Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Bwia L-1011 And Problems  
User currently offline220389 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (15 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1635 times:


Has anyone heard the latest on the BWIA L-1011 replacement. I heard that Laurence Duprey and Conrad Aleong is having some disagreements about the replacement. Durprey wants the A340 and Aleong wants the 767. Now what do you guys think is the better replacement for the L-1011. If BWIA goes with the 767 then they should go with the 767-400. If they go with Airbus they should go with the A330-200 or the A340-300. What are ure opinions on the replacement. How many aircraft do u think that BWIA will purchase for the L-1011 replacement. I think that the mistake that BWIA made when purchasing the L-1011's is that they purchased them instead of leasing them which would of been better for them to do. I think that the A330 or the A340 is a good replacement. This is my opinion.

21 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineTrintocan From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2000, 3297 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (15 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1543 times:

From the outlook the 767-400 would seem better for BWee because there would be some commonality with the 737-800s they fly at present and they would have to deal with only one supplier of spares, etc. BWee, however, does not have a history of maintaining great fleet commonality so that the possibility of purchasing the Airbus type(s) remains. The important issues in their choice would be the ability to fly to LHR from regional ports nonstop, the availability of adequate cargo space and the ability to handle the one or two short hops which their flights to LHR and Europe tend to have.

I was very young when BWee bought the TriStars but I do not get the impression that long-term leasing of planes was as big a business back in 1980 as it is now. More often than not, airlines simply went all out and bought planes. The leasing business developed later that decade as with the recessions, increasing costs and other concerns, airlines began to find it more cost-effective to dry-lease planes for long periods. Dry-leasing refers to the leasing of the aircraft for which the airline provides crews and maintenance, while wet-leasing, which is largely a very short-term arrangement, refers to the provision of plane, crew and maintenance by the leasor. Some airlines now have to resort to wet-leasing in order to operate to the USA in the face of Category 2 or 3 ratings for their home countries.

Interestingly, in 1988 due to the severe cash flow problems in T&T as a whole, the Government asked BWee to sell off 3 of their 4 TriStars and lease them back, which they did. I am not sure how many of them remain leased; at least 40D, which has US registration, still is (the leasors plan to scrap it   ). Hence is the advantage of buying - the airline has hard assets which it would not have had if it leased the planes. In fact, for a while the one TriStar left unleased was the only aeronautical asset of BWee, as they sold off the DC-9s and their MD80s are all leased (plus the now sub-leased A321s).

As for the row in the Board, I have not heard any more; it seems that the high political season in T&T is drowning out relatively peripheral issues such as those.


Hop to it, fly for life!
User currently offlineCeilidh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (15 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1525 times:

Leasing would have been a bad idea for BWIA - just look at the shenannigans involved with 40D!! The lessors (Field Aviation) are going to have to scrap it because it's overvalued by some US$7 million due to the various kickbacks demanded by BWIA and government figures. An L1011 in pieces is, unfortunately, worth more than one whole.

As things stand at the moment, the average value of each L1011-500 is around US$3 - US$3.5 million, based on the overall condition and especially that of the engines. BWIA are asking US$7.5+ for each aircraft. They have their spares on their books at some US$11m - in fact the market value is just US$750k.

Therefore, whilst this IPO is going on, BWIA cannot afford to sell the aircraft; and as it needs the cash for deposits then the new aircraft aren't going to happen, either.

As for the ongoing Airbus/Boeing battle, I hear that Aleong has been trying to get the board members to sign a retrospective document saying that they all agreed to the B737-800 deal; and that he (Aleong) didn't get any 'consultancy fees' out of either the B737-800s or the DHC8s. Lawrance Dupree apparently quashed it - so it looks like Aleong's the designated scapegoat for that particular fiasco!

BeeWee - caaaaaaaaaan't fix!

