Page 4 of 4

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:57 am
by kitplane01
BA777FO wrote:
Net promoter scores are higher for passengers that have been on the refreshed 777s versus those that have been on the ones yet to be refreshed.


Can you educate me? What is a "net promoter score" and how is it measured?

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:00 am
by kitplane01
Waterbomber2 wrote:
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.


Why do you think the A350 has "high British content"? Do you think it's more than 20%?

I might be wrong, but I don't think bare wings alone are that expensive (especially if some of the parts come from overseas).

Now engines if you add the engines .. I still wonder if you'd get above 20%. I'm willing to be educated by people with numbers.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 6:53 am
by Waterbomber2
JayinKitsap wrote:
emiratesdriver wrote:
Waterbomber2 and friends, how about getting this through your heads, the 380 is a dead duck in terms of its appeal to BA, simple really. When I talk to the line engineers and heavy maintenance engineers about the 380, they all say the same things, it’s poorly built and requires a lot of extra unplanned work in comparison to previous Airbus aircraft and Boeing’s.
The upshot of this is that even my employer are looking for the exit sooner rather than later as in EK service the 380 has always been at best revenue neutral...and latterly calamitous with respect to fuel burn and expense v revenue.
Within EK flight Ops it is now no longer denied that the numbers of 380s in EK service are a problem, the stated intent in the last 6 months is all about fuel saving and utilisation rather than expansion and capacity.
Face facts, the 380s economics never really stacked up in the real world, it’s worth observing as well that little Timmy the 380s biggest fanboy has been noticeably quieter in recent times.


Quite interesting! Some questions:
1 The extra unplanned maintenance - on structure or like access panels, or devices, or in its systems.
2 On EK's birds, is there a big variation from the early to later planes.
3. Are there issues with the 5,000 psi hydraulics vs the far more common 3,000 psi hydraulics?

Why I note access panels comes from my experience with doors on buildings, the standard door is a no brainer, but get to a 5' x 10' door the hinges become massive, the frame is stout, the door weighs a ton, and they always need adjustment.

Do the RR trents handle the sandy environment as well as the EA engines?

I am sure BA figured in their maintenance costs in the review of what to purchase next.

To those whining about buying local. That is great to do, but once the cost to go local adds 5% or more, the economics have to over rule. Is it a government requirement that all planes in the UK are to be Airbus with RR engines. Why is it OK for AF to buy GE engines on 777's instead of RR engines. Isn't that a choice of the purchaser that is trying to make money on its investment.



First of all, EK's maintenance department is a mess in its own right. You should ask what they think about the B77W as a comparison.
Most are guys who started off at Biman, PIA or AI.
Having worked on aircraft, I can attest that most aircraft are utter pieces of junk anyway. You should see how some aerodynamic panels are held together on some aircraft. The fit is poor, there are gaps all over the place filled with filler pastes, and they constantly lose fasteners.
Not a week goes by without something major breaking down on most aircraft.

RR's save fuel over GP engines on the A380. But they suffer more from sand erosion. Give and take, no biggy considering that they can fly years between the replacement of eroded parts. The GP engines suffer from erosion too.
Not a factor for BA.

EK is not a profitable entity in my opinion and neither are EY or QR. They are vehicles to sustain the artificial economies of tbeir reapective countries.
That doesn't change the fact that they fly a lot of capacity into LHR, generating traffic that could be flying with BA instead.

Somebody mentionned seasonality as an issue for the A380. July vs. November demand.
If we follow that reasoning, BA should replace the B744's by A321NEO's on LHR-JFK. Why stop at B779's or B787-10's, why not go all the way down?
Why order B779's over the much lighter and just barely smaller A350-1000 or even B787-10's.
Why operate B787-10's when the B788 can do it at higher unit margin?
By now you realise that this smaller aircraft nonsense has no ground to stand on.

