Slz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7888 times:
That depends on their future needs for more planes in the VLA market segment I should say, although there's also the possibility of them ordering more A380s, not to expand, but to replace their initial fleet with.
Almost all of the A380 customers will roll over their fleet at some point in time, and especially for the early customers those fleet renewals have a high probability to see newer A380s ordered, given the fact there's really nothing at the horizon to even remotely compete with the A380 yet...
With BA still in the waiting list to get their first A380 and the fact they seem to operate their planes for a long time, it will be quite a while still before this phenomenon makes them order another A380, but I'd expect SQ for instance to start thinking about its fleet renewal mid next decade already and order a bunch of newly built A380 for delivery as from 2020....
We've all seen how people have questioned EK's mega-order for the A380, whereas in fact I am convinced part of that order is actually ment to replace early deliveries, so it could very well be that by the end of next decade, several airlines have ordered a total of 50 or more A380s since program launch. Especially SQ wouldn't surprise me.....
EPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 3582 posts, RR: 36 Reply 6, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 7579 times:
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 5): Its A3510-388 combo all the way for BA in my opinion.
I agree with you on this. But they will also need some airplanes smaller then these two birds. BA could also be a possible A389 candidate since slot restrictions could hurt them on several key airports. Wouldn't that be great?
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 5):
Its A3510-388 combo all the way for BA in my opinion.
I agree with you on this. But they will also need some airplanes smaller then these two birds. Wink BA could also be a possible A389 candidate since slot restrictions could hurt them on several key airports. Wouldn't that be great?
In many ways BA are the poster boy for the A389 - i can think of very few airlines with the network/hub/operations etc that make as much sense for the A389 as BA does. Absolutely no question in my mind that if/when Airbus offer the A389 BA will be inviting them to London for tea, biscuits and some Battenburg.
If you look at the number of places BA fly multiple daily 744/772 routes - and HKG is a classic example of this - then the A389 makes a huge amount of sense for them. In the future I can see instead of BA's 3 x 744 departures ex-HKG - LHR within a few hours of each other, and CX's two, that CX and BA will be deploying one A389 each, three or four hours apart, plus another BA A388 in there as well. The cost savings over the 744 ops would be compelling to say the least.
It also makes sense on shorter routes such as JFK, where you can mop up three of BA's six departures LHR-JFK with one A389 flight, whilst retaining sufficient frequency through the AA/OneWorld codeshare. Similar arrangement would work for ORD I think as well.
I wonder if JAL may cease LHR altogether in this eventuality, and just codeshare on the BA A389 services instead?
DXB could support a BA A389 as well, quite apart from the EK metal going backwards and forwards. Perhaps on the Kangaroo flights LHR-SIN-SYD etc as well?
Almost anywhere they are planning to send the current A388 could support the A389 in my view, as they are such huge, developed citypairs.
[Edited 2009-12-11 02:39:12]
[Edited 2009-12-11 02:40:51]
What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
UAEflyer From United Arab Emirates, joined Nov 2006, 903 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 7078 times:
What are the orders placed by British Airways currently ? from all manufacturers>
MIgAiR54 From Spain, joined Jun 2007, 1276 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 6908 times:
They will, because they need more. It is perfect for high yield routes with 4 classes planes, adding capacity as well....
they have some on order to replace B744 and they will need some more, at least 10 more, they also need A350 to replace B777 and B787 to replace B777 and B767.
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 7): If you look at the number of places BA fly multiple daily 744/772 routes - and HKG is a classic example of this - then the A389 makes a huge amount of sense for them. In the future I can see instead of BA's 3 x 744 departures ex-HKG - LHR within a few hours of each other, and CX's two, that CX and BA will be deploying one A389 each, three or four hours apart, plus another BA A388 in there as well. The cost savings over the 744 ops would be compelling to say the least.
totally agree with you, HKG, JNB, DXB, JFK, GRU, IAD...... they could send one A389 and B787 or A350.
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 5): Question is - will they take the 748i as well as more A388s, like KE and LH have?
I don´t think so, they already place the order for A380 and I think they will go for A350, they also have B787 on order so they have all the possibilities covered.
Babybus From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 3512 posts, RR: 6 Reply 10, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 6787 times:
Just off the top of my head, wouldn't it be possible and more cost effective if BA and AA could share a BA A380 as a OneWorld branded flight. AA on one level and BA on the other.
My concern is fuel savings.
I believe BA will need more A380s than they have on order.
and with that..cabin crew, seats for landing please.
Jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7342 posts, RR: 7 Reply 11, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 6767 times:
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 7):
I wonder if JAL may cease LHR altogether in this eventuality, and just codeshare on the BA A389 services instead?
