Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
IAG Order 18 More 787 For BA  
User currently offlineseansasLCY From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2007, 871 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 21425 times:

IAG have apparently converted 18 options to orders for the 787 for BA.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...s-iag-boeing-idUSBRE9320YD20130403

72 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1842 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 21442 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

As usual, this article is a mess. Replacing 747s with 787s? I also doubt IB would be taking in an order of 748s given the Airbus order just announced.

Hopefully we'll get a release from BA or a more knowledgeable wire service about this order.


User currently offlinen1786b From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 560 posts, RR: 17
Reply 2, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 20907 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 1):
I also doubt IB would be taking in an order of 748s given the Airbus order just announced.

They announced an order? Where? Oh, the press article where they were reported to be in talks for the A350?. Fair enough, there is no smoke without fire. But here on a.net, we love to split hairs  


User currently offlinejetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2807 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 20727 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Interesting news from BA. I would have thought orders would hold off until everything has settled with the dreamliners.

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 1):
Replacing 747s with 787s?

I have to admit I found it a little odd as well. Jon Ostrower from the WSJ did say the same thing though. Maybe they think they can right size some routes this way.
Pat



All of the opinions stated above are mine and do not represent Airliners.net or my employer unless otherwise stated.
User currently offlineabba From Denmark, joined Jun 2005, 1372 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 20649 times:

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 3):
Maybe they think they can right size some routes this way.

That is also how I read it. Its the only way it makes sense.


User currently offlineAtlflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 736 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 20661 times:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...787-order-with-iberia-set-for-more

With a quote from Willie Walsh, this seems legit... Congrats to BA and Boeing.


User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1842 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 20534 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I would expect they would be flexible on subtype in the contract language. Given they are stated to replace the 744s, they would likely be the -1000 type when it's finally offered.

User currently offlineblrsea From India, joined May 2005, 1425 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 20498 times:

Quoting seansasLCY (Thread starter):
IAG have apparently converted 18 options to orders for the 787 for BA.

Were the options initially for 788 or 789?


User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1842 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 19196 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting blrsea (Reply 7):
Were the options initially for 788 or 789?

Options don't normally lock in a sub type. They should be read as flexible and convertible to slots for production of the -8, -9, or -10 once offered.


User currently offlineely747 From Slovakia, joined Jan 2013, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 18194 times:

Would that mean that BA is planning to start some obvious destinations on US East Coast out of MAN or BHX ? 787 seems to be the right fit for such city pairs, in addition this would free up some slots at T5?

User currently offlinewaly777 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2012, 337 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 18146 times:

Quoting ely747 (Reply 9):
Would that mean that BA is planning to start some obvious destinations on US East Coast out of MAN or BHX ? 787 seems to be the right fit for such city pairs, in addition this would free up some slots at T5?

Those are very unlikely for the foreseeable future, they have quite a few 767 and 777 aircraft to replace in the coming years.



The test of first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold 2 opposed ideas in the mind concurrently, and still function
User currently offlineely747 From Slovakia, joined Jan 2013, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 18018 times:

Quoting waly777 (Reply 10):

Why is BA so Heathrow centric actually?


User currently offlineedina From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 745 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 17910 times:

Quoting ely747 (Reply 11):

Little or no premium traffic from anywhere else....



Worked on - Caravelle Mercure A300 A320 F27 SD3-60 BAe146 747-100/200/400 DC10-30 767 777 737-400 757 A319 A321
User currently offlineely747 From Slovakia, joined Jan 2013, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 17748 times:

Quoting edina (Reply 12):

If my memory serves me well VS were able to fill up a 747 on MAN-LAS though it was leasure market for the most part, but then again CO, AA or US seem to be doing quite well and are confortable at MAN.


User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1842 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 17715 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting edina (Reply 12):
Little or no premium traffic from anywhere else....

EK has done well at airports other than LHR. BA's focus is LHR with connecting traffic. Its unlikely they'll take the chance on P2P flights such as to MAN to North America.


User currently offlineely747 From Slovakia, joined Jan 2013, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 17615 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 14):

Sorry wrong topic

[Edited 2013-04-03 17:26:23]

User currently onlineKaiTak747 From Switzerland, joined Aug 2012, 157 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 17618 times:

Quoting ely747 (Reply 9):
Would that mean that BA is planning to start some obvious destinations on US East Coast out of MAN or BHX ? 787 seems to be the right fit for such city pairs, in addition this would free up some slots at T5?

