British Airways - 2
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: "there reason being of course that the current configuration has been proved to be the most cost effective to build, run and maintain"
You're right Heathrow Harry! both for aircraft and cars.
Quote: "I just booked our latest trip to LHR/YVR in Club World, upper deck on the 747 and as far as I am concerned that is the way to fly, just love the 747 and upstairs it is quiet and super comfortable.
We make the flight fairly regularly and I will probably weep when the 747 retires if the replacement is not as good - will it be 777, 787 or A380 anyone know?
If it is the 777 I will be giving Virgin a call.......!"
Agree about the excellent B747, but it's eventual demise is to be expected and it's regretable that B747-8 has not been the replacement of choice.
You're right Heathrow Harry! both for aircraft and cars.
Quote: "I just booked our latest trip to LHR/YVR in Club World, upper deck on the 747 and as far as I am concerned that is the way to fly, just love the 747 and upstairs it is quiet and super comfortable.
We make the flight fairly regularly and I will probably weep when the 747 retires if the replacement is not as good - will it be 777, 787 or A380 anyone know?
If it is the 777 I will be giving Virgin a call.......!"
Agree about the excellent B747, but it's eventual demise is to be expected and it's regretable that B747-8 has not been the replacement of choice.
Last edited by Fairdealfrank; 10th Jun 2013 at 16:16.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: cornwall, uk
Posts: 1,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doubtful currently.
B787 will be seeing EWR, IAD, YYZ and YYC but not JFK.
A380 is scheduled to LAX & HKG initially, JFK is planned in the future but it's doubtful by January 14.
Basically the 787 will replace 767 routes and the 380 on 744 routes.
Hope this helps
cs
B787 will be seeing EWR, IAD, YYZ and YYC but not JFK.
A380 is scheduled to LAX & HKG initially, JFK is planned in the future but it's doubtful by January 14.
Basically the 787 will replace 767 routes and the 380 on 744 routes.
Hope this helps
cs
This would be the case as long as the revenue holds up, otherwise a drop down to the 777-300ER would be the most likely change. There are still some more of these to be delivered to BA in the future, filling the size gap between the A380 and the 787.
After many years in the 1960s-70s of leaving Vancouver to Air Canada, BA discovered that there is a lot of long-haul connecting traffic out of there to the rest of Europe, and indeed to India and Africa, and Vancouver being one of the mining engineering and also shipping centres of the world, quite an amount of business traffic. Both cities are also film/entertainment industry centres for their respective regions, London long established while Vancouver has become a West Coast cheaper (and more visually attractive) alternative to Hollywood. The days when the route was one for visiting granny in the summer on Wardair are well in the past.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently the recently announced order for 12 787-10's is rumoured to be the replacement for the LGW longhaul fleet, and that there will also be other significant changes/moving around to help make the operation profitable. (I presume the latter part is referring to shout-haul or the operation as a whole).
Apparently the recently announced order for 12 787-10's is rumoured to be the replacement for the LGW longhaul fleet, and that there will also be other significant changes/moving around to help make the operation profitable. (I presume the latter part is referring to shout-haul or the operation as a whole).
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Slough, UK
Age: 35
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turin, not strictly true.
The 737s will start to be retired from the start of this year's winter schedule. There is a natural reduction in Gatwick flying during the winter season so the retirements can be accommodated without moving any extra aircraft down.
BA are receiving 10 new A320s (1 already delivered, 9 to go). The intention is that as these are delivered, the rest of the ex-bmi A319s will go down to Gatwick to replace the remaining 737s.
A320 G-MEDK is permanently down at Gatwick as this is a higher MTOW version of the A320 so is able to do the longer flights to Tenerife and Paphos without much of a performance hit compared to the A319s. It also provides extra capacity on busy routes throughout the summer.
The intention is to keep the remaining ex-bmi A320s at Heathrow as they are mostly homogenous with the BA aircraft, along with the mid-haul A321s (which will be converted to ULD loaded).
Champ
The 737s will start to be retired from the start of this year's winter schedule. There is a natural reduction in Gatwick flying during the winter season so the retirements can be accommodated without moving any extra aircraft down.
BA are receiving 10 new A320s (1 already delivered, 9 to go). The intention is that as these are delivered, the rest of the ex-bmi A319s will go down to Gatwick to replace the remaining 737s.
A320 G-MEDK is permanently down at Gatwick as this is a higher MTOW version of the A320 so is able to do the longer flights to Tenerife and Paphos without much of a performance hit compared to the A319s. It also provides extra capacity on busy routes throughout the summer.
The intention is to keep the remaining ex-bmi A320s at Heathrow as they are mostly homogenous with the BA aircraft, along with the mid-haul A321s (which will be converted to ULD loaded).
Champ
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't see how the A319's would struggle with TFS or PFO, they should have a longer range than the A320's, as I do not believe they are de-rated at all like EZY's ones.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree - PFO is doable in a 319. Did the LGW-PFO trip in a BA A319 back in 2009.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew to ACE with BA in late April. The flight was showing as being operated by a A319 until a couple of days before. Then it was changed to a 734.
The crew said that it there had been a number of flights to PFO, TFS and ACE operated by the ex BD A319's that had encountered weight restriction problems.
From ACE a number of flights were required to make a tech stop on route to take on fuel and on the PFO this has meant on occasion a number of bags have been left behind.
The crew said that it there had been a number of flights to PFO, TFS and ACE operated by the ex BD A319's that had encountered weight restriction problems.
From ACE a number of flights were required to make a tech stop on route to take on fuel and on the PFO this has meant on occasion a number of bags have been left behind.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Southampton, U.K
Posts: 1,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The A319's must take quite a hit from their configurations then, supposedly they have a range of ~3600mi, ~1900-2200mi sectors causing problems seems very odd.
The reason for the difficulties with the A319 on the Canaries and Cyprus routes is most probably the certificated MTOW. Like the original BA aircraft these ex BMI A319s are only certificated to 64 tonnes except just two aircraft which are 68T. (Data is from G-INFO) It is only these latter aircraft that would stand any chance of operating full load on these routes and even then adverse winds could be enough to cause a fuel stop.
A319s can be certificated to much higher MTOWs such as 75T on the Germania aircraft which would have no problem operating longer routes. The reason for restricting MTOW is usually to reduce landing and en route charges. Manufacturers brochure figures are best ignored in assessing the capability of an individual operator’s aircraft since customer specifications can vary widely. I am surprised BA had not identified the problem before assigning these aircraft to those routes.
A319s can be certificated to much higher MTOWs such as 75T on the Germania aircraft which would have no problem operating longer routes. The reason for restricting MTOW is usually to reduce landing and en route charges. Manufacturers brochure figures are best ignored in assessing the capability of an individual operator’s aircraft since customer specifications can vary widely. I am surprised BA had not identified the problem before assigning these aircraft to those routes.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Solihull
Age: 60
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
787's
The first BA 787 is registered with the CAA but I understand this is where the good news ends and the first delivery flight has not taken place with rumours the second is delayed as well.
Whether or not the financials have taken place I am not sure.
Pete
Whether or not the financials have taken place I am not sure.
Pete