Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
When Does BA Receive Their First 380?  
User currently offlineac853 From Canada, joined Aug 2009, 25 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14113 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Does anyone know when British Airways will take delivery of their first Airbus 380 and what routes will it first fly on?

32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineg500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 934 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14102 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Is LAX still their first destination in North America?

I read somewhere they were looking at JNB, NRT and LAX as their A380 "launch destinations"


User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26787 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 14009 times:

I heard HKG LAX BJS SIN JFK . They should get the first A380 in March 2013 with training flights LHR-MAD similar to
what AF did CDG-LHR.


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4098 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 13992 times:

AFAIK it will be next spring, but the recent issues with the wing may make this a little optimistic.

[Edited 2012-07-29 17:06:17]


Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineg500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 934 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 13992 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting OA260 (Reply 2):
I heard HKG LAX BJS SIN JFK .

maybe you're right, I think I mixed up NRT with HKG... Hong Kong makes more sense


User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26787 posts, RR: 58
Reply 5, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 13934 times:

Quoting g500 (Reply 4):

Well thats just what I heard and read so dont rule out any Asian destination yet it could be on the list , I guess they all make sense but Im really interested in the training flights   I did the AF ones and they were really nice without having to do the longhaul . Maybe time to start racking up the AVIOS  


User currently offlinen729pa From UK - England, joined Jan 2011, 385 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 13156 times:

Quoting g500 (Reply 1):
Is LAX still their first destination in North America?

I've heard it's JFK, HKG, PEK and SIN in that order initially - how accurate that is I don't know but it's also quoted on A380flights.net too

Quoting OA260 (Reply 2):
They should get the first A380 in March 2013 with training flights LHR-MAD similar to
what AF did CDG-LHR.

Great news I was hoping this might be the case, let's hope BA do a similiar promotional fare set up that AF did to encourage passengers to fly on it, pointless doing it if it's half empty. That's made my day and will be something to look forward to and make the dreary winter months pass!


User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19186 posts, RR: 52
Reply 7, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 12819 times:

Quoting n729pa (Reply 6):
Great news I was hoping this might be the case

Indeed. It'll be great if they do.

I thoroughly enjoyed my ultra-cheap AF LHR-CDG-AF 380 flights, especially as I got upgraded to first class from the purser who is saw on A.net that I was flying the machine on that specific day. Very kind fellow.



"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2006 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 12784 times:

Yes, a short break to Madrid next spring sounds good!

Quoting n729pa (Reply 6):
I've heard it's JFK, HKG, PEK and SIN in that order initially - how accurate that is I don't know but it's also quoted on A380flights.net too

The 3 Asian destinations seem more obvious places than JFK, especially as many of their rivals are already operating A380s from SIN. JFK may be BA's flagship route, but as most of the flights will still be 744/777 operated, someone expecting an A380 is likely to be disappointed?



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlinejumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 782 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 12356 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 8):
The 3 Asian destinations seem more obvious places than JFK

Given that BA are only scheduled to take 3 A380s next year it would seem that unless they only operate a route with A380s once or twice a week they wouldn't be able to dip into more than one Asian destination in the short term. So maybe a daily JFK rotation to start with while they have just one A380; then introduce the second to asia [or maybe LAX] 3 times a week; and then when they are up to 3 they could probably/possibly do one Asian/LAX and one JFK rotation per day.

If they are going to operate more than a handful of A380 routes I think they need really to be topping up their order asap.


User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2946 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 12157 times:

My bet -- BA25/26 to HKG (to supplement BA27/28 77W and including the cancellation of the 3 weekly BA21/22 service) and then a North American service (but probably not JFK). There's a whole pile of North American cities that could justify a BA A380.

Having said that, I fully expect to see them move these planes a bit as they build up the fleet, testing different things out before they settle on the best cities to see more permanent service (as they have with the 77W).


User currently onlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7361 posts, RR: 17
Reply 11, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 12009 times:

Quoting n729pa (Reply 6):
I was hoping this might be the case, let's hope BA do a similiar promotional fare set up that AF did to encourage passengers to fly on it, pointless doing it if it's half empty.

The purpose of short haul training flights on new types of long haul aircraft is to maximise the number of complete rotations operated by the flight crews being trained and to minimise the cost per training rotation.

The presence or otherwise of fare-paying passengers or the use of promotional fares to help fill an excessively large aircraft for the service it is operating is a secondary consideration.

.


User currently offlinespiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 11969 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 8):

Why do you say that JFK is less obvious than the 3 Asian destinations? You even stated that it is their flagship route, and to an airport with connections all over the place on AA! If you ask me, JFK is the MOST obvious launch destination.

