NA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 8618 posts, RR: 11 Posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 5803 times:
- A handful of A380s for IB perhaps?
- A combination of A380 and A350-1000 in the longer term to replace all 744s, 777s and A346s? More 77Ws for BA make less sense now than before the merger.
- A330s/short A350s or 787s for IB and BA to replace 772s and A343s?
- what about the huge gap between A343/777/787/A330/A350 and the A321?
- Standardisation on Airbus A318-21 in the lower midsize regional fleets (well, already happening).
- What consequences for the minor routes? ERJs, C-series?
RIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1779 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 5726 times:
Quoting NA (Thread starter): A combination of A380 and A350-1000 in the longer term to replace all 744s, 777s and A346s
- not sure about 346, but 777 will never be "replaced" by 35A. When time comes to replace 777s, then 350 (or 787) will be same "new" as 330/777 are today. Unless you believe 787/350 are the ultimate designs forever.
BA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 593 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 5713 times:
Quoting NA (Thread starter): - A handful of A380s for IB perhaps?
- A combination of A380 and A350-1000 in the longer term to replace all 744s, 777s and A346s? More 77Ws for BA make less sense now than before the merger.
- A330s/short A350s or 787s for IB and BA to replace 772s and A343s?
- what about the huge gap between A343/777/787/A330/A350 and the A321?
- Standardisation on Airbus A318-21 in the lower midsize regional fleets (well, already happening).
- What consequences for the minor routes? ERJs, C-series?
Aircraft in the fleets of the airlines really have nothing to do with the fact that they are merging. Thats not to say we wont see some IB planes in BAs hangers at LHR and the same with BA in IBs at MAD.
On minor routes BA have just bought a load of E-jets.
Burkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 3977 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 5632 times:
That really depends if BA and IB really put their optimizations together, or if it is all about putting share holder money into management pockets only.
IF the really form a common buisiness model, all traffic from UK and London to South America will be lead via Madrid ( Instead of Miami/DFW ) currently. Most traffic to North America will go via London.
Madrid is a hot and high airport, so requires quads ( unless you schedule all the flights around midnight as Air Comet does )
So I see 5 x A380 ( Sao Paolo, Buenos Aires ) , A346 and A343 operating ex Madrid in 5 years, maybe 772 for the shorter leggs. London will be A380//744/773/772/ 787/350
If 789 or A359 can do it from Madrid or not remains to be seen once they have reached their specification in 3 to 5 years.
FlyCaledonian From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 1832 posts, RR: 4 Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 5340 times:
I think that future aircraft purchases would be to have common types for BA/IB. This could allow aircraft to be moved between the BA/IB fleets as required. In addition, this would be even more feasible if BA/IB adopt common seats for their cabins. I don't think we'll see anything in the short term, but mid- to long-term I'd expect more moves towards commonality. That to me would be a more thorough mereger, with expectations that whether on IB or BA, the class of travel could deliver the same service.
The gap between the A321 and the smaller widebodies is an interesting one. BA still uses 7 767s in Europe largely for cargo. IB hasn't any dedicated shorthaul widebodies. Yet with a merger could there be demand for regular widebody LHR-MAD flights for cargo purposes?
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 19519 posts, RR: 18 Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 5304 times:
Quoting BA174 (Reply 2): Aircraft in the fleets of the airlines really have nothing to do with the fact that they are merging. Thats not to say we wont see some IB planes in BAs hangers at LHR and the same with BA in IBs at MAD.
With them maintaining two separate certificates, the amount of flexibility will be limited. It'll be something like what we see with DL/NW today, with extremely limited cross-fleeting only where there is a specific operational need (e.g. NW doesn't have the right size aircraft).
Given that IB has widebodies better-suited to MAD, there will likely be less widebody cross-fleeting than we might otherwise see.
Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 4): I think that future aircraft purchases would be to have common types for BA/IB.
