Hi all. New here.

A friend of mine at British Airways has informed me that theres a rumor going round his division of the company that they may firm up 4 A380's options. The 3rd daily LAX flight can then switch to A380 and Boston can go A380 year round.

May not be true and Im not really bothered if people want to de-bunk it, but thought it was an interesting bit of info all the same.

Can see this happening however i doubt they'll transfer the 3rd daily LAX over to an A380 from a 747 in northern winter season. We'll probably see two daily SFO and LAX over Summer though.

That then lists the possible candidates to get the A380 service;
CPT (2 airframes required for a daily service)
ORD
DXB
JFK!?

In the past they've indicated that they'd take used A380s, but perhaps they are ready to just exercise options instead.

PlanesNTrains wrote:

In the past they've indicated that they'd take used A380s, but perhaps they are ready to just exercise options instead.

I suspect that was to try encourage the price of said options down slightly. The obvious potential used models - MHs - are not becoming available anyway

No question it makes sense. They recently added an extra W17 LAX B789 frequency departing within 20 minute of their JV partner AA. This B789 is likely coming from another route which may well be served instead by their sole new 2017 arrival long haul frame, a B788.

With more A380s they could continue double daily A380 over the winter and then upgauge other routes with the new frames, freeing their new B788 deliveries to launch badly needed and long-awaited new routes to broaden their network.

I wouldn't be surprised BA does this. That airline already has cut the size of the 747-400 fleet and I expect BA will replace it with a mix of A35K and A388 planes for its long-range higher-capacity services.

EIDL wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

In the past they've indicated that they'd take used A380s, but perhaps they are ready to just exercise options instead.

I suspect that was to try encourage the price of said options down slightly. The obvious potential used models - MHs - are not becoming available anyway

Is EK retiring some early frames that might be available?

cheapgreek wrote:

EIDL wrote:

PlanesNTrains wrote:

In the past they've indicated that they'd take used A380s, but perhaps they are ready to just exercise options instead.

I suspect that was to try encourage the price of said options down slightly. The obvious potential used models - MHs - are not becoming available anyway

Is EK retiring some early frames that might be available?

EK's early frames have the wrong engines. They are GP, whereas BA uses RR.

Suspect this is just a mater of time tbh

Eventually I could see BA adding another 10+ A388s


cs

There are a number of routes that could definitely benefit from an A380, More BOS, YYZ, YVR year round, PHX during the summer, DXB, IAH, the list goes on. I think it's a given that there are a ton of viable options, but it begs the question, is it really worth it? To be successful, they don't have to dominate every route they fly, if the 777/747/787 mix on other routes makes money, why bother spending the hundreds of millions to purchase A380's for what, a marginal at best increase in profitability.

I think they are probably satisfied with what they have for the most part, frame can be added down the line if there is a pressing need, but at this point, it's likely not financially viable to commit to any relatively large scale A380 expansion,

How about LAS? They are almost double daily now on the 744 and Virgin has added some extra Mon/Wed 744 flying on the LGW route along with the daily flight. Additionally, the A380 gate should be ready soon at LAS.

They once had 57 B747-400s so I am not surprised even if they operate 30 A380s eventually.

So the third daily LAX flight is using the 787's later?

Considering the huge number of 744's they have historically used it would be odd indeed if such a high proportion ended up being downsized rather than up sized.It would suggest to me that for decades they have been flying aircraft grossly underused.Which is not the case.
To date a few routes have been upsized to the A380 but many more are being downsized to 7810,s and 351's.The old remaining 744's have been left to soldier on (in a low cost oil environment).It stands to reason that some of these aircraft will require an upgrade -unless they are swapped out on a Like for like size basis i.e. The 779.
If IAG/BA publicly state they require 6 more then I tend to believe them (price paid is a totally separate matter).
If (see other thread) Emirates is struggling at the moment then all the better for BA to negotiate a strong deal (for themselves).Guess we will find out at the airhow.

During Northern Summer those extra A380s could easily go on a second rotation to SFO, make BOS daily and replace B747 to LAS and PHX daily.

During Northern Winter they could go to CPT once a day, second MIA and maintain daily BOS.

