Qantasclub From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 757 posts, RR: 3 Posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 7437 times:
Sorry to add to the ever growing list of A380 hot topics, but I was just through Heathrow yesterday and it amazed me that BA hasn't as yet ordered any A380. Costs aside, a large capacity aircraft such as the 380 would make perfect sense for the largest airline operating out of the most slot constrained airport in the world. Moreover, BA's 744 fleet is beginning to age, with no replacements in sight. If they DO order the A380 eventually, delivery won't be until way after 2010 at the current rate of production which means BA;s fleet will look comparatively ancient next to the gleaming new A380s of SQ, QF and VS.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13031 posts, RR: 78
Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7110 times:
It is not true to say that BA have ruled out the A380, in last week's BA News Rod Eddington said nothing of the sort, where do these myths come from?
What he did say is that BA are not ordering any aircraft for the foreseeable future, nothing new in that, it's been fact for 3 years.
BA's average fleet age is 8 years, BA has massive debts to clear, BA will first order a 757/767 replacement, for around 2010, clearly between the A350 and 7E7.
A recent comment by a member of BA's fleet planning department, pointed out that when the time comes to replace B747-400's, probably the original G-BNL- batch onwards delivered from 1989, Airbus will be keen to break into the BA longhaul fleet, which will inform their marketing and pricing.
BA has no trouble operating aircraft maybe older than competitors, we happily operated B747-100's right to the end of the 1990's, aircraft that were delivered from 1970 onwards, so if BA desire to wait for A380, if they want to, that's fine.
But BA have issues to sort out, they were probably hurt more that any non US airline by Sept 11th, BA had to (unlike US majors) pay for enhanced security themselves, BA have no Chapter 11 to fall back on, get in the shit like Alitalia? Then BA are on there own, no handouts.
LHR, being the crowded place it is, will probably see eventually A380's in BA colours, even if some sort of 747adv is launched, which BA might buy as well.
But a 757/767 replacement comes first, but not for a few years, if you are waiting for new BA aircraft orders, you've a long wait.
But I don't see BA A380's in the numbers similar to the 747-436 fleet, BA do like frequency, but as air travel keeps on expanding, as LHR becomes more crowded, the case for a BA A380 will probably become stronger, particulary if 747adv does not match A380 capacity, even in any stretched form.
Though 747adv would be a logical replacement for maybe much of the 747-436 fleet.
Airbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 7740 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 6893 times:
Also as has been mentioned the A380 can't operate into a great deal of airports that BA might want to use it on.
Of all the excuses I hear, this one I don't buy it. An A380 can operate to just about any airport a 747 can. All this talk about airports not being ready is nothing but cosmetic fixes and excuses to extract money from tax payers. Expensive fixes are needed, yes, but they're mostly cosmetic ones. If it can land and take off, then it can serve that airport. If it doesn't fit at the gate, then use a remove bay and shuttle the passengers by bus. So what if it takes a little longer. You wanna talk slow? Try clearing immigration at BOS
BCal From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, RR: 17
Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 6418 times:
We will need someone from the BA Board to tell us the reasons why BA has not yet ordered (or if they will order) the A380. However, judging from scraps of information available it seems that the following might all be contributory factors:
BA has no immediate need to replace their long-haul fleet. Their 744s are relatively new and will see out their long-haul requirements for a few years
BA is more concerned about reducing their debt. This is important for an airline that has no Chapter 11 protection to fall back on, no handouts or subsidies from the government or EEC, and had to pay for their own security (as already mentioned in a previous reply to this thread)
BA is not typically the launch customer of any aircraft
BA is a public limited company (PLC) and it would have to convince their shareholders of their need to acquire new aircraft when its fleet is moderately young
BA tends to prefer to offer frequency of flights - currently they offer ten daily flights between London and New York. If they had A380s, could they offer this frequency?
