Big BA Boeing Order

[Suggs]

Rumours are rife at work that we've already placed a large order with Boeing for about 60 aircraft, mix of 777 and 787's plus options. Looks like a -400 replacements. They had to order the aircraft before their slots were bought up by other carriers..

But the company are keeping quiet because they want to use our pensions to pay for em. Or am I just being cynical!

[Roobarb]

They're going to pay my pension first, or else!!:mad:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/410000/images/_411783_roobarb.jpg
I’ll take on the opposition anyday. It’s my management I can’t beat!

[MarkD]

this again?

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=207935

:rolleyes:

[DarkStar]

This is interesting because I was chatting to an EK Captain who told me downroute that BA had put in a big order for 773's and it was done on the basis of Boeing keeping quiet because of the pension issue. I laughed it off at the time as he mentioned the pension debacle, but perhaps the joke was on me after all. :*

Pension first, 773's later :mad:

[jack red]

Is the pension not protected by Law in the U.K. ?

[Dollond]

BA should start supporting a European business and European jobs and switch to Airbus aircraft. :E

The 787 orders should have been A350.

[punkalouver]

Typical socialist propaganda. An airline that has to compete worldwide should buy planes that don't necessarily fit into what is needed or what is the best deal. Maybe if manufactures have to compete then better products will be built because they have to fight for it.That's called capitalism. Please don't start listing other cases. They are because there are many other economically short sighted people like you. Remember the eastern European method of aircraft aquisition.

[Roadtrip]

BA should start supporting a European business and European jobs and switch to Airbus aircraft. :E
The 787 orders should have been A350.

I'm sure that their competition also wishes that.

[Dollond]

Typical socialist propaganda. An airline that has to compete worldwide should buy planes that don't necessarily fit into what is needed or what is the best deal. Maybe if manufactures have to compete then better products will be built because they have to fight for it.That's called capitalism. Please don't start listing other cases. They are because there are many other economically short sighted people like you. Remember the eastern European method of aircraft aquisition.

My point is BA seem to have an aversion to Airbus. You can't say Airbus don't produce as good, if not better planes than Boeing. Airbus haven't been outselling Boeing these last few years for nothing - that's capitalism. :D

Time will tell if BA do actually judge aircraft types on merit, or whether the company executives get nice kick-backs from Mr. Boeing. Will BA take the only logical step and order some A380s?

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

My point is BA seem to have an aversion to Airbus. You can't say Airbus don't produce as good, if not better planes than Boeing. Airbus haven't been outselling Boeing these last few years for nothing - that's capitalism. :D
Time will tell if BA do actually judge aircraft types on merit, or whether the company executives get nice kick-backs from Mr. Boeing. Will BA take the only logical step and order some A380s?

I don't understand how one can say BA is anti-Airbus. That very large number of new A319s/A320s/A321s must be a mirage. It makes sound commercial sense for the airline to have a foot in both camps. It seems clear to me that BA are going Airbus for Europe/UK and Boeing for long haul.

[Big Kahuna Burger]

My point is BA seem to have an aversion to Airbus.
Hmmm. I wouldnt call 75 ish Airbus 319/320/321 and more on option an aversion.

But back to the thread.

Walk away from my pension (deferred pay) and you wont have any pilots to fly your shiny new 777-300s.:mad:

BAs has a whole department full of Alistair Campbells SPINNING the PR out on this one.

[squeaker]

Makes sense, at least when the Airbus goes tech it isn't far from home....

[Dollond]

BA inherited it's original A320s from British Caledonian. Extra orders have been made to logically supplement these. BA have never made a break for it and supported a new Airbus concept.

[norodnik]

dollond,

are you sure your location is planet earth ??

Why don't BA replace their old 757's with new TU 204's ?

The 204's have the same RB211's, and it looks the same.

Come to think of it, why don't we get rid of those RB211's as well and go for the PS90's. That would keep engineering happy as they would spend more time off the wing than on it.

