British Airways to buy 12 A380s

[Re-Heat]

In this business where aircraft are bought "off-plan" often before they are even designed, it's more about the bean counters, than whether they are the ideal aircraft for their routes.

Really? When I was an accountant, I witnessed aircraft selections on which my firm advised whose primary purpose was to find the ideal aircraft: I think you are confusing the management who achieve a poor bargain, with their accountants...

The aircraft are ideal for high-yield routes at a slot-constrained airport, where additional frequencies, though desired, are simply impossible. Sending 4 of them to NY each day out of the 7/8 flights (not to mention Newark) would not only be sensible, but enitrely profitable. You only have to look at the routes which have two 747 departures within an hour of each other to see where consolidation might be possible, to free up BA's Heathrow slots for other routes.

[L337]

I did read, I think in the Times, that BA managed a 50% discount.

I suspect the truth will forever be a closely guarded secret.

[Re-Heat]

Zeke:

EADS is in an extremely poor financial position. Cash in the bank is offset by massive debts, a lack of ongoing currency hedges to protect their revenue against the falling dollar (a/c are sold in dollars), and numerous operational and unionisation issues.

EADS have €4.1bn cash (declining each time they report!), and earnings of €19m from €12.9bn revenue. Not so safe if you ask me.

[PAXboy]

arinc

When you sit in any of the Y class sections on an A380 the aircraft "feels" no different what so ever to a 747-400. In fact my impression is that the rear section (18) especially has an almost cinema going feel certainly on the SIA A/C. toilets in abundance too! The Business and first class sections are however quite a bit superior to the aforementioned Boeing, from any airline I've seen.

Which A380 have you seen? If it is the SIA then that is only one carrier.

When the machine visited the UK last year, there were the reporters gabbing about how it might be fitted with showers and could have a gymnasium ... where have we heard that before? Well, with the 747 (various Mks) and the 346. The underfloor crew rest of the 340 has been touted for many things but it usually works for crew or cargo.

The salesmen are very smart at getting the best and most spacious fittings into the eyeball and then the carrier arrives and fits out the aircraft for revenue service.

[glad rag]

ARINC

In fact my impression is that the rear section (18) especially has an almost cinema going feel certainly on the SIA A/C.

So your saying you have had access to SIA aircraft then?

[Seat1APlease]

You only have to look at the routes which have two 747 departures within an hour of each other

Such as HKG-LHR, JNB-LHR and SYD-LHR which I admit are contenders, but on the JFK you also have to think about the logistics of getting 500 passengers on board, back off board, and getting their baggage to them in a reasonable time. The great masses looking for the cheapest fare may put up with all that, but on a route such as JFK the business passengers are looking for quick check-in, fast boarding and the same at the other end, that is why concorde was successful, in that it saved time.
I can't see a 500 seater being able to give that punctuality, but time will tell.

[Rainboe]

Seat1A:

I can't really see that many high density routes where the A380 would be ideal for BA. On the atlantic they want frequency of service, and on the Caribbean and most African routes they don't need the capacity. Other destinations such as the Indian routes problably couldn't handle an aircraft of that size at the moment. The only routes it might work is the Far East/Australia and Capetown/Jo'burg or Hong Kong.
Having said that if the price is right................

Oh yes? Where did you get this? Have you seen the 80 standbys left behind in Barbados? The 3 services daily to LAX, HKG, CPT, JNB, SIN, BKK. Those places justifying 2 747s/777s a day will naturally grow to 2 A380s. Won't be long before 3 daily 747s grow to 3 A380s. But the flexibility will be there for 1 or 2 A380s and supporting 747s and 777s. I really cannot believe some are still preaching doom about this aeroplane! Emirates with 55, SIA ordering, BA still only starting the first tranche of orders. The Japs will soon be hitting the market......and still Parabellum is convinced it's going to fail! Don't wait up!

Regarding Heathrow hangars - I thought the whole point of T5 was that it would be big enough to accomodate A380s? Surely it's a shortsight on BA's part if they have to modify all their hangars now?!

Hangars? Are Hangars at LHR still needed? The parking area those hangars stand on is needed- no hangars for maintenance in the future! I suspect those hangars might be standing on the future Terminal 6, but we really need that extra runway first. LHR will just be a cleaning/refuelling station for turnarounds!

[banana head]

Hangars? Are Hangars at LHR still needed? The parking area those hangars stand on is needed- no hangars for maintenance in the future! I suspect those hangars might be standing on the future Terminal 6, but we really need that extra runway first. LHR will just be a cleaning/refuelling station for turnarounds!

Which is all fine and dandy until operational necessity requires an engine change/ Flap assembly replacement etc which prevents the A/C being ferried back out of LHR to CWL or wherever.
Might just about be workable without our lovely climate

[PAXboy]

Seat1APlease

I can't see a 500 seater being able to give that punctuality, but time will tell.

