BA 757's

[xxzz123]

I would like to know what the replacement strategy (if any) is for BA's 757 fleet.

[wysiwyg]

Are you trying to imply there actually is a strategy?!?

[xxzz123]

No I'm not suggesting anything - but the 757 fleet is getting on a bit now. I travel on them regularly to Europe, and must say that they appear to be in very good condition.

[foghorn]

Someone who actually knows can actually qualify this: this is what I've heard.

The 757s are going to TNT as Freighters. They are being replaced gradually by A320s and A319s, which are smaller aircraft, the A319 notably so. The latter have been too small for some of the runs that BA have tried them on (a 319 was doing the Friday evening CPH-LHR service earlier this year and had to be replaced with a 757 because it was booked out weeks ahead and punters like me complained and flew with the competition).

This has sparked discussion here that some of the airbus orders may be upgraded to A321 or that even new 757s may be purchased.

In my experience as pax some of the 757 interiors are getting a bit worn out, but otherwise they seem fine. Talking to crews, they seem to love 'em because of the excess power.

[tech...again]

foghorn,

have heard similar although, having read previous threads on this, it would seem that the new 757 (-300's were mentioned) idea is not correct as it wouldn't fit in with the current BA fleet strategy (there's that word again!). Also heard that on discussing the as yet undelivered A319's to A321 swap idea with Airbus, they said "fine, but get to the back of the queue..!"

Also, I believe all the 757's that are off (and those that have already left) are going to DHL, not TNT. I think they're the G-BIKx series and those other aircraft with the non RB211 engines - at least at the present time.

Rgds,

TA

[ironbutt57]

the ba airplanes being converted to 757 "sf" specs are powered by rb-211-535C engines and will be operated by both EAT and a carrier based in east midlands for DHL

[splonguk]

Here's the offical BA line on the shorthaul fleet changes:

" 767 (252 seats) fleet reduces from 22 to around 10 and 757s (180 seats) from 53 to around 12 in August 2003. These aircraft will be replaced by Airbus aircraft from a mix of A320 (149 seats)/A319 (126 seats)/A318 (105 seats)."

Is it just me, or when things pick up again, will BA have to be doing the reverse to increase the capacity of their fleet?

[SevenFiftySeven.]

I think it would be a shame to replace the 757 with a lower seat availability of the 'Bus. Most times I have flown BA 757's, the flights have been full, or close to full.

Personally, I love flying on the BA 757's they ooze power! :cool: but hey, that's just my personal preference.


SevenFiftySeven - rocket with wings! :cool:

[xxzz123]

I agree with the previous comment - I regularly see these a/c at capacity. BA clearly wish to concentrate on higher yield pax, and the flexible config's certantly cater for this, however I find it very hard to understand why they would select lower capacity a/c on busy routes that will eventually become busier.

[SFly]

Now wait a minute . . . what are BA thinking when they reduce their 767 fleet by about 12 and then the best they can do to replace them is an A321, with about 100 seats less? The 767s are most of the time, are they not, filled to the gunnels because they put them on the heaviest of the short-haul routes? They could at least, if this is an Airbus-oriented plan have ordered a few A330s to make up for the loss. The same with the 757s . . . A319s are hardly replacements --- those at BA either forsee a decrease in popularity in the coming years (hmmm, makes a chap think . . .) which is not likely, or they are utterly blind to their operation. :rolleyes:

Anyone agree?

SFly

[ 25 July 2001: Message edited by: SFly ]

[splonguk]

Ok, let us think a minute. BA are reducing the over lap of destinations served by LGW and LHR. They are also reducing the number of longhaul flights from LGW from 43 to something like 15 (I think those numbers are about right). Some of these will be moved to LHR, some will be stopped. In effect, what they are doing is reducing the number of passengers flying in from Europe, to LGW, and then transferring to a longhaul flight leaving from LGW.

By doing this, they will reduce the number of passengers using the european flights as there are no flights for them to connect to! They are concentrating on the UK market, trying to get more UK citizens flying with them, and more EU citizens using them to fly to London. BA used to charge a Parisien half as much as a Londoner to fly BA to JFK in club class (via London). If they can fill all their flights with UK citizens, they can make more money!

Also, most of us fly when most other people want to fly! At peak times the flights (on the 757s and 767s) are of course always going to be full, hence they are not getting rid of the 75s and 76s completely but keeping them for these flights. However, if the non-peak time flights aren't busy, why shouldn't they use a smaller aircraft for that flight?

This is what they have done over the years with the Super Shuttle services. Shuttles used to always be operated by 757s and used to operated to more UK destinations. They now use A319s, A320s, 737s and 757s, and operate to less destinations. The market obviously isn't there so why should the airline continue to operate planes with empty seats?

However, I can see in about 5-7 years time when demand picks up again, BA buying 757s and 767s again! Sounds stupid to get rid of them and then probably buy them back, but it is obviously the decision they see as the most profit making in the current situation. We have to remember that they can see the whole picture. They will have considered everything in this strategy including the cost of retraining flight crew on the new Airbus aircraft as they get rid of the Boeings. Yes it is a shame to see less 757s in the sky, but hey at least the Airbus' also help a partly british company, and I most saying that the Airbus' ahve grown a lot on me in recent years. I think it probably has something to do with the sidestick, it strikes me as novel, innovative and cool!!

SFly I have just re-read your post, yes BA do want to reduce the seat capacity of routes, hence the decrease in capacity of the aircraft they are buying in the future. They aren't getting enough bums on seats of the bigger jets like the 767s.

[ 25 July 2001: Message edited by: splonguk ]

[tech...again]

One issue I haven't spotted in the discussions so far is that of yield per seat (apologies if I've missed it).

