gilesdavies
Posts: 2271
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 7:51 pm

Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 1:56 am

I was reading in Aircraft Illustrated magazine today (UK Edition), that British Airways has begun a strategic review of its long haul fleet and over the coming months or years will decide what aircrafts they want to update their fleet with.

The article was very brief but basically stated that BA would be considering the 777, 787 and 747(ER/Adv)

There was a brief line that stated BA would be discounting the A350 and they did not feel this was a viable long haul aircraft.

I am just interested in how BA can reach this decision, when the aircraft has not been officially launched and will boast similar range, costs and seating as the 787 and 777.

The A340 was not even mentioned!

The article also gave quite a frosty response to any potential A380 orders, by BA "shrugging its shoulders" as saying the aircraft is not even in service yet and will have to see how well it performs.

Is it me in thinking this... But does BA not trust aircrafts launched by Airbus and will not commit themselves until the aircrafts are flying? When they are happy to be launch customers for Boeing, as they were for 777 and 747-400 and potentially place an order for the 787 before it goes into service.

Im not after an A v B showdown in this thread but just interested in BA's thinking and strategy to new long haul aircraft.

[Edited 2005-08-20 19:12:57]
 
AirplanePeanut
Posts: 407
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:00 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 1:59 am

Quoting Gilesdavies (Thread starter):
The article was very brief but basically stated that BA would be considering the 777, 787 and 747-400ER.

That's sounds like their looking for Boeings, To complement their already Boeing-Long Haul Fleet.

 airplane Peanut
..
 
Beaucaire
Posts: 3888
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:48 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:03 am

Quoting Gilesdavies (Thread starter):
The article also gave quite a frosty response to any potential A380 orders, by BA "shrugging its shoulders" as saying the aircraft is not even in service yet and will have to see how well it performs.

With all due respect that applies to the 787 as well- while the A380 is flying,the body of the first 787 still has to be assembled...
So considering a paper -aircraft rather than acknowledging the presensce of a plane like the A380 is somewhat "very BA.."
Please respect animals - don't eat them...
 
SNATH
Posts: 3049
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:23 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:05 am

Quoting Gilesdavies (Thread starter):
BA would be considering the 777, 787 and 747-400ER.

I'd be surprised if they are not considering the B747Adv, which will make more sense in the long run (yes, if it gets launched).

Tony
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8573
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:07 am

>> The A340 was not even mentioned!

This should come as no real suprise. BA has a huge fleet of 777-200ER, which largely outperform the A343. A large fraction of BA's fleet is GE90-powered, so they could integrate the more capable 777-300ER/200LR without difficulty. Contrast this to the A345/A346 which would be a totally new fleet type, in addition to being less capable aircraft than their Boeing counterparts. It really doesn't make sense to include the A340 in any fleet evaluation at BA...

>> There was a brief line that stated BA would be discounting the A350 and they did not feel this was a viable long haul aircraft.

My guess would be they found A350 too big to replace BA's 763ER and too light to replace BA's (still young) 772ER.

>> The article also gave quite a frosty response to any potential A380 orders, by BA "shrugging its shoulders" as saying the aircraft is not even in service yet and will have to see how well it performs.

BA has had two incidents in recent memory where being a launch customer for a new type turned into a Bad Idea:

(1) The entry into service for the Ge90 777 was very rocky, and while opperating fine today, why be first when you can let other customers smooth out reliability?

(2) BA was one of many burned by the PW-powered A318, and later converted all of their order into other A320 types.

Perhaps it is a good thing that they have not ordered the A380 because it would have likely made strike three: Airbus has already announced a program delay that will affect (now disgruntled) customers like SQ and QF.

As to the question, why does BA not yet require the A380, their amount of LHR slots doesn't force them into larger units of capacity like some airlines. BA has many options in what increments of capacity they order.

>> Is it me in thinking this... But does BA not trust aircrafts launched by Airbus and will not commit themselves until the aircrafts are flying?

They havn't yet placed any orders for Boeing aircraft either, and their initial response to the 787 was much the same reaction they had to the A380. I don't see any double standard on BA's part.