User currently offlineB777-200LR From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (15 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1519 times:

i will definately go for the A330 . It is an impressive aircraft and very suited for BWIA . Maybe they should order 10-20 aircrafts depending on their needs

User currently offlineCeilidh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (15 years 7 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1503 times:

B777-200LR - I hope you're being facetious here, my friend!! BWIA can only just about justify four long range aircraft - and probably have the financial capability to pay for two new ons.

Anyway, with a user name like yours, why aren't you supporting the 767?  

User currently offlineGunpowder From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Sep 2000, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (15 years 7 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1498 times:

Right on B777-200LR in for a pound, etc, but, hey, why not 50 777-200s or so?
Much better than those tinny slow old buses!   

User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (15 years 7 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1493 times:

Why did they bother painting all their L-1011's up in the new cls then???

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Ben Pritchard


User currently offline220389 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (15 years 7 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1478 times:

Hey gunpowder,

those A330's are real good aircraf and very reliable. Have you ever flown on one of A330's before. Those things give a smooth ride. I never flown on the 777 but i would like too. It is most posible that BWIA will choose either the 767 or the A330/A340 for the L-1011 replacement. Regarding the question about BWIA rebranding some of the L-1011's. I think that they started to give trouble after the re-ferbished them. I think that they planned to keep them for a couple of years again. But now they are costing them lots of money to maintain. Aproximately 15 million USD a month to keep them running.

Hope the Get the A330 or the A340 for the replacement.

User currently offline220389 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (15 years 7 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1463 times:

Do you guys think that BWIA will take Lan Chiles 767-300's for the L-1011 replacement. I think they might consider it because right now they probably are not financily stable to get new aircraft. I hope that they become like Lan Chile and take delivery of some new Airbus Aircraft like the A330 and the A340. By the way, why is Lan Chile replacing there 767-300's??

User currently offlineCeilidh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (15 years 7 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1458 times:

Gunpowder - Why stop at 50? The way the price of oil is going, the T&T Govt will soon be able to afford to give every Trini around the world his or her personal jet. Unless, of course, the money disappears in a cloud of invoices for consultancy fees...   

LGW - Very true. As a measure of the BWIA management foresight, they have now decided to keep 9Y-THA (which was originally not repainted, reupholstered or equipped Delta large overhead bins or with the plasma video screen in J class) and park 9Y-TGJ (which had all of the above done to it) instead. The main reason for this is that it's in better shape and has the rear web spar mod completed - which of course they should have been fully aware of at the time of the original planning!! 

220389 - where on earth did you get the figure of US$15 million a month to maintain from? Obviously out of very thin air indeed!! If it cost that much, BWIA would have gone bust a heck of a long time ago - let's do some sums here. They fly their aircraft on average 250 hours per month. That means a maintenance cost of US$60,000 per hour - equal to US$248 per hour per passenger. On a flight from LHR to POS, that would cost them US$2,240 per passenger - assuming a 100% load factor! - just for maintenance - we haven't even factored in the normal operating costs such as fuel, crew, insurance, navigation, landing, handling etc. Even if the US$15m is spread amongst the two operational aircraft, that still means a maintenance cost no less than four times higher than all other costs combined! Really!?!    

Incidentally, the A330 is an awful aircraft with a very poor build quality - both physically and in terms of its operating software. Boeing isn't much better - unfortunately the higher quality manufacturers (Lockheed and Douglas (not McDonnell Douglas) priced themselves out of the market long ago. This is, unfortunately, a price rather than quality driven industry.

User currently offlineGunpowder From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Sep 2000, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (15 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1456 times:

You are pretty right on most counts Ceilidh and I keep hoping that a coalescence of Boeing production technology and Lockheed skunk works ideas would happen and produce the ultimate airliner.
Just a dream, unfortunately. 

User currently offlineCeilidh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (15 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1441 times:

Gunpowder - stealth TriStars, perhaps? Just think how you could massage your ontime figures with one of those ... "of course it's at the gate - can't you see it?"

A real case of emperor's clothes, methinks!    

User currently offlineGunpowder From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Sep 2000, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (15 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1432 times:

You wouldn't need slots at LHR either, you could just sneak in and out undetected. You could also send all those airport noise whingers crazy... noise, what noise?, I don't see anything sir.
Heck you could even avoid "consultants".

User currently offlineCeilidh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (15 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1427 times:

Yep, and think about all the Eurocontrol fees you'd avoid .... hey, we'd actually consistently profitable airlines!!      

User currently offlineF_boot From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (15 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1417 times:

The easiest way to avoid air navigation fees is to exist only in cyberspace. Virtual airlines R us, eh Ceilidh.

User currently offlineNY-JFK-LGA From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 374 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (15 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1412 times:

I love my BWee!

Bring back McDonnell Douglas & T W A!!
User currently offlineCeilidh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (15 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1407 times:

Fors $1.25 a share you can have it, NY-JFK-LGA!

User currently offlineTrintocan From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2000, 3297 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (15 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1403 times:

Only 2 of the TriStars have been repainted but, as was earlier mentioned, 9Y-TGJ has been retired despite the repaint while -TGA, which has not been upgraded, will continue in service. The mechanical factors provide the reason.

I still have not heard any more about the TriStar replacement or the row in the Board.

The only thing I have heard (and from this forum) is the cessation of Air Jamaica's service to POS. This gives BWee more of a monopoly in POS but, as I discussed in a post on that thread, the reasons for JM's failure are more intractable than merely competing with BWee in its home market.


Hop to it, fly for life!
User currently offlineCeilidh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (15 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1399 times:

I hear from very reliable sources that the future of Butch as JM's CEO is in some doubt - as is the future of the airline itself. Unlike T&T, which is doing very nicely, thank you, due to the high oil prices - Jamaica is more or less bankrupt and can no longer afford the losses being created by Mr Stewart whilst he fills his Sandals resorts.

User currently offlineTrintocan From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2000, 3297 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (15 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1400 times:

Ceilidh, you are very correct about JM. When Butch took over JM back in 1995 he attempted to bring some new life into the carrier. At that time JM had a bad reputation for ferrying ganja from Jamaica to the USA and its planes were forever being impounded in MIA. Butch did try to revitalize JM by giving it a new image, new planes and paint scheme and projecting it as THE airline to the Caribbean.

Where he went wrong, though, was in his route selection and operations. Jamaica has a very large home market for air services, mostly based in Kingston (KIN) along with an enormous tourist market at Montego Bay (MBJ). JM's flights have thus traditionally flown from KIN to MBJ and then elsewhere. However, there is only so much capacity that Jamaica could realistically fill and there are lots of competing carriers into the island, especially at MBJ.

So Butch, who runs the Sandals and Beaches chains, chose to co-market the two products (airline and hotels) and geared JM's operations towards serving his hotels. Specifically, the airline began flights to Nassau (NAS), Grand Turk, St. Lucia (UVF) and Antigua (ANU), where he has hotel properties, as well as to Barbados (BGI) where he had intended to open a property. That Caribbean expansion in 1996 faced obvious drawbacks, though - Jamaica is in the western Caribbean while most of those other destinations are in the East. As such he chose to develop MBJ as a hub from which those cities would be served and connecting flights would continue to the US. Alas, those islands are all served by AA and, in the cases of UVF, ANU and BGI, BWIA directly to the US. Additionally, the local market for regional flights is located in KIN, not the tourist-centred MBJ, so JM literally left BW unchallenged in that regard. The result is that the expansion flights fared poorly from their 1996 introduction and within the same year ANU and Grand Turk were dropped. JM did start direct flights from JFK to UVF and BGI but they too suffered and were halved in frequency in late 1996.

JM, now trying desperately to fill the massively increased fleet they had obtained by then, upped gears another notch and promoted themselves even more actively as the airline to the Caribbean. Hence, their massive promotional campaign, "Red Carpet Service", free champagne and so on. They also took to sponsoring many regional events and to expanding their regional services where gaps were left by others. As a result, when AA left UVF (the Eagle still serves SLU) and GND (Grenada) JM filled the gaps with new direct services from JFK to those islands. BGI also proved to be quite a strong destination for JM despite the absence of a Sandals rseort so the services continued there and were increased.

Further to their Caribbean reach, JM has expanded to Bonaire (BON) and Panama City while starting service with a regional carrier, EC Xpress, from BGI to the nearby Windward Islands. The EC Xpress flights connect with the JFK services. Yet that does not seem logical, as both KIN and MBJ have been served by Copa from Panama for many years and, in like fashion, ALM has served KIN from Curacao, Netherlands Antilles. The ultimate was the now ill-fated thrust into Port of Spain (POS), where it was coming head-to-head with BWIA in its strongest route. The capacity to fill up 2 competing flights daily on the route was not forthcoming, hence JM's imminent withdrawal. Of course, BWIA competed vigorously too and that undermined JM severely.

So if BWIA has problems, Air Jamaica has them manyfold. And who has paid for all of this? The Jamaican taxpayers, who are being asked to shell out ever more money to sustain the airline. It is sad to see JM leave POS after 3 months; with better organization it may have worked for them. Above all, JM needs to decide what niche it really intends to serve. A year-round scheduled carrier cannot base its entire survival on the seasonal and fickle tourist market, far less to serve only one chain of hotels.


Hop to it, fly for life!
User currently offlineCeilidh From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (15 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1393 times:

A most interesting and relevant recent history of JM, there, Trintocan - thank you very much for that!   That helped fill some gaps in my knowledge and I can now agree - even more so - that it looks like it's going to be a race to see who's the first to go - Butch or Air Jamaica!

User currently offlineTrintocan From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2000, 3297 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (15 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1390 times:

Ceilidh, what we have here is in fact a Catch-22 situation. JM does enjoy the loyal support of Jamaicans - the Jamaican national psyche is very strong and patriotism is high. As such JM could survive by merely serving the home market and the Jamaican communities in the US and England. However, if one wants to stop the losses, what is there to do? If you remove Butch, the age old question will arise of who could you put to run the airline? Only a sale to foreigners or a merger with BWIA(?) seems logical at this point. And if you remove Butch, you would be removing the main financier of the Jamaican economy. He has, after all, poured millions of dollars of his profits into the Treasury on his own free will to prevent the fall of the Jamaican dollar (and, as such, ensuring that JM continues to get Treasury support).

So, if Butch is taken away the economy collapses while if JM is shut down foreign carriers will flood the market and funds would migrate overseas, again causing fiscal collapse.

Either way it is between a rock and a hard place for Jamaica. What a pity for such a beautiful and vibrant country.


Hop to it, fly for life!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Gulfstreams And Problems Lately? posted Sun Nov 27 2005 22:21:09 by Higney85
Sharp Objects Can = Fines And Problems W/ TSA posted Wed May 11 2005 16:20:40 by LTBEWR
Bwia L-1011 On Terror Webside Sparks Concern posted Fri Sep 10 2004 01:16:50 by WestIndian425
The L-1011 And The MD-11, Coincidental Swan Song? posted Tue Mar 16 2004 20:51:51 by Mirrodie
Bwia L-1011 Replacement posted Thu Dec 13 2001 03:04:29 by BWIA330
Does BA Still Fly The L-1011 And The DC-10's? posted Wed Sep 19 2001 22:19:41 by Fly_emirates
Bwia L-1011 Replacement Due Second Quartar 2002 posted Sat Aug 18 2001 01:46:55 by BWIA330
Airlines With Both L-1011 And DC-10 posted Sat Feb 24 2001 14:59:09 by Republic
Airline Pilot Strikes, And Problems With Airlines. posted Sun Jan 28 2001 05:09:32 by DeltaFan9263
What Can You Tell Me About Bwia L-1011's? posted Fri Jan 26 2001 19:43:22 by LGW