Flynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (10 years 11 months 4 weeks ago) and read 551 times:
I'm confused. I've heard talk of BA replacing the 744 with the 772 on its MCO operations beginning June 1. Is this true? Today, June 3, I saw a BA 744 on approach into MCO. I believe the aircraft was G-BNLN (see http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=G-BNLN). I'm not sure of the exactly registraton, but it did have a teal/blue-colored tail. Regardless, that aircraft being a 744, when can we expect a BA 772 at MCO?
Englandair From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2000, 2228 posts, RR: 3 Reply 2, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 493 times:
I think it's very interesting that VS is dominant over BA in a US city! VS has 3 daily 747 services into MCO (one from MAN) where as BA are down grading the route to a B777! Who'd have thought it possible 18 years ago...!
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31119 posts, RR: 73 Reply 3, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 462 times:
Englandair, I don't think it is amazing. Orlando-London yields are pretty pathetic, especially compared to other city's. Virgin Atlantic can handle the lower yields and still make a profit, British Airways cannot.
Englandair From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2000, 2228 posts, RR: 3 Reply 4, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 460 times:
Yeilds to VS's leisure destinations aren't actually pathetic! Economy is often jam packed and Premium and Upper Class are often fairly full too.
And yes I'd say it is pretty amazing that an airline that started with just one 747 up against extreamly feirce competition has done so well, when everyone said they'd fail, actually!
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31119 posts, RR: 73 Reply 5, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 454 times:
Englandair, as I said, Virgin is able to make a lot of money serving destinations like Orlando and Las Vegas that have weak yields, BA is too business passenger-oriented. Yields to Orlando ARE pathetic, but Virgin is able to make a profit with them.
727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5722 posts, RR: 20 Reply 6, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 454 times:
Funny you should ask, I just checked BA's website yesterday& it says the flight is NOW a 777-200.
DeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8771 posts, RR: 13 Reply 7, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 436 times:
The reason for the switch to a 777 is that BA is going to only have 777s flying longhaul out of LGW, as the 744s are going to be transferred to Heathrow. My assumption is that it will be one of the VII 777s operating this route.
Dazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5447 posts, RR: 53 Reply 8, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 419 times:
BA today is a 744. I thought the 777 switch was in mid June?
OA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4980 posts, RR: 25 Reply 9, posted (10 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 404 times:
I second MAH4546s sentiments. In several ways, VS and BA are completely different operations. One of these is, as MAH pointed out, the fact that VS can fly low-yielding flights profitably while BA cannot. MCO is traditionally a very low-yield destination from Europe. Don't believe me, just look at the number of European charter airlines that serve the airport. Also, IIRC BA is using one of those specially configured 777s on the MCO route that feature only Club World, WT+, and WT, no first class. If it were a high yielding flight for BA they would certainly be flying either a 4-class or 3-class 777 equipped with First Class on the route.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31119 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2000, 2228 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