>> When they are happy to be launch customers for Boeing, as they were for 777 and 747-400 and potentially place an order for the 787 before it goes into service.

Like I said above, a lot has changed in the last decade... some of it caused by being the launch customers of these types.  Wink
 
Arniepie
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:00 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:09 am

BA seems to be on track to have an exclusively AIRBUS smallbody and BOEING widebody fleet.

To me it seems that they have a working strategy because the A320-family is cheaper (purchase price) and about equally capable than the 737-family.

They have a good widebody fleetmix: 747(=proven) ,777 (hate to say it but better than the airbus counterparts) and the 767 still has a lot of years in it and the most viable replacement for it is the 787.
[edit post]
 
pdxtriple7
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 6:27 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:11 am

Quoting SNATH (Reply 3):
I'd be surprised if they are not considering the B747Adv, which will make more sense in the long run (yes, if it gets launched).

When did Boeing say they would launch it by if they were going to launch it? Isn't it coming up?
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:12 am

DfwRevolution I have long respected your levelheadedness on these forums even though up untill recently I did nothing but lurk.

Well done on another levelheaded answer  Smile

You're on my RU list  Smile
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:13 am

Quoting Gilesdavies (Thread starter):
Is it me in thinking this... But does BA not trust aircrafts launched by Airbus and will not commit themselves until the aircrafts are flying? When they are happy to be launch customers for Boeing, as they were for 777 and 747-400 and potentially place an order for the 787 before it goes into service.

It's like auto companies - when you have a good experience with one you tend to look at that same company again when you are next in the market for a new auto. Can't blame BA for that one.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8573
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:13 am

>> When did Boeing say they would launch it by if they were going to launch it? Isn't it coming up?

If it will be launched, before the end of 2005 or very early 2006. Next few months then...
 
philb
Posts: 2645
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 5:53 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:14 am

Aircraft Illustrated is an enthusiasts' magazine which contains a great deal of excellent information.

It has, in the past, printed some excellent articles covering what various airlines will and won't do regarding fleet equipment but not all of them have been correct.

I haven't seen the issue yet. How much credence can be given to the statement will depend on the journalist involved and who his sources at BA are.
 
beauing
Posts: 329
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 1:59 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:24 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 4):
My guess would be they found A350 too big to replace BA's 763ER and too light to replace BA's (still young) 772ER.

Could you please elaborate on the A350 being "too light"? I thought an aircraft could never be too light...
 
pdxtriple7
Posts: 641
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 6:27 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:25 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 9):
If it will be launched, before the end of 2005 or very early 2006. Next few months then...

Awesome! I really hope it's launched. A sky without the Queen would be sad.

[Edited 2005-08-20 19:26:53]
 
User avatar
garpd
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 9:29 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:28 am

Quoting Beauing (Reply 12):

Could you please elaborate on the A350 being "too light"? I thought an aircraft could never be too light...

I guess what meant by being too light is the A350 will not be able to pick up the same weight in payload of the 777-200ER?
arpdesign.wordpress.com
 
David L
Posts: 8549
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:28 am

For the reasons given by DfwRevolution and ArniePie:

  • Boeing for longhaul, Airbus for shorthaul
  • BA don't look likely to buy any aircraft till it's been tried and tested in airline service.


These are reasons why BA doesn't appear to be considering it at the moment.

Sorry to repeat you guys but I suspect this might have to be done every 5th post or so!

[Edited 2005-08-20 19:31:45]
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8573
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:30 am

>> Could you please elaborate on the A350 being "too light"? I thought an aircraft could never be too light...

Too light as in not being able to lift enough payload. Not "too light" as in low empty weight.

As WideBodyPhoto explained, the A350-900 will match the 772ER's passenger capacity, but as planned, cannot lift a corresponding amount of cargo over a givin distance. Reduced fuel burn does not necessarily compensate for reduced revenue, so the allure of the A359 depends on how the customer utilizes the 772ER.