Why? MAD has unique operational needs that LHR doesn't, and both carriers are large enough to sustain their own type; the cost savings of a single fleet wouldn't be very high, especially with IB m/x centered on Spain and BA m/x centered on the U.K.
BA174 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 593 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4733 times:
Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 4): think that future aircraft purchases would be to have common types for BA/IB. This could allow aircraft to be moved between the BA/IB fleets as required. In addition, this would be even more feasible if BA/IB adopt common seats for their cabins. I don't think we'll see anything in the short term, but mid- to long-term I'd expect more moves towards commonality. That to me would be a more thorough mereger, with expectations that whether on IB or BA, the class of travel could deliver the same service.
The gap between the A321 and the smaller widebodies is an interesting one. BA still uses 7 767s in Europe largely for cargo. IB hasn't any dedicated shorthaul widebodies. Yet with a merger could there be demand for regular widebody LHR-MAD flights for cargo purposes?
KL/AF have not gone for common types take KLs 737 choice for SH compared to AFs airbus choice neither do we ever see aircraft cross working between the two carriers. BA/IB couldn't cross work fleets anyways as they would have the interior/livery of the other carrier. Imagine a BA exec card holder turning up to find an IB product/plane at LHR
FlyCaledonian From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 1832 posts, RR: 4 Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4530 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 5): Why? MAD has unique operational needs that LHR doesn't, and both carriers are large enough to sustain their own type; the cost savings of a single fleet wouldn't be very high, especially with IB m/x centered on Spain and BA m/x centered on the U.K
Cost savings could be generated in single aircraft type/engine type. I'm not saying that BA will start ordering A346s, or that IB will suddenly be getting some 777s.
US carriers manage pretty well with aircraft operating from hubs with different operational needs. Why should future aircraft purchases not be for use from both MAD and LHR?
Quoting BA174 (Reply 7): KL/AF have not gone for common types take KLs 737 choice for SH compared to AFs airbus choice neither do we ever see aircraft cross working between the two carriers. BA/IB couldn't cross work fleets anyways as they would have the interior/livery of the other carrier. Imagine a BA exec card holder turning up to find an IB product/plane at LHR
But that is adding to existing aircraft familes. IB isn't going to suddenly add IAE engined A320s at MAD, nor will BA add new GE engined A320s at LHR. But come the time to replace the A320 family, and I'm talking either a major upgrade of the A320 or 737 family or the replacement for these types, then the board of the holding company will have clout to make a big purchase.
Also, if you'd read my post (and you quoted this part!) I said BA/IB would need to align on board service to do such exchanges. Maybe even a common base livery too for exterior purposes. Yet such a situation would depend on the holding company deciding that IB in MAD and BA in LHR should offer the same on board service on say shorthaul.
We don't know how deep this merger will go. Yes, it's going to follow the AF/KL model, but not necessarily down to the letter. Fleet commonality isn't something you achieve overnight - it took BA twenty years to phase out the last of the BEA/BOAC ordered aircraft from its fleet because it used them until they no longer were required. BA/IB will be the same.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 19519 posts, RR: 18 Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4506 times:
Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 8): Why should future aircraft purchases not be for use from both MAD and LHR?
If it works, there's no reason for them not to be - but the economic incentives aren't so large that they'll force the issue.
Australis From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 96 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4386 times:
I personally think, overtime, we will see BA/IB have a similar fleet, so they can create further synergies and reduces costs. Afterall, they would have not going down the path of merging for not to consider the option of fleet commonality...
Wont be done overnight, but should eventually happen.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 30438 posts, RR: 77 Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4366 times:
Quoting Burkhard (Reply 3):
IF the really form a common buisiness model, all traffic from UK and London to South America will be lead via Madrid ( Instead of Miami/DFW ) currently.
That's how it already is. BA does not even codeshare with AA on any South American routes except Miami-Lima. Nothing is going to change with regards to that.
VV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 5864 posts, RR: 15 Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4180 times:
Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 8): Cost savings could be generated in single aircraft type/engine type.
