GB Airways order 4 A321, 1 A320, V2500 engines.

[MarkD]

GB have placed a direct order with Airbus (their first, rather than on BA's orderbook). Current fleet 11 x 320, 3 x 321.

http://www.airbus.com/dynamic/media/press_releases.asp#1678

Are these A32x expanding the GB fleet or will BA aircraft return to BA Euro Fleet?

If the latter, is this to replace 737s or for SH expansion to fill gaps that 767s refitted for longhaul may open?

Edit to correct subject line - 4 not 3 321.

[yellowdog]

Not quite sure I understand the bit about BA.

The order is purely for GB, and their continued expansion, especially from Manchester.

I know GB is currently using a BA A320 but this is a lease to cover lack of aircraft at GB.

Just double checking with some GB sources and these are part of a back order for delivery from 2007, to replace older GB A320\'s when their leases are up for renewal.

Sorry for the duff info before.

[MarkD]

yellowdog

I understood some previous GB 321s were actually ordered by BA and transferred to GB and BMed and thus my question was whether the GB 321s would be transferred back to BA or if the GB fleet was increasing.

http://www.luchtzak.be/postt3577.html

Since your info indicates some of the other 320s are leased and being returned, then it probably means no transfers back to BA.

[Torquelink]

Mark

GB previously exercised options to acquire aircraft under the overall BA order umbrella. However, the aircraft are acquired from Airbus, not from BA, and will stay with GB until either returned to their lessors or sold - they won't be going "back" to BA inasmuch as they were never "with" BA. The one exception is the short term dry lease of a single BA A320 which will go back to BA once the new deliveries arrive.

Hope this helps.

[HZ123]

More to the point is which extra routes will be given over to GB from BA. This before Willie Walsh.|

[yellowdog]

HZ123, why does everybody keep on about routes going to GB. Is it just a case of stirring it up :hmm:

To my knowledge BA Eurofleet LGW and GB have no tie ups in the past, now or in the future. In fact GB and Eurofleet LGW are now, since 9/11, in more head to head competition than ever. Why would the management at BA give routes that their own, very low cost, crews could operate. This is specially so now that a mixed flying fleet is due to be implemented at LGW.

In fact I have it on good authority that most of the new routes that EUF LGW are operating were in fact bid for by GB as well, and were did they end up:D

Who knows what Willie Wlash will do, but I do now that there are 1600 CC at LGW that are on BA contracts and will cost the Company loads in redundancy or will have to be offered jobs else where, with benefits, if e does think that he can shut the base down.

[HZ123]

Well if you had observed what has been going on in the last ten years you will have seen GB take over most of Portugal, many stations in Spain and all of N Africa from BA, irrespective of whether it is mainline, LGW or what ever diversion we are part of this or next week. Good luck to them I am merely posing the question as an order of this size would indicate to me that they have some new work on the horizon. I have no interest in stirring it up I can leave that to the rest of you and I fail to understand how we at BA can operate any route more cost effectively than most other companys if we are then its a 'first'.

[yellowdog]

Well if you had observed what has been going on in the last ten years you will have seen GB take over most of Portugal, many stations in Spain and all of N Africa from BA, irrespective of whether it is mainline, LGW or what ever diversion we are part of this or next week.
HZ123

forgive the ignorance but apart from Nantes, Montpellier and Lisbon, I can't think of any routes that mainline have operated in the past. It's just a fallacy that GB has taken much work from BA.