A customer like US who only uses their widebodies across the Atlantic would benefit from an aircraft like the A359 because they do not need the full capability of the 772ER. A customer like CO who regularly opperates the 772ER at max payload between EWR-HKG would see no advantage with the A359.
 
vfw614
Posts: 3168
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 12:34 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 3:09 am

I have my doubts that BA would be so stupid and inform Boeing through Aircraft Illustrated that they have no serious competition.....
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 3:11 am

Quoting Vfw614 (Reply 24):
I have my doubts that BA would be so stupid and inform Boeing through Aircraft Illustrated that they have no serious competition.....

My thoughts exactly. I think the Boeings are definite favourites in this race, but BA isn't going to want to let on that easily. They want Airbus to make so good offers to force Boeing to make good offers.
 
David L
Posts: 8549
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 3:21 am

Vfw614, you're right, of course. But the signs are that BA aren't about to buy any brand new Boeing aircraft, e.g. 787, till it's been tried and tested, either.
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 3:23 am

Being as BA won't be buying anything for probably 2-3 more years, a lot can change.

However, I get the impression that 787 is certain.
A380, different people at BA say different things about that.
My impression is that it won't be in the first wave of any new fleet renewal, but everyone I've spoken to thinks an eventual BA A380 order is inevitable.
2012 might yet have tipped the balance slightly towards A380, if only in the form of a possible lease, a sort of 'suck it and see' approach.
(On a far bigger numbers scale, that's how AA got into the MD-80).

But all this is very preliminary, a lot of serious evaluation (which we are not at yet) lies ahead.

Right, that out of the way, here is what I'd like to see.
R/R B787, replaces 767, 757, complements 777, more than one version of it then.
More A319/320, get rid of remaining 737-300/400/500, also the original legacy and very early production A320's built for BCAL, so an airframe type exited, as well as an engine (CFM-56).
A380, not one for one replacing 747-400, not even close in fact, but LHR, for all BA's dominance, is still fundamentally slot restrained, pax numbers are climbing.
I could see 15-20 A380's, so scratch the older 747-400's.
We happily operated 747-100's for over 25 years, so remaining 747-400's built in the mid/late 1990's have plenty of time left, all one careful owner too, don't knock it!

I should now reveal a personal beef, I think GE's management of the former BA engine overhaul facility in Wales, with decreasing quality, that crippling shut-down last year, means that BA should avoid, as much as possible, doing new business with GE, this is not about the engines themselves however.
BA keep letting themselves get let down by contractors, it aint just the caterers either!
Time to make a stand.

In any case, my simple minded view is that if you are going to buy a new 4 engine long hauler, go for the all new (though well proven by the time BA buy), not the warmed up old model, good for it's target market the 747ADV will no doubt be.
(Plus that GE exclusivity rankles, I know why, limited market and all that, but still, with 4 engines on each airframe, an increasingly rare occurrence, R/R should also have been allowed on board, unless the market is just so limited, which in my view is a question mark over the whole project).
 
David_itl
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 3:33 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 4):
(2) BA was one of many burned by the PW-powered A318, and later converted all of their order into other A320 types.

Burned by the A318? Let's try the "Future Size and Shape" programme which saw them redeploy their fleet. The A318s were to be used at MAN + BHX, however, with the FSS plan, the 737s at MAN were flung to LGW, the A319s at BHX were sent to LHR, the RJ100s at LGW were sent to MAN + BHX and some LHR 737s sent to LGW. The focus was on single-fleet types for the short-haul at LHR (the A320 family) and LGW (the 737 family); as there was no need for a small Airbus at LHR, they converted their A318 order to a lesser amount of A321s.

David
 
planesarecool
Posts: 3208
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 3:43 am

Why would they be considering anything yet anyway? Their oldest B777 is just 9 years old, and their newest is less than 4 years old. And their oldest B747 in service at the moment is just 16 years old, with the youngest being 6 year old.

Also they're just upgrading most of their B767's into long-haul dusk formation, so they obviously have no intention of replacing them in the next few years. Plus, the oldest of their B767's has only been in service 15 years, and the newest, just 7.

