BA has money to burn !
 

Constantly being told that "Cash is King " .... So anyone care to calculate ........

How much did BA waste today on flying a 747-400 empty LHR-LGW-LHR just so they can claim a stupidly childish "record" as the first aircraft under Gatwicks new passenger bridge ? Just to beat the bearded one ?

Note....BA do not fly the 747-400 out of LGW ........even on routes that would easily be full......Miami, Orlando.

As if the publicity will be worth anything after the CDG terminal collapse.....:suspect: :suspect: :suspect:

BA made more profit this year than ALL the UK low quality (sorry low cost) airlines combined. Yup, we got cash to burn. And it feels good. And (while the going is good) we will induldge.

Great to see BA where is should be - leading the pack.
:ok: :ok: :ok: :ok: :ok: :ok: :ok:

Cirrus, it was probably a training flight for landing recency or such, so it wasn't wasted.

1: BA rent the North Terminal, and are probably responsible for around 75% of the movements at LGW (thereabouts).

2: It needed to be a 747 to check the clearances under the bridge.

3: I don't know about you....but if the Bearded one was about try and pull a publicity stunt (as rumoured), then wouldn't you want to make sure you got the PR coup?

Faced with this prospect, the words attributed to Rod E were apparently (insert Oz accent here) "Over my Dead body...!"

ummm ... what has the CDG collapse got to do with this, cirrus01? BA don't use T2 there!

I'm with Bumblebee ... if it stopped the Bearded One getting in first it was worth it - Branson would have milked it for all he could, to BA's detriment.

Llademos, actually BA do use T2 at CDG. They moved into it last year while T1 was refurbished. Shame - I'd come to like Satellite 5 for all its quirks.

As for this stunt... Good on BA! For once taking the positive initiative. BA invests (spends) money all the time (have you any idea of the spend on IM for a start?.. It's not far off 3/4 of a million pounds a day) and to my mind this is just one of them.

I hadn't been to LGW for a while and was amazed by this bridge. It's a great feat of engineering - and dare I say more impressive than the T5 roof for now).

Isn't a bridge of this size across a taxi-way a world-first?

Quinunc - BA didn't make that profit from trading profitably, they made it from slashing cost. That easy to do at the beginning but it gets harder and harder, lets reserve judgement shall we ?

The 'Bearded Virgin' is planning to FLY a 747-400 under the LGW bridge, to grab the headlines!!!!

.and I know JUST the chap to do it:D

I think I heard on the radio this morning ,the only other bridge like this is Denver.

Well done BA--after all the negative publicityover the last few years,this was a good one----after all it is mainly their terminal.

It would be nice to see 747's back at LGW!Come on BA lets have a few back from LHR!!!!!!!!

Couldn't they have done that with a tape measure?

BA must be getting desperate!

Next thing you know they'll be going back to trying to ambush customers on their way to the Virgin check in desks and lure them away!

BA is still a dirty word - no matter what childish and wasteful "stunt" they try and pull.

More power to Richard. Top man!

And Branson doesn't resort to these? Think Courtney Love and the air rage incident. How despicable was that?

Im not sure it was there to check the hight of the bridge,

Yesterday we were on 107 and we had to get pushed back all the way down Q. The "L" taxiway is totally blocked off by cranes, trucks, diggers etc, still the same when we got back late afternoon.

As somebody said, why not a tape measure

Hot Dog

Actually if I know BA, and I think I do, its more likely to have been a couple managers having a jolly don't you? Anyone care to confirm?

I believe that the aircraft has now travelled under the bridge, there was a blurry photo on BBC.

There's a photo in today's Daily Telegraph , anyone any idea how much taller the tail of the A380 is ? The bridge must have been designed to accept that as well ..... or was it ?!!!

I was just going to add, lets see if anyone can get an A380 under there in a couple of years! B74 yes but the A380 is going to be hell of a lot bigger...

A380 tail is 79.36 feet tall.

747-400 tail is 63ft 8in tall.

The bridge is 98.42 feet off the ground. Can't see a problem myself.

If the A380 needs to go under the bridge they can let some nitrogen out of the tyres.