I am not sure about this.
Currently BA operates 318s, 319s, 320s, 321s, 734s, 752s and 763s in its short haul fleets and has only just retired its 733s and 735s which, until recently, operated along with these 7 types.
BA's long haul fleet comprises 744s in two different configurations ('Mid J' and 'Hi J'), 772s in three configurations (4-class, standard 3-class and 3-class high density) and 763s and these 6 types will soon be joined by the six 773s and then the first of the 380s that BA have ordered.
Admittedly the 318s are a special case, but if BA sees fit to operate 7 different short haul types (10 if you add in BA CityFlyer's RJ85s, RJ100s and E170s) and 7 different configurations / models in its long haul fleet why should we expect to see a costly re-eqipment and fleet rationalisation programme simply because BA will be owned by the same company as IB?
It seems to me that BA recognises the need to operate aircraft types to meet the needs of particular routes and services on particular days. I take it that BA has a sophisticated aircraft allocation software suite that ensures the best utilisation of its complex fleet. This would explain why one not infrequently finds that the aircraft type used on a specific flight varies with the day of the week. So, for example, BA762 (LHR-OSL) is currently operated by an A319 on Monday and Tuesday, an A320 on Wednesday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday and an A321 on Thursday.
I picked BA762 totally at random but I believe that if you were to check out most of BA's LHR short haul routes you would find a similar picture. However with the removal of the 733s and 735s and the significant reduction in the 319s based at Gatwick for the Winter 2009-10 schedules, this is no longer so true for short haul LGW flights which are now mainly operated by 734s.
CHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5886 posts, RR: 68 Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 4131 times:
As has been stated - onboard service/product would have to be alligned. BA are a four class airline and may well go five class if they introduce suites on their A388s, which wouldnt surprise me at all.
I think a common C product is the key here - the nuances between Y product are not great enough to be a major issue, but C is. IB's C product is fairly good, in line with other European majors, but lagging behind NCW in some respects in my view. I would expect an all new C class offering to be rolled out across both fleets in the next couple of years - maybe as early as 12 months time. I would expect IB to get AVOD in Y as per BA's offering, but I'm not sure if they would roll out a new Y+ product as well - for me, the BA product is quite poor, and is well due for a major and much needed revamp (see QF's offering!) so maybe IB may get it as well, we'll see. AFAIK IB do not offer an F product and I cant see that changing until they get some A380s, which I am 90% sure will happen once the tranche two of the BA fleet renewal is announced.
Re fleet - i think its clear that the A350 is the future, and that was the case before the merger and is even more so now.
I see BA taking A359 and A3510 alongside the A388, and IB doing likewise. A large order for all three looks likely in the future. I think the BA 772s and 77Ws are in the fleet until the A350s arrive, and will be phased out progressively by about 2016. IB's A343 and A346 fleet will be gone by then I'd have thought.
Do i see a role for 788 at IB as it is at BA? I dont see any reason why not. A LHR-MAD shuttle alone would be ideal, and it would offer IB the opportunity to look at some thinner long-haul routes for them that might otherwise not be economical on their A343 or A358 fleet. Places like Tegulcigalpa, Tijuana, San Juan etc. It may be that a 788 and A3510 combo works best for IB, and that they dont need the A359 as well like BA do, but thats all up in the air right now.
Still, interesting times. Looks very, very likely that we'll see a red and yellow liveried A388 now!
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
Timboflier215 From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 1144 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3889 times:
I'd have thought that the main difference with the merger would be that BA/IB could order aircraft together, to squeeze an even better deal out of A or B. I do not see IB a/c operating BA routes, or vice versa. It's not an operational merger, at least at the moment.
FlyCaledonian From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 1832 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3722 times:
Quoting VV701 (Reply 12): Currently BA operates 318s, 319s, 320s, 321s, 734s, 752s and 763s in its short haul fleets and has only just retired its 733s and 735s which, until recently, operated along with these 7 types.