I'm sure they'd like to see their oldest B747's through at least 25 years before replacing them.
 
whitehatter
Posts: 5180
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 6:52 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 4:00 am

BA don't need to make any decision at the moment, but a lot will depend on Willie Walsh when he takes over. He will probably be the guy in the important office when the time comes to start looking at an order.

As for aircraft types, the A350 strikes me as being too much plane for 767 routes and also too much of an overlap with the existing 772 fleet. BA may want to keep its fleet profile at a similar size, so a direct replacement for the 763 by the 788 would be ideal for them without having to upscale with an A350.

The 763 suits many routes BA operates which are a bit too thin or short for a 772, so an A350 would not be ideal. The similar size, better cargo and increased range of the 788 could fit BA like a glove.
Lead me not into temptation, I can find my own way there...
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 4:06 am

Don't expect ANY new BA deliveries before 2010.
Now think of the bandwidth this interesting, but common and still very speculative subject, will use up in the the interim, and weep!

By the time BA order any 787's (which is the only type that we can say with certainty is a front runner), it will have flown, probably even be entering service.
Not only the innovations, economies this type promises, but the range of versions across the 787 range.
BA will be very attracted by that, I suspect that more than anything is the reason for BA being cool on the A350, plus the Airbus has only fairly recently been properly defined, 787 will fit BA's range of requirements/types to be replaced, better.

I could stir the pot and say that if I (and not only me, not that I'm in any position of authority) think better to go for all new with A380 rather than modernized older 747, that cuts across to 787/A350.

But I'm sure A350 will work out for Airbus, if only to prevent Boeing total dominance is this huge sector, not the A330 is fininished yet, but post 787/A350, I bet any A330's sold are cargo versions as well as military, (RAF. RAAF, probably French AF in time as well as others, though probably not the USAF).
 
vv701
Posts: 5773
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 4:17 am

Will the 2012 London Olympics influence the timing of a BA order for new wide bodies and their required delivery dates? Seems to me that around August 2012 a few new wide bodies in the BA fleet could be very useful and not just on long haul flights with the slot constraints at LHR. Then BA could start retiring the replaced aircraft once the Olympic passenger 'bulge' has past.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8573
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 4:24 am

>> Burned by the A318? Let's try the "Future Size and Shape" programme which saw them redeploy their fleet

An event set in motion by PW's failure and subsequent delay of the A318 program:

Deliveries were scheduled between January 2003 and December 2004. BA, as with the majority of the A318 customers, selected the Pratt & Whitney PW6124. The enormous technical problems met by the engine manufacturer forced British Airways to switch all of its A318 commitments to other models in early December 2002, taking three A319s and ten A321s instead. BA is now quietly changing its strategy.

http://airtransportbiz.free.fr/Fleets/BA318.html

Were BA about to come out and blast PW and Airbus? Of course not. The facts, however, indicate that BA had to change their strategy as a causality of PW missing their mark with the PW6000.
 
egmcman
Posts: 729
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 6:28 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 4:26 am

Quoting WhiteHatter (Reply 30):
BA don't need to make any decision at the moment, but a lot will depend on Willie Walsh when he takes over. He will probably be the guy in the important office when the time comes to start looking at an order.

I agree, do you see a joint order with other Oneworld alliance carriers such as EI to get a large discount?

Cheers

egmcman
 
Leezyjet
Posts: 3541
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:26 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 4:47 am

I'm still waiting for them to announce the Concorde replacement !! Big grin

 Smile
"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 2455
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 4:54 am

Quoting VV701 (Reply 32):
Will the 2012 London Olympics influence the timing of a BA order for new wide bodies and their required delivery dates?

Good question - I've seen quite a few comments in other threads about Chinese airlines ordering planes to be delivered in time for the 2008 Olympics. Now if they need the capacity anyhow then yes it makes sense to have them delivered by the time of that spike in load factor, but I don't think they'd order the planes just to cover a short-term increase is passenger load.
 
David_itl
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 5:13 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 33):
The facts, however, indicate that BA had to change their strategy as a causality of PW missing their mark with the PW6000.