Also, not that many people will be disappointed with the a380. Not all people all geeks like us   . Most people just want to get to their destination and don't care whether it is a 767, 777, 747, a319LR, a380, etc. They just care that it flies. There will, however, be a few people in nostalgia that will be upset about the a380 being put on the route, but BA won't base their decision on them (us).


User currently offlineg500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 934 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 11869 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 12):
If you ask me, JFK is the MOST obvious launch destination.

JFK is a frequency market for BA. There is so much traffic between NYC and London that BA is better off offering more flights with 777/747 than putting the A380 on that route.

When is all set and done, as far as the U.S goes, LAX, JFK and probably MIA will see A380 flights, its only logical


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8248 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 11846 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting g500 (Reply 13):
JFK is a frequency market for BA. There is so much traffic between NYC and London that BA is better off offering more flights with 777/747 than putting the A380 on that route.

JFK is a frequency and large plane route, I don't believe for one second you can replace 6 744 with 4 A380's but why not one or two A380 with 4 744 or 777 or 787's ? JFK should have A380 service and will since BA will probably launch a Club or First upgrade with their A380's. And it only needs one A380 per daily round trip.


User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11607 posts, RR: 60
Reply 15, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 11772 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 11):
The presence or otherwise of fare-paying passengers or the use of promotional fares to help fill an excessively large aircraft for the service it is operating is a secondary consideration.

AF sold heavily discounted fares on the CDG-LHR route because having a mostly full cabin, in all classes, was considered integral to the training process.

However I doubt that BA/IB would need to offer discounted fares to fill an A380 between LHR and MAD. They already have two daily BA 767-300s on the route and a (IIRC weekday only ) A340-300/600 service by IB. Considering the likely seat count on BA's A380s, it won't be that much of a capacity increase to replace a few A346 rotations with it.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2946 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11706 times:

Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 12):
If you ask me, JFK is the MOST obvious launch destination.

Biggest issue with replacing Hi-J 744's is the influx of W/Y seats that this would cause. No doubt they can fill any extra 20-30 J seats per day in the peak, but that doesn't mean that they can fill an extra 150-200 W/Y seats a day in each direction without diluting yields significantly.

The hi-J 744's are good for this route because there are so few W/Y seats for BA to fill. They provide the premium capacity that is needed without overdoing the W/Y capacity, also bearing in mind that AA is increasing Y capacity with their 77W.

It would also be tricky to schedule one aircraft to cover a peak service in both directions. BA would end up having to fly the larger plane on a weaker service in one direction, which undermines the point of the aircraft.

And BA is better of using their most efficient aircraft on their longer sectors to take advantage of the increased efficiency.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 14):
A will probably launch a Club or First upgrade with their A380's. And it only needs one A380 per daily round trip.

F/J will be exactly the same as the existing Hi-J 744's.. The only difference will be the new IFE system (same as what is in the 77W).


User currently onlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7361 posts, RR: 17
Reply 17, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11491 times:

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 15):
AF sold heavily discounted fares on the CDG-LHR route because having a mostly full cabin, in all classes, was considered integral to the training process.

What aspects of training did AF have in mind?

I assume not cabin service. With 538 seats on an AF 380 and an elapsed actual flight time of around 28 to 30 minutes between CDG and LHR - even less with the seat belt signs switched off - cabin service would require serving passengers at a rate of above 20 a minute. This would in no way be representative of the training required for cabin crew on a long haul flight.

I also assume that it was not training for the boarding and disembarkation of passengers. This could be most efficiently and economically achieved without any flight between these two activities. This would equally apply to baggage handling.


User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2946 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11460 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 17):
What aspects of training did AF have in mind?

Familiarisation for the Flight Crew and (more specifically) ground handlers at CDG I imagine. It's no good throwing the plane immediately into a tight long haul schedule if the ground crew aren't familiar with how to load the plane, maintain it between turns etc. A plane full of bags, catering etc is testing the abilities of ground crews to prepare her, and a plane full of mess after the flight tests cleaning teams etc.

They might also have been testing the IFE system, gathering their own data on performance, getting a feel for the balance of the fully loaded aircraft and so on.


User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11607 posts, RR: 60
Reply 19, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11240 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 17):
I also assume that it was not training for the boarding and disembarkation of passengers. This could be most efficiently and economically achieved without any flight between these two activities. This would equally apply to baggage handling.

Actually it was considered useful to gain experience with ground handling. They appeared to want as 'real' a scenario as possible.

Quoting VV701 (Reply 17):
What aspects of training did AF have in mind?

