777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (11 years 1 week 4 days ago) and read 2062 times:
It was Boeing Allways, and it was a general term. With 737s 757s 767s 747s and involvement with the 777 everyone thought that BA would always stay Boeing.
Crosswind From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 2574 posts, RR: 59 Reply 4, posted (11 years 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1972 times:
Yep,
BA definitely were Boeing Airways!
One of the most stark examples being;
They took delivery of 10 A320s from an order they inherited with B.Cal in 1988-1990. They obviously liked the A320, or I doubt they would have kept such a small fleet of 10, especially when early demand for the A320 meant there would have been many airlines willing to take almost new aircraft rather than wait for a delivery slot. However, they remained "Boeing Airways" and ordered the B737-400 as part of their short-haul fleet renewal soon after the A320 entered service. So the 2 types with near identical capacities have operated side-by-side ever since. It was 10 years after service introduction of the A320 before BA ordered an Airbus by choice!
Arsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7791 posts, RR: 22 Reply 7, posted (11 years 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1920 times:
That tag must now go away i'd say, BA has zillions of A320/A319/A321's now. With the 757/767's disappearing, a airbus short haul fleet is the norm for BA now.
Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 7724 posts, RR: 55 Reply 9, posted (11 years 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1906 times:
BA's early (ex BCal) A320s were not as sought after as suggested above, because they are very early build -100 series aircraft (no winglets for one thing) and the -200 appeared quite soon after the -100. If BA had got early deliveries of A320-200s they would have had a much higher resale value.
PS El Al tried to defect (a la BA and United) by ordering A330s, but no way was the US State Dept going to tolerate such ingratitude.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
Crosswind From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 2574 posts, RR: 59 Reply 10, posted (11 years 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1884 times:
Cedarjet,
Yes, BA's first 5 A320s are series 100s. I still don't think BA would have had too much trouble finding a buyer for the aircraft, around the time of delivery. Being "very early build" machines doesn't really matter when the aircraft is 6 months old and it's the most advanced airliner flying!
I take your point about the A320-100 now though when they're 12 years old, I always wondered whether BA would strike a deal to sell 'em to Air France who already operate 12 A320-100s, maybe now they will once more V2500-powered A320s arrive.
In a similar vein, I doubt anyone will be falling over themselves to take the 2 non-ER B777-200s that BA have just returned to Boeing. They may have been of interest to Asian airlines like Cathay/Malaysian as range is not an issue on their trunk routes, but their GE90 engines mean these airlines are unlikely to be interested.
Only 2 potential customers spring to mind;
China Southern and JAL, who've switched from PW to GE for recent 777 orders.
Airsicknessbag From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, RR: 37 Reply 16, posted (11 years 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1663 times:
Did those early BA A320 actually fly for BCal or were they delivered straight to BA? I´m just wondering whether there were 3 or 4 -100 operators.
Daniel
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7717 posts, RR: 5 Reply 19, posted (11 years 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1509 times:
What's interesting is that British Airways could have been a big Airbus customer earlier had the British government not stupidly bowed out of the Airbus Industrie consortium in 1969.
If the British had continued to support Airbus back then it would have been very likely that British Airways would have ended up buying 30-35 A300B4's powered by RB.211-524 engines for European operations instead of buying Lockheed L1011's, and very likely would have been among the very first customers for what became the A320.
Arsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7791 posts, RR: 22 Reply 22, posted (11 years 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 1383 times:
It's not a bad thing being called boeing airways, i think it's OK, but time moves on and things eventually change. i.e. BA breaking the duck and buying airbus.
Charliecossie From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 467 posts, RR: 10 Reply 23, posted (11 years 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1330 times:
Crosswind:
I think that picture is of the first A320 which was painted in BCal colours on one side and Air France on the other.
I was at Gatwick the day Busby (G-BUSB) arrived and it was in BA colours.
Dynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1838 posts, RR: 7 Reply 24, posted (11 years 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1306 times:
Boeing Airways? Really? I didn't know Boeing also made the Concorde, VC-10, and L-1011.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7717 posts, RR: 5 Reply 25, posted (11 years 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1267 times:
However, Hawker Siddeley continued its involvement with Airbus as a private venture without British government assistance, building the A300B wings. It was this venture that allowed the British to rejoin the Airbus consortium a number of years later.
If the British government had stayed with Airbus very likely sales of the Lockheed L1011 would have much lower, to say the least.
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7791 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 975 posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6659 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Nov 2001, 152 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 559 posts, 
From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 4723 posts, 
From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4934 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Apr 2002, 1219 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