13th Feb 2002, BA reveal FSS:

"A major part of the fleet simplification plan involves the transfer of 16 RJ100s based at Gatwick to the airline’s regional bases in Manchester and Birmingham. In turn, eight A319s at Birmingham will move to Heathrow to join the existing fleet of 25 A319s and 11 A320s. Four B737s will move from Manchester to Gatwick joining 29 B737s already there.

Mr Eddington said: “Simplification is key to removing cost from the business. These fleet moves mean our operations at Gatwick will be flown by just two aircraft types - Boeing 737s for short haul and Boeing 777s for long haul. For our regional bases, a simpler fleet helps to deliver operational efficiency."

So, given the "facts" as you've reported why would then some 10 months later announce on 13th December 2002 :

"Changes to Airbus order
British Airways is to switch its current aircraft order with Airbus to receive 10
A321 aircraft instead of 12 A318 aircraft and three A319 aircraft.
...
"The 108-seater A318s and the 126-seater A319s were ordered originally to be based at regional airports in the UK. However, as part of its fleet simplification strategy, British Airways’ has decided to base its Airbus fleet at London’s Heathrow and Gatwick airports and re-deploy its fleet of 16 110-seater RJ100 aircraft from Gatwick to the British Airways CitiExpress fleet at regional airports."

Quoting GDB (Reply 27):
More A319/320, get rid of remaining 737-300/400/500, also the original legacy and very early production A320's built for BCAL, so an airframe type exited, as well as an engine (CFM-56).

Aren't there still 100+ options for the A320 family?
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 9:32 am

Some options, but nowhere near 100.

Whitehatter is correct, FSS drove the Airbus order change, though avoiding adding a new airframe sub-type and wholly new engine was welcomed in the circumstances at that time.
 
UA772IAD
Posts: 1269
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:43 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:41 pm

No surprise to me. While the A380 is certainly an exception (the first one), BA has always favored Boeing for their long-haul operations. Perhaps their a contributor to the design team?
 
filton216
Posts: 91
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 6:19 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 3:06 pm

I read an article in the finacial times a couple of weeks ago and it says that BA is considering and leaning across towards the A380.

filton216
Filton216 - The home of Concorde 216!
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:04 pm

Filton216, that article you read proves that you cannot rule A380 in or out at BA, it's just far too soon.
Others will quote BA sources saying A380 is not being seriously considered, the truth is no-one knows, yet.
 
Fiedman
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2001 2:49 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:25 pm

I am just wondering and no one has brought this up yet but how much of this could be politically motivated. I mean BA is the flag ship carrier of the UK, and is used but the British government to carry members of parliament to various destinations in the UK and around the word as well as members of the Royal family. And the UK and the United States are on very good political terms right now more then the UK and the rest of Europe.
Westjet - Canada's National Low-fare Airline
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:37 pm

Forget all these imagined political pressures on BA to buy this, or buy that.
I don't think you can look at BA procurement over the past 20 years and claim any such thing with a straight face.

They were not even that patriotic when still state owned, or as BOAC and BEA, except when they had specified an aircraft type to their own requirements, then tried to get out of ordering them, except with the VC-10 when BOAC were allowed to reduce the numbers ordered.

There is no Boeing long haul, Airbus short haul policy.
There is no policy favouring one manufacturer.

What has changed in the last 15 years or so is that the Airbus range has expanded, so they are more likely to be able to offer what BA wants now.
 
windshear
Posts: 2258
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 4:45 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 7:03 pm

I understand why... But it seems I cannot reflect on this here on airliners.net...

I love all aircraft, but from certain business points of view, I can see why some, in this case BA, would prefer Boeing over Airbus.

Would also understand why others would favor Airbus over Boeing...

Boaz...
"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
 
GQfluffy
Posts: 3072
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 1:25 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 9:50 pm

Someone once said 'BA' was short for 'Boeing Always'. Guess that isn't so true when you look at their narrowbody fleet... Only time will tell.
This isn't where I parked my car...
 
highflyer9790
Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 1:21 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 10:02 pm

1. they will get a reletively good deal because they already have a lot of boeings.