As I understand all the preparations, the objective is to treat the a/c as (almost) two separate a/c. Load the upper and lower floors separately and do your uttermost to ensure that pax get into the correct departure gate and only staff and crew to traverse the stairs during loading.

Will carriers provide a double cleaning crew and then ensure the a/c is loaded by two doors on each floor simultaneously ...?? Whether this can be made to work, time will indeed tell.

[Rainboe]

Banana Head:

Which is all fine and dandy until operational necessity requires an engine change/ Flap assembly replacement etc which prevents the A/C being ferried back out of LHR to CWL or wherever.
Might just about be workable without our lovely climate

There is no reason why Main Base should also be regarded as a Maintenance Base. If the real estate the main base engineering department stands on is excessively expensive, as in LHR, JFK, you move the engineering out to where it is more cost effective. This has taken place at LHR which needs be no more an engineering centre than just another transit network engineering department, with the heavy serious stuff done either down network or at dedicated maintenance organisations.

I am reminded of getting on a 737 at Terminal 4 early on a very cold frosty morning for the first flight of the day. The aircraft was incredibly warm (APU running all night), the Captain's seat was fully reclined, with pillow, and the headset had Capital Gold tuned in. That was 'overnight maintenance'!

[gas path]

Rainboe
You've obviously not seen the new hangar plans then?
Up to 4 bays A380 size to be built opposite TBJ/K.

[Taildragger67]

SET 18,

You're probably right - except that freighters will probably keep the 747 line open for a while yet. There is lots of 747 infrastructure around the world - but getting 380F infrastructure set up is a bigger deal. It's not just loaders but ground infrastructure like taxiways & maint capability. Fine for hauling freight from Stansted to Shanghai, but if you wanted to drop into somewhere like Harcourt with a 380F you might have a problem. So the 74F line might have life for a while (unti lit gets eaten up by the 777F line. So the Big 'B' can piggy-back some cheap(ish) pax versions onto the line as the marginal costs aren't great - eg. same interior as 777, same engines as 787, so it's not as if you're having to inventory a whole lot of type-specific parts just in case, but can easily slot it into your supply chain.

[Rainboe]

gas path:

You've obviously not seen the new hangar plans then?
Up to 4 bays A380 size to be built opposite TBJ/K.

No, I haven't seen the plans. There is no mention of hangarage in the original order announcement! I assume BA didn't announce the plans for the A380 hangars before the order for the A380s themselves, so an announcement was made since?

Very pleased that a successful outcome is continuing. it was a tremendously exciting leap of faith and risk for Airbus to take on such a massive project. It's success is assured now, so very relieved for all the Airbus staff who worked so hard on it. How sad so many carp on and denigrate it- I don't know what they want- maybe the world to move backwards? And well done for Rolls Royce- I'm glad the 747-8 and its 'no choice' engines was disregarded. Perhaps manufacturers won't try and stitch up their customers this way again.

[Taildragger67]

I still think it's just fg ugly...

[Rainboe]

That's exactly what people used to say about the 747. Don't worry- you'll grow into it.

[airsound]

It isn't very pretty, I agree. It'll probably get better when it's stretched - most aeroplanes do.

One thing that I think looks a bit odd is that its 'eyes' are half way down its 'face' - although having eyes midway is a human characteristic. I realise it's because they wanted to keep the flight deck the same height above the ground as on other longhaul Airbi - but I don't think we're used to that look yet.

airsound

[Skintman]

A380

I think we all knew deep down that BA would go for a mix of aircraft. Makes good commercial sense to keep the 2 big boys competing. Overall a very sensible and balanced decision.

The A380 is not what you'd call a strunner to look at, but it is a brave design that will serve it's purpose af moving hoards between hubs.

Good also for our lads and gals in Broughton and Derby who will make the wings and engines respectively.

[J-Class]

Sorry if this is a dumb question - but regarding maintenance bases, I thought the single biggest problem at Heathrow is lack of runway space, and surely every time a plane has to be flown to or from CWL that's another minute or two or take-off and landing time that can't be used for revenue services, which is negative for all airport users?

[aviate1138]

Skintman said in part.....
"The A380 is not what you'd call a stunner to look at, but it is a brave design that will serve it's purpose af moving hoards between hubs."
Aviate1138 thinks that......
It will look a lot better when the extended version is built. Which is inevitable, despite Boeing bias. At the moment it's a bit stumpy but a longer forward fuselage will make it look much more balanced. Although even 'stumpy' looks OK in BA colours IMHO.

A Bertrand Augras image

[ARINC]

So your saying you have had access to SIA aircraft then?

Big old thing isn't she....