But hey, their cheap, what other reason does one need ?

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

BA inherited it's original A320s from British Caledonian. Extra orders have been made to logically supplement these. BA have never made a break for it and supported a new Airbus concept.

They did indeed inherit 10 early A320s from the British Caledonian order. But I hardly think a further 60 or so A319s/A320s/A321s is not support for Airbus.

[Dollond]

Okay, I concede that BA have a significant fleet of A319/A320/A321. :}

Notwithstanding that the rest of their long haul fleet is Boeing, BA do seem to deny the fact that Airbus long haul aircraft also have their merits.

Going back to the point I made earlier, BA must surely buy some A380. Once AF and LH A380s are flying around merrily, I hope common sense prevails and BA makes an order.

If you accept the above, surely it would make sense to split this 60 plane order between Boeing and Airbus, and make use of the commonality between the A350 and A380?

Come on, BA pilots, wouldn't you like a shiny new A380? :O :ok: :suspect:

[M.Mouse]

Errr...no actually.

[Dollond]

Okay then, :\

Do you think it inevitable that BA will have to buy A380?

[Hand Solo]

No. It doesn't suit our current operation.

[Dollond]

Shame. I fear you've backed the wrong horse. :yuk:

Time will tell.

[Grunf]

Dollond,

First BA has to resolve issues with their employees (if they're smart). Then to decide what to do with current 747 fleet (possibly to follow others in converting them into freighters, the BCF).

Second it is really weird to have Airbuses and Boeings in your long haul fleet, no matter what AF and LH do. I guess they (LH and AF) are under more political pressure to "buy domestic".

You might say that same should hold for BA due to BAe but I would seat and wait. Capacity wise they can not wait for the 350 to come out and leasing 330's in the mean time is not viable option.

For 380, again, I would like to see LH and AF not willing to buy them?! I mean, in UK BAe manufactures all the wings for Airbus fleet but I do not see 330s and 340s with a Union jack on its tail!

Besides, similar thing happened in Canada some time ago. Namely, Air Canada decided to go with Embraer's 170 instead of a homegrown CRJ 700 (just next door, less then 10 min of walking distance between the two entities).

The way things work in Canada you would expect that "buddy" system would kick in and bring a smooth ride for Bombardier! Alas, that was the hope form the company but to everybody's surprise Air Canada's parent (ACE) made a smart, business oriented, decision and went with a BETTER DEAL.

Sure, maybe there were kickbacks but you want to tell me they're non-existent with Airbus deals?

Former Canadian PM was dragged through courts because of AC Airbus deal and his kick-back. The only problem is they could not find money. Too bad.

In conclusion I hope BA buys 777/787 (when they complete pension issues!). This is, in my oppinion, a much better deal for their needs.

Only Emirates can allow themselves to spread money like peanuts.

Cheers,

[Hand Solo]

You want people to buy Airbus, particularly the A380, based on the fact that it's European. Nowhere in your assessment to you appear to consider:

1. Whether its advertised performance levels will be met.
2. Whether any cost savings will outweight the cost of decreased fleet flexibility.
3. Whether the aircraft can be utilised effectively throughout the day.
4. Whether a more cost effective deal can be extracted from Boeing.
5. Whether the cost to change will exceed any savings from direct operating costs.

Fortunately the people who choose BAs aircraft do so on the basis of hard facts and sound economics, rather than a 'feeling in their waters' or political leanings.

[PlatinumFlyer]

I am not qualified to speak about the technical merits of the A380, but, as a passenger, I can relate a conversation I had with Larry Kellner, President and CEO of Continental Airlines this past Saturday. I was in Houston along with 300+ other frequent flyers from Flyertalk.com to discuss issues from management's and the customer's perspectives. (Everyone paid their own A/F and hotel bills). Meeting with your best customers is something every airline should do.

Larry's view on the A380 was: " I could think of better ways to spend $15 Billion. You can make money with it on the weekend, but what do you do with it during the week".

[international hog driver]

Dollond, Ok I’ll bite.