Summer:

LAX x2 (+789)
SFO x2
YVR x1
BOS x1 (+3x772)
JNB x1 (+74S)
SIN x1 (+77W)
HKG x1 (+77W)
LAS x1
PHX x1

Winter:

LAX x2
SFO x1 (+74S)
MIA x2
BOS x1 (+2x772)
JNB x2
SIN x1 (+77W)
HKG x1 (+77W)
CPT x1 (+74V)

I think BA is missing a trick here with new B789 rotation to LAX. They should time it as evening departure providing the only option from Europe to US West Coast during that time (7.30pm departure, 10.30pm arrival) with the return the next day around noon landing 6-7am LHR time.

Last I read here CPT isn't A380 ready. Updates on this ? DFW & IAH would my candidates for an A380 BA upgrade.

DFW maybe
SEA maybe
IAH is a no no, all the oil traffic dried up it's only 772/789 now
ORD is also a no no otherwise AA wouldn't be putting 788s on it.

If anything I'd say only current mid-J routes could support A380.

Definitely DXB & JFK need the A380, the 747 is sadly leaving the fleet and the A380 is the perfect replacement. Good luck BA, I think Airbus will be more happy than anyone if this rumour turned to be fact.

I believe CPT isn't A380 ready. BA already fly their Mid-J 744 twice daily and 3-4 times a week fly LGW-CPT with a 772 (soon to be "densified").

JFK is one of the main destinations for the refitted "Super-J" 744s, which have a new product in all classes. These match the seat count of the A380 almost exactly in F, J, W, but fewer Y seats. They are ideal for the high frequency routes to the east cost with high J demand - apparently.

BA could certainly find use for more A380s, seemingly year round.

Interesting, hopefully this rumor becomes fact. As stated above, they could put them to good use. Airbus might be inclined to give them a very good deal because they too have a problem, as does RR with these engines.

Is Heathrow ready for extra A380s both T5 & T3 only have limited A380 stands and at time can be a challenge to get them all in.

Does the BA terminal at JFK have A380 gates ?

Lofty wrote:

Is Heathrow ready for extra A380s both T5 & T3 only have limited A380 stands and at time can be a challenge to get them all in.

My thoughts exactly, am glad you picked up on that.

parapente wrote:

Considering the huge number of 744's they have historically used it would be odd indeed if such a high proportion ended up being downsized rather than up sized.It would suggest to me that for decades they have been flying aircraft grossly underused.Which is not the case.
To date a few routes have been upsized to the A380 but many more are being downsized to 7810,s and 351's.The old remaining 744's have been left to soldier on (in a low cost oil environment).It stands to reason that some of these aircraft will require an upgrade

Particularly as downsizing to smaller aircraft and instead adding frequency is impossible for BA because of the slot situation at LHR (also for many long-haul markets more frequencies do make limited sense as you cannpt spread departures evenly across the day). So the only growth can be through larger aircraft.

Big twins is the way they will go. Super-cheap B77W's for quick availability if they need it (doubtful). Otherwise the A35K's they are getting and maybe B779's in a few years. I would be mildly surprised but not WTF! if they picked up some EK frames. New builds would be a WTF! moment, unless they got them at rock bottom prices. Is there a massive rush? Seems like the likes of DY may be siphoning load.

4/1/2017. Happy April Fools day.

CPT isn't A380 ready at present, it needs runway realignment. I'm not sure what that will entail, but it could well be able to be done before any new A380's could be delivered. I would think that LAX, LAS and HKG would be good destinations. JNB could also use one to replace the 2nd 747 flight. I would imagine the A380 would be very popular if it was sent to JFK.

That's quite a lot of discussion for a rumor from a first-time poster without evidence.

It would be a nice morale boost for the A380 program if BA should convert these options, and it's an interesting rumor that they might.

parapente wrote:

Considering the huge number of 744's they have historically used it would be odd indeed if such a high proportion ended up being downsized rather than up sized.It would suggest to me that for decades they have been flying aircraft grossly underused.Which is not the case.
To date a few routes have been upsized to the A380 but many more are being downsized to 7810,s and 351's.The old remaining 744's have been left to soldier on (in a low cost oil environment).It stands to reason that some of these aircraft will require an upgrade -unless they are swapped out on a Like for like size basis i.e. The 779.
If IAG/BA publicly state they require 6 more then I tend to believe them (price paid is a totally separate matter).
If (see other thread) Emirates is struggling at the moment then all the better for BA to negotiate a strong deal (for themselves).Guess we will find out at the airhow.