The A320 "family" are effectively one type, just as the 737 classics (733/734/735). The 757 and 767 were BA purchases of the 1980s and early 1990s, as were the 737 classics. From the mid-1990s the A320 family has been BA's shorthaul aircraft of choice. My point was that come the time to replace the A320s at BA/IB, I'd expect a single "family" and engine choice - BA opted for IAE engines, whilst IB went for CFM. The 757s will be gone within six months, while the 734s are concentrated at LGW (as were the 733s/735s).
The 767 came late to BA compared to other aircraft, but it offered pilot commonality with the 757, and BA was able to get RR RB211-524G engines on there, the same as its 744s.
The next generation of widebodies for BA are the A380 and 787. No decision has been made on the second tranche of the longhaul fleet replacement, and if BA went for the A350, then I'm sure the question of replacing the older IB A343s with those too, plus maybe additional 787s to be used by IB too.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 19519 posts, RR: 18 Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 3706 times:
Quoting FlyCaledonian (Reply 15): I'd expect a single "family" and engine choice - BA opted for IAE engines, whilst IB went for CFM.
FlyCaledonian From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 1832 posts, RR: 4 Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3427 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 16): How much would a single engine choice save them?
Depends on leverage with the manufacturer. As things stand, if BA/IB suddenly announced they were going up the 737NG, they'd have to take CFM engines.
My point has been, that in the future we'll have to see how this merger works out in terms of depth. DL isn't going to order new types in future based on what it wants to operate out of ATL, and then think it wants something different for DTW/MSP because they were NW hubs.
When BA opted for the A320 family for shorthaul in the late 1990s, it took out a load of options when it ordered the initial A319s. The first deliveries went to BA Regional (BHX/MAN), then they were intended to go to BA EuroGatwick (LGW). The decision to phase out the early 757s amongst other things saw those A319s move to LHR, and LGW never saw any new A319s. It only got some based there after transfers from LHR in the last few yaers (and most have now moved back to LHR). Likewise, with all the options on the A320 family aircraft I believe GB Airways and BMed both benefitted from being able to take up some of BA's options.
The point about moving in future to standard types is that you can move aircraft around over their lifetime with the airline. AF/KL can't do that at the moment, and BA/IB can't. But if you order a common type in future, you can look at moving aircraft about.
Just because AF/KL have kept their identities, just as BA/IB will, does not mean that future fleet replacement decisions won't be made at Holding Company level to then optimise pricing, etc, with suppliers. TopCo may decide that MAD needs some A380s, so exercises some of the BA options but has them delivered to IB.
Various factors stop the European airlines undertaking full-blown mergers. And BA is supposed to have been wary of mergers because of this, but has seen that AF/KL can achieve savings. Willie Walsh is to be CEO of the new holding company, and I wouldn't be surprised to see him integrate as much as possible over time that can be.
I'm surprised that many don't think that because a full-blown merger can't be achieved like DL/NW, that BA/IB will just stay as separate independently operated entities that just happen to be owned by the same company. Even AF/KL is moving to integrate different things - look at the moves to have Martinair become the cargo airline arm of the group.
R2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 1811 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2754 times:
There will be no immediate changes, and both airlines will keep their current fleets and short/mid-term fleet plans as they are. Except of course for a probable A380 order from IB when BA orders its second batch. The IB route network can easily support 4-5 A380s, but such a small fleet did not make sense. Combined with BA's, it could.
Later on, when the time comes to replace the A340's and 777's, I could perfectly see IB-BA operating a combination of 787s and A350s.
PM From Japan, joined Feb 2005, 6559 posts, RR: 67 Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2571 times:
Of interest to a handful of us will be the implications for engine orders. We should assume that a combined BA/IB will very sensibly shop around for the best deals they can get but it is hard not to feel that RR will benefit because of this merger.
BA have choen RR for their 787s and A380s and, if the rumours are true, there will be RR-powered A350s coming down the line too.