UA and AA fly to these destinations using 757s. These are the perfect size aircraft for these small long haul markets.
And as others have stated, some of the 767s are over 20 years old and are in need of replacement.


User currently offlineely747 From Slovakia, joined Jan 2013, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 17442 times:

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 16):

I think the market is there even for 3 class 763 (club world, world traveller + and world traveller) but aircraft rotation / utilization could become problematic and not efficient respectivelly, adding extra costs to move labor out of its LHR base. Just my thought.


User currently offlineQFVHOQA From Australia, joined Mar 2012, 468 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 17437 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 14):
EK has done well at airports other than LHR. BA's focus is LHR with connecting traffic. Its unlikely they'll take the chance on P2P flights such as to MAN to North America.

A few other airlines can do well with flights to airports outside London - KL serves more British airports than BA.

But for BA, with their TATL partner AA they can leave these routes to be served by AA instead and BA can use their aircraft for London routes. I don't see them venturing back to non-London flights.


User currently offlineblue100 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 44 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 17267 times:

Quoting ely747 (Reply 11):
Why is BA so Heathrow centric actually?
Quoting ely747 (Reply 13):
If my memory serves me well VS were able to fill up a 747 on MAN-LAS though it was leasure market for the most part, but then again CO, AA or US seem to be doing quite well and are confortable at MAN.

I have to be honest, I find this topic about BA being LHR-centric to be rather humorous every time it comes up. My question would be how is it any different than what most other airlines do?

With regards to the US airlines listed above, all are flying to their respective hubs (EWR, ORD, PHL etc.). Hub to spoke. In BA's case, LHR is the hub and MAN is the spoke. AF, KL, AZ, SQ, and yes, even EK (DXB) centralize their flights into their respective hubs. Point to point only really works well if there is a lot of O&D traffic or if you have a very low cost base. Even with a large amount of O&D, it may be too cost prohibitive to run outlying flights. That's why you see airlines try to build their hubs with the right mix of O&D and connecting traffic to fill the planes.

Just my   .

Anyway, back on topic, I certainly think that BA will be able to put these aircraft to good use if these options have in fact been picked up. Does anyone know if BA plans to replace the 777 fleet at LGW with 787's? If so, what variant would they likely use for these routes?

Cheers.


User currently offlineely747 From Slovakia, joined Jan 2013, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 16873 times:

Quoting blue100 (Reply 19):

It is slightly different since it is the fattest TATL route. Multiple hub system works fine for LH. If MAN manages to attract more direct services which will and not only to North America, then BA is going to lose out. Businesses need direct links. Surley one cannot ignore greater Manchester area.

[Edited 2013-04-03 18:39:15]

User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6937 posts, RR: 63
Reply 21, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 16634 times:

Quoting Atlflyer (Reply 5):
Congrats to BA and Boeing.

And RR...  


User currently offlinelebb757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 9 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 16593 times:

The 787 will work nicey for BA

User currently offlineplanesarecool From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 4124 posts, RR: 11
Reply 23, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 16441 times:

Quoting ely747 (Reply 20):
Multiple hub system works fine for LH.

Ah that old chestnut of comparing the apple of the UK to the orange of Germany, a common favourite of the MAN fanboys in these monotonous threads. Do some research on the economics, geography, population distribution and inbound tourism of Germany compared to that of the UK and you may realise why they have more success at a 'multiple hub system' than BA or in fact any other airline in Europe.

I'll help you out, answer these four questions...

Where is the most densely populated region of Germany? And the UK?
Where is the financial centre of Germany? And the UK?
Where is the most visited region of Germany for international visitors? And the UK?
What is the most visited city of Germany? And the UK?


User currently offlinecol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2122 posts, RR: 22
Reply 24, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 16278 times:

I too do not get the BA and MAN push. It failed before and was not good for MAN anyway. The 1-11's have gone!! BA and OW are shrinking at MAN. MAN's future is much brighter without BA, and BA future is much brighter without MAN.

User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12515 posts, RR: 35
Reply 25, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 16425 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 6):
I would expect they would be flexible on subtype in the contract language. Given they are stated to replace the 744s, they would likely be the -1000 type when it's finally offered.