If you look at things in the greater scheme, there is no large enough aircraft for a hub as LHR.
The demand is there and you can decide to share that market with dozens of airlines that will drive the yields down for everyone, or you can start taking care of business.

Yield management is a joke at most airlines anyway.
Most airlines including BA overcharge for O&D and would rather spend more money flying lower yielding transferring pax from competing hubs despite that they could make more money by focussing more on O&D and their local market.
While BA is eating a lean piece of LH's lunch, LH is eating a lean piece of BA's lunch. It's mostly nonsense.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:00 am
by Speedbird2155
BA777FO wrote:
Lots to cover here. Bear with me!

Speedbird2155 wrote:
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.


What has been confirmed internally is that the B787-10 won't have cabin crew bunks. The A350 certainly does have them, noticeable by the lower bins over the seats at the rear of the aircraft. It will be clarified in a few months when the aircraft arrives.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:05 am
by BA777FO
Speedbird2155 wrote:
BA777FO wrote:
Lots to cover here. Bear with me!

Speedbird2155 wrote:
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.


What has been confirmed internally is that the B787-10 won't have cabin crew bunks. The A350 certainly does have them, noticeable by the lower bins over the seats at the rear of the aircraft. It will be clarified in a few months when the aircraft arrives.


Sorry, you are right, too many types to keep track of. The 787-10 won't have them, the A350 definitely will.

It seems the plan is for the A350 to do all of the 3-class work (I'd expect EZE to be top of the list when the fleet size ramps up) and the 787-10 will do the premium heavy flying and the 777X the heavy lifting.

Sorry, my mistake. Absolutely pleased to correct my error that the A350 will definitely be delivered with bunks.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:07 am
by Jetty
EvanWSFO wrote:
Waterbomber2 wrote:
As some seem to be insisiting that I'm making this all up, a few more posted on Tripadvisor no earlier than today:

If I booked my flights based on TripAdvisor (or any ratings site), I'd never fly. There will ALWAYS be disgruntled pax on EVERY airline. Perhaps you should grow up and spend more time doing something productive than making an a** of yourself on here.

If you booked your flight based on TripAdvisor you wouldn’t book BA. Yes, every company has disgruntled pax. But it’s still telling BA (and IB) have the lowest rating among large European legacy airlines.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 12:53 pm
by peterinlisbon
50 million dollars for seats - I think BA is getting ripped off.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:02 pm
by SomebodyInTLS
Waterbomber2 wrote:
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.


To be fair, that seems to be an actual choice by UK airport management in order to drive shopping and catering sales. Transit through Gatwick back in the early 2000s was the first time I experienced this. On the way out I thought "must be a bad day in LGW". When it was the same thing on the way back I thought "Gatwick seems to be a mess!"... then while having the exact same experience almost every time I passed through a UK airport since then I started to realise that it's systemic to the UK (and I never had the same thing happen anywhere else).

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:07 pm
by Revelation
Airlinerdude wrote:
It's impossible for BA to know the demand of people wanting to fly to LHR when other airports in the London area will likely segment some of this demand. If it turns out that demand is still concentrated on LHR, then yes they might place top-up orders for 779s/350s/78Ks, but they might also regret not having taken up used 380s.

The LHR focus is not hard for many of us who have lived through the Bermuda II era to bet on. Airlines other than the chosen 4 LHR airlines had no choice but to make LGW or STN work for them, and while I would not say those efforts were unsuccessful, once LHR became an option many shifted over to LHR.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:12 pm
by SomebodyInTLS
kitplane01 wrote:
I might be wrong, but I don't think bare wings alone are that expensive (especially if some of the parts come from overseas).


Wings are definitely more complex to design and manufacture than fuselage. Pretty sure, given their size, that they're the most expensive structure.

Now engines if you add the engines .. I still wonder if you'd get above 20%. I'm willing to be educated by people with numbers.


Engines are by far the most complex and expensive parts of an aircraft. I seem to recall the engines are about half the cost (or more) of the rest of the aircraft.