2. political relations
121
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 10:12 pm

Quoting GDB (Reply 23):
Don't expect ANY new BA deliveries before 2010.

I agree, but I'm thinking it will be more like 2012 before any new WBs are ordered, and 2 years later before they are delivered. I would guess the next order from BA will be to start replacing the B-737-300/400/500s and the B-757-200s. My guess is (and it is only a guess) Boeing will make a very hard pitch to BA for the B-737-600/700/800s to replace the B-737 Classics and push the B-737-900ER to replace the B-757s. Airbus also knows this and will push their A-318/319/320/321s. But that still leaves a gap for the B-757 replacement as Airbus doesn't really have a NB product that can match the B-757s range, performance, or payload. This might give Boeing a SLIGHT edge for the NB orders.

Another advantage that Boeing MAY have over Airbus is the long rumored B-737NG follow-on airplane. If it is a good and promising design, BA may want to risk being a launch customer again. True, they did have some losses being a launch customer on the A-318 and B-777, but how much of those losses were offset by the launch customer discounts they received? If Boeing launches that, say within the next 4-5 years, Airbus will again be playing catch up, like they are now with the A-350s late start against the B-787.

Quoting Planesarecool (Reply 21):
Why would they be considering anything yet anyway? Their oldest B777 is just 9 years old, and their newest is less than 4 years old. And their oldest B747 in service at the moment is just 16 years old, with the youngest being 6 year old.



Quoting Planesarecool (Reply 21):
I'm sure they'd like to see their oldest B747's through at least 25 years before replacing them.

That is correct. BA doesn't really need to order any WBs before 2012 for 2014-2015 delivery dates. These will start replacing the oldest B-747-400s, when they turn 25 years old. I will include my OPINION on the B-747-400 replacement airplane below.

Quoting GARPD (Reply 13):
Quoting Beauing (Reply 12):

Could you please elaborate on the A350 being "too light"? I thought an aircraft could never be too light...

I guess what meant by being too light is the A350 will not be able to pick up the same weight in payload of the 777-200ER?

When it comes time to start replacing BA's current B-747-400 fleet, the fact the A-350 cannot replace the B-777-200s MAY also be the same reason BA does not buy the A-380-800/900.

I agree the A-350-800 may not (at least at this point in time, a design change could change that) be able to lift the same payload as the B-777-200, over the same range.

The A-350-800 is a lot bigger airplane than the B-767-300ERs BA has. If BA is still looking for the B-767 replacement to be approximately that same size, The B-787-300/800 will, most likely, be the first choice. But, I would not rule out an A-330-200/300 order to replace the B-767-300ERs.

But the A-380-800/900 may be just the opposite. It may be a lot more airplane than BA needs. The B-747-ADV will also have a higher payload capability and increased range over the current B-747-400 models, but will still be smaller (by about 100 seats) than the A-380-800.

I believe that BA will wait for another 2-3 years before ordering anything. But, they will be looking at Airbus and Boeing NB products to start to get a feel for the next NB fleet order. The same for the WB fleet replacement, but it will be 5-7 years before any orders of these are made. BA simply doesn't need any new NB or WB airplanes before that, unless they want to grow bigger than what they are now (but they really don't NEED to grow right now).

BA will be playing both Airbus and Boeing against one another to get the deepest discounts per airplane. That is what they should do.
 
richardw
Posts: 3136
Joined: Tue May 08, 2001 3:17 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 10:26 pm

Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Perhaps it could be because it may not be able to accommodate flat bed business class seating that well, and they are looking for something a little wider.
 
David L
Posts: 8549
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 10:30 pm

Quoting GDB (Reply 35):
There is no Boeing long haul, Airbus short haul policy

I stand corrected again - lucky I'm not counting.

Quoting David L (Reply 14):
Sorry to repeat you guys but I suspect this might have to be done every 5th post or so

That's what guaranteed I was was going to be wrong.