I doubt JAL's Japanesse passenger would feel comfortable buying a JAL ticket to LHR with no JAL plane. London is a huge tourist and business destination for Japan and JAL. ITS so big that London and the UK are the biggest destination in Europe for Japaneese travel and investment. SO NO WAY.
I would see the reverse happen first BA code sharing with JAL an no flight of their own. But Doubt that would happen, BA would just send a smaller plane. They cut their NRT flights from two a day to one.
Scouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3254 posts, RR: 10 Reply 12, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 6735 times:
Quoting UAEflyer (Reply 8): What are the orders placed by British Airways currently ? from all manufacturers>
This is slightly approximate but it's something like
A320 - 9
A380 - 12
B773 - 4
B788 - 8
B789 - 16
This may be wrong though as I think they'll need some more A320s soon
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26682 posts, RR: 83 Reply 14, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 6285 times:
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 5): Question is - will they take the 748i as well as more A388s, like KE and LH have?
I'm going to say no, as well, since BA prefers lower-density configurations so the step-change from the 777-300ER/A350XWB-1000 to the A380-800 won't be great enough to allow the 747-8 to slip in.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26682 posts, RR: 83 Reply 17, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 6116 times:
Quoting KU747 (Reply 15): Did BA considered 748? or is it out of the picture?
Boeing did submit the 747-8 in response to BA's RFP.
Some sources indicate that BA selected the 747-8, but Airbus and Rolls offered them "a deal they could not refuse" at the last moment and they switched to the A380-800, but those in the know have not leaked concrete proof that it happened so the Airbus Aficionados hotly deny it while the Boeing Booster are sure it is true.
Brilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 3167 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5985 times:
To answer the question, I don't foresee them ordering more A380's but it would not surprise me if they went for the A350 family of airliners as a replacement for their aging 744 and 763 fleets. At this time most airlines are some what snake-bitten when looking at their long term fleet plans especially in the way the the world economy is in the sh@#$ right now and probably for the next year or two.
Kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 11949 posts, RR: 37 Reply 19, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5722 times:
Quoting Brilondon (Reply 18): To answer the question, I don't foresee them ordering more A380's but it would not surprise me if they went for the A350 family of airliners as a replacement for their aging 744 and 763 fleets
I agree; at some stage, I expect them them to order more, but not for the foreseeable future. A350s on the other hand - particularly -900/1000s - I could see having a big part in BA's future fleet. However, one question I have concerns the success of the new BA operation from LCY-JFK. I wonder how much that will impact on future requirements.
The short haul fleet out of LCY, for one thing, is in the process of being replaced by Embraer jets, which will (I expect) have a very considerable impact on the attractiveness of LCY; previously it was RJ100s - no thanks. Given the opportunity to fly on an E-170/190 with a 2-2 layout, I can see this becoming very attractive to business travellers.
On long haul routes, I could see BA ordering some A319LRs/CJs for expanded operations out of LCY; the A319 can do the 5.5 degree glide angle descent like the A318 and I could see it being used on other routes. At the end of the day, with LCY right around the corner, why go all the way out to LHR.
The question is, what impact would this have on J-class demand; if BA could operate an A319CJ into HND (when that airport opens to intl ops late next year), would it mean BA could/ would operate a smaller acft into NRT? Likewise other long haul routes?
Certainly, the success of the new LCY-JFK route suggests to me that BA will want to expand on this.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 12704 posts, RR: 80 Reply 20, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 5152 times:
Well there are 7 options above the 12 on order.
However, beyond that, I'm not so sure.
Forget 747-8i, BA made it clear that there was room for just one new 4 engined large aircraft type in the fleet, that was decided back in 2007.
BA will try to minimize as much as possible the number of types.
(The expected, at least when the A380 and 787 were initially ordered, addition of the 777-300's to arrive next year, is much more to do with 787 delays than an indication of the future fleet beyond the 2007 orders).
I don't think, with the A380, we'll really get a feel for any orders over and above the options, until the main long haul replacement is decided.
Which I don't see for some years yet due to the current situation the airline is in.
If I was a betting man I'd rate A350 for that order.
But I don't see any A380-900, if it is launched, as part of that.
A380-800 will most likely be the only BA version, whatever happens with any future orders.
EA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10 Reply 21, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4821 times:
Quoting EPA001 (Reply 6): I agree with you on this. But they will also need some airplanes smaller then these two birds.
They do. They ordered 787s I can see them taking on more 787s, as well as an order for A359/3510s. To me, the A350-1000 would be a perfect plane for BA to replace some 747s. I don't see BA ordering too many more VLAs, at least not for a while. And certainly not any 748Is...I could be wrong though.
We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
KU747 From Kuwait, joined Mar 2008, 368 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4458 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 17): Boeing did submit the 747-8 in response to BA's RFP.