Since this hasn't officially been launched, these orders can't be for the -10 model. I'm guessing these are for -9s exclusively.

That brings BA's 787 firm orders to 42, of which eight are 787-8s. They still have purchase rights on a further ten.


User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1842 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 16175 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting kaitak (Reply 25):
Since this hasn't officially been launched, these orders can't be for the -10 model. I'm guessing these are for -9s exclusively.

That brings BA's 787 firm orders to 42, of which eight are 787-8s. They still have purchase rights on a further ten.

Unless BA is terrible at negotiating, they will have flexibility to change the sub type up to a certain point before scheduled delivery for a certain slot. Keep in mind these slots are four ish years down the road. They must have language which allows them to chose any variation of the 787 including the -10.


User currently offlineeljas From Singapore, joined Mar 2013, 36 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 16494 times:

Quoting QFVHOQA (Reply 18):
KL serves more British airports than BA

...and BA serve more airports in the Netherlands (excluding Netherlands Antilles) than KL. That's how hub and spoke works.

I'm surprised that BA want more 787s, especially as a 744 replacement. I assume it they will be -900 or -1000, which could potentially be a replacement for the 772s, but replacing 744s with them is a big drop in capacity, which needs to be high on most longhaul routes out of LHR. Would they possibly configure some for shorthaul ops like the 767? Or a replacement of the LGW longhaul fleet maybe?


User currently offlineLJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4461 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 16252 times:

Quoting eljas (Reply 27):
...and BA serve more airports in the Netherlands (excluding Netherlands Antilles) than KL. That's how hub and spoke works.

Not entirely correct if you count KLs codeshare on AFs RTM-LCY as a KL flight.


User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1637 posts, RR: 1
Reply 29, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 15425 times:

This is a big boost for Boeing, after reports BA is set to order a huge number of A350s (favouring it over the 777X). It will take the number of 787s for BA to 42, not that far from the number of 777s they operate. Didn't really expect this, to be honest.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 25):
They still have purchase rights on a further ten.

Will these be the delivery slots they negotiated for IB? Or does this mean even more?

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 26):
Unless BA is terrible at negotiating, they will have flexibility to change the sub type up to a certain point before scheduled delivery for a certain slot. Keep in mind these slots are four ish years down the road. They must have language which allows them to chose any variation of the 787 including the -10.

   Could very well be converted to the 787-10, it would be an excellent replacement for 744s on transatlantic routes.



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6937 posts, RR: 63
Reply 30, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 15321 times:

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 29):
it would be an excellent replacement for 744s on transatlantic routes.

To be honest, I'm guessing that's partly what the A350-1000s will be for.


User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1637 posts, RR: 1
Reply 31, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 15156 times:

Quoting PM (Reply 30):
Quoting frigatebird (Reply 29):it would be an excellent replacement for 744s on transatlantic routes.
To be honest, I'm guessing that's partly what the A350-1000s will be for.

Oh, on those routes TA routes that require a bit more capacity than the 787-10, for sure. But I would say the A350-1000 would be best on longer routes like Asia or South America.



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 14015 times:

Fascinating timing, with Boeing desperate for some positive PR for the stricken programme, I imagine BA got a very nice deal!


it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlinewaly777 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2012, 337 posts, RR: 3
Reply 33, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 13940 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 32):
Fascinating timing, with Boeing desperate for some positive PR for the stricken programme, I imagine BA got a very nice deal!

Lol talk about being melodramatic. No, it had absolutely nothing to do with that BA is making decisions on long haul fleet replacements...oh no, the programme is stricken and desperate for PR is why BA would spend billions...smh.



The test of first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold 2 opposed ideas in the mind concurrently, and still function
User currently offlineLofty From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2008, 314 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 13329 times:

It is a B747 replacment

"International Airlines Group (IAG) has reached agreement with Boeing for new long-haul aircraft to replace the older Boeing 747s in the British Airways fleet between 2017 and 2021."

and IB will be getting B787's

"IAG has also reached agreement with Boeing to secure commercial terms and delivery slots that could lead to an order for 787s for Iberia when it has restructured and reduced its cost base and is in a position to grow profitability."


User currently onlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7616 posts, RR: 17
Reply 35, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 12778 times:

From the IAG web site:

"International Airlines Group (IAG) has reached agreement with Boeing for new longhaul aircraft for the group's fleet.