What I was really getting at was that, just because BA haven't mentioned the A350 yet, it doesn't mean they don't rate it - but I had to take it too far.
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Sun Aug 21, 2005 10:46 pm

We won't want to add a new type when not needed, so replacements for old 737's will be more Airbus.
Anything else would be perverse and totally fly in the face of the fleet simplification of recent years.

BA won't change their 'not being a launch customer' policy either.

767 is the most urgent, relatively speaking, (from 2010 ish), so expect 787 there.
How far other 787 versions replace or supplement other types, we will have to see.
An A321/787 combo could replace remaining 757's.

787's and existing 777's could serve the thinner long haul routes, but some BA routes could use A380's, especially as pax numbers expand, LHR might be getting a new terminal, but a new runway is probably further away than many seem to think.
And BA offer 4 classes, not 3.
In any case, a new long haul widebody is a very long term investment, which you want to future proof against rising pax levels.

As for engines, well BA management have to decide how much they like getting screwed by GE over the Wales engine facility, whether they want to carry on getting it rammed to them by GE in this respect.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Mon Aug 22, 2005 12:17 am

Quoting GDB (Reply 42):
We won't want to add a new type when not needed, so replacements for old 737's will be more Airbus.
Anything else would be perverse and totally fly in the face of the fleet simplification of recent years.

Then couldn't the same argument be said for the B-737NGs?

Quoting GDB (Reply 42):
767 is the most urgent, relatively speaking, (from 2010 ish), so expect 787 there.

I agree, but wouldn't BA's "wait and see how it performs with other airlines" policy push back any B-787 introduction until at least 2012? By, 2010, the best the B-787 can expect is about 18 months of airline service, and maybe 20-25 airplanes in service worlwide. That may not be enough of a snapshot of the B-787's operation to tell BA what they need to know. But, I still think that BA might also consider the A-330-200 as a B-767-300ER replacement.

Quoting GDB (Reply 42):
An A321/787 combo could replace remaining 757's.

The A-321 can only compare to the B-757 (with full passenger/cargo loads) on short/ medimum haul routes of about 1500 miles (2410 km) and less. That may be enough to serve the EU routes, non-stop. After that I think BA might be looking at something like the B-787-300, but that will be around the launch time frame for that version.

Quoting GDB (Reply 42):
787's and existing 777's could serve the thinner long haul routes, but some BA routes could use A380's, especially as pax numbers expand, LHR might be getting a new terminal, but a new runway is probably further away than many seem to think.

I think you are right about the existing B-777s and possible future B-787 order. I don't know if BA will want to invest in any airplane based on the limitations (landing slots) of any airport. The A-380 is a very big investment in infastructure improvements. While most airports will absorb this (and LHR is one of them) those additional costs will be passed on directly to A-380 operators. Many airports have already said this, because their non-A-380 operators don't want to pay for these improvements. Here at DFW, for example, there will be a surcharge added to every A-380 (and other ADG-VI airplane, like the An-124-100) operation to pay for the runway and taxiway improvements. BAA, the private contractor operator of the airports around London is doing something very similar, although I have not read all of their details.

But, terminal improvements and any additional jetbridges needed will be the responsibility of the airlines, unless they work a deal with the airport authority. Either way, the airline that flys the A-380 will pay for the needed improvements, even if it is through higher terminal lease payments.

I very much agree that Heathrow really needs a new runway before building another terminal. But, I understand the NIMBY crowd is trying to prevent any new runways being built at LHR.

Quoting GDB (Reply 42):
In any case, a new long haul widebody is a very long term investment, which you want to future proof against rising pax levels.

I agree with that, but now, if the last 2 years have been any indication, rapidly raising fuel prices will also be a consideration.
 
ChrisM001
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 7:47 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Mon Aug 22, 2005 12:58 am

Quoting David_itl (Reply 29):
"The 108-seater A318s and the 126-seater A319s were ordered originally to be based at regional airports in the UK. However, as part of its fleet simplification strategy, British Airways’ has decided to base its Airbus fleet at London’s Heathrow and Gatwick airports and re-deploy its fleet of 16 110-seater RJ100 aircraft from Gatwick to the British Airways CitiExpress fleet at regional airports."

