as a through
>>service with American Immigration done at Dublin)
>If the Americans allow Immigration to be done at Dublin, why not also
>at LHR and LGW? Considering the hellishness of Immigration at JFK in
>terms of queues, etc, it would be an absolute godsend.
Politics. As you probably no, more people living in the North East of the
United States claim to be Irish than live in Ireland. Thus, to many people,
Eire is the homeland, while the rest of the British Isles are the brutal
oppressors. Add the fact that some of those North Easterners have names
like "Kennedy" (as in President John, Senators Robert and Ted).
Canada and a couple of Islands also have off-shore US immigration
facilities.
>ANNA
Malc.
martin
>and...@mcmail.com (martin) put digits to keyboard and typed:
>
>>ma...@mci2000.com (Malcolm Weir) wrote:
>>
>>>Who operates scheduled flights from Bristol to JFK?
>>
>>Aer Fungus via Dublin (as they promote most UK regionals as a through
>>service with American Immigration done at Dublin)
>
>If the Americans allow Immigration to be done at Dublin, why not also
>at LHR and LGW? Considering the hellishness of Immigration at JFK in
>terms of queues, etc, it would be an absolute godsend.
Anna they tried it out in Shannon years ago, and perhaps someone
else may know, but I remember a comment being made in Business
Travellers World that a form of pre immigration had been tried out at
Gatportairwick. Where one places ones palm on a *reader* and this is
then *cleared * by the Washington Data Base on Line, and Immigration
is complete. The Handprint was valid for 12 months .. perhaps
someone can elaborate on this??
martin
Malcolm Weir
On Sun, 26 Apr 1998 08:23:56 GMT, and...@mcmail.com (martin) caused to
appear as if it was written:
>>If the Americans allow Immigration to be done at Dublin, why not also
>>at LHR and LGW? Considering the hellishness of Immigration at JFK in
>>terms of queues, etc, it would be an absolute godsend.
>Anna they tried it out in Shannon years ago, and perhaps someone
>else may know, but I remember a comment being made in Business
>Travellers World that a form of pre immigration had been tried out at
>Gatportairwick. Where one places ones palm on a *reader* and this is
>then *cleared * by the Washington Data Base on Line, and Immigration
>is complete. The Handprint was valid for 12 months .. perhaps
>someone can elaborate on this??
That's the INS FastPass system, available only to US citizens and (recently)
resident aliens.
It's generally installed at major *US* checkpoints, such as JFK, and while
it helps, it really only benefits those who would normally go through
immigration without anything more than a swipe of the passport and "how long
have you been away?"...
>martin
Malc.