"IAG plans to convert 18 existing Boeing 787s options into firm orders for British Airways. They will be used to replace some of the airline's Boeing 747-400 aircraft between 2017 and 2021.

"For Iberia, IAG has reached agreement with Boeing to secure commercial terms and delivery slots that could lead to an order for Boeing 787s. Firm orders will only be made when Iberia has restructured and reduced its cost base and is in a position grow profitably.

"British Airways' 787s will be powered by Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engines. The engine order includes a comprehensive maintenance package with total care agreement."

The perception that you need to replace a 744 with a similar sized or larger aircraft is not necessarily correct. Here it is worth remembering that BA went down the 744 route in August 1986. Then they ordered 16 and took out options on a further 12. It is possible that range and not size was the single biggest determinant in that order. Today things are very different. Range is no longer a major factor in the decision making process.

[Edited 2013-04-04 04:48:49]

User currently offlineGCPET From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2012, 204 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 12627 times:

Not surprised by the order and it's good to see BA renewing the Long-Haul fleet further.

GCPET



If it's not Boeing, I'm not going!
User currently onlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8474 posts, RR: 10
Reply 37, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11639 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 1):
Replacing 747s with 787s?

It does make some sense for BA who have a very large LHR-US/CAN network of p2p routes. 747's are simply too big in this day and age of JV's and high frequency p2p routes.


User currently offliner2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2675 posts, RR: 1
Reply 38, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11420 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 35):
"For Iberia, IAG has reached agreement with Boeing to secure commercial terms and delivery slots that could lead to an order for Boeing 787s. Firm orders will only be made when Iberia has restructured and reduced its cost base and is in a position grow profitably.

Should we interpret from this that 787's for IB are basically a given (sounds almost like an LOI). If so, this comes as a surprise as many were expecting an A359/351 Combo for IB...


User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1842 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 11192 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

For IB, I think we'll see the 359 or 351 for larger routes and the 788 for smaller ones. This will bring IB down to two a/c types for long haul routes. Airbus should continue to be the supplier for short haul a/c.

User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31098 posts, RR: 85
Reply 40, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 11164 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'm guessing IB is not having problems filling their A340-300s, since they're taking delivery of A330-300s and not A330-200s, so I would think the 787-8 would be too small for them.

User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 817 posts, RR: 1
Reply 41, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 10932 times:

Quoting r2rho (Reply 38):
Should we interpret from this that 787's for IB are basically a given (sounds almost like an LOI).

BA had 28 options for the 787, so it's possible that the 10 remaining options have been novated to Iberia.


User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1637 posts, RR: 1
Reply 42, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 10812 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 41):
BA had 28 options for the 787, so it's possible that the 10 remaining options have been novated to Iberia.

The Businessweek article states "IAG said it has also secured an unspecified number of additional delivery slots for future Iberia needs", so I guess these will be supplemental to the existing options.



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlinelebb757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 9 posts, RR: 0
Reply 43, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 10411 times:

If IB actually order he 787, it would allow fleet commonality within IAG.

BA should definetely start looking at the 7810. It is simply the right airplane for all those thinner TATL routes for which BA uses the 747 suboptimally with a low seat density. 789s would replace the bulk of the 772 fleet and 788s wiil replace the 763. For the higher capacity routes I think BA will top up the a380 order and deploy them on routes like LHR-JFK/HKG/LAX, give up some frequencies and make a few 777s or 787s available for other routes. The capacity gap between the 380 and the 7810s should be covered by either the 350 or the 777X but not both at the same time.

As for IB, they will do fine with just one widebody family (787 ideally). When Boeing start offering the 7810, IAG should make a joint order and buy it for both carriers. Iberia would also need the 789 for those routes where they cant fill that many seats or they need more range. For IB's thicker routes like EZE or MEX they will have to add frequencies. Sadly, the cost of incorporating a bigger aircraft like the 748 for a few routes is not justifiable. I say sadly cos the 748 would look stunning on IB livery.


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6951 posts, RR: 46
Reply 44, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9950 times:

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 1):
As usual, this article is a mess. Replacing 747s with 787s?