As per above, I would not see BA wanting to take EK's oldest, heaviest A380s that have the wrong engine type, so I imagine you are suggesting they can use EK's recent deferrals of A380s to get favorable treatment from Airbus on the A380 options they hold? However, I thought the whole point of an option is that the price is negotiated in advance, and since BA was on board with the A380 quite early, I'd presume it's a pretty favorable price.

I would think BA has its 747 replacement strategy well in hand via 787-10 and A350-1000 as you suggest, and if they really wanted cheap lift to get rid of 747-400s ahead of schedule, I think they'd do what United did and get themselves some 77Ws, either new or used. We all know Boeing is pretty desperate to fill the orders gap till the 77X is up and running so new ones can be had at very good pricing. Used 77Ws have the advantage of all having the same engine type and having a large number of aging frames coming off lease in the next few years so the market will be flooded.

G'day

Any chance BA is in discussions with Airbus to pick up some of the six 2018(?) delivery slots recently postponed by EK? Surely Airbus would compromise on pricing to accommodate BA

I also doubt BA will want to downsize all of the B747 flights as some posters suggested here, some of those flights will justify upsizing to A 380's, particularly in view of slot restrictions at LHR

Just a thought

Cheers

Peter

What if these are actually the pan IAG group A380's that are often rumoured to be going to Iberia and Aer Lingus as well as BA for peak travel uses ?

I guess BA is in a good negotiating position for either/both 773's and/or A380's frankly.And yes one should not rule out Iberia.
This years air show 'might' be interesting regarding this potential order and perhaps the 'plus' updates.
None of it will change the overall (poor) landscape for the VLA market and the A380 in particular but 'every little helps'!
In timing terms, if they were to be ordered I imagine it would be mid 2019'ish delivery.

Softaero wrote:

That's quite a lot of discussion for a rumor from a first-time poster without evidence.

And? I've been watching airliners.net for years but I joined as a member because I thought I actually had something worth sharing. Like I stated, de-bunk it if you will I really do not care. It was passed on to me from someone I know at BA. I personally don't think its the most probable option but would not dismiss it. I just wanted to see it anyone could shed some slight or had heard a similar thing.

And no April fools from me. This thread was created yesterday UK time (March 31st).

Jeez! Way to welcome the new guy!

Thanks for the post, Arion640. I for one look forward to engaging you in the future.
And that's not an April Fools bit.

Better off buying a few more B777-300ER for cheap. They are at the end of the current model run, you can get them fast, sold at a great discount, and flexible to run on other routes.

Bricktop wrote:

:roll: Jeez! Way to welcome the new guy!

Thanks for the post, Arion640. I for one look forward to engaging you in the future.
And that's not an April Fools bit.

Thanks mate appreciated.

Beatyair wrote:

Better off buying a few more B777-300ER for cheap. They are at the end of the current model run, you can get them fast, sold at a great discount, and flexible to run on other routes.

Whilst i agree with the 777-300er been a flexible aircraft for BA it won't help grow some routes unless they add an additional frequency. The A380 on the other hand is a good candidate for growth on routes - to CPT (when A380 ready), JNB this upcoming winter, MIA, JFK, SFO, LAX, ORD, DXB.

Lots of grumbling in Boston that the three A380 gates just opened were built using a curious design limiting the upper jetway useless unless a A380 is there. So far no sign that EK is planning to deviate from their 2x rotation of 77Ws. So it sure would make MASSPORT happy to see BA go year-round daily with the A380 and at least make them feel better about their investment.

I don't doubt that there are rumours doing the rounds at BA, especially following the news regarding the LAX flights. IMO, it is a case of when, not if, BA will exercise some of its options. Although, to some extent, the when will be subject to airport infrastructure and CPT is a good case in point. If EK need to rearrange their delivery schedule, and this involves Rolls Royce powered frames, then Airbus just may be able to give BA an offer that is hard to refuse!

TedToToe wrote:

I don't doubt that there are rumours doing the rounds at BA, especially following the news regarding the LAX flights. IMO, it is a case of when, not if, BA will exercise some of its options. Although, to some extent, the when will be subject to airport infrastructure and CPT is a good case in point. If EK need to rearrange their delivery schedule, and this involves Rolls Royce powered frames, then Airbus just may be able to give BA an offer that is hard to refuse!