So either way, manufacturing workshare or cost, I would put the share quite a lot higher than 20% if you include RR engines...

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:26 pm
by SomebodyInTLS
Jetty wrote:
But it’s still telling BA (and IB) have the lowest rating among large European legacy airlines.


Anecdotally, my own experience with BA - quite a few years ago now - was that they screwed up just about everything they could outbound and back, and ignored me every time I pointed out a mistake they'd made during my trip (to the point I ended up having to be "that guy" fighting for my rights to e.g. a hotel stay and refreshments after they made me miss connections) - and again when I complained afterwards.

So after returning home and reflecting on my comedy-movie list of mishaps while waiting for word on my *second* set of lost luggage (the first bag they lost on the way out remains AWOL) it was pretty obvious I wasn't going to be flying BA again any time soon.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:34 pm
by par13del
So all the talk about Airbus a/c having high US content was just talk to have the US Military and US carriers buy Airbus a/c?
I recall the Military and civilian threads on Airbus purchases, and this was before the Airbus FAL, amazing how many things are ultimately revealed in the sunlight.
In the A380 threads EK was bashed as having too many A380's to kill competition, now we realize that BA was the reason Airbus pulled the plug on the A380. Must be a Brexit thing as everything else is...

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:43 pm
by SomebodyInTLS
par13del wrote:
So all the talk about Airbus a/c having high US content was just talk to have the US Military and US carriers buy Airbus a/c?
I recall the Military and civilian threads on Airbus purchases, and this was before the Airbus FAL, amazing how many things are ultimately revealed in the sunlight.


Personally, I don't feel there was ever talk of "high" US content, just that there was *some* US content (mostly systems, gear and engines).

In the A380 threads EK was bashed as having too many A380's to kill competition, now we realize that BA was the reason Airbus pulled the plug on the A380. Must be a Brexit thing as everything else is...


Err... I don't really know where this is coming from either. FWIW, obviously if a second customer such as BA was to join EK in wanting a NEO or at least another batch of CEOs then it would have happened.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:46 pm
by cledaybuck
par13del wrote:
So all the talk about Airbus a/c having high US content was just talk to have the US Military and US carriers buy Airbus a/c?
I recall the Military and civilian threads on Airbus purchases, and this was before the Airbus FAL, amazing how many things are ultimately revealed in the sunlight.
In the A380 threads EK was bashed as having too many A380's to kill competition, now we realize that BA was the reason Airbus pulled the plug on the A380. Must be a Brexit thing as everything else is...

Once you stick US made engines on the aircraft, the American content by $ is going to be pretty high. Of course, this isn’t (rightfully) a factor for a for profit commercial airline like BA.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:53 pm
by chonetsao
peterinlisbon wrote:
50 million dollars for seats - I think BA is getting ripped off.


To be fair, the figure quoted was $30 to 50 million total refurbishment per aircraft. Emirates just finished refurbishing B77L at $15 million per aircraft. So $35 to $40 million for A380 depends on the configuration is not unreasonable estimate.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 1:53 pm
by par13del
SomebodyInTLS wrote:
Err... I don't really know where this is coming from either. FWIW, obviously if a second customer such as BA was to join EK in wanting a NEO or at least another batch of CEOs then it would have happened.

Well it seems to be the gist of the Waterbombers rant, BA choosing the 777X killed the A380 and EU jobs, even if wrapped in a bunch of competitive airline "Stuff" his main point is the death of the A380 production, gotta blame someone.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:12 pm
by EvanWSFO
Jetty wrote:
EvanWSFO wrote:
Waterbomber2 wrote:
As some seem to be insisiting that I'm making this all up, a few more posted on Tripadvisor no earlier than today:

If I booked my flights based on TripAdvisor (or any ratings site), I'd never fly. There will ALWAYS be disgruntled pax on EVERY airline. Perhaps you should grow up and spend more time doing something productive than making an a** of yourself on here.

