|
As far as I remember it each city ( well certainly ORD) certainly also had a dedicated "terminator". There's probably a couple of reasons for the additional LHR-ORD-IAH flight...
1. The load on the route (i.e. number of passengers ) was not enough to economically run all flights as separate flights to each destination and 2. It uses one London slot to serve two US cities. As you imply this is no longer the case and AFAIK each city gets dedicated services. |
The press announcement copied into my last post (5th July)was given prominence in the Sunday Times today.
Is BA imploding? Can the company survive another summer like the last one? It seems to me that it's already slid a long way down the slope to oblivion, and might well be pushed to the bottom by the Management and the T&G, seemingly working together to achieve that. What's the view from inside? |
Iah-ord-lhr
The reason for the IAH flight to LHR via ORD was simple, Bermuda II prohibits BA flying from IAH to LHR. Direct flights from IAH to London have to go to LGW.
Routing via ORD allowed a flight from IAH to connect to other BA "oil" flights at LHR to places such as DME, LOS, ABZ etc. It will all change at the end of March 08, when open skies permits direct flights from IAH to LHR. Currock Base |
Is BA imploding? Can the company survive another summer like the last one? One or two contracts have been lost, but for the bulk of the big businesses using BA, they don't have much of a choice. BA, like most airlines, gave up caring about anyone in the back years ago. This is far from a criticism, its just an economic reality of the time. |
SF. A true statement indeed but BA will have to change as the public is fast running out of patience.
|
but BA will have to change as the public is fast running out of patience Load factors are down, no doubt due to many of the problems that have hit over the last few months. But at the same time, premium cabin load factors are up. BA are making more money. As I said before, BA have no interest whatsoever in looking after non status, economy class passengers. They are fast becoming an irrelevance. Hence the investment in programmes that retain the high spending premium passengers: Great lounges, one of the best business class products, and great customer service to those in the upper echelons of the frequent flyer programme (Gold Guest List and Premiers). Clearly they are putting some effort into reducing the negative PR they are getting, but there is not going to be systemic change to combat the problems. It just isn't a good use of resources. :( |
Can someone explain to me why BA don't order the 773ER's.Wouldn't it be ideal on some UK-US routes as well as SYD?Apologize for my ignorance,but just curiosity.
|
There is no specific reason why they have or haven't ordered these. They haven't ordered ANY aircraft for years (with the exception of option conversions).
We should know in the next few months what the outcome of the fleet renewal programme is, and it may well include 773ERs. |
Lgw-dub
Aer Lingus are to re-enter the Dublin-Gatwick route from October with a 4 times daily service. With Ryanair already offering a 6 times daily service will this mean the end for BA on the route.
|
en2r
it could be that BA wanted to do something else with their slots. WW has been squeezing shorthaul at LGW pretty hard so he may welcome the opportunity to hand it over to EI as a codeshare. |
I take it you mean EZY squeezing at LGW as WW no longer operate in to LGW since they withdrew the MME service |
quite right en2r - Willie's initials are a bit misleading! Apologies.
|
Boeing and British Airways Finalize Contract for 24 787 Dreamliners
Boeing and British Airways Finalize Contract for 24 787 Dreamliners
SEATTLE, Dec. 27, 2007 Boeing [NYSE: BA] and London-based British Airways have finalized an order for eight Boeing 787-8s and 16 787-9s, raising the total number of 787s ordered worldwide from 766 to 790 and taking the 787 order book past the 787th mark. The order is valued at $4.4 billion at list prices. British Airways also placed options for 18 787s and purchase rights for an additional 10. Willie Walsh, British Airways' chief executive, said, "The 787 is a fantastic aircraft and will be a welcome addition to our fleet. It will provide major environmental improvements in terms of global emissions, local air quality and noise. "With lower operating costs and the range to fly to all our destinations, it will give us more flexibility when planning our route network and we are confident that our customers will enjoy flying on the aircraft," Walsh said. British Airways first announced its selection of the 787 Dreamliner as a key element of its long-haul fleet renewal last September. The carrier also announced in September that it will power its 787s with the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000. "This order is a vote of confidence from one of the world's leading global network carriers in the 787's unprecedented performance," said Marlin Dailey, vice president of Sales for Europe, Russia and Central Asia, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. "No other airplane in its category offers British Airways the superior efficiency, economics and passenger comfort while also fitting so easily into its medium- and long-haul twin-aisle fleet." "Reaching the 787th order is significant for the program, and it's great that we get to celebrate it with British Airways. Their leadership in the industry validates our momentum in the marketplace," said Patrick Shanahan, vice president and general manager, 787 Program. The 787 will help British Airways meet aggressive environmental performance targets. It will reduce CO2 emissions and has a noise footprint that is more than 60 percent smaller than those of today's similarly sized airplanes. Common elements between the 787 and British Airways' 777 flight deck will allow for 777 pilots to train for 787 certification in only five days. The 787 also offers more cargo-revenue capacity than the 767 and similarly sized airplanes. With 790 orders in three years, the 787 remains the most successful airplane launch in aviation history. Boeing developed the 787 for the mid-sized jetliner market, estimated at 3,500 aircraft over the next 20 years. The 787 will be more than 50 percent advanced carbon composites which allow the largest windows in the industry, higher cabin humidity and a lower cabin altitude that reduces the fatigue often experienced by passengers. High-efficiency engines combined with a lighter airframe and improved aerodynamics mean the 787 will produce seat-mile costs normally associated with much larger aircraft. |
790 is a nice order book, but we're into the last few hours of 2007 & the 787 was supposed to be earning revenue by now. Airbus got crucified fror the delays on the 380 & ended up with a load of cancellations which they are just starting to claw back. In no way shape or form do I wish any such thing to happen to Boeing, but I do wonder how long the Seattle magic will keep the accountants at bay before they start to threaten the order book.