With no immediate need for a long-haul replacement, they could be waiting for decisions regarding the 747 Adv or perhaps the 7e7
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7912 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 6317 times:
Given that BA already has most of the choice landing slots at LHR, I don't think they'll need to buy the A380-800 anytime soon. This is especially true for their route to JFK, a route that emphasizes more frequency of service than sheer capacity per plane. Why do you think BA is flying both 747-400's and 777-200ER's on this route?
AlanUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 4 days ago) and read 5967 times:
Although I believe BA will eventually order the A380, I can't see why people say "they will need to compete on some major routes with QF, VS and SQ"... When it comes to competition, it's what IN the plane that counts, not what plane it is!!!
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 4 days ago) and read 5849 times:
"When it comes to competition, it's what IN the plane that counts, not what plane it is!!!
The A380 chauvanists would argue that certain luxury ammenties and services can only be economically "in" a plane with the floor space and operating economics of the A380. Time will tell whether the paradigm becomes the flying cruiseship or cattle car.
here is BAxMan's repost..................this might answer your question....
From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 116 posts, RR: 0
Posted Wed Jan 26 2005 01:21:23 UTC+1 and read 321 times:
A brief statement by Neil Cottrell (Fleet Planning Manager at BA) on the BA intranet went as follows:
In BA configurations a 747 has 291-351 seats and an A380 448-499 seats. If we look at a like-for-like comparison by comparing running costs per square metre of floor area (excluding ownership costs) then the A380 is 15-20% cheaper than a 747. However there are two other important considerations. Firstly if one considers ownership costs then the total costs per square metre of operating a brand new A380 is roughly the same as operating an older 747 as ownership costs of an older 747 are much lower. Secondly any airline buying the A380 has to fill the extra seats at a good yield to make as good a return as on a 747.
Past work has suggested that it is important to offer frequency to our longhaul passengers and it is unlikely that we will replace two 747s with one A380 as this will reduce both total seats on the route and frequency.
It is true that there are often good deals to be had as a launch carrier - however if we do look to buy the A380 we shouldn't underestimate the power of a competition between Boeing and Airbus to replace our 747s. Airbus would be very keen to break into the BA longhaul fleet so I'd expect some very competitive prices. It is also true that later deliveries are likely to be more refined than launch deliveries with teething problems ironed out and probably less aircraft weight as Airbus engineers learn about the true performance of the aircraft.
There have been a number of comments about no-frills carriers flying 800 passengers. BA makes most of its money on longhaul from premium products - many passengers want comfort on a longhaul flight. A carrier carrying 800 passengers is going to find it very challenging to fill the seats consistently at a high enough yield to make any sort of decent return - it will also be difficult to turn an 800 passenger aircraft round very quickly.
There are also a number of comments on gyms etc on A380s. Any such exotic products need to pay for themselves and that means getting passengers to pay a premium consistently for such products - past experience suggests that putting more seats in is a better way of gaining revenue.
Finally, fleet planning will look at the A350 and 7E7 as well but I can assure everyone that no new jobs will be created to see if we can afford any of these aircraft.
So pretty much non-commital, sitting on the fence sort of stuff really, as well as discrete dismissal of VS propoganda to turn their planes into entertainment centres cum mass transit device."
Dayflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 5252 times:
We'll see what they do. I would bet they eventually order it due to the number of passengers crossing the pond into London from places like NY. I would be very surprised if they went for the 747 Adv unless they had serious input into the upgrades, seating capacity and so forth.
Ushermittwoch From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 2951 posts, RR: 17
Reply 23, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 5214 times:
The problem will just be that a lot of airlines on the Kangaroo Route, as well as to NRT (VS) or HKG will be able to offer more capacity, which would reduce ticket costs and then I doubt that BA will be able to hold up that competition for all too long, especially given that two of the carriers, Cathay Pacific and Qantas, are actually One World members so the argument of FF miles and what not is obsolete.
Aerosol From Germany, joined Oct 2000, 549 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (9 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4337 times:
I think it has to do with the British philosophy. See how it works then join. Was the same with EC, A320, Euro (future). And that is not meant as criticism. This is simply a conservative approach to matters.
Sooner or later they will order, because I can not imagine them having only the 2nd biggest plane @ home .