British Airways orders B777-300

[ETOPS]

We have just announced our order (long expected) for 6 B777-336ER aircraft - there is also an option for 4 more. Delivery starts in 2010 to cover 787 delays - and (i'm guessing) replace some 744's eventually.

[Dysag]

I suppose the mods will dump this, but I don't understand why 50% of posters insist on putting a 'B' in front of Boeing model numbers. It's not as if anyone is going to think a 777 is an Airbus.

You can't buy a B777 from Boeing. They'd be happy to sell you a 777, though.

[Lurking123]

If dysag was a real spotter he would know that the aircraft is properly (at least under FPL terms) known as a B773.:ouch: Also, Boeing don't sell aeroplanes, they insist on selling airplanes; I rest my case. :rolleyes:

Back on thread, an interesting move by BA considering there current financial status. They either see the environment getting better or really need to move those B744s. :)

[BOEING777X]

This order was a long time coming. BA could have waited and may yet still order A350-1000's, but that likelihood diminishes with this new 777-300ER order (http://www.fleetbuzzeditorial.com/2008/08/01/ba777order).

Under the A380, BA will phase out it 747-400's and focus on 787's, 777-200ER's and 777-300ER's - merging with IB will also likely see the Spanish carrier lose its A340's too. :ok:

[Skipness One Echo]

That's a whole lot of capital needed to refleet a new fleet of A340-600s. Unless money is growing on trees down Madrid way, I suspect that will not be the first priority of the new company. Air France haven't quite flogged theirs yet and they are now quite into the B777.
Dysag - with a "B" or without, do get a life.

[ExSp33db1rd]

[QUOTE]I suppose the mods will dump this, but I don't understand why 50% of posters insist on putting a 'B' in front of Boeing model numbers. It's not as if anyone is going to think a 777 is an Airbus[/QUOTE.

Dysag - is it the wrong time of the month ? If so kindly go sulk somewhere else, who cares ? They are Boeing 777's and Airbus 380's abbreviated since time immemorial to B707 and A320 etc.

Those of us in the know - know.

The meat of the info. is what we look for, not a degree in English Language proficiency - smart a.se

I guess you've won, you wound me up.

[Final 3 Greens]

I suppose the mods will dump this, but I don't understand why 50% of posters insist on putting a 'B' in front of Boeing model numbers. It's not as if anyone is going to think a 777 is an Airbus.

Apart from Her Majesty's Press.

[Pinkman]

Are BA still taking that cancelled lease on 777s that was discussed on pprune recently?

[StoneyBridge Radar]

This order was a long time coming. BA could have waited and may yet still order A350-1000's, but that likelihood diminishes with this new 777-300ER order.

I disagree entirely. The official blurb categorically states this is interim lift, which to me translates into non-cash compensation for the B787 delays in the way of heavily discounted B773s.

Boeing saves face, retains the B787 order, adds a blue-chip carrier to the B773 portfolio, BA gets needed capacity quickly at a knock-down price, allowing accelerated retirement of less efficient B744s; everyone's a winner.

I can't see any reason why BA wouldn't go for A350-1000s when the time comes to issue the RFP for that part of the fleet. 6 B773s and 4 options in no way fulfills that requirement.

[Shaka Zulu]

This has got c*** all to do with the future aircraft order re 787's/350-1000's/or a revamped 777.
These aircraft are coming in to the fleet because of the delay to the 787 but with oil prices as high as they are now, they are not going to be used for growth but for 1 on 1 replacement for the 747's.
If oil comes down below a $100 again then we might well see these aircraft as growth.

Hence recruitment is being frozen aswell and there will be some internal shuffling going on..
Rest assured with profits down 88%, we are hurting, hence the need for a more fuel efficient aircraft pronto!

[makeapullup]

AFAIK B777-300ER is a B77W (ICAO)

Cheers:ok:

[StoneyBridge Radar]

Flightglobal confirms what I and Shaka Zulu have posted: :ok:

"British Airways has ordered six Boeing 777-300ER aircraft, and placed options on another four of the type, as an interim measure to cope with delays to the Boeing 787 programme."

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ba-orders-up-to-10-777-300ers.html

[Dysag]

I get it now, how stupid of me: B777 is an abbreviation of 777.

For your info 'A320' is the full and official Airbus-given name, not an abbreviation.

[janek62]

Does this now mean that British Airways is happy with GE engines on the B777?

[MilktrayUK]

AFAIK B777-300ER is a B77W (ICAO)

Cheers:ok:

Thanks for that bit of info, had not seen that code before. It would appear to be a new designation, which has already caused at least one incident. Giant Boeing 777 assigned to wrong LAX taxiway; AP [/URL][URL]http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=AP&date=20080627&id=8837445 (http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=AP&date=20080627&id=8837445)

It is not surprising that it has caused confusion. The ICAO website was last updated 09Apr08 and does not list this. Doc8643 - ICAO Aircraft Type Designators (http://www.icao.int/anb/ais/8643/index.cfm) My interest in this is professional, as currently implementing a system which includes processing of flight plans. Interesting how many appear to have missleading aircraft types.