Yes people do tend to want to travel at the same time and so the majority of peak flights are full, good point, but it's all very well filling the aircraft up to the gunnels - but filling it up with what? It's what those bums on seats are actually paying that counts.

Many aircraft that depart full may not even be breaking even, let alone making a profit, and with all of the Europen low cost operators out there and soaring fuel prices (fuel consumtion of a 757-200 versus an A319...), it's not getting any easier.

However, I too will be sad to see the 75's go - great aircraft.

TA

[High Volt]

BA are losing!

[M.Mouse]

High Volt

Would you care to expand on your somewhat meaningless post?

[N380UA]

It appears as though High Volt is going at the idea that BA is reducing the seats on a short time scale rather than expand the seat number in foresight that the market will have a much higher demand in some years?? At least that's my interpretation on that post.

Splonguk, although a joystick is indeed novel, innovative and cool, I heard of a lot of pilots, ex-Boeing, that it was a unnatural feeling to handle the aircraft. Especially the flare is, at first at least , somewhat unusual to handle.

Cheers

[Mike Oscar]

I would agree with a lot of the comments made above. However, it appears BA have fallen into the trap of thinking they can reduce costs by going for a smaller aircraft. In practice I think they are finding the A319 uneconomical to operate out of LHR given the BA cost-base, handling fees, crew costs, etc.

Some of the 757's were getting a bit 'long in the tooth' but surely a mix of 320/321 would have been better than 319/320 ??


:) :) :)

[eeper]

This is all rumour and conjecture, but here goes:

The basic strategy was to get rid of the 757 and replace them with A319/320s. The airbuses are far more efficient and BA had a dream of lots of small, efficient aircraft flying around stuffed to the gunwals with full fare club passengers. All this was in line with the (quite sound) strategy of repositioning the brand towards the premium sector.

The 757 fleet was supposed to be much smaller now than it actually is so we can only assume that there has been some sort of rethink. Certainly the shuttle 757s were to be scrapped by June, but they are still going strong. I have even heard that BA have been offered some cheap 757s that they will take.

There is no doubt that the A319/320 are efficient, well-made aircraft and, judging from what I've heard, a joy to operate. However the loss of a medium capacity shorthaul aircraft such as the 757 is a mistake. The A321 is a logical solution, but is heavily oversubscribed. The A330 would also seem to be a logical replacement for the shorthaul 767s. Much as I love my Boeings, I can see the logic behind going Airbus, but I feel it should be a complete move i.e include all of the above types with the benefit of a pilot workforce that could operate all of them.

Remember that the 757 is essentially a longhal aircraft (it will easily take you across the pond). Much of its fabled flexibility and over performance is due to that fact.

[SFly]

Now BA obviously has some sort of incentive to buy Airbus, and a little fleet revitalization is needed now, obviously, due to the fact that the 757s and 767 are almost launch-order batches.

So that's fine . . . but if the plan is to buy Airbus, then I believe that a rethink is in order.

The A319/320 idea is not a replacement but a downgrade in passenger numbers in BA's shorthaul market. While BA intended this to be a (and I use Eeper's words) "a strategy of repositioning the brand towards the premium sector". Still, the A320/321 combination gives them that strategy, but with a little bit more flexibility . . . and surely they can't be sending A320/321's across the North Atlantic and longhaul routes to replace those few 767 that are sent on them? Therefore, they should have at least thrown a few (or even many) A330s in with the order. After all, the A321 and A330were designed specifically to target and/or replace the 757/767s.

And instead of having many smaller aircraft flying the same routes, why do they not just have larger aircraft but with less seats, which would create spacious, comfortable seating. This in turn would create their "shift to the premier market", and would help to sell their product better if they advertised their "luxurious" new aircraft.

Whatever happened to the Airbus A380 strategy of "decluttering the skies with size"? :confused:

SFly

[ 31 July 2001: Message edited by: SFly ]

[splonguk]

As I pointed out in my post on the previous page, BA aren't getting rid of all 757s and 767s, just the majority. Therefore, they will still the 767s that they use for transatlantic routes, and the 757s for those busy early bird and hush hour flights!!!!

[flaps]

Sounds fab to me. All you 757/767 drivers can get up early for the morning rush flights. I'll just stroll in mid morning after a nice snooze.

Dreams....

[GustyOrange]

I have to agree with the comments suggesting using the 757 for peak hour shuttles and 319/20 for off peak. However I have been on a few LHR/GLA shuttles where even the 319 has been only half full. It's a real shame because I love the 757, especially when I have 3 seats to myself. :(

[bean_counter]

tech..again

correct - perfectly possible for every BA 75 to be full but unprofitable due yield per pax. Also, for every full peak flight the other half of the round-trip is often at a less desirable time and mostly empty.

Airbus mix probably provides greater flexibility and less empty seats flown ?

Also likely that in the future BA will move back to larger aircraft again. Especially when they have to give up slots to get into bed with AA !

[SFly]

Still, I have a horrible forecast that BA terminals worldwide will echo to the sound of a PA announcement:

"If your travel plans are flexible, please make yourself known to the ground staff."

SFly

:eek:

[Goforfun]

I'm a Boeing man.

BUT... those BA 757's started arriving in 1982. Some of the 747-200s are younger!

BA got a great price for those A320/319s- at the same time had a good offer for the 757s to be with drawn from service.

However! I will be sorry to see them leave- they are pretty elegant compared to those lifeless Airbus attempts! :eek:

[Fil]

Some better news for the Airbus is that BA have swapped all of next years A319's into A320's so more bigger a/c sooner.