In fact if GB were taking work from us why haven't they jumped on the CDG, GOT, HEL, ARN, CPH etc, etc, Simply because a lot of routes from LGW are leisure routes which offer fairly low business cabins and therefore comparatively low yields. And as I say EUF LGW are now taking a lot of that sort of work for themselves, see all the new routes over the last year and a half.
as an order of this size would indicate to me that they have some new work on the horizon.
I refer you to my earlier post, an extra 20 seats per aircraft, ie replacing A320 with A321's hardly consitutes a massive expansion. :suspect:
Just double checking with some GB sources and these are part of a back order for delivery from 2007, to replace older GB A320\'s when their leases are up for renewal.
As for
I fail to understand how we at BA can operate any route more cost effectively than most other companys if we are then its a 'first'.
then I presume you must a LHR person. When you look at crew from EUF LGW then you see we operate on totally different T&C's from our esteemed colleagues at LHR. Our cost base is completely different and therefore it is completely feasible to operate most of our routes at a profit. As for the customs and practices of the groundstaff and ramp staff, well just don't get me started:*

Bring on WW and his hatchett to get rid of all the old and antiquated C&P's at LHR.:yuk:

[TopBunk]

Yellow

forgive the ignorance but apart from Nantes, Montpellier and Lisbon, I can't think of any routes that mainline have operated in the past. It's just a fallacy that GB has taken much work from BA.

Add to that list FAO, OPO, AGP as a starter for three!

I refer you to my earlier post, an extra 20 seats per aircraft, ie replacing A320 with A321's hardly consitutes a massive expansion.

Well, A320 in BA config = 150 seats, A321 =194 seats. This equates to about 30% which is pretty large.

Your lack of factual accuracy does your arguments no favours.

[MarkD]

thanks Torquelink for the info.

[yellowdog]

Topbunk,

and when did mainline at LGW ever operate AGP,OPO and FAO.
Certianly not in the last ten years I've been flying with them.

Well, A320 in BA config = 150 seats, A321 =194 seats. This equates to about 30% which is pretty large.

Well put this over the whole fleet
10 A320=1500
03 A321=0582
=2082

7 A320=1050
6 A321=1164
=2214

About a 10% increase, in three years time so hardly the biggest expansion ever. (Figures from GB website and not inc. the BUSJ lease)

And please don't patronise me when you say
Your lack of factual accuracy does your arguments no favours.
still as far as I am aware my argument is factually correct.:*

[Barber's Pole Bob]

Yellowdoggy

Considering GB had 8 B737's a few years back and a handful of routes they haven't done too bad for themselves. What do you reckon ??

Now as it stands the fleet is 4 A321's and 11 A320's from May and these new orders may not replace older models --- This depends on the market state in the press release from GB. So by 2010 the fleet could be near 20 airframes.

Don't forget the expansion ex MAN ! 2nd aircraft arrives at MAN 6 months earlier due to strong demand, at the end of the summer.

The only fly in the ointment is BA and restricting the flying GB do. I have heard GB is BA's think-tank ie GB ask to do a route like LGW-Dubrovnik and BA say what a good route that would be and they start it.

Let's not forget Bilbao --- GB offered to do it when they dropped it ex LGW so when it flopped ex LHR and was offered to GB then, it was no surprise they declined the offer.

Who knows what's on the horizon ?? More charter ?? More bases in the regions ?? A330's --- A350's ???

[yellowdog]

Bob's Barber Pole,

Don't get me wrong, I have never said that GB haven't done really well for themselves. They have done great things for LGW and BA at LGW.

The whole argument hinged on HZ123's point of which routes will be given over from BA to GB, I still bank on my three:O

Talking to a mate at GB he said the A320's leases are up and the A321's will replace them, at the moment I have to believe him.

Not quite sure where you get the think tank idea from, are the management at BA clever enough to listen to a think tank;)

As for Bilbao do you think GB would let a previous snub overcome a valuable commercial decision. If there was a big profit in the route and GB could fit it in I'm sure they would have. I'm sure Mr. G doesn't think hold those sort of grudges.

Yeah and I agree, who knows what on the horizon for GB and EUF LGW. All I'm saying is GB have a different competitor in EUFLGW now. In the past it was a business point to point and LH connection outfit, now it's a leisure driven holiday season airline.

As Delia said, "Where are you? Where are you? Let's be having you. Come on."