Considering the fact that when the 744 came out it was the only plane with the range it had, it stands to reason that airlines that did a lot of long haul flying would have bought a bunch of them (and BA at one time had the largest 747 fleet in the world.) Now that smaller planes have the same or greater range, some of the 744's will undoubtedly be replaced with smaller planes. In fact, Boeing said sometime years ago that more customers bought the 747 for its range than for its capacity.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlinebehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4801 posts, RR: 44
Reply 45, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9931 times:

Quoting edina (Reply 12):
Little or no premium traffic from anywhere else....

Dont know why people keep on saying this without knowing the actual facts especially for a market like MANCHESTER where EK and EY in particular have literally got the entire GCC/Austral-Asia premium market all nicely wrapped up for themselves.

In 2012, the top long & medium haul 20 business class market segments out of Manchester were as follows:

DXB 16,082
SIN 12,357
HKG 11,455
JFK 11,453
IST 10,032

PVG 9,209
PHL 9,136
BKK 8,952
ORD 8,644
DEL 6,877

EWR 6,541
JNB 6,372
BOM 6,181
PEK 5,843
IAH 5,335

SYD 5,286
ISB 5,087
NRT 4,555
LHE 4,461
YYZ 4,399


User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2744 posts, RR: 58
Reply 46, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9887 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 44):
In fact, Boeing said sometime years ago that more customers bought the 747 for its range than for its capacity.

Actually, that was Airbus. Though to my knowledge, Boeing never disputed the statement. I'll have to look up my old collection of AW&ST's, but I believe it was @ 1988 or so that Airbus stated that ~60% of all 747 sales had been based on that planes range capability than it's seating capacity. Of course, this was also during the height of the A340 sales pitch, so take it for what it's worth. I never saw stats either refuting or confirming the claim.


Hamlet69



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12515 posts, RR: 35
Reply 47, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 9817 times:

Quoting behramjee (Reply 45):
Dont know why people keep on saying this without knowing the actual facts especially for a market like MANCHESTER where EK and EY in particular have literally got the entire GCC/Austral-Asia premium market all nicely wrapped up for themselves.

Very interesting figures, but where is AUH on this list?


User currently offlinepeterinlisbon From Portugal, joined Jan 2006, 549 posts, RR: 0
Reply 48, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 8540 times:

I think the reason that it makes sense for KLM to fly to more British airports than BA is that it makes more sense to fly to Amsterdam from places like Birmingham, Norwich etc than to London because to get to London there are plenty of other options like driving or taking the train. Also, Amsterdam has plenty of capacity for services with small regional aircraft whereas at Heathrow slots cost a fortune and it is best to use these for more lucrative services (long haul, high capacity).

User currently offlinebehramjee From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 4801 posts, RR: 44
Reply 49, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 7796 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 47):
Very interesting figures, but where is AUH on this list?

both DOH and AUH J class travel to MAN was less than 3,000 hence did not fall in the top 20 medium/long haul market segments


User currently offlinetheginge From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 50, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 7639 times:

Quoting behramjee (Reply 45):
Dont know why people keep on saying this without knowing the actual facts especially for a market like MANCHESTER where EK and EY in particular have literally got the entire GCC/Austral-Asia premium market all nicely wrapped up for themselves.

In 2012, the top long & medium haul 20 business class market segments out of Manchester were as follows:

DXB 16,082
SIN 12,357
HKG 11,455

There obviously is a premium market but for HKG, thats about 30 a day, not enough for a direct service?? Especially as some of it may well already go via DXB and other hubs.

Back on topic this will push BA in to being one of the biggest 787 operators when they are all deleivered


User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6793 posts, RR: 32
Reply 51, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 7435 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 35):
The perception that you need to replace a 744 with a similar sized or larger aircraft is not necessarily correct. Here it is worth remembering that BA went down the 744 route in August 1986.

   And IMO BA can likely make more money with premium-heavy 787 configurations than they can by trying to sell a bunch of deeply-discounted World Traveler seats in the back of a 747. Additionally, I believe that the U.K. APD makes LHR a less competitive hub for price-sensitive travelers, so it makes sense for BA to move away from competing for that traffic.

[Edited 2013-04-04 14:55:14]

User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10106 posts, RR: 97
Reply 52, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 7077 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 44):
In fact, Boeing said sometime years ago that more customers bought the 747 for its range than for its capacity.