IB were an RR customer on the 757 and have A430s with RR. Further RR orders would not be remarkable.
So, by 2020 we could see the two airlines with a long-haul fleet comprising 787s, A350s and A380s - and all with RR.
RIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1779 posts, RR: 1 Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2559 times:
Quoting R2rho (Reply 19): when the time comes to replace the A340's and 777's, I could perfectly see IB-BA operating a combination of 787s and A350s.
- it would be a pity if when the time comes to replace BA 777s (of which some have not been delivered yet), 787 and 350 are still the best option. Add to this 380 monopoly on the very top and whatever Boeing will do in what currently is 77W/748... Are we going to see same stalled duopoly in all market segments as we see today with narrowbodies?
PM From Japan, joined Feb 2005, 6559 posts, RR: 67 Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2552 times:
Quoting RIX (Reply 21): - it would be a pity if when the time comes to replace BA 777s (of which some have not been delivered yet), 787 and 350 are still the best option.
BA started taking delivery of 777s in 1995 so by the middle of the next decade the oldest ones will be 20 years old.
Apart from the four new ones delivered this year, their youngest was delivered in October 2001. So a programme to replace them between 2015 and 2021 would not be unreasonable. What planes other than 787s or A350s could be on offer by then?
That would leave four newish 777-200ERs and the six 777-300ERs which I still believe are only being taken as interim lift. (And four of the 777-300ERs are being leased.)
It would be no great surprise to me to see all 777s gone from BA's fleet by around 2020. And, yes, they'll be replaced by A350s and, perhaps, 787s.
RIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1779 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2535 times:
Quoting PM (Reply 22): So a programme to replace them [777s] between 2015 and 2021 would not be unreasonable. What planes other than 787s or A350s could be on offer by then?
- by 2021? Boeing is in quite a trouble if 787 is all they have by then.
PM From Japan, joined Feb 2005, 6559 posts, RR: 67 Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2484 times:
Quoting RIX (Reply 23):
- by 2021? Boeing is in quite a trouble if 787 is all they have by then.
To replace the 777? What else will they have? A 7772NG? Y3? My guess is that they'll be pitching a 787-10 to BA (and others) as a 777-200ER replacement.
It's certain that Airbus won't have (or need) anything other than the A350 in that game and I can't see Boeing going any route other than the 787.
Anyway, i was proposing 2021 as the end of BA's 777 replacement schedule, not the start. So if Boeing want it, they'll need to be ready sooner than 2021.
25 RIX: - to replace 772s one-to-one - almost certainly, nothing, nor would they need to have anything other than 787. To offer to BA to shape their fleet po
26 TristarSteve: Long interview with W Walsh in the FT. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c016a3da-d...7-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1 He talks at length about all BA issue
27 JAL: Don't think there will be any big changes in the short-term but maybe in the long term things might change but not now. BA and IB do have the same sho
28 VV701: In Note 15 ("Property, Plant and Equipment") in the British Airways 2008-09 Annual Report BA state: "Fleet is generally depreciated over periods rang
29 Trinxat: I think that if they eventually get IB FAs speak proper english that will be an achievement
30 PM: Well, it would surprise me. The great bulk of the BA fleet was delivered between 1995 and 2001. By "the early 2030s" the youngest of these will be 30
31 VV701: Of course the bulk of BA's 772s will be retired well before 2030. But some are, if history is any guide, more likely than not to be in service. Sub f
32 PM: Everything you say is true. But. The 777 sub-fleets you quote are sustainable within an overall 777 fleet of nearly 50. Having an overhead crew rest a
33 FlyCaledonian: G-VIIA/B/C can be swapped with any of the 17 4-class GE powered 777-236IGWs at LHR. G-YMMB/F can be swapped with any of the 8 3-class RR powered 777-
Sponsor Message: 
From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 8618 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1779 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2009, 593 posts, 
From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 96 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 30438 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5886 posts, 
From Japan, joined Feb 2005, 6559 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
