Lots to cover here. Bear with me!
To start from the top.
The B777X definitely doesn't have 70% parts commonality with the B787 and B77W.
Quote a source for this.
In the cockpit and some LRU's perhaps, but they won't even have the same windows or cabin furnishings.
They were from a slide a training FO showed me a couple of trips ago - I'll see if I can get hold of them and reproduce some of it here. But as I said, it was 70% parts, not 100% of the entire aeroplane, so yes, there will be some new stuff in it!
The A350-1000 exceeds the B779's range and they have more crew rest facility options, including containerised solutions.
777X will carry 4 ULDs extra over the A350 (and B77W) - that's extra uplift, it'll carry more passengers than the A350 too. While in theory the range of the A350 8,000nm, in reality with a full payload and 20 tonnes of cargo it's much less. But BA doesn't really need that range anyway. That's why they've opted for no cabin crew rest - it's cheaper, allows extra seats (ie revenue) and the 777X is better at lifting a lot, further. I thought BA would have taken the cabin crew bunks after realising that not fitting them on the GE 777-200s was a mistake, but that's what they've done. I think the order was under Keith Williams' tenure thoufh, so you can't blame Alex for that one.
There is no commonality between the GE90 and GE9X that I know of. That BA is already a GE customer is a pretty irrelevant fact when I'm mentionning the special relationship between BA and RR.
GE bid like hell to win the BA business on the GE90 back in 1991. Airbus were pretty pissed.
There doesn't need to be any commonality for engines. BA and RR may have had a special relationship but a) RR messed up with the 787 engines b) BA is not a charity for RR and c) BA's relationship with GE is much improved since the 77W introduction. So what's irrelevant is BA's relationship with RR, which arguably became too cosy. None of this is a reason to order a sub-par aircraft not suited your needs.
Airbus and RR must be very very pissed about BA's order for B777X, almost 30 years after their orginal order for B777's.
So? Airbus should have worked harder to win the order, that's their fault, not BA's. Now Airbus knows in future it needs to be more competitive on product and/or price.
British Airways has killed thousands of cutting edge British jobs with the B777X order, by denying Airbus their last hope for an A380 order and by not ordering the A350 with high British content.
Combined with the Brexit debacle, I think that there is no way that Airbus will include major workshare for a British company for their next design. At this point, it makes more sense to build wings in Japan, because Japan will guarantee orders and investments for workshare
Like I said, BA doesn't exist as a charity for RR or Airbus no more than Delta is obliged to buy GE or Boeing. It's utterly irrelevant. BA's board would be doing a disservice to shareholders if they opted for anything other than the best overall package. If that means GE and Boeing, as in the past, then so be it. You're really clutching at straws with this one.
And to set the record straight, all of BA A350-1000s have the appropriate crew rest facilities.
They will come fitted with flight crew bunks but not
cabin crew bunks - this has been confirmed internally. So that will limit the range although not to the extent of no bunks at all. Cabin crew can do up to a 16 hour FDP (so about a 14 hour sector, although in reality it'll never be planned that tight) with a Class 3 rest facility, which means blocking off seats in the cabin. It can cover most of the network, but not all of it.
Perhaps Cruz can sell the 9 to 10-abreast conversion to investors as an upgrade, but you can't do that on airliners.net without being met with the appropriate criticism.
HND is still a 9-abreast B77W? How about in a few months? I'm not taking chances.
Personal electrical outlets have been an industry norm for almost a decade now. Glad to know that BA is catching up.
You can watch BBC live among a variety of live channels on a variety of airlines now, but not on BA.
Appropriate criticism? As I said, customer satisfaction scores related to the cabin are higher on the refreshed 777s than the unrefreshed ones - the seat is about 0.5" narrower, in reality most people don't notice, but they're happy that their typical family of four can now sit together instead of splitting across aisles or rows.