Willie Walsh has said that IF they buy more A380's, they will go the route of used A380's. Plus, with oil still cheap, its more cost efficient for them to keep their 747's around than to buy used A380's.

Slightly off topic, but why does BA use the A380 to BOS? Such a relatively short long-haul route. I thought BA preferred to have East Coast USA flights have as much frequency as possible, like JFK. I know there are already 4 flights to/from BOS but as one of them is an A380, would it not be better to have 5 777's and put the A380 on another longer-haul route?

jumbojet wrote:

Willie Walsh has said that IF they buy more A380's, they will go the route of used A380's. Plus, with oil still cheap, its more cost efficient for them to keep their 747's around than to buy used A380's.

I think that is possibly an old quote, dating from when MH had aircraft on the market. In any case, the subtext to WW's quote can be taken as "Airbus, make me a better offer!" Remember the 777-9 "would be a perfect fit" quote? That was right before BA ordered the A35K.

Oil prices are a factor, and that is one reason for BA to reschedule the said A35K's and delay the retirement of 4 744's. Time will tell on the A380 front.

lhrsfosyd wrote:

DFW maybe
SEA maybe
IAH is a no no, all the oil traffic dried up it's only 772/789 now
ORD is also a no no otherwise AA wouldn't be putting 788s on it.

If anything I'd say only current mid-J routes could support A380.

No, IAH is mostly 744/772 everyday, occasionally switching to 77W. Other days have had twice daily 744. The LHR-IAH market is growing again, along with oil rising, it's bound to be at its best. The market is huge and I believe it can support the A388/789 daily in the future. I would put this flight far ahead of many other routes.

Never say never, but IAG has an extremely disciplined approach to capital expenditure.

I cannot see BA buying more new A380s unless it can get an absolutely stonking price from Airbus.

BA traffic trends (particularly premium traffic) have been good of late but this is an airline has historically bled cash the moment it has to park quad-engine aircraft in a downturn.

BA actually sold and leased back a new number of new 787s last year. It's clear that they want as much flexibility as possible to adjust capacity in a downturn.

When Willie Walsh said he was interested in leasing second hand A380s I think he meant it and wasn't posturing for a better price from Airbus.

8herveg wrote:

Slightly off topic, but why does BA use the A380 to BOS? Such a relatively short long-haul route. I thought BA preferred to have East Coast USA flights have as much frequency as possible, like JFK. I know there are already 4 flights to/from BOS but as one of them is an A380, would it not be better to have 5 777's and put the A380 on another longer-haul route?

Maybe they feel that those LHR slots are better used for other destinations?

lhrsfosyd wrote:

DFW maybe
SEA maybe
IAH is a no no, all the oil traffic dried up it's only 772/789 now
ORD is also a no no otherwise AA wouldn't be putting 788s on it.

If anything I'd say only current mid-J routes could support A380.

What does AA putting 788s on the LHR route make ORD a no no? I can see them putting one a day on ORD, replacing the 744..

If BA had spare A380s they'd use them on rotations where AA cannot provide additional capacity uplift. ORD isn't one of them.

Arion640 wrote:

Softaero wrote:

That's quite a lot of discussion for a rumor from a first-time poster without evidence.

And? I've been watching airliners.net for years but I joined as a member because I thought I actually had something worth sharing. Like I stated, de-bunk it if you will I really do not care. It was passed on to me from someone I know at BA. I personally don't think its the most probable option but would not dismiss it. I just wanted to see it anyone could shed some slight or had heard a similar thing.

And no April fools from me. This thread was created yesterday UK time (March 31st).

Bricktop wrote:

:roll: Jeez! Way to welcome the new guy!

Thanks for the post, Arion640. I for one look forward to engaging you in the future.
And that's not an April Fools bit.

Agreed. Welcome to a.net Arion640. Hopefully in future threads you'll get a warmer reception, rather than the bitchiness this one has thrown up

Could extra 380's be used on the SYD service ? That would free up a couple of 77W's which in turn can be used to free up old 744's on some more of the US services.

No, IAH is mostly 744/772 everyday, occasionally switching to 77W. Other days have had twice daily 744. The LHR-IAH market is growing again, along with oil rising, it's bound to be at its best. The market is huge and I believe it can support the A388/789 daily in the future. I would put this flight far ahead of many other routes.

No, both IAH flights are 772 for S17