According to our bean counters they “estimate” an A380 costs the same to run/own/maintain as a present day “new” 744. You only make money/savings on the super slug when you start filling more than 450 seats.

Subsequently the 748 with 787 engines and a marginal pax increase will have even lower DOC, provide optimum seating and range, with a significantly lower total design cost than the SS!

If the Long haul (340) bus is so good then why are Airbus contemplating the idea to pay airlines a refund on extra fuel costs as opposed to the 777?

12 orders V’s 150+ for 2005…….. hummmm makes you think doesn’t it!

BTW I am not on a group of islands off the coast of western Europe:E

[BahrainLad]

Larry's view on the A380 was: " I could think of better ways to spend $15 Billion. You can make money with it on the weekend, but what do you do with it during the week".

With all respect to Mr. Kellner, US airline CEOs, experienced as they are in the US airline market, are not the best people to comment on the concept of the A380. His airline doesn't have 3 747s departing within an hour of each other from one heavily slotted airport to another heavily slotted airport every day of the year...

[Suggs]

In regard to the A380, I did a trip a few months ago with the lad who evaluated it for BA and because of our geographic position and route structure it doesn't work for us, perfect for the middle eastern carriers but not us.

Fact not fiction.

You buy aircraft on business grounds but the fact that it says boeing on the side helps!

[BusyB]

Re the A380, what provision has been made for inflight medical emergencies if you have to land at an airport without facilities for parking etc. I know it was mentioned some time ago but I don't recall a solution.
This could well put a lot of operators off the A/C.

[Hand Solo]

I doubt it's any different from landing a 744 at an airfield without facilties. I'd be most surprised if Airbus was not compiling a list of emergency airfields with a suitable PCN and turning space to accomodate the 380 in dire straits.

[ALLDAYDELI]

I think ground equipment at alterates is the biggest issue.

[ARINC]

A pound to a pinch of salt BA buy the A380, BA reps here there and everywhere at the moment (Hamburg)
1. Whether its advertised performance levels will be met.
2. Whether any cost savings will outweight the cost of decreased fleet flexibility.
3. Whether the aircraft can be utilised effectively throughout the day.
4. Whether a more cost effective deal can be extracted from Boeing.
5. Whether the cost to change will exceed any savings from direct operating costs.

Bless...
All valid points but UK Gov just gave us another 500 Mil..Ostensibly for the A350....but try telling dear old taxpayer aka voter that the A380 is not a good option for BA

"yes Mrs Trellis... we did give them a lot of money but our national airline thinks it's a white elephant."

Politics trumps your list any day. :ok:

[onthemagicbeam]

All this about the future aircraft for the long haul fleet, what about replacing the short haul fleet at LGW? Lets hope that is another 'Big BA Boeing order!@:ok:

[Skipness One Echo]

In reply to what the chap said about ordering the A320 logically following the BCal aircraft into the fleet - they ordered the 737-400!! And only to replace them did they order the A320. The original BA A320s are 17 years old.
Oh God I feel old:oh:

Be surprised if BA LGW didn't get the A320 / A319 though. Commonality and all.

[Andy_S]

Politics trumps your list any day. :ok:

Except that BA are answerable to their shareholders, not the government.

[False Capture]

onthemagicbeam,
It's not a case of replacing the SH fleet a LGW, more like moving everyone up to LHR after T5 is up and running. BA could then get rid of the B737 and close LGW. At the moment we're battling to crew the a/c we have without introducing any new ones. The shiny new jets will arrive once the B737 has gone and LGW has passed into history.

[Hand Solo]

A pound to a pinch of salt BA buy the A380, BA reps here there and everywhere at the moment (Hamburg)

Of course they are! Nothing at all to do with them all trying to look indispensible to save their jobs in the impending managment cull. Meanwhile Boeing sent their reps to LHR, and sent a shiny new long range 777.