9-abreast 77W is here for quite a while yet - the RR 777-200ERs won't even be finished by year end 2019 so the 77Ws won't be done for quite some time. Live tv? Meh, most airlines charge for it anyway, don't they? I'd rather have wifi - streaming content will be the future of IFE, not live tv. You seem to be knocking BA's product without having tried it for yourself.
T5 was a complete mess and still is. Too often you don't know your gate number until 40 minutes before your flight time and need to keep checking the screens. When you leave the lounge to get to your gate on time, you end up waiting another half hour because they can't seem to decide which aircraft to assign to your flight. Past the departure time, there is still no sign of boarding.
T5 a mess? The terminal that has won countless Skytrax awards? Hmm...
I've never had an issue with screens - but that's controlled by HAL, not BA. A last minute plane change is a big deal due to catering alone, so planes are not switched last minute unless operationally necessary due tech issues. To put it into perspective, having operated on the 777 for quite some years I've had one aircraft change within 2 hours of departure.
BA have cut the short haul snack service for BOB. Shameful for pax who come off a long haul journey and just have gone through the misery of transferring at LHR.
BA have cut legroom and are cutting the recline.
Want the luxury of choosing your seat? Ok and pay at the cashier on your wait out.
BOB - pretty much what most airlines in Europe offer. There are some exceptions, but generally BOB is accepted and appreciated these days - people used to moan at only being given a snack of a cookie or small bag of crisps, now they can have a variety of sandwiches. Want a more substantial meal? BA offers Club Europe - so that option is still there if you want it.
Legroom and recline is on a par with most other European operators too.
As for choosing your seat, Silver and Gold Exec card holders (plus those travelling with infants) can choose their seat at the time of booking free of charge, meaning that those who spend the most with BA get first choice. Bronze members can select within 7 days od departure and anyone else who isn't an exec card holder can select for free 24/48 hours prior to departure. There's no requirement to pay. Again, this is also quite common among many other carriers.
But you know what? I must be dreaming all of this and must be the only one to see what's going on.
I'm going to stop wasting my time on it and let the BA frequent flyers speak:
Anecdotal complaints...you'll always get a few. BA's net promoter score is nearing record highs. As for the comments from those in the Future Lab - thank goodness much of it is ignored, we'd be bankrupt if we followed half of that. It was mostly all tried and failed. Hence the need for a new direction. And as mentioned, it's not all been cuts, cuts, cuts. There's a new, highly competitive J seat, a new First seat is coming, arguably the best-in-the-sky bedding for J, new and more plentiful catering for all cabins, new WT+ seat, larger screens in WT, WT+ and Club, new and updated lounges, wifi, powerpoints and lots more. Don't insult people's intelligence by calling it just another Ryanair.
The fact is though that the A350 and A380 can offer much more comfortable products while matching the unit cost of a densely configured B787 or B777.
How they can achieve this? Well first of all, the dense configurations p*ss off 100% of the passengers while only adding about 10% of capacity. That added capacity will only serve the airline when it is converted in additional revenues. But airlines like JAL are converting their low density superior products into additional revenues by being able to command higher fares and still fill their aircraft.
Except the A380's breakeven loadfactor is much higher due to higher trip costs. Like I said, a 777-9 will carry ~50 fewer passengers than an A380, carry 15+ tonnes more cargo and do it for half of the fuel (and almost half the cabin crew/half the cost of hotel rooms). Trip costs kill the A380. I've travelled a lot on 777s, I wouldn't call it uncomfortable any more than an A380 or A350. Everyone has their own personal preferences though. As has been repeated countless times, 10 abreast economy on 777s has been well received, the refreshed cabins are giving higher NPS scores across the board. And BA's loadfactor is going up with those densified aircraft. At Gatwick, due to the Monarch slots, BA increased ASK's by 20% and revenue by 22% - that's virtually unheard of in the industry to add so much capacity and improve your RPKs at the same time. If only Norwegian could have done that - then they'd turn a profit instead of losing it hand over fist.