[TwoOneFour]

Possibly. Although the alternative to GE on the 777-300ER is, er, glide.

[funky monkey]

cant see command coming down under 400 years tho!!!!!
and those 744's needed to go years ago!!!!
still the only job to hav in the uk tho!
enjoy the new plane smell:ok:

[CHINOOKER]

BA may be happy with having the GE engines on the new 777s,but believe me,BAs engineers won't be!!.......Compared to the Rollers they are a "pile of pooh"

[BOEING777X]

The official blurb categorically states this is interim lift, which to me translates into non-cash compensation for the B787 delays in the way of heavily discounted B773s.

I dont disagree at all with that.

The point Im making based on the shareholder presentation (not sure if anyone has seen it with the results this morning) points to flexibility in its orders - for both replacement and growth of the existing fleet.

Talks on the 77W have been ongoing since last year.

....BA's presentation makes the case of the 77W's efficiency against the 747-400, not the 787 delay. (As opined, I have no doubt that the 787 delay has indeed impacted BA's decision to order the 77W).

Of course, the 787 delay/compensation has impacted this deal, but to suggest that BA will stick with 6 77W's and exercise just 4 more and not place a follow up up order is certainly not paying attention to BA's long term vision.

Part of that vision involves the 77W family, otherwise they wouldnt have ordered it. Period.

:O

[NWSRG]

A350-1000 isn't available until, when, 2015? Add in programme delays (not unreasonable) and BA's policy of not being on the 'bleeding edge', and you will not see an A350-1000 in the fleet until 2018/19 at the earliest...

The 77W purchase allows BA to (a) park 744s and (b) get cheap capacity due to 787 delays.

And come 2015, when there will be maybe 10 or more 77Ws in the fleet, BA can make an informed call on more 77Ws, A350-1000s, or 777NGs (whatever they make look like).

Today's purchase seems the only obvious call!

[EpsilonVaz]

I get it now, how stupid of me: B777 is an abbreviation of 777.

For your info 'A320' is the full and official Airbus-given name, not an abbreviation.

Dysag mate, do us a favour and go discover the forum on airliners.net. I'm sure you'll be at home there :rolleyes:.

[Groundloop]

Part of that vision involves the 77W family, otherwise they wouldnt have ordered it. Period.

They ordered them as the 747 is getting expensive to operate and Boeing "made them an offer they couldn't refuse". ie 777s dirt cheap. Period.

[BOEING777X]

They ordered them as the 747 is getting expensive to operate and Boeing "made them an offer they couldn't refuse"


If thats the case, why didn't they order them last September?

Perhaps you can tell us the "dirt cheap" price?

I mean, why bother with just 10 frames to replace 747's?

Sure they have A380's on order, but they wont be arriving till much later on (circa 2012 (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/09/27/217208/ba-outlines-likely-a380-long-haul-routes-and-delivery-dates.html)). Neither are they a 1-for-1 replacement of the 747-400 fleet.

By 2012, BA could have a sizeable 77W fleet, adequately replacing the bulk of its 747-400's. Heck, it could even order the 747-8I and still have enough in service before the first A380 arrives.

Whenever BA announces its next tranche of orders (assumed this year), I'd be highly surprised if the 77W didnt feature again.

[Taildragger67]

Skipness1E,

With the fuel price where it is, wouldn't IB prefer to halve the number of big engines it has chewing fuel? Especially if there were economies of scale from merging some support functions with those of a sister company? Who knows, maybe even other oneworld carriers could get in on the act.

I'd suspect that most of IB's 343s are getting towards the end of their leases and the earlier 346s would be getting on for half-way through. Replacing over the next 5 years or so starts to look feasible.

Then again perhaps like others whose governments have a big stake in their countries' aerospace industries, there'd be too much face lost if the national carrier didn't have some (at least partly) home-grown long-haul heavy metal flying to the ex-colonies... :hmm:

[ReallyAnnoyed]

Does anyone know what plans BA have with the 747s? Will they be chopped up or are there buyers for them anywhere? The fuel price is the same(ish) everywhere. I have no idea how old the aircraft are :)

[Wycombe]

Some of BA 744's (G-BNLx) were among the first built, came off the line in 89/90 timeframe.

[Poof in Boots]

Only someone like KALITTA would use ex BA 744's..... Maybe he has some experience of RR engines after buying ex BA Tristars.

I understand BA are currently re-jigging schedules so that the 744's do not operate sectors over 10 hours whenever possible. Hence the 777ER going on the BKK route for the winter.

[bermudatriangle]

the increase in 777 fleet is directly commensurate with fuel efficiency.the 747-400 is a superb aeroplane,however the fuel burn per passenger is much higher than the 777.with fuel such a major cost in operations,the 777 becomes the hull of choice.

[Mr @ Spotty M]

Just a minor point to what's gone on above so far, BA have only agreed to purchase the Boeing 777-300ERs, they have not finalised the contract with Boeing yet.