Some sources indicate that BA selected the 747-8, but Airbus and Rolls offered them "a deal they could not refuse" at the last moment and they switched to the A380-800, but those in the know have not leaked concrete proof that it happened so the Airbus Aficionados hotly deny it while the Boeing Booster are sure it is true.
BA is one of the oldest 747 operators, so do you think this is the end with 747 family for BA? when you go back in history and remembering the oldest 747 operators, BOAC will come to mind.
I can't imagine BA fleet without the queen of the skies
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26682 posts, RR: 83 Reply 23, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4336 times:
Quoting KU747 (Reply 22): BA is one of the oldest 747 operators, so do you think this is the end with 747 family for BA?
Yes I do. The 777-300ERs will have very similar seating capacities to the 747-400 through shrinking Club World and increasing World Traveller and World Traveller Plus. If Boeing does not offer a comparable platform to the A350XWB, then I expect BA will order the A350XWB-1000 and should be able to fit ≤300 seats in them, as well.
I would expect BA to follow QF with a lower-density, four-class configuration on their A380s. So around 450 seats, which would be about a 50% increase in capacity over the 747-400. That's not a small jump and therefore BA might feel the 777NG/A350XWB-1000 flying the same loads as their 747-400s is the more prudent step, benefitting from lower CASM while still maximizing RASM by not increasing capacity. The A380-800s would then serve the highest-traffic trunk routes where there is consistent demand for those extra 150 seats.
Now, BA could conceivably split the difference between a 300-seat twin and a 450 seat A388 with a 375-seat 747-8, but I am inclined to think that BA doesn't need it.
Parapente From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1310 posts, RR: 10 Reply 24, posted (3 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4294 times:
As pointed out above.Orders plus options (19) - on what was "said" to be one hell of a deal will be enough.Whether the options turn out to be 8's or 9's no one could know as it does not exist.
But I imagine about 30 351's filling the rest of the 744 fleet.Quite a nice mix come to think of it.
having said this they have this small orphan group of 773er's.now if Boeing do decide to improve it -this may alter the ballance.
The latest announcements from Boeing mean that the 787 (in its present form) can never be more than a 767 replacement.BA have made that call (correctly).So I guess it's a 351/773ng battle in 2 years time.
25 Scbriml: Personally, I'd be amazed if they didn't order more. IMHO, they'll end up with at least 24.
26 EA772LR: Huh?? What announcement has Boeing made that said the 787 will be nothing more than a 767 replacement?? The 787 will both fly significantly further,
27 Parapente: My humble appologies - you are absolutly right.They did announce a decrease in the size of the wing and they did announce an increase in the weight -
28 JRDC930: Id love to see that too, but BA clearly said an emphatic NO, to this when they chose the A380 over the 748i. Whilst they didnt insult the plane like
29 EA772LR: I'm failing to see how anyone can possibly make the assumption that a decrease in wingspan of less than 2m will have a negative impact on the 789?? A
30 American 767: Neither can I. BA is one of the oldest operator of the 747 with BOAC taking delivery of the first 100 Series already in 1970, not only that, but it a
31 AirNz: Other than Auckland, which ended many years ago now, when did BA ever serve the South Pacific.....and on what fantasy basis are you assuming they wou
32 American 767: Isn't the 789 designed for long haul missions? On what routes will BA fly the Boeing 787 aircraft? I didn't know BA stopped flying to New Zealand. I
33 Stitch: I would expect the 787-8 to replace the 767-300ERs and the 787-9 to replace the 777-200ERs that do not have a FIRST cabin.
34 Cubsrule: With so much of BA's widebody capacity going to North America, I have to believe that AA's future fleet choices will factor in to what BA decides to
35 CV990Coronado: I'm surprised that I can't see any reference to IB in these posts surely as we are looking maybe 7-10 years ahead this will make a difference. Or am I
37 GDB: Well I can and BA have decided, they went for A380. However public this was made, or not, certainly within BA this is what we know to be true. And wh
38 Gemuser: Depending on what exactly you mean by "South Pacific" BOAC served SYD, MEL, AKL & NAN from HNL & LAX until the late 1970/early 1980s. SYD, MEL & AKL
Sponsor Message: 
From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 8792 posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24621 posts, 
From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4248 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 3582 posts, 
BA could also be a possible A389 candidate since slot restrictions could hurt them on several key airports. Wouldn't that be great? 
From United Arab Emirates, joined Nov 2006, 903 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jun 2007, 1276 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 3512 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7342 posts, 
From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1324 posts, 
From Kuwait, joined Mar 2008, 368 posts, 
From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 3167 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 11949 posts, 
I can see them taking on more 787s, as well as an order for A359/3510s. To me, the A350-1000 would be a perfect plane for BA to replace some 747s. I don't see BA ordering too many more VLAs, at least not for a while. And certainly not any 748Is...I could be wrong though.
Printer friendly format 