As was mentioned on at least one other thread, earlier today, professionals who know their job and how it relates to the overall business, and more importantly, can do it "hands on" when everything else falls around their ears, are no longer in charge, and everything is driven by the numbers on the current bottom line, regardless of whether its a good idea for the business to do the one thing or the other, if it puts a bigger number on the balance sheet now, you can bet that that's what'll happen. Sorry for being pessimistic & all that, but I think that if there were more low-cycle 757/767 & similar hulls on the second hand market, we'd already be seeing a few orders being reduced or maybe delayed at the very least. It was also interesting to note on the Boeing website in the 787 press releases a comment about conversion for 777 crew expected to take less than five days, similar to the type rating on 757 qualifies you for a 767 & vice versa. Although I am looking at this as a comment to the investors and glossing over the fine detail of the actual process, if it's even been finalised for the 787 as yet. (I also can't believe it's as simple as that for the 757/767 either.) |
Rumours in BA at the moment are that only the Trainers will be dual rated 777/787 as they are worried about maintaining crew recency. Sounds about right.
|
Boeing offers 5 day transition course from the 777 to the 787. I don't see how BA can introduce a new type and then interfer with their pilots' aspirational bids onto it by only providing a 5 day course for existing 777 pilots!!!
|
But when will ba actually receive the 7-late-7?
First flight isn't currently expected until spring 2008 - and they still plan first deliveries for late Nov/Dec 2008... At the moment, that is. |
7-late-7 |
But when will ba actually receive the 7-late-7? |
But when will ba actually receive the 7-late-7? |
I cannot think of any new aircraft being delivered on original dates set by the manufacturer. BA had their fingers burnt being launch customers with the B777, so hence taking a back seat on the A380 / B787, so I believe
|
I don't think BA had their fingers burned with the 777 but the previous CEO had his whole arm scorched with the A330 at Cathay and was dead against ever being the launch customer for anything ever again! I think that mantra has continued with the new CEO.
|
the previous CEO had his whole arm scorched with the A330 at Cathay and was dead against ever being the launch customer for anything ever again! I think that mantra has continued with the new CEO. |
787.your're having a laugh!!
Pardon me for sounding negative but............ The plastic pig hasn't even flown yet and given it is crammed packed full of new technology, the certification program is sure to have a bumpy ride.
I would stick my kneck out and boldly say no 787's will be delivered in 2008. Tell me I am wrong!! Coop & Bear |
Hand Solo,
What's the old expression? "Never fly the 'A' model of anything"! |
Okay Coop, I'll take your bet. Who will hold our money and BTW, lets do this in Pounds Sterling as I don't want to get short changed in the deal!;)
|
The 757 767 have a common type rating meaning that you can maintain recency on both and do sim checks in each alternately.
This is not the same as is proposed for 777 787 where there is a shortened conversion course for transfer between these types but one must then fly only the 777 or the 787 until the next conversion course. However it would seem difficult then to insist on a four year freeze. |
Spooky 2 Bet
Ok Spooky but as its an American machine the bet has to be in dollars.
I bet you $5 US that it doesnt fly in 2008. On the day its does fly the dollar should be worth around 10 pence!!!! Coop & Bear:} |
I think what you meant to say was doesn't deliver to ANA...right. Okay $ it is. You said won't fly and that's a bet that I think anyone will take:ok:.
|
787 delays
Read this for discomfort:
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/a...ves/116545.asp Airbus seem to have more experience at fitting "bits" together but it doesn't sound too healthy to me. Some re-jigging needed I fancy before Boeing can be comfortable about the issue. |
....though I notice the date on that blog (June 2007) is around 5 months BEFORE Boeing announced the current delays to the 787 programme. I'd assume (always dangerous) this means Boeing have factored the issues raised in the blog into their new timetable.