BA can't match the lowest bidders on price and they won't be able to keep commanding higher yields for their poor and deteriorating product. Eventually, they will reach the tipping point where enough people talk about it that this will catch up to them, afecting both yields and volume.
Correction: BA never used to be able to match the lowest bidders on price. However, now with NAPS closed, staff on market rate (or just below) contracts, efficient aircraft right-sized for the market, they often now compete well on price, even against Norwegian, easyJet and Delta. Given BA's new Club seat and high frequencies, as well as the enviable position at Heathrow, BA will be able to command high yields at the top end too. BA's passenger numbers and load factors are increasing month on month, year on year, so that'll need a lot of people to keep on talking!
Tell us exactly how the smaller aircraft will result in higher yields, in a broad market with endless competition and a deteriorating product/brand image?...Do you expect BA to capture the best part of the market with a poor product, just because they have fewer seats to fill and their name is British Airways?
So there's demand to fill 469 seats over August bank holiday. That same demand doesn't on a Wednesday in November but guess what? If your aircraft has 469 seats in August it has 469 seats in November too! That loadfactor of 90% in August commands high yields but that loadfactor of even 85% in November is at bargain bucket prices. Heathrow, and London, are great aviation markets, but you can't fill an A380 on every flight. The trip costs of an A380 are crippling outside of peak travel periods. Flying 50 fewer people for virtually half the cost on a 777X is worth forgoing those 50 passengers for 1 month of the year to command the higher yield in the remaining 11.
As for poor product, really? I'm starting to wonder if you're a disgruntled former emoylee!
Ah yes, the one-stop granola crunching poor lads filling the 6 daily EK, 3-4 daily EY and twice daily QR A380 first and business class seats out of LHR.
Those 6 EK A380s are feeding into network of 100s of other flights, many of which, given London's geography and demand profile, don't necessarily lend themselves to direct services. BA is rock-solid on USA-Europe and USA-Middle East/India. Anything else, the geography tends to work against you. But how much money are Etihad and Qatar making? How well is working it out for them?! Unlike the Middle East Sheiks, BA is run to make a profit rather than being a vanity project.
BA already has more slots than it has profitable long-haul markets. It has more than half the slots at the airport, and can convert a short-haul slot to long-haul any time it can identify a sufficiently profitable market. No spending of hundreds of millions would necessary for a long time for BA to expand long-haul frequency in key markets. And the size of the 777X order strongly suggests it is planning to do so Depending on how you count, the 777X order is growing the fleet by 5 to 8 aircraft, assuming no moving up of retirements.
Spot on. BA has made lots of efficiencies to its slot portfolio and the work is still ongoing. That's why Heathrow has a lot of Wednesday afternoon and Saturday flights to places like Spain, Greek Islands and Canary Islands, which are going full, compared with a Dusseldorf or Frankfurt that at those times is half empty. The biggest restriction to adding more longhaul flights is a lack of airframes (and crew to fly them - BA has recruited record numbers of pilots 3 years in a row and that looks set to continue for some time to come) - the 787 engine issues haven't helped.
What has worked well lately is the foray into secondary markets with the B787-8 - Nashville, New Orleans, Pittsburgh, Charleston, Osaka, Durban, San Jose - all little to no competition and performing exceptionally well rather than simply adding loads of capacity to already mature markets. Austin sees the 747 now in the summer season, that's how successful it has been. As these markets mature they'll get 787-9s/777-200s and the 787-8s can go on opening new markets when necessary. That can't be done with a bunch of A380s, half of which get switched around every season because they don't know how to make it work outside of HKG, JNB and SIN. There's also LGW, as more A350s and B787-10s come in, that allows 777-200s to move to Gatwick to take advantage of ex-Monarch slots there. By 2023 I'd be surprised if Gatwick hasn't gone from 14 777s to 20 777s.
So back to the title of the thread, yes, the A350/A380 package wasn't competitive and it's not the right mix for BA's needs.