[flyer55]

BA will never close LGW as Easyjet would take over and that North Terminal would be painted Orange! As for Crewing levels at LGW Eurofleet is fully crewed at the moment and is currently recruiting extra crew for the planned changes and expansion!

[onthemagicbeam]

I agree with flyer. BA can't afford to pull out of LGW and let it become an orange domain. Firstly it would be too expensive, it would be admitting defeat to easy and lastly there simply isn't the capacity at LHR without another runway!!

I think LGW is here to stay, may be a bit smaller though!:ok:

[vapilot2004]

Do you think it inevitable that BA will have to buy A380?

Out of all of the liveries I've seen rendered on the super jumbo, it is British Airways' paint that finally gives big bird's fuselage some grace. (to me anyway) :}

I'm already in love with the wing design - must be the prettiest set of wings ever put on an airliner.

[PlatinumFlyer]

With all respect to Mr. Kellner, US airline CEOs, experienced as they are in the US airline market, are not the best people to comment on the concept of the A380. His airline doesn't have 3 747s departing within an hour of each other from one heavily slotted airport to another heavily slotted airport every day of the year...

BahrainLad: With respect, the only issue that counts is, if you buy the A380, can you make money with it. Perhaps CO is too conservative, but as LK repeated many times over the weekend, buying the wide bodies now is so expensive is that each one is a $250 million dollar business that cannot be allowed to fail. I suspect that Etihad and other big buyers of the A380 does not have these concerns. I would agree that it will make a great freighter.

BTW, CO is the sixth largest airline in the world (I believe this figure is by daily departures), and has more flights to Europe than any other carrier. It still holds rights to serve Australia from the US. One would think that if there was anyway they could buy the A380 for this route and make money, they would go for it. It is possible that BA and others are making similar calculations and holding off to see what happens.

I'll close with a couple of more quotes from LK about Australia. These do give a rare view of how SOME airline CEO's make decisions.

Q. Will we ever see CO back to Australia?
A. No. UA and QF fly 744s and that gives them much flexibility to haul a lot of leisure traffic. The 777s can't do it profitably.

Q. But is not AC starting YYZ-LAX-SYD with 5th Freedom rights?
A. Yes, (and with a smile) it will be interesting to watch.

[MarkD]

Platinum

AC already have 5th freedom YVR-HNL-SYD so they know the market. Other Canadian markets with AC links to LAX will be linking to that flight.

[bealine]

BA will never close LGW as Easyjet would take over and that North Terminal would be painted Orange! As for Crewing levels at LGW Eurofleet is fully crewed at the moment and is currently recruiting extra crew for the planned changes and expansion!

I'll remind you of that in 2009!!!

[ARINC]

Of course when the A380-900 comes along, all those seats on one slot are going to look even more tempting.

Ok 2 pinches of salt to your pound they buy the -800 they may just wait for the 900

[Taildragger67]

Dollond, old PPRuNe,

Just face it, the dugong doesn't suit everyone. I note that Iberia, with a very heavy Airbus fleet, still uses 747s on its heaviest route. These run very strong load factors at solid yields so they'd probably be able to fill a few 380s (eg. to MIA and EZE) and CASA is a major part of 'bus so there's the political angle... but they've clearly taken the view that it doesn't fit their current patterns.

Where do you suggest BA run 380s?
NY: every thinking traveller would avoid BA to NY like the plague if they had to arrive in a 380. That terminal can barely cope with a single 747, let alone a couple of 380s dropping in. So by getting 380s to do that route, you are also suggesting that BA spend loads more of the cash it doesn't have, expanding its JFK facilities.

Asia: Possibly, but given the schedules on the main Asian routes, you would have your massive investment sitting idle for most of the European day. Lots more routes can support 747 ops so as it is, you can turn round a 747 that's just lobbed in from SIN and push it out as the mid-day JFK or late-afternoon JNB.

West Coast: punters want frequency, not one-a-day. You can fill 3 777s to LAX but you'd be scratching to fill 3 380s unless you drop the fares to uneconomic yields.