Bobbsy |
Boeing had a national press conference that was mainly directed at the airlines and investment community on or around Dec. 12th and publicly stated that they felt the aircraft was on track for 1st flight around the end of the 1st quarter and deliveries to ANA before the end of the year. Unless I here otherwise, I'll have to stck with that assumption.
Actually there is more to my involvement with this subject than meets the eye! |
Spooky looks like you know something we dont.....!!! Boeing know how to build A/C properly so sound like a good bet to back for it entering service by the end of 2008 ! :ok: Like perviously stated every A/C has it delays, that does'nt mean it will be in the hangar for the next 2 years trying to get its wings fitted on or even to the factory !!! but time will only tell.....
With regards to the 5 days course for 777 crew over to the 787, there is nothing wrong with that, similar to the type rating of the 757 and 767 and many other aircraft out there ! Why waist time training your crew when you have A/C that are very similar most likely in systems and cockpit layout (not to clued up on the 787 maybe some one can enlighten us on the similarities) ! It will be a good selling point for the A/C as well, it will keep the training costs down for airlines and keep their A/C in the sky... 790 orders and climbing...sound like a good start to me !!!:D:D:D you go 787..... spot you in the sky !!! |
Boeing build aircraft properly..
Oh - really? They are no better and no worse than Airbus and some others. As a businessman I have to say that the only dramas I have had to date have been on Boeings. None terribly dramatic but nonetheless disconcerting. The more they try to rush out the Dreamliner the worse it will be. And as for having to physically distort and force two sections of the fuselage together to make them fit - well. That says it all.
Pride comes before a fall..... |
Hmmm...
Wonder if Boeing will have to buy 'em all back like Beech did with the Starship......... Remember that - another all-composite fuselage. |
Well I wish I could tell you that there was a lot of similarity in the two cockpits, but from the little I have seen, they don't look very much alike IMO. While colors have little if anything to do with this common type issue, for some reason Boeing has gone back to the grey motif on the 787. What is that all about?:uhoh:
|
The real interest with the BA / B787 deal is ......Who will be doing the maintenance ???
Gold Care package ? or will BA reverse many years of downsizing and upgrade the Hangars at LHR . |
Intersting points in the Blog.
In my professional capacity I'm an engineer dealing with large (up to & exceeding 747 dimensions & wts), very close-tolerance mating and moving structures, I would hope that, as mentioned in one of the previous replies, Boeing have addressed these issues. The one thing that concerns me is the removal of internal structures being necessary before the two sections would mate, under what is very definitely impled as being a force well in excess of what was originally calculated for correctly fitting parts. This tells me that firstly, their tolerance analysis at the joints didn't tie in with the allowances that the separate plants were working to. Secondly, It looks very likely that their assembly jigs at the two plants don't mirror each other. Thirdly, it looks like they tried to fit the parts and ground to a halt before going back to the drawing board to ask how much force they could actually apply. I'd also query how the parts came to be finished off with the quoted 1 1/2 inch bulge on the left hand side of one of the sections within the mating area. The other possibility that springs to mind is that the manufacturing plugs for the barrels have something unusual in their design and maufacture which means that the thermal movement in each plug is different from that of its complementary plug during the curing process. Having done considerable work with composites for hot/wet & irradiated pressure envelope service for a previous employer, I'd have some concerns about the mating process used. It sounds like the end result is a joint which has residual stresses and strains in excess of the normal values. Whilst this likely remains significantly within acceptable limits, it does tend to show up a development programme that is in fire-fighting mode rather than setting the two parts aside until other sections with a more suitable tolerance build-up for each became available and coach-building finished airframes using these two "unusual" sections. Oh Well, We all live in Intersting Times occasionally. Best of luck in '08 to the guys in Seattle, I wish them well & hope they can get a full production spec hull in the air before the year is out. |
787 bits "forced" together...
Donkey 497. Your point is well taken. My father-in-law, now long since retired, was Head of Production Research at one of the UKs major manufacturers back in the 60,70s and when told about this was horrified. He said there would have been no attempt to "marry" the parts but a complete re-analysis of the drawings, fabrication techniques and material studies before ensuring that the offending section - always assuming only one was incorrect - was remanufactured or altered to match spec. I can only assume that that joint in the airframe is now carrying an undesigned pre-load.
I would like to know that airframe number. |
Donkey497,
I recall a chinesse saying about "I wish you not to live in intresting times". At a times I think it is right. Isn't the Boeing 787 situation similar to the A380 problems with the poorly design wiring? Definitely history repeating itself.. And also if computers failed to produce good matching components, should we trust them on the estimation of all the other features that make the 787 so innovative, or are we going to see more surprises during flight testing? Rwy in Sight |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 18:53. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.