And I find it laughable that we actually believe that airlines would really buy the most expensive frame around, seating 400 people, just so they could fly 180 people a bit further.....
Whether it ended up like that is a different matter. But I have a really hard time believing that airlines procured the plane with easily the highest DPOC knowing that they could never fill it   

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 46):
Actually, that was Airbus.

You'll need to find a link to that, because it's always put forward on here as a Boeing comment, by Boeing fanboys trying to have a dig at A380 sales forecasts.....   

Rgds


User currently offliner2rho From Germany, joined Feb 2007, 2675 posts, RR: 1
Reply 53, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6667 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 40):
I'm guessing IB is not having problems filling their A340-300s, since they're taking delivery of A330-300s and not A330-200s, so I would think the 787-8 would be too small for them.

Yes and no. On their current route network, I agree. But IMO IB is missing out on opportunities in thinner LatAm secondary markets due to not having an adequately sized aircraft. Tried-and-shut-down routes like MVD or FOR should be no-brainers with a 788, as well as struggling routes like BOS or the former IAD. Having to profitably fill a not-so-fuel-efficient A343 at a minimum in order to open a new route really restricts your market choices.

Quoting lebb757 (Reply 43):
When Boeing start offering the 7810, IAG should make a joint order and buy it for both carriers. Iberia would also need the 789 for those routes where they cant fill that many seats or they need more range. For IB's thicker routes like EZE or MEX they will have to add frequencies. Sadly, the cost of incorporating a bigger aircraft like the 748 for a few routes is not justifiable. I say sadly cos the 748 would look stunning on IB livery.

The 787-10 will be perfect for BA&IB North Atlantic routes but IB needs more range (+hot&high) for the deep South America routes. The A351 seems a better candidate for those, offering high capacity with enough range.


User currently offlineJerseyFlyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 642 posts, RR: 0
Reply 54, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6224 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 35):
British Airways' 787s will be powered by Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engines

Interesting this from IAG's website refers to RR power for BA, not for IAG. This does leave the door open to GE power for IB.


User currently offlineGCPET From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2012, 204 posts, RR: 0
Reply 55, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6123 times:

Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 54):
Interesting this from IAG's website refers to RR power for BA, not for IAG. This does leave the door open to GE power for IB.

I think they'll probably have RR's as BA will have them on their's which will cut maintenance costs I'd assume.

GCPET



If it's not Boeing, I'm not going!
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8422 posts, RR: 7
Reply 56, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6088 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 40):
I'm guessing IB is not having problems filling their A340-300s, since they're taking delivery of A330-300s and not A330-200s, so I would think the 787-8 would be too small for them.

The reason for some IB 787-8 could be to fly to cities that are too small for A340 or A333, many Central American cities, San Juan, and Santo Domingo fall into this category. IB recently stopped flying to SDQ and SJU ; Central America is flown with odd routing and only 3 times weekly. Many countries are not even flown to. A 787-8 can provide flights to smaller cities and perform from the many challenging airports in South America. Quito to Madrid nonstop by 787-8, who would have ever thought possible. Cali or Medellin to Madrid by IB might work with a 787-8 too. This plane open possibilities that weren't possible before.


User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 817 posts, RR: 1
Reply 57, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6000 times:

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 42):
The Businessweek article states "IAG said it has also secured an unspecified number of additional delivery slots for future Iberia needs", so I guess these will be supplemental to the existing options.

But would Boeing be prepared to guarantee delivery slots without an actual order for an aircraft?


User currently onlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7616 posts, RR: 17
Reply 58, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6005 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 41):
BA had 28 options for the 787, so it's possible that the 10 remaining options have been novated to Iberia.

The original order announced on 27 September 2007 and placed in the Boeing Order Book on 24 December 2007 was for six 787 8s that were then scheduled for delivery between August 2010 and February 2011 and 18 787 9s with the first delivery of this type then slated for June 2011. This order additionally included options for a further 18 frames and purchase rights for another ten aircraft.

Since these further ten aircraft were not options it still seems possible that, IB's situation permitting, they could be used for an IB order. But . . .

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 44):
BA at one time had the largest 747 fleet in the world

BA still has the largest 747 fleet in the world with 52 aircraft in service and three parked at VCV. At its height between April 1999 and October 2008 the BA 744 fleet comprised 57 frames but two have since been broken up.

After the delivery of their last 744 in April 1999 BA briefly continued to operate a small fleet of both 741s and 742s. The last five 741s were withdrawn from service on 31 October 1999 but their sixteen 742s remained in service for a further two years.