I think you'll find the Airbus's are at LHR only, with the occasional one moved to LGW to cover short term requirements such as 737 maintenance.

Senior folk at BA like the fact that we have a self contained shorthaul fleet of 737's at LGW, as it proves we can operate efficiently a seperate type of aircraft at LHR and LGW. Gives us more options when it comes to replacing the 737 rather than just plumping for more Airbus's. We may still end up with more A319's etc, but it makes the replacement of the 737's a realistic competition with Boeing so there may be better deals on offer.
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Mon Aug 22, 2005 3:38 am

I don't see this 'separate base' at LGW carrying on much longer, Walsh says he will focus on shorthaul, if fleet renewal is part of it then remaining options on Airbus with some new added, will cover that.
737NG had it's chance in 1998. The Airbus fleet is also very highly regarded.

Expect to see more Airbus cover at LGW, maintenance on these 737's is getting more costly, including on one aircraft having to do a lot of repair work recently.
But Walsh might also defer on buying, though not for long in the case of the 737, but 737NG would effectively be a new type, be stupid to order anything else but more of the now well established Airbus's to replace them.

When we say 'BA will not be a launch customer', it means exactly that, whether the said aircraft is flying is another matter, though BA would prefer it was!
But as 787 has such a large customer base already, I don't think there will be any major slippage as to when BA seek to replace 767's, except possibly production line places..

BA are lucky in one respect with LHR, even without them, it's going to be a major A380 hub, if BA order, by the time we get them any improvements will be ancient history.
Noise and fuel costs might well work in A380's favour too, this might be why BA are talking about a 'wait and see' with A380.

I do think BA missed out on getting some A330-200's back in the late 1990's, but we still a quite young fleet of 767's, which happen to be difficult to sell on due to the rare engine type.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Mon Aug 22, 2005 3:53 am

Quoting GDB (Reply 45):
I do think BA missed out on getting some A330-200's back in the late 1990's

Since Airbus "officially" still has every model they ever built in production, I think you will still be able to order the A-330-200 25 years from now.

Quoting GDB (Reply 45):
Noise and fuel costs might well work in A380's favour too, this might be why BA are talking about a 'wait and see' with A380.

I fear the silence on the A-380, from Airbus, about the progress of the flight testing, is deafening. BA is doing the right thing by the "wait and see" approach.
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4834
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Wed Aug 24, 2005 9:08 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 39):
But that still leaves a gap for the B-757 replacement

You assume that BA (or any airline) always want to replace models on a one-for-one, like-for-like basis. Clearly, that isn't true. BA only have 13 757s now whereas in the late '90s they had 50 or so. They've replaced the others with smaller planes (and higher frequencies) or found some other preferred solution. There's no obligation to operate a 757-sized aeroplane. Many airlines don't such as LH, KL and AF.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 43):
Then couldn't the same argument be said for the B-737NGs?

As far as I know, BA don't - and never have - operated any 737NGs. Any future narrowbody orders seem most likely to be more IAE-powered A319/320/321s.

On topic, a BA order for any Airbus widebody seems some way off but never say never. It took them a fair few years to buy the A320 ... but they did.
 
avek00
Posts: 3157
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Wed Aug 24, 2005 9:19 pm

Quoting Fiedman (Reply 34):
I am just wondering and no one has brought this up yet but how much of this could be politically motivated.

None - BA is a NON-STATE OWNED air carrier that does not have to accede to any government whims on fleet purchases.
Live life to the fullest.
 
keesje
Posts: 8753
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Why Will BA Not Consider The A350?

Wed Aug 24, 2005 9:42 pm

Quoting Gilesdavies (Thread starter):
a frosty response to any potential A380 orders, by BA "shrugging its shoulders" as saying the aircraft is not even in service yet

I think Airbus put down an "arrogant" proposal on BA's last A380 RFI & they hate it.. something along the lines of "Please contact us if we can help you.."
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway

Who is online