Because some people don't live in South East England, possibly.

Well, because it was definitely a 747 and it was in a retro scheme and it was a daytrip and if it all went pear-shaped I could get a National Express coach home.

Have you actually priced EGLL-KJFK-EGLL? In March 2020, the cheapest month loaded, the outbound trip is about £150 on Virgin, but the inbound leg for that day or the one following is about £1,200. You need to wait for two days for the fare to drop to a sane level.

So, you decide to add a hotel room for two nights... suddenly that cheap trip is becoming expensive.

There was considerable adverse press from environmentalists about these flights - could that be the reason?

Firstly, BA never specifically announced these flights would use the trio of retrojets. The booking engines did say it would be 747's as I saw that myself, but the use of retrojets in the absence of an official announcement somehow became fait accompli from reporting by blog news pages. I don't know their sources though and they could well have got their info from BA, but when you take a step back why would BA not announce something like this themselves? Other airlines who have done something special in the past such as KLM with the MD-11 farewell pleasure flights out of AMS and Monarch turning the LGW-BHX positioning flight of their final A300 into a farewell special seemed fine with making an official announcement about it.

Secondly, BA are a business and with the greatest of respect, I doubt BA will be losing sleep because a small number of enthusiasts who had booked on it because it was scheduled for a 747 and under the false impression it would be a retrojet are upset about it, especially when compared to some of the major issues they've had in the past such as IT failures, LHR T5 opening teething problems. At least BA have offered refunds when they could have easily hid behind their T&C's and claimed they always reserve the right to change planned equipment prior to the flight taking place.

It may have demonstrated to BA there is demand to do something special and hopefully there will be, but I expect anything special to be announced in a more official manner as that would be more fairer than just quietly slipping it in there and others running with it.

Handling agents had been informed - the specific a/c had been allocated to the three routes.

With all due respect, they have 3 retro 747s and planned to fly 3 747s on 3 routes on the 100th anniversary. I think it was pretty safe to assume the 3 747s were the retro colours. I don't know why you seem to think this wouldn't have been the case or that people booked under false expectations. They would have no reason to run 747s on these routes if it wasn't going to be the 3 specific planes that have been painted to mark the 100th anniversary on an event that was specifically being done to mark the 100th anniversary.

The trouble with LED is that since there is only one flight a day, this results in a number of connecting options facing a nightstop in LHR on either the inbound or outbound. Both KL and LH have an aircraft night stopping in LED, giving an early departure to connect with the first wave of connections at AMS and FRA, which will be well timed for transatlantic travel too. Also, to add insult to injury is that Rossiya price their LED-LGW route very competitively for point to point traffic, with an example being that a Business class ticket with Rossiya often costs similar to what one would pay to travel with BA in Euro Traveller.

As an aside, BA actually do well on PMI with there being a generous uptake for Club Europe, especially in the summer. On the rarer occiaions when it is operated by a 320, it's not uncommon for half of the cabin to be Club.

I only said it was a false impression because prior to the cancellation there was nothing in the public domain from BA themselves to say that the retrojets would be used - use of 747's yes, but nothing about retrojets was there? Compare that to the announcement about the BOAC 747 being used at next month's Royal International Air Tattoo to perform a flypast with the Red Arrows. It seems strange nothing was announced officially regarding these. When the e-mail went out to passengers announcing the change of time and equipment, it referred to anything special happening on those flights as "speculation on aviation websites". Having been shown what was sent out, I will admit it contradicted itself slightly when it said it will no longer be operated by a 747 despite booking engines in the public domain (including BA's own website) saying it was allocated a 747, which most observers would have noticed is a rare occurrence on a BA domestic flight.

Please don't get me wrong, I'm gutted for those who had booked tickets. I know a few people who booked on because it was a 747 whom got more excited when it was reported on websites it would be the retrojets. I nearly did so myself if only for the opportunity to sample a 747 on a domestic UK flight and any 747 would have been good enough for me.

All that said, besides the refunds (which I felt was good of them to do as no doubt they realised many wouldn't have booked on if it was the normal Airbus equipment) I think it could have been handled a bit better. I don't know the full story behind all this and what led to 747 use on these being scrapped and flight times changing, but hopefully if something like this happens in the future on a special basis it will be announced more officially in good time.

As an aside, I see the Landor-liveried 747 has been ferried back LAS-LHR after being on the ground there for a few days.

BA did no marketing of this apart from the aircraft type on their website.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that some travel blogs were given a heads up and that seems to be where the hype came from.

Given the fares they achieved, it's a shame that the flights aren't going ahead with 747s. Assume BA need them elsewhere...

The Handling agents were informed and the RWY slots were filed at the respective airports for 747's, so yes they were happening, and no, it wasn't just Plane spotter tittle-tattle.

Which I acknowledged as the aircraft type was on the website. As far as title tattle and the aircraft type, care to disclose where BA announced these special flights?

why else would they schedule a 747 on those routes on a one off?

AS EDI says - 3 retro 747#'s, 3 747 flights on the same day - which just happens to be the (spurious) 100th Birthday.................

This link may be subject to restrictions: The Independent
It's the same old story. Airports and carriers don't learn. Apparently, BA is the official Paralympic carrier!

Whilst it would be reasonable to assume that may have been the case and I'm not doubting those who have said slots were filed for 747's, it seems strange though that no official announcement was made about their use or handled in a more controlled manner. After all, there was an announcement for this that involves one of the retrojets: British Airways - RED, WHITE AND BLUE AT THE ROYAL INTERNATIONAL AIR TATTOO

I think I've made my points multiple times now, so I shall say no more on the subject.

It's actually a LOI for 200. A mix of the -8 and -10. Delivery from 2023.

WW said they will be used for Level, Vueling and BA at LGW.

I think this decision will bite IAG in the proverbials. 4 years away may be beyond the current issues, but thinking more about the group having old technology, in an aircraft that's undersized in terms of competitive cabin space, elbow room, overhead space, etc.

If you look at the parts they said they are meant for its their low cost arms so maybe they feel that the 737 is better for that type of operation and makes them more competitive against the LCCs. Also if they take over Norwegian those aircraft will then in the future possibly be used as replacements for their older 737s.