These last 21 747 Classics in the BA operational fleet were effectively replaced with smaller 772ERs. So BA replacing 747s with smaller aircraft is certainly not a new trend as BA briefly operated a fleet of 78 747s but today only operates 52.

In early 1997 I believe JL were operating around 100 747s. They were the largest ever 747 operator. But today they have none.


User currently offlinejumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 846 posts, RR: 0
Reply 59, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 5806 times:

Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 54):
This does leave the door open to GE power for IB.

Indeed the new IB A333s which were ordered after the BA/IB combination have GE engines rather than the RR Trent that would have given some commonality with BAs wide bodies. . Also we shouldn't forget that BAs early 772s and their new 773s are GE powered. So there is a small body of evidence to support the contention that IAG may select a GE engine over RR.


User currently offlinetheginge From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 60, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5629 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 57):
But would Boeing be prepared to guarantee delivery slots without an actual order for an aircraft?

I would imagine they would for a major airline group like IAG, just as they would for say Emirates for example...


User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 5053 posts, RR: 5
Reply 61, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5447 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 35):
British Airways' 787s will be powered by Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engines. The engine order includes a comprehensive maintenance package with total care agreement."

For Rolls Royce you could read General Electric. The point is that I do not see advantages in being exclusive with one engine over another just for the sake of it. There has to be a time when one engine package has an advantage over another.


User currently offlinejumpjets From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2012, 846 posts, RR: 0
Reply 62, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5194 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 57):
But would Boeing be prepared to guarantee delivery slots without an actual order for an aircraft?

I seem to recall that when BA originally placed their first order for 787s there was some commentary about how they had got relatively early delivery slots [+ or - 3 or 4 years in the event!] when they were a bit late to the party compared to other airlines. It was surmised at the time that Boeing had been holding slots available for them in anticipation of an order being forthcoming.

They may well be doing the same with IAG for a potential order for IB.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31098 posts, RR: 85
Reply 63, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5115 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 57):
But would Boeing be prepared to guarantee delivery slots without an actual order for an aircraft?

They did so with AA. AA signed an MoU that required their pilot's union ratifying their contract before AA would firm the order. It is believed that Boeing assigned delivery positions with the requirement that AA confirm the position by a certain advanced date or else they would relinquish it and Boeing could re-assign it to another customer. Once the pilots signed the contract, AA firmed the MoU and all those positions were then locked in.


User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 817 posts, RR: 1
Reply 64, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 4987 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 58):
The original order announced on 27 September 2007 and placed in the Boeing Order Book on 24 December 2007 was for six 787 8s that were then scheduled for delivery between August 2010 and February 2011 and 18 787 9s with the first delivery of this type then slated for June 2011. This order additionally included options for a further 18 frames and purchase rights for another ten aircraft.

Interesting. I assumed BA had 28 options as that was what was quoted in the fleet table towards the end of the last annual BA report. Either way, it's good there's some positive news and expansion for Iberia.

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External...c1Njk3fENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1827 posts, RR: 0
Reply 65, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4735 times:

I think there will be versions of the 787 that can do hot and high, a 788 with 789 engines and mtow etc?

User currently onlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7616 posts, RR: 17
Reply 66, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4103 times:

Quoting jumpjets (Reply 59):
So there is a small body of evidence to support the contention that IAG may select a GE engine over RR.
Quoting VV701 (Reply 35):
From the IAG web site:

"International Airlines Group (IAG) has reached agreement with Boeing for new longhaul aircraft for the group's fleet.

"IAG plans to convert 18 existing Boeing 787s options into firm orders for British Airways. They will be used to replace some of the airline's Boeing 747-400 aircraft between 2017 and 2021.

"For Iberia, IAG has reached agreement with Boeing to secure commercial terms and delivery slots that could lead to an order for Boeing 787s. Firm orders will only be made when Iberia has restructured and reduced its cost base and is in a position grow profitably.

"British Airways' 787s will be powered by Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engines. The engine order includes a comprehensive maintenance package with total care agreement."

Note the last paragraph from this extract of the IAG Press Release. So they are saying is a done deal and includes the Trent 1000 and the RR support package.