If you booked your flight based on TripAdvisor you wouldn’t book BA. Yes, every company has disgruntled pax. But it’s still telling BA (and IB) have the lowest rating among large European legacy airlines.


I flew them over the Christmas holidays BNA-LHR-BNA. I found the service quite good. As this was my first try on them, and because it's the newest and longest flight out of BNA, I got a bit uncomfortable, but overall it was worth it. I might fly them to morrow, and have a totally different experience, thus my comment no airline is infallible on great service.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:37 pm
by Weatherwatcher1
Waterbomber2 wrote:

Yield management is a joke at most airlines anyway.
Most airlines including BA overcharge for O&D and would rather spend more money flying lower yielding transferring pax from competing hubs despite that they could make more money by focussing more on O&D and their local market.


I’m fairly confident that everything you said in this paragraph is wrong. Yield and demand management innovation has revolutionized ticket pricing and resulted in much higher load factors.

Nonstop O&D is earns both higher fares and costs less to operate. Point to point nonstop O&D is where much of the most profitable flying is for high yielding passengers.

I don’t know where you get the idea that BA focuses on lower yielding transfer passengers. Only 30% of traffic through LHR is connecting passengers.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 6:07 pm
by 9Patch
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:

I’m fairly confident that everything you said in this paragraph is wrong.

That's why I've stopped reading his posts and just skip ahead to the rebuttals.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:11 pm
by Waterbomber2
Weatherwatcher1 wrote:
Waterbomber2 wrote:

Yield management is a joke at most airlines anyway.
Most airlines including BA overcharge for O&D and would rather spend more money flying lower yielding transferring pax from competing hubs despite that they could make more money by focussing more on O&D and their local market.


I’m fairly confident that everything you said in this paragraph is wrong. Yield and demand management innovation has revolutionized ticket pricing and resulted in much higher load factors.

Nonstop O&D is earns both higher fares and costs less to operate. Point to point nonstop O&D is where much of the most profitable flying is for high yielding passengers.

I don’t know where you get the idea that BA focuses on lower yielding transfer passengers. Only 30% of traffic through LHR is connecting passengers.


1 in 3 passengers in LHR is a granola crunching (I didn't start this expression, see page 3 of this thread) connecting passenger and you say "only".
On a 300 seat aircraft departing LHR 75 seats will be filled by air, and 75 seats by granola crunchers, with only 150 high yield O&D passengers.
You know what? Forget the B787-10, BA needs the A321XLR. Even on long haul, they should replace all their widebodies with A321HyperUberUltraExtraLR's.

May I remind you though that BA is the only one to operate a major connecting hub in LHR?
So if LHR's combined transfer ratio is 30%, what is BA's ratio of connecting pax at LHR? 40% perhaps? and given they have 50% market share, the other airlines' combined ratio would be 20% perhaps?

So it looks like BA has half the market share at LHR and they carry less O&D in and out of LHR than the combined other half (even if they do so with a stop at their respective hubs).
And we're not even considering all the BA pax whom are transferring at the other end with BA's partners.
Point to point you say?
Find the problem...

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:17 pm
by JayinKitsap
Just think, if BA had ordered another 12 A380's there would have been another year of production, but what airline would order the next 12. Outside of EK only ANA ordered the 380 and that was to obtain the Skymark slots. Is Qantas adding, AF's top off order, did JAL order, those huge orders from China, LH additional orders, AA orders, DL orders, and of course WN is ordering. There is only so long a company can push on a rope.

Possibly if BA had ordered the 748 there would still be production of it.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:53 am
by kitplane01
chonetsao wrote:
peterinlisbon wrote:
50 million dollars for seats - I think BA is getting ripped off.


To be fair, the figure quoted was $30 to 50 million total refurbishment per aircraft. Emirates just finished refurbishing B77L at $15 million per aircraft. So $35 to $40 million for A380 depends on the configuration is not unreasonable estimate.