I'm afraid I didn't ask in detail.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlinechrisnh From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 4079 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11135 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 10):
There's a whole pile of North American cities that could justify a BA A380.

Well, I honestly don't think it's a 'whole pile.' Like other posters have said, many NA cities opt for frequency. While you could take a couple 777s and squash them into one A380, I suspect customers would prefer the 777s spaced several hours apart. Also, it's not much fun to be disgorged from an A380 at Heathrow at Bleary-O'Clock along with a bunch of other aircraft from various U.S. cities. With a hoard like that the day is half over and you still haven't managed to waddle through customs.


User currently offlineboeing773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 413 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 10385 times:

Quoting jumpjets (Reply 9):
If they are going to operate more than a handful of A380 routes I think they need really to be topping up their order asap.

I was hoping I wasn't the only one who thought that. They actually need to announce a whole bunch of orders in my personal opinion, not just A380's. They have 55 (give or take a few) 747's; still active in their fleet. They have 12 A380's, and 4 more 773ER's on order, so 16 VLA's on order to replace more than 55 VLA's. I know they have plans of operating the 747's for a bit more time, but most of the VLA's besides the 747-8 have huge backlogs. So I don't know if they are waiting for the new 777 or what, but they need to be a bit more proactive with their fleet orders.

Also, I am sure they can use some more 787 orders. They have enough to replace 763s but they should be getting some more for growth, these would be perfect to open some more international routes out of MAN or LGW.

Sorry, I know we were talking about the A380's but I kinda got off topic.



Work Hard, Fly Right.
User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11607 posts, RR: 60
Reply 22, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 10255 times:

Quoting boeing773ER (Reply 21):
So I don't know if they are waiting for the new 777 or what, but they need to be a bit more proactive with their fleet orders.

More A380s are a given - you only have to look at the number of A380 stands at LHR T5 to see that.

Quoting boeing773ER (Reply 21):
I know they have plans of operating the 747's for a bit more time, but most of the VLA's besides the 747-8 have huge backlogs.

I think the majority of their 747s are from the late 90s - these machines have a good ten years left with BA.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlinespeedmarque From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 684 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 8930 times:

The MAD will be sold to Euro 767 loads and all on one deck. The company are asking CAA to operate it with less than minimum crew and ignore one whole deck.

[Edited 2012-07-30 11:27:04]

User currently offlinespeedbrds From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 98 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7376 times:

Another good reason for me to fly to London.

25 qf002 : The A380 allows them to concentrate supply at peak periods (ie when the most people want to travel), offering additional frequencies with smaller air
26 AirbusA6 : Actually I said that passengers would be disappointed if they DIDN't get an A380! Most airlines (running into LHR) have heavily advertised the fact t
27 FoxBravo : While I agree that JFK would seem a logical destination, as a practical matter does anyone know if an A380 can actually fit at T7? It's awfully crampe
28 fcogafa : As I understand it (from pilot sources) the A340s are largely on the route as freighters and the pax count is around A320 levels.
29 rutankrd : And promotion reflects reality does it ? How many of BA customers travel First compared to Y, yet which is used for promotions. Same can be said for
30 rutankrd : There is always the legalese. No guarantee..... Reserve the right to........... etc...
31 Speedbird2155 : This is what everyone seems to ignore. JFK T7 is not A380 ready and has a very tight ramp where the aircraft are already very close. I suspect that t
32 DarkSnowyNight : They can do that if they want, but they'll have to be a much smaller airline, at least by ASMs. There isn't anything like enough aircraft on order to
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...
When Is NWA Going To Receive Their First A332? posted Sat Feb 21 2004 08:00:50 by JetJock
When Will BA Receive Its A318 For The LCY-JFK? posted Tue Nov 11 2008 15:15:05 by BAfan
When Will Syrianair Receive Their Ilyuchine 96? posted Sun Jun 1 2008 01:05:29 by Beaucaire
Gol Receive Their First 737-800 W/Winglets (pics) posted Sat Apr 22 2006 15:02:58 by LipeGIG
When Did Britannia Receive Their 767-300's? posted Tue Aug 23 2005 23:26:57 by LGW
How Does JetBlue Receive Their Planes From AirBus? posted Sun Apr 10 2005 05:05:42 by BosCollJetBlue
When Does AS Get Their 738s? posted Sat Oct 9 2004 22:45:49 by BCAInfoSys
When Will United Repaint Their First 744? posted Sat Apr 10 2004 19:59:59 by Thrust
When Do EasyJet Get Their First A319? posted Mon Jul 14 2003 10:42:18 by Noelg
When Will CX Get Their First A340-600? posted Sun Dec 16 2001 05:54:06 by Red Panda