As to the IB position, with IAG prepared to sign an increase in their order from 24 to 42 aircraft I cannot imagine that Boeing were too reluctant to grant IAG at least a temporary lien on production positions for possible aircraft for IB. This is particularly true as at this time with market confidence in Boeing and the 787 not at an all time high.

This very significant order from a not insignificant customer is just what Boeing needed as they march out of trouble towards Paris. Indeed I would be a little but not totally surprised if Boeing flew in to Paris a 787 in BA livery. This would counterbalance the possible appearance of a BA 380 at the show (which is said to be being considered by BA). The appearance of a "BA" 787 at Paris would emphasise that IAG has not only bought the 380 as a 744 replacement.

Would BA say "No" to such a proposal? I doubt it.


User currently offlinebluesky73 From UK - England, joined Oct 2012, 322 posts, RR: 0
Reply 67, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4061 times:

It can't be too long before we see G-ZBJA in BA colours and with the timing I'm sure BA will do some publicity shots with its two new birds joining the fleet this summer.

I just hope BA paint the engine nacelles blue.


User currently offlinerutankrd From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 3016 posts, RR: 7
Reply 68, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4034 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting bluesky73 (Reply 67):
I just hope BA paint the engine nacelles blue.

Are you prepared to pay for the performance hit ?


User currently offlinebluesky73 From UK - England, joined Oct 2012, 322 posts, RR: 0
Reply 69, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4023 times:

Does anyone know how much painting the engines blue/red etc will cost efficiency? I don't want this topic going off course but good to know.

I'll chip in if others want to  


User currently onlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7616 posts, RR: 17
Reply 70, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3852 times:

Quoting bluesky73 (Reply 67):
I just hope BA paint the engine nacelles blue.

If they were painted white it would by no means be a first.

All high winged aircraft in BA livery excepting only the DO 328s of Sun-Air have been painted with white engines. These include all the BAe 146s / Avro RJs and DHC8s But I agree that BA low winged aircraft with white engines would take a bit of getting used to just like the DO 328s with blue engines:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Terry Wade
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Karl Nixon



User currently onlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7616 posts, RR: 17
Reply 71, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3264 times:

Quoting VV701 (Reply 70):
If they were painted white it would by no means be a first.

Somebody somewhere is expecting the engines on BA's 767s to be painted white:

http://www.airbank-travel.com/airfar.../bites/ba-upgrades-jfk-terminal-7/


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6951 posts, RR: 46
Reply 72, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2997 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 52):
Whether it ended up like that is a different matter. But I have a really hard time believing that airlines procured the plane with easily the highest DPOC knowing that they could never fill it

If they can make money it doesn't matter whether or not they can fill the thing. If the fares are high enough to cover the costs with the plane only half full then they could care less about the rest of the seats (with the possibility, of course, that if they DO fill the seats they make a bunch of money). In a world with nothing else having the same range, there may well have been enough people willing to pay the fares to fly the long haul routes. I do not know if this was in fact the case, but it may well be. After all, there was a small but definite market for the 747SP, and then the 744 provided even greater range without the payload hit, and at the time there was NOTHING else that had the range. And if the plane is not full of passengers there is that much more freight that can be carried. Of course, once smaller planes appeared with the same or greater range (A340, MD11, 777) the picture changed.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
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...
Wouldn't it make more sense for BA to fly DFW - ORD - LHR? posted Fri Feb 20 2004 04:38:07 by ORDnDFW777
More Negative Media Coverage For BA posted Wed Oct 8 2008 04:12:37 by Tcxdegsy
Chalk Up More Orders For Boeing's 787 posted Fri Apr 7 2006 21:20:20 by MrMcCoy
Boeing Looks At Larger 787 For EK, BA posted Mon Sep 26 2005 06:41:59 by Sq212
IAG Says 777X A 'Perfect Fit' For Parts Of Network posted Tue Mar 19 2013 16:52:56 by waly777
A319 For BA LGW posted Tue Feb 19 2013 10:15:14 by Lofty
Is Santiago De Chile Still A Go For BA? posted Thu Jan 10 2013 16:59:00 by DolphinAir747
200 More B737s For Ryanair? posted Wed Jan 9 2013 16:06:45 by fcogafa
Any Plans For BA To Fly To Split? posted Fri Jan 4 2013 04:00:19 by 8herveg
787 For ORD-KIX/NGO/others? posted Wed Dec 26 2012 17:30:36 by nomorerjs