I cannot be sure of how accurate this is so apologies if there is anything incorrect in this.

A friend of mine was due to fly back from DXB to LHR with Virgin a couple of days ago. After take off, the flight deck said there was a tech problem (mid air) and said they were to return to Dubai. After being in the airport for some 7/8 hours the flight was cancelled and only then were they offered a hotel. In the 7/8 hours of waiting in the airport they were only given a £7 food/drink voucher.

Does anyone know any more information on this Virgin DXB to LHR flight?

Nose gear doors failed to close after gear retraction so a return to DXB was initiated.....

Virgin and the 787???
 

What about the "4 engines for longhaul" principle painted on their aircraft. Perhaps Richard will replace it with "2 ul do" now.


Regards
Exeng

Got to be some good news for people looking for jobs. Hopefully they go faster than the A343

Exeng,

I recently made a similar observation and got flamed...

Going by the thread title, I thought this was an early Tues joke
 

:}

While it has been generally known for a while that they (Virgin Atlantic) are not very happy with their A340s (add in the recent manufacturer's reported 'caveat emptor' response to the airline's complaints about the A346) all things being equal, the selection of the 787 was based purely on economics, no?


The part I have a hard time understanding is Dickies' airline eschewing an outstanding powerplant series from his home - namely the RR Trent.

He's got American engines on his 744s rather than RB211s so I'm not sure the national origin of his engines is uppermost in his thinking.

Seems I may have been wrong earlier - the 787 order may well be Virgin's. See here.

Scroggs

The, um, 'witty' debate about the '4 engines' strapline has been held several times over the past couple of years, ever since it became inevitable that Virgin would order twins at some point, and it's now a bit hackneyed. That strapline is in fact an Airbus TM, and never appeared on the Boeings. It was removed from the A340s last year, before the much-rumoured A330 order which was dropped at the 11th hour.

If this 787 order is indeed for Virgin, it will indicate an interesting change of direction of - or, rather, addition to - the company's route strategy, I suggest. I would anticipate more emphasis on regional and non-UK bases.

Scroggs

I, and a good many others, am still laughing!!!:O

True to say an interesting change of direction, and commentry of course on future aviation trends; but, as well as changing direction "strapline" words have been eaten, whatever your argument is of their origin and how you choose to spin it.

And with BA deserting the regions I would say that there are lots of opportunities for Virgin to clean up and make poor old Willy wonder where it all went wrong.

Oh It's True
 

FWIW Virgin Blue in Aus have ordered a number of 787's, perhaps they got a better deal with a larger batch ordered?

Actually VB has ordered 777-300ER's not 787's

Hmmmm 5 A340-300s replaced by 15 B787s with options on 8 more. Seriously, the A340-600s are being dumped by their launch customer are they not?

Or from the horse's mouth:

http://www.virgin-atlantic.com/en/gb.../pr240407a.jsp

Virgin is an expanding airline, that is why it needs extra aeroplanes. The 787-9 is a good replacement for, and enhancement over, the A343. It doesn't make sense as a replacement for the 368-tonne (or 380-tonne) A346. It is considerably smaller. The 777-300 would be the obvious Boeing product to replace the A346, if Virgin were looking for one.

Scroggs

Except the only remaining BA regional longhaul route...still remains.

If BA can't find the premium travellers who largely make or break the route, how will Virgin??

More likely for thinner routes from London