Congratulations to Boeing and IAG. The 737 will continue to have a long and successful life.

And some of these posts... Well, they are just shameful.

Its not the thread thats wrong its the small percentage of people who make these comments, anyway it will be interesting to see the Max in BA colors.

I sense a substantial growth plan for IAG LCCs across Europe is on the cards, LEVEL shorthaul, Vueling, and BA shorthaul at LGW maybe folded into a single entity all flying MAXs

dcajet wrote:

glideslope wrote:

dcajet wrote:

And one that knows how to get a very meaningful discount from Boeing...

The same applies to Airbus. Just sayin........

Except that Airbus does not have its cash cow grounded and with a huge halo of bad publicity (a death trap, basically) hanging over its head. I bet IAG got to name the price of this commitment. Boeing was desperate for good news and IAG threw them a lifeline. Good for them!

Point taken. I agree .

dcajet wrote:

glideslope wrote:

dcajet wrote:

And one that knows how to get a very meaningful discount from Boeing...

The same applies to Airbus. Just sayin........

Except that Airbus does not have its cash cow grounded and with a huge halo of bad publicity (a death trap, basically) hanging over its head. I bet IAG got to name the price of this commitment. Boeing was desperate for good news and IAG threw them a lifeline. Good for them!

If you think the 737 is a deathtrap then I certainly hope you don't set foot in a car, bus, motorcycle...

RandWkop wrote:

VV wrote:

nickllhill wrote:

Am I being silly in thinking.. These can’t go to BA at Heathrow as they can’t take containers?

Why are people so obsessed by containers on single aisle aircraft. Get over it.
Does Ryanair have issues with containers?

Do you know how expensive it is to carry a lot of baggage in Europe?

Damn! Please stop this madness about containers on short haul flights in Europe.

I think the question was asked because BAs T5 has an infrastructure which can only work with container loading. Hand loading would require a lot of changes. I may be wrong.

There's a long running meme here on a.net that suggests 737 is not acceptable due to its lack of containers despite loads (sic) of evidence otherwise, now augmented by this IAG deal for 200 frames.

Here's a charming thread from the past: viewtopic.php?t=1371679

It seems like the era of the container fetishist is coming to an end.

So has anyone seen the conditions on the LOI, does it say something like invalid if the a/c is not back in the air by end June-2019?
Why do we believe that BA will be an end user, since IAG has a group of airlines under its belt, could BA be outsourcing their short haul ops?

In any event, if firmed up it is a good order for Boeing, they do need a confidence boost right now.
Still waiting to hear about the pressure that Trump placed on IAG to buy American....

par13del wrote:

Why do we believe that BA will be an end user, since IAG has a group of airlines under its belt, could BA be outsourcing their short haul ops?

Because WW himself told us that BA will operate 737s from LGW.

par13del wrote:

So has anyone seen the conditions on the LOI, does it say something like invalid if the a/c is not back in the air by end June-2019?
Why do we believe that BA will be an end user, since IAG has a group of airlines under its belt, could BA be outsourcing their short haul ops?

In any event, if firmed up it is a good order for Boeing, they do need a confidence boost right now.
Still waiting to hear about the pressure that Trump placed on IAG to buy American....

Why does it have to be back in the air by June 2019 when deliveries don't start until 2023?

Please provide evidence that IAG was pressured by Trump.

nickllhill wrote:

Am I being silly in thinking.. These can’t go to BA at Heathrow as they can’t take containers?

Most likely for IAG`s LCC carriers

UAEflyer wrote:

The rumours here in Paris they got between 40% to 50% discount.

Which is dead-average for a narrowbody. Actually, one could argue they're paying a premium if they only received a 40% discount.

Basically, the current IAG A320 fleet and orders consists of:

In-fleet
317 CEO's
35 NEO's
Orders
80 NEO's

Detail
BA: 132 CEO's + 15 NEO's in-fleet, 20 NEO's on order
EI : 34 CEO's in-fleet, 14 NEO's on order
IB: 38 CEO's + 4 NEO's in-fleet, 12 NEO's on order
Level: 7 CEO's in-fleet
VY: 106 CEO's + 16 NEO's in-fleet, 34 NEO's on order

So if IAG take up each and every of the 200 MAX ordered, it means that the current fleet of relatively young 317 CEO's would eventually entirely be replaced by 200 MAX and 80 NEO's.

Risky timing for this order. Not so much for Boeing, very much for BA/IB.
The public opinion is very low about the MAX, what does it say about IAG ordering an aircraft that no one wants to fly on?

For me this order is political to pressure some institutions (but apparently this board is censoring the B-word) and I don't see it materialising.

However, if Boeing can get this order to firm, it would be a huge huge deal.

TTailedTiger wrote:

dcajet wrote:

