Quote: "The chances that we will buy Airbus A380 are as good as ever. We have absolutely no doubt that EADS will resolve the problems surrounding the project," German newspaper Handelsblatt quoted BA chief executive Willie Walsh as saying in an advance extract of an interview to be published on Tuesday.
"There are good arguments for us to buy a few Airbus A380s," he said, adding that BA would need at least 10 of the jets to run its long-haul services efficiently.
Atnight From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 624 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 10829 times:
Thanks for giving a clear picture of what Willie Walsh said about the A380... so know, even though he says the A380 would slow down LHR (as said in the other half-thread), BA isn't against the idea of the A380.... they actually have come up with a number figure for what they would initially order... This just confirms what I've being thinking all along.... that the A380 will be a part of BA's fleet....
PM From Namibia, joined Feb 2005, 7183 posts, RR: 63
Reply 9, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 10296 times:
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 5): LHR-JNB is a big route, but even SA is saying that JNB-LHR isn't enough for them to get an A380....
Because, I think, that was their [i]only[i] route where it was needed. While it might not be cost effective for SAA to buy one or two for one route, BA would have several routes that would sustain A380s of which LHR-JNB would be one.
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 5): That being said, there is a potential to see BA order maybe a "dozen or so" A380's down the line..but I think that would be tops............
I'm sure Airbus would not see a BA order for "a dozen" A380s as a disappointment or an insult...
PM From Namibia, joined Feb 2005, 7183 posts, RR: 63
Reply 12, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 10219 times:
Quoting FCKC (Reply 11): Probably they will order A380s , 777-300ERs , and 787s.
That would be my guess. In fact, I'd say it's almost a given. We all but know that the 777W is coming, the 787 seems almost inevitable and I'm one of those who see the A380 as likely. With their existing fleet of 777-200ERs (and 744s for a few more years) that should cover pretty much all routes. A 748i would be one new model too many - in my strictly amateur opinion.
SparkingWave From South Korea, joined Jun 2005, 681 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 9577 times:
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 4): Or he's just trying to get a better deal from Boeing. After all, isn't that what people say when it's the other way around?
Actually, he might be trying to get a better deal from Airbus, since they're not in the best situation right now, and they lost the sale of 10 A380s to FedEx. These carrot statements might entice Airbus, since they can't offer these planes on time at the initial profit they hoped for.
Flights to the moon and all major space stations. At Pan Am, the sky is no longer the limit!
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 15063 posts, RR: 59
Reply 20, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 9365 times:
Quoting PM (Reply 9): Because, I think, that was their only[i] route where it was needed. While it might not be cost effective for SAA to buy one or two for one route, BA would have several routes that would sustain A380s of which LHR-JNB would be one.
True, that is why I listed a few routes and why I think BA [i]might possibly buy the A380....
Quoting PM (Reply 9): I'm sure Airbus would not see a BA order for "a dozen" A380s as a disappointment or an insult...
Given how Airbus (especially Leahy) incessantly claimed carriers would switch 1:1 from the B744 to the A380, selling a "dozen or so" would certainly be a disappointment or an insult.....
Quoting BALAX (Reply 14): DL's JFK-LGW route is not a threat to BA, 2 different airports, LHR is still preferred. The same applies to MaxJet to Stansted. I really don't see DL's route as a gold mine.
It still falls under "New York - London"...many many pax don't mind if its LGW, LHR, STN..even LTN.....and the fact MaxJet and Eos Airlines are still around (and expanding) shows that there are alternatives to flying LHR....not only that, the fact UA pulled out of the route just goes to show how competitive New York - London route is.....
Quoting RJ111 (Reply 18): You forget to mention UA pulling out of that route though. Probably the most significant of the 3 changes to BA.
UA had only one flight to LHR...but there has been a net increase seats during the past year to year and a half on the New York - London route.
Timboflier215 From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 1346 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 8985 times:
Don't forget, BA, like SQ, has their planes configured in a very low-density way. IF they did get A380s, they would probably put more F and J class seats in, rather than cramming it full of economy seats. So there wouldn't be a huge increase in capacity overall, but on routes where they think they can get more premium traffic, the A380 could work well. But, to paraphrase, it ain't over until the fat lady orders (no offence BA!)
Morvious From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 708 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 8844 times:
BAW was never really in the buying mood since the A380 was launched. Now they need new planes they just look better to airplanes availible and what other carriers are doing.
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 20): Given how Airbus (especially Leahy) incessantly claimed carriers would switch 1:1 from the B744 to the A380, selling a "dozen or so" would certainly be a disappointment or an insult.....
Even a 2 year old knows that the A380 is not a 1:1 replacement for the B747 at this stage. But who knows what the future will bring to aviation and airports around the world. What will be the heathow of 2030?