British Airways orders B777-300
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.
For your info 'A320' is the full and official Airbus-given name, not an abbreviation.
.
Part of that vision involves the 77W family, otherwise they wouldnt have ordered it. Period.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They ordered them as the 747 is getting expensive to operate and Boeing "made them an offer they couldn't refuse"
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). 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.
Last edited by BOEING777X; 1st Aug 2008 at 14:12.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
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...
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...
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 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: I live like a gypsy.
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
