BA Fleet Age
Thread Starter
BA Fleet Age
On reading SLF flight reviews on other forums, one issue that comes up time after time, is the fact that the BA fleet is 'long in the tooth' and 'tired'. F3G made a similar comment regarding a recent BA flight.
Can someone please enlighten me as BA's current purchasing position regarding new aircraft [especially LH].
I for one would quite like to fly with BA on an aircraft that is less than 10 years old!
Can someone please enlighten me as BA's current purchasing position regarding new aircraft [especially LH].
I for one would quite like to fly with BA on an aircraft that is less than 10 years old!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EGGW
Posts: 2,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree about the cabin condition, as long as you fly long haul and keep off the B747 & B767 fleet you have a chance of a 10 years or less a/c.
Some of the B777-200s are new and the the B777-300s start to be delivered next month.
Some of the B777-200s are new and the the B777-300s start to be delivered next month.
the lunatic fringe
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 67
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I for one would quite like to fly with BA on an aircraft that is less than 10 years old!
I fly the 747-400 and they are well over 10 years old. If they are unsafe please tell me so I can report it to BA the press the CAA and my wife.
Paxing All Over The World
I agree that most passengers will take the condition of the cabin interior to be indicative of the age of the airframe. That is because they will, not unreasonably think that it is like a domestic car - where the interior reflects the age of the vehicle.
If the aircraft has passed it's airworthiness, then it is airworthy. Once in a blue moon these things are fiddle but not usually in Western European carriers!!
In some web sites, folks don't have much to ßitch about and 'age' is often an easy choice.
If the aircraft has passed it's airworthiness, then it is airworthy. Once in a blue moon these things are fiddle but not usually in Western European carriers!!
In some web sites, folks don't have much to ßitch about and 'age' is often an easy choice.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can someone please enlighten me as BA's current purchasing position regarding new aircraft [especially LH].
I for one would quite like to fly with BA on an aircraft that is less than 10 years old!
I for one would quite like to fly with BA on an aircraft that is less than 10 years old!
In the meantime, BA have a lovely fleet of brand new aircraft which you can take your pick of. Cityflier services from LCY use new E170s from Embraer, and if you have a few bob you can hop aboard one of their 4 brand new A318s operating LCY-JFK. Additionally, a fair number of the A320 series fleet is young with an average age across A319/320/321 of 6.5 years.
As for the 'older' aircraft, as previously mentioned if they weren't safe then they wouldn't still be in use...
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to barge in, but there are only 2 (shiny and new) A318 aircraft doing LCY - JFK...
Unfortunately, a lot of people these days make a mess on aircraft, break things (ie traytables) and don't tell the crew. I've read reviews online where customers have commented about how old the aircraft interior looks, even though the aircraft is only 6 months old.
For those worried about "old" planes, there are strict rules we adhere to in regards to engineering. Checks are done on things that the average "Joe Bloggs" wouldn't even think about.
Unfortunately, a lot of people these days make a mess on aircraft, break things (ie traytables) and don't tell the crew. I've read reviews online where customers have commented about how old the aircraft interior looks, even though the aircraft is only 6 months old.
For those worried about "old" planes, there are strict rules we adhere to in regards to engineering. Checks are done on things that the average "Joe Bloggs" wouldn't even think about.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of the B777-200s are new
Fleet age British Airways - Airfleets
Thread Starter
Just to be totally clear, I was in no way suggesting that the age of the plane, certainly in the case of BA, had any bearing whatsoever on safety.
I probably should have just kept my question simple - when will BA be getting new aircraft, and what type?
To say that BA has new aircraft is one thing, but when, as PaperTiger points out, less than 10% of the B777-200s are less than 10 years old, makes the point I was initially trying to make.
I probably should have just kept my question simple - when will BA be getting new aircraft, and what type?
To say that BA has new aircraft is one thing, but when, as PaperTiger points out, less than 10% of the B777-200s are less than 10 years old, makes the point I was initially trying to make.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA's policy, particularly with its longhaul fleet, has always been to keep its aircraft almost throughout their working lives. This reduces their ownership costs but increases maintainance costs as the aircrfat get older .The alternative, adopted by some carriers (Singapore has been a notable in the past) is to turn the fleet over at quite a young age while it is still an attractive second hand buy. This increases the cost of ownership but reduces engineering costs.
From the passenger point of view an aircraft can be kept looking young by periodic replacements of the interior sidewalls, ceilings, hatracks and toilets and maintainaing the exteriors in good condition. The cost of a complete interior strip-out and replacement is upwards of £2 million per aircraft and toilets add to the bill. BA in the past, while good at seating innovations, has been less good at the cosmetic aspects, inside and out and this shows on some of the 747s and 767s in particular.Nobody likes a tired looking aircraft but as the financial results of looking down at heel are difficult to quantify CEOs have often been slow to tell the accountants to dig in their pockets.Airlines have a lot of data on the passengers they fly but almost none on those who walk away because they dont like the aircraft appearance, service or any other thing.
From the passenger point of view an aircraft can be kept looking young by periodic replacements of the interior sidewalls, ceilings, hatracks and toilets and maintainaing the exteriors in good condition. The cost of a complete interior strip-out and replacement is upwards of £2 million per aircraft and toilets add to the bill. BA in the past, while good at seating innovations, has been less good at the cosmetic aspects, inside and out and this shows on some of the 747s and 767s in particular.Nobody likes a tired looking aircraft but as the financial results of looking down at heel are difficult to quantify CEOs have often been slow to tell the accountants to dig in their pockets.Airlines have a lot of data on the passengers they fly but almost none on those who walk away because they dont like the aircraft appearance, service or any other thing.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also BA look after their aircraft very well with the backing of their own in house maintenance facilities at Heathrow, Gatwick, Glasgow and Cardiff.
My only issue with the older aircraft is cosmetic. Put an old Lufthansa B737 next to a 1992 build Gatwick based BA machine and only one of them will look shiny and new on the outside alas. I'm wierd in that I like oder aircraft. I got all excited last year flying out on one of the original BA A320s from the early 90s and miffed when I went home in a shiny new build one.
My only issue with the older aircraft is cosmetic. Put an old Lufthansa B737 next to a 1992 build Gatwick based BA machine and only one of them will look shiny and new on the outside alas. I'm wierd in that I like oder aircraft. I got all excited last year flying out on one of the original BA A320s from the early 90s and miffed when I went home in a shiny new build one.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wasn't implying anything by citing the average age, just trying to be accurate. Really unless you're a (cough) spotter the age of any particular plane is impossible to ascertain just by looking at it; inside or out.
Northwest (well Delta now) is still flying DC-9s with an average age of 35 years. Delta is retiring the oldest (vintage 1966 on !) ones but plans to repaint and refurbish the -50 series and keep them for up to 5 more years.
I'm sure they are maintenance hogs, but like the bumper sticker says - don't laugh it's paid for. Long since.
Northwest (well Delta now) is still flying DC-9s with an average age of 35 years. Delta is retiring the oldest (vintage 1966 on !) ones but plans to repaint and refurbish the -50 series and keep them for up to 5 more years.
I'm sure they are maintenance hogs, but like the bumper sticker says - don't laugh it's paid for. Long since.
I recall flying as pax on a BA One-Eleven Birmingham to Glasgow in the last month of their operation. This was a 1968 aircraft in about 1993, and I knew it was probably my last One-Eleven trip. The cabin interior was immaculate, everything clean, no sign of dirt or wear at all.
A few years later I also flew, in 1998 I think, in the pioneer 747 AWNA which dated from 1970, back from Vancouver to Heathrow. It's condition was similarly immaculate.
The condition of the cabin interior has nothing to do with the airframe age, it is all down to how well it is maintained inside by the team on the ground. Unfortunately everybody, from the government to BASSA to the oil market speculators, seems to think they have a prior claim on BA's funds nowadays.
I also have been on a Virgin Atlantic 747-400 which was less than two years old. So many of the fittings for the seat controls, items in the washrooms, etc, were broken or worn. I was not surprised that could happen in 24 months of use, but I was amazed that it appeared not to have had a single spanner applied to the cabin fittings since it was delivered.
A few years later I also flew, in 1998 I think, in the pioneer 747 AWNA which dated from 1970, back from Vancouver to Heathrow. It's condition was similarly immaculate.
The condition of the cabin interior has nothing to do with the airframe age, it is all down to how well it is maintained inside by the team on the ground. Unfortunately everybody, from the government to BASSA to the oil market speculators, seems to think they have a prior claim on BA's funds nowadays.
I also have been on a Virgin Atlantic 747-400 which was less than two years old. So many of the fittings for the seat controls, items in the washrooms, etc, were broken or worn. I was not surprised that could happen in 24 months of use, but I was amazed that it appeared not to have had a single spanner applied to the cabin fittings since it was delivered.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: The Med
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to reinforce the OP's point, we frequent pax don't link cabin condition to safety, so L337 less of the sarcasm please, it makes you look childish in the context of those people posting here.
However, if you pay 700€ to fly in something (for 4.5 hours) that resembles a well used garden shed and then the service is poor, one is going to remember that there are alternatives available.
I've been riding up and down to the middle east on BA777s that are probably 12-15 years old and they look immaculate in the Club World cabin - backed up by good service; I'll be booking some more flights after Ramadan.
However, I won't be flying BA short haul again, unless there is no alternative, the experience was awful and the aircraft condition was truly depressing.
BA don't seem to learn, the Malta route was flown by GB with new and well (interior) maintained A32x equipment. Flights were full.
BA terminated GB and proceeded to replace the A32x with some of the most awful 737s I have ever flown in; on one flight, I adjusted the headrest and the whole thing came away in my hands
Panels were missing, the beige plastic was dirty yellow in places, the loos stank, carpet was taped together.
Guess what, we all avoided these flying garbage trucks like the plague and BA chopped the route. (One aspect that was good was the cabin crew from LGW, who did their best on a route with lousy timings for them for a season - how they were so cheerful working with such rubbish was beyond me, but was still appreciated.)
One cannot retrench forever.
We still have nice A320s, but they are KM or U2.
However, if you pay 700€ to fly in something (for 4.5 hours) that resembles a well used garden shed and then the service is poor, one is going to remember that there are alternatives available.
I've been riding up and down to the middle east on BA777s that are probably 12-15 years old and they look immaculate in the Club World cabin - backed up by good service; I'll be booking some more flights after Ramadan.
However, I won't be flying BA short haul again, unless there is no alternative, the experience was awful and the aircraft condition was truly depressing.
BA don't seem to learn, the Malta route was flown by GB with new and well (interior) maintained A32x equipment. Flights were full.
BA terminated GB and proceeded to replace the A32x with some of the most awful 737s I have ever flown in; on one flight, I adjusted the headrest and the whole thing came away in my hands
Panels were missing, the beige plastic was dirty yellow in places, the loos stank, carpet was taped together.
Guess what, we all avoided these flying garbage trucks like the plague and BA chopped the route. (One aspect that was good was the cabin crew from LGW, who did their best on a route with lousy timings for them for a season - how they were so cheerful working with such rubbish was beyond me, but was still appreciated.)
One cannot retrench forever.
We still have nice A320s, but they are KM or U2.
Last edited by F3G; 25th Jun 2010 at 21:08. Reason: To recognise good CC from LGW
Thread Starter
I think F3G is also on the point here - if you have spent a large sum of money on a flight, you want to feel that the 'kit' matches the expenditure.
When I fly to the Far East with an Asian carrier I know I will get a newish aircraft, normally with better pitch than BA, and with an attentive cc.
On BA I will get an old aircraft, 31'' pitch and [at the moment] a variable crew experience.
If the price is the same, which should I choose?
When I fly to the Far East with an Asian carrier I know I will get a newish aircraft, normally with better pitch than BA, and with an attentive cc.
On BA I will get an old aircraft, 31'' pitch and [at the moment] a variable crew experience.
If the price is the same, which should I choose?
Paxing All Over The World
Skylion
It is similar (not the same) as owning a domestic car. Once the car is paid off, the maintenance cost goes up. If you then buy a new car, maintenance goes right down, but your repayments are high.
In commerce, acquisition and maintenance costs are dealt with differently. Depending on the way the airline runs it's finances, depending on whether it's a private or public company or state owned - they will handle these differently. Not to mention if you do your own maintenance or whether you outsource or have some other kind of leasing agreement with maintenance included form the supplier. So, for some, having high maintenance costs will look bad, for some, buying new machines will look bad.
Over, say, 25 years of owning a car/aircraft the cost might be similar if you buy one and maintain it OR if you have three new ones for 8 years each. BUT the way in which the cost appears in your books will be different. Also, there is insurance, training of staff on a new machine, the manpower involved in selling and buying a/c and many more besides. Add to that the image/PR and corporate/state pride that can be big factors and you will begin to work your way through the problem.
BA's policy, particularly with its longhaul fleet, has always been to keep its aircraft almost throughout their working lives. This reduces their ownership costs but increases maintenance costs as the aircraft get older .The alternative, adopted by some carriers (Singapore has been a notable in the past) is to turn the fleet over at quite a young age while it is still an attractive second hand buy. This increases the cost of ownership but reduces engineering costs.
In commerce, acquisition and maintenance costs are dealt with differently. Depending on the way the airline runs it's finances, depending on whether it's a private or public company or state owned - they will handle these differently. Not to mention if you do your own maintenance or whether you outsource or have some other kind of leasing agreement with maintenance included form the supplier. So, for some, having high maintenance costs will look bad, for some, buying new machines will look bad.
Over, say, 25 years of owning a car/aircraft the cost might be similar if you buy one and maintain it OR if you have three new ones for 8 years each. BUT the way in which the cost appears in your books will be different. Also, there is insurance, training of staff on a new machine, the manpower involved in selling and buying a/c and many more besides. Add to that the image/PR and corporate/state pride that can be big factors and you will begin to work your way through the problem.
F3G
However, I won't be flying BA short haul again, unless there is no alternative, the experience was awful and the aircraft condition was truly depressing.
BA don't seem to learn, the Malta route was flown by GB with new and well (interior) maintained A32x equipment. Flights were full.
BA terminated GB and proceeded to replace the A32x with some of the most awful 737s I have ever flown in;
BA don't seem to learn, the Malta route was flown by GB with new and well (interior) maintained A32x equipment. Flights were full.
BA terminated GB and proceeded to replace the A32x with some of the most awful 737s I have ever flown in;
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: The Med
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiggy
No, not a blanket refusal, did you read my post thoroughly or didyou only look for evidence to support your thesis? I said intend to book Club World flights in Q3/4.
Also, my point was not made on the Malta run, this was just a reinforcement of the appalling experience between Larnaca and London last week.
Basically 700€ in CE for an aircraft with a knackered interior, 7" less seat pitch than Cyprus Airways and inattentive service, with a poor product (no before take off drink, no hot towels and no after dinner drinks for 2 hours, not even water.)
The Heathrow fleet is not just Airbus, this was a careworn 767 - just not good enough.
My philosophy for buying travel is simple, but not simplistic, I seek best value.
CE is nowhere near best value.
No, not a blanket refusal, did you read my post thoroughly or didyou only look for evidence to support your thesis? I said intend to book Club World flights in Q3/4.
Also, my point was not made on the Malta run, this was just a reinforcement of the appalling experience between Larnaca and London last week.
Basically 700€ in CE for an aircraft with a knackered interior, 7" less seat pitch than Cyprus Airways and inattentive service, with a poor product (no before take off drink, no hot towels and no after dinner drinks for 2 hours, not even water.)
The Heathrow fleet is not just Airbus, this was a careworn 767 - just not good enough.
My philosophy for buying travel is simple, but not simplistic, I seek best value.
CE is nowhere near best value.
There are, by direct discussion I have had with them, a significant number of business pax on London to Moscow who have been turned off by the atrocious state that the "short-haul" 767 interiors have been allowed to get into.
One of the fleet (there are what, about 8 aircraft) became known to regulars as "The Disco" because of the constant flickering and flashing cabin lights that Engineering were never given the funds to fix properly.
BA did a complete refurb of the interiors of the long-haul 767s a couple of years ago, but didn't touch the over-tired interiors of the short-haul variant.
Yes, people commented again and again about the contrast with the Aeroflot Airbuses, which although some have now been around long enough for a D-check still look new and looked after. Coupled with the far better C class service that Aeroflot provide nowadays, BA have lost ground on what was apparently one of the best performing financially of all their European routes (and at the fares they charge, so it should be). On this route service quality between the two airlines is a complete reversal of what it was a generation ago. Someone once suggested to me that when Aeroflot pulled themselves together (which they have done very thoroughly) and got rid of the broken seats and the disgusting catering, they had sold it all as a job lot to BA.
One of the fleet (there are what, about 8 aircraft) became known to regulars as "The Disco" because of the constant flickering and flashing cabin lights that Engineering were never given the funds to fix properly.
BA did a complete refurb of the interiors of the long-haul 767s a couple of years ago, but didn't touch the over-tired interiors of the short-haul variant.
Yes, people commented again and again about the contrast with the Aeroflot Airbuses, which although some have now been around long enough for a D-check still look new and looked after. Coupled with the far better C class service that Aeroflot provide nowadays, BA have lost ground on what was apparently one of the best performing financially of all their European routes (and at the fares they charge, so it should be). On this route service quality between the two airlines is a complete reversal of what it was a generation ago. Someone once suggested to me that when Aeroflot pulled themselves together (which they have done very thoroughly) and got rid of the broken seats and the disgusting catering, they had sold it all as a job lot to BA.