Why?

If a 777L costs $15 million, and an A380 has maybe 50% more seats, shouldn't it cost about $22.5 million to redo the interior? Is there something about the A380 that increases the per-seat interior refurbishment cost?

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 9:35 am
by chonetsao
kitplane01 wrote:
chonetsao wrote:
peterinlisbon wrote:
50 million dollars for seats - I think BA is getting ripped off.


To be fair, the figure quoted was $30 to 50 million total refurbishment per aircraft. Emirates just finished refurbishing B77L at $15 million per aircraft. So $35 to $40 million for A380 depends on the configuration is not unreasonable estimate.


Why?

If a 777L costs $15 million, and an A380 has maybe 50% more seats, shouldn't it cost about $22.5 million to redo the interior? Is there something about the A380 that increases the per-seat interior refurbishment cost?


B77L EK (new version) seats 302 with 38J and 264Y. Cabin floor space is roughly short of 350m2
A388 BA seats 469 with 14F97J55W and 303Y. Cabin floor space is 260m2 upper deck and 324m2 lower deck (total 584m2)

So if EK spent $15m for the 350m2 space, BA should invest at least $25m for its A388 based on 584m2 cabin space.

But the calculation is not that simple. It lies on the 14F97J55W303Y seat count BA needs to install. Compare with EK, BA needs to spend more on the 14F59J55W and 39Y additional seats. If we count the cost of 55W39Y as neutral or zero. You are still looking at the additional cost to install 14F59J additional seats. Don't forget, seat costs is based on per seats, not floor space. The additional 14F59J (73 premium seats) would cost at least $8million (estimate). That brings the total to $25M+$8M=$33M.

Then we are not counting the additional man hours to refit the A380 compare with the B77L. If the floor space is the indication, then we are talking about 66% more cost when compare B77L VS A388.

So overall, BA needs to spend a minimum $25m plus any additional cost in seats and man power. $35m is a good estimate as any if the EK B77L refit is an indication.

Re: Package of new/used A380's pitched to BA was uncompetitive: Cruz

Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:41 pm
by Waterbomber2
chonetsao wrote:
peterinlisbon wrote:
50 million dollars for seats - I think BA is getting ripped off.


To be fair, the figure quoted was $30 to 50 million total refurbishment per aircraft. Emirates just finished refurbishing B77L at $15 million per aircraft. So $35 to $40 million for A380 depends on the configuration is not unreasonable estimate.


Even 15 million USD per aircraft is on the very high side for a B77L.

With IFE package, a Y seat costs about 5K USD on the invoice.
For A C class seat you are looking at 20-30K USD.
That's also assuming that you won't resell the old seat/IFE package.


Airlines love to boast about how much they are spending for their aircraft purchases, maintenance and refurbishments, but those figures don't include the huuuuuuuuge discounts they get on everything.
When I worked within a major European airline group and worked on the frontline to do the switch to the slimline seats, we were told 10.000 EUR per seat by the big shot managers.
I did the math and then challenged one of them.
"So you are paying 2 million EUR to add 2 rows of seats that may not always get filled? Assuming the seats last 30.000 cycles, those 12 seats are going to cost 70 EUR per cycle each, which brings the installation cost for those seats to an unreasonably high amount."
Then I was obviously told a figure that was a lot more reasonable...

The IFE's are more expensive than the seats and are often reused or sold when a cbin refurbishment occurs.
If the plain seats were that valuable,they wouldn't throw them away at the scrapyard...

The labor is frankly quite limited. The engineering is done once for all aircraft to be refurbished, and once the configuration is set and the schematics are printed, it goes quite quickly.
Installing seats, PSU's and cabin fittings takes very little time.
I think that the IFE and wiring can be the nastiest part, but there too, if the engineering work is done properly and you do it when everything is open during a C-check, 3-4 guys can rewire an entire C-class section in one day.