British Airways - 2
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Leeds, UK & Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect that the future fleet of BA, like many airlines, would be an A320/321 NEO mix or 737-8/-9 MAX. Don't think the smaller A319/737-7 will be too popular with the heavier engines and wings, much like the -500 was a popular classic, but the -600 was considered something of a dog. The consensus in the industry seems to be the A320 and the 737-8 are the baseline models.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd expect the lower end to be covered by the C-series or upgraded/re-engined E195's if BA did not order the A319NEO (Which I think they would order, just less of them than of the larger variants).
Snow performance
Analysis of departures of major carriers from LHR scheduled in 12 hours between 1200 midday and 2359 midnight on Friday 18 January 2013
UK
Virgin 15 scheduled, 15 operated, zero cancelled
BA 194 scheduled, 49 operated, 75% cancelled
Overseas
Aer Lingus 14 scheduled, 6 cancelled, 43% cancelled
Air Canada 7 scheduled, 7 operated, zero cancelled
American 8 scheduled, 7 operated, 12% cancelled
Gulf carriers (EK, EY, QR) 10 scheduled, 10 operated, zero cancelled
SAS 14 scheduled, 6 cancelled, 43% cancelled
United 8 scheduled, 8 operated, zero cancelled
Source : Flightstats
Same airport. Same runways. Same snow.
UK
Virgin 15 scheduled, 15 operated, zero cancelled
BA 194 scheduled, 49 operated, 75% cancelled
Overseas
Aer Lingus 14 scheduled, 6 cancelled, 43% cancelled
Air Canada 7 scheduled, 7 operated, zero cancelled
American 8 scheduled, 7 operated, 12% cancelled
Gulf carriers (EK, EY, QR) 10 scheduled, 10 operated, zero cancelled
SAS 14 scheduled, 6 cancelled, 43% cancelled
United 8 scheduled, 8 operated, zero cancelled
Source : Flightstats
Same airport. Same runways. Same snow.
Last edited by WHBM; 19th Jan 2013 at 08:13.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What were the stats for Air France, KLM and Lufthansa? I'm trying to work out why you include 7 long-haul airlines with limited operations against BA who have a large network of short-haul routes. I've read that LHR went down to 6 movements per hour at one stage... so it's hardly surprising that BA was the most affected.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Stockholm Sweden
Age: 74
Posts: 569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A United B767 can stand at LHR for 5 hrs, and then operate its flight. No canx.
It doesn't come back.
A BA A319 will stand there for 5 hrs, and then operate its flight, but arrive back in LHR about 8 hrs late. BA runs out of short haul aircraft.
Here in Stockholm we operated 3 out of 5 flights to LHR. First on time, second 5 hrs late and third 5 hrs late, both waiting for landing slots at LHR. The third left ARN at about the time the 5th should have.
There was not enough runway capacity at LHR.
It doesn't come back.
A BA A319 will stand there for 5 hrs, and then operate its flight, but arrive back in LHR about 8 hrs late. BA runs out of short haul aircraft.
Here in Stockholm we operated 3 out of 5 flights to LHR. First on time, second 5 hrs late and third 5 hrs late, both waiting for landing slots at LHR. The third left ARN at about the time the 5th should have.
There was not enough runway capacity at LHR.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK, sometimes USA
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Swedish Steve - don't mention snow and runway capacity in the same sentence. It will only give our Government the incentive to review the current review and decide they need a different type of review to be completed by 2020.
OK, for all the long haul/short haul apologists, I've divided BA up on that basis.
Long haul :
65 scheduled, 27 cancelled, 38 operated, 42% cancelled
Short haul :
131 scheduled, 119 cancelled, 12 operated, 91% cancelled
Long haul :
65 scheduled, 27 cancelled, 38 operated, 42% cancelled
Short haul :
131 scheduled, 119 cancelled, 12 operated, 91% cancelled
Last edited by WHBM; 19th Jan 2013 at 10:38.
I've read that LHR went down to 6 movements per hour at one stage... so it's hardly surprising that BA was the most affected.
Virgin 15 scheduled, 15 operated, zero cancelled
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: leeds
Age: 77
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ airmiles
Irony aside, surely the reliability benefits of running Heathrow at say 95% of rated capacity with 3 runways versus 100% with 2 must be an integral part of the Davies inquiry. Simulating normal working is all very well, but what happens on the worst five performance days of the year is very important to the case.
Irony aside, surely the reliability benefits of running Heathrow at say 95% of rated capacity with 3 runways versus 100% with 2 must be an integral part of the Davies inquiry. Simulating normal working is all very well, but what happens on the worst five performance days of the year is very important to the case.
the reliability benefits of running Heathrow at say 95% of rated capacity with 3 runways versus 100% with 2
That it runs at 99%, with all that that implies for resilience (or lack thereof), is purely a commercial decision. I imagine that Davies and co will be capable of working that out for themselves.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: scotland
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's only 99% of the artificially limited capacity. Under FAA rules the runways would be independent and run in mixed mode. In addition there needs to be more reality with regard to arrival vortex separation with regard to the actual wind. Only on departure have I ever had any vortex encounter, easily predicted by the slack wind and easily handled, at least in the 74.
It's only 99% of the artificially limited capacity. Under FAA rules the runways would be independent and run in mixed mode.
And the fact that LHR doesn't operate in mixed mode has nothing to do with the fact that FAA rules don't apply.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: leeds
Age: 77
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ Dave Reid
Sure, agree, but buying out or expropriating 4% of existing slots ain't going to happen. Maybe the moment when you have a shedload of slots to dish out is the moment to enforce it on all parties as part of the deal. Is there an estimate of the annual delay cost at Heathrow to the total air traveller/airline/airport system?
Sure, agree, but buying out or expropriating 4% of existing slots ain't going to happen. Maybe the moment when you have a shedload of slots to dish out is the moment to enforce it on all parties as part of the deal. Is there an estimate of the annual delay cost at Heathrow to the total air traveller/airline/airport system?
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: "It's only 99% of the artificially limited capacity. Under FAA rules the runways would be independent and run in mixed mode."
BTW, it's CAA rules that apply in the UK, not FAA.
Quote: "Mixed mode would add about 15% to runway capacity. It would arguably add nothing to resilience, since commercial pressures would ensure that movements would grow pro-rata and utilisation would be back up at 99%."
The trouble with mixed mode is:
(1) it does not address congestion and delays in the air (stacking) and on the airport (queing to take off);
(2) it does not provide a long term remedy to the UK's lack of hub capacity: LHR still needs two more rwys;
(3) it will lead to more noise for flightpath residents who lose their daily half-day of quiet, so politically unacceptable.
Maybe it could be used just while the rwys are being built. Maybe it could be used to illustrate to flightpath residents that more rwys is a better option. But as a long term answer - no chance.
BTW, it's CAA rules that apply in the UK, not FAA.
Quote: "Mixed mode would add about 15% to runway capacity. It would arguably add nothing to resilience, since commercial pressures would ensure that movements would grow pro-rata and utilisation would be back up at 99%."
The trouble with mixed mode is:
(1) it does not address congestion and delays in the air (stacking) and on the airport (queing to take off);
(2) it does not provide a long term remedy to the UK's lack of hub capacity: LHR still needs two more rwys;
(3) it will lead to more noise for flightpath residents who lose their daily half-day of quiet, so politically unacceptable.
Maybe it could be used just while the rwys are being built. Maybe it could be used to illustrate to flightpath residents that more rwys is a better option. But as a long term answer - no chance.
Last edited by Fairdealfrank; 19th Jan 2013 at 23:04.
The trouble with mixed mode is:
(1) it does not address congestion and delays in the air (stacking) and on the airport (queing to take off);
(2) it does not provide a long term remedy to the UK's lack of hub capacity: LHR still needs two more rwys;
(3) it will lead to more noise for flightpath residents who lose their daily half-day of quiet, so politically unacceptable.
(1) it does not address congestion and delays in the air (stacking) and on the airport (queing to take off);
(2) it does not provide a long term remedy to the UK's lack of hub capacity: LHR still needs two more rwys;
(3) it will lead to more noise for flightpath residents who lose their daily half-day of quiet, so politically unacceptable.
As I said in a previous post:
mixed mode is the ultimate lose-lose scenario
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: "No argument there - I certainly wasn't proposing mixed mode as a solution, simply responding to the post that suggested it would already be in use today, if only FAA rules applied."
Isn't there some new-ish arrangement that allows limited mixed mode to clear backlogs in the events of incidents or in adverse weather conditions?
Isn't there some new-ish arrangement that allows limited mixed mode to clear backlogs in the events of incidents or in adverse weather conditions?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hope its ok to ask the following on here. I did post similar on another forum but as yet no reply.
I see that Boeing 737 G-DOCE returned from Sofia maintenance today after a 19 day stay. Boeing 737 G-DOCN left for maintenance at Sofia this morning. I think usually the 737s go to BA Engineering at Glasgow, although both Glasgow and Prestwick are both very busy at the moment with Airbus work. Quite a few of the 737s have had long maintemance checks recently and some a repaint. Hopefully this, along with extra A319s, will enable the summer schedule to run smoothly.
Just a thought but is there scope for BA in times of extreme weather and such like at Heathrow to operate more flights temporarily from Gatwick? I have transferred several times LGW-LHR and vice versa and it hasn't been too bad at all.
As always any comments and views welcome..
V.
I see that Boeing 737 G-DOCE returned from Sofia maintenance today after a 19 day stay. Boeing 737 G-DOCN left for maintenance at Sofia this morning. I think usually the 737s go to BA Engineering at Glasgow, although both Glasgow and Prestwick are both very busy at the moment with Airbus work. Quite a few of the 737s have had long maintemance checks recently and some a repaint. Hopefully this, along with extra A319s, will enable the summer schedule to run smoothly.
Just a thought but is there scope for BA in times of extreme weather and such like at Heathrow to operate more flights temporarily from Gatwick? I have transferred several times LGW-LHR and vice versa and it hasn't been too bad at all.
As always any comments and views welcome..
V.
Last edited by vectisman; 20th Jan 2013 at 20:56. Reason: Spelling
Isn't there some new-ish arrangement that allows limited mixed mode to clear backlogs in the events of incidents or in adverse weather conditions?
Heathrow Noise: Operational Freedoms trial