Flight Intl. BA to buy 321 instead of 318
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight Intl. BA to buy 321 instead of 318
Anyone else heard this?
I was flicking through FI in WHSmiths and saw an article mentioning that BA had cancelled 6 out of 12 confirmed A318's and all their 318 options but ordered 4 A321's.
Sounds good if true but I cannot see why they'd still want the remaining 6 A318's, especially as the engines will be incompatible with any other BA aircraft. They may as well add 6 A319's, might cost more initially but commonality would save over the lifetime, wouldn't it?
Two days later after not buying FI I'm left wondering if it was true????
I was flicking through FI in WHSmiths and saw an article mentioning that BA had cancelled 6 out of 12 confirmed A318's and all their 318 options but ordered 4 A321's.
Sounds good if true but I cannot see why they'd still want the remaining 6 A318's, especially as the engines will be incompatible with any other BA aircraft. They may as well add 6 A319's, might cost more initially but commonality would save over the lifetime, wouldn't it?
Two days later after not buying FI I'm left wondering if it was true????
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Silly Cone Valley
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what they’re saying is that BA should never have cut capacity in the first place. By buying 321’s and restoring the 767’s they are describing the requirement for a 200 seat and a 280 seat short/medium mix fleet. Now I know a company that used to have 53 757’s and 28 767’s. Sounds just about right to me.
I’ll take on the competition anyday. It’s the management I can’t beat.
I’ll take on the competition anyday. It’s the management I can’t beat.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mark,
I believe they were P&W. The CFM 56 would have offered some commonality but BA's longer term plan seems to be to replace the CFM56 powered 737's with IAE V2500 Airbus's.
They still have 10 CFM powered early model A320's including the 5 real slugs (the A320-100's) but last years rumours suggested that they would be replaced by shiny new ones at some future time so ensure the complete whole fleet commonality.
Again...runmours and speculation but what's the name of this forum...errr ...Reporting Points
I believe they were P&W. The CFM 56 would have offered some commonality but BA's longer term plan seems to be to replace the CFM56 powered 737's with IAE V2500 Airbus's.
They still have 10 CFM powered early model A320's including the 5 real slugs (the A320-100's) but last years rumours suggested that they would be replaced by shiny new ones at some future time so ensure the complete whole fleet commonality.
Again...runmours and speculation but what's the name of this forum...errr ...Reporting Points
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: err, *******, we have a problem
Age: 58
Posts: 1,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weren't BA a launch customer for the 318? If so, there may be some contractual elbow-twisting to get them into service one way or another.
At least the 321 is the right decision... about 3 years too late, mind you, but the right decision.
At least the 321 is the right decision... about 3 years too late, mind you, but the right decision.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bcal were the launch customer along with air france for the A320 but the company was taken over by BA just as the aircraft turned up.
There was a lot of anti airbus predudice in BA at the time and most people thought that the A320 would not be around for long but the airbus proved its worth in a staunchly Boeing company.
There was a lot of anti airbus predudice in BA at the time and most people thought that the A320 would not be around for long but the airbus proved its worth in a staunchly Boeing company.
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: err, *******, we have a problem
Age: 58
Posts: 1,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, A and C, what you say is correct and accurate, but I'm talking about the 318 "variant"... as far as I'm aware, BA were one of, if not the only launch customer for what is an aircraft that can carry less than some of the existing 737 variants they operate on the same routes.
The 321 is the one that is needed to replace the high-density Shuttle routes and the high club-load intra-european stuff previously the remit of the 757. Better late than never...
The 321 is the one that is needed to replace the high-density Shuttle routes and the high club-load intra-european stuff previously the remit of the 757. Better late than never...
Join Date: May 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe BA is one of 3 or 4 launch customers for the 318, Air France certainly being one of the others, and there is definitely another customer with the PW order, though I cannot recall who at the moment. Heard the rumours myself a few months ago, when the PW engine was going through some real development problems, which will result in it being late anyway.
Cannot see the point in only operating 6 318s: engineering training costs cannot justify it IMHO unless BA can do work on those of other operators (of which there are worryingly few), and not only was the 318 was not only destined for the regions anyway (which BA have decreased involvement in), but are also heavy aircraft compared to 717 for example.
Agree that 321 should always have been the choice, especially since the 757s need replacing anyway due to age - silly decision in the first place.
Cannot see the point in only operating 6 318s: engineering training costs cannot justify it IMHO unless BA can do work on those of other operators (of which there are worryingly few), and not only was the 318 was not only destined for the regions anyway (which BA have decreased involvement in), but are also heavy aircraft compared to 717 for example.
Agree that 321 should always have been the choice, especially since the 757s need replacing anyway due to age - silly decision in the first place.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Surrey
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lucifer,
Part of the deal was that BA had to take delivery of a minimum of 6 318s and they cannot get out of this,especially as a launch customer.They were originally intended to op in the regions.
Part of the deal was that BA had to take delivery of a minimum of 6 318s and they cannot get out of this,especially as a launch customer.They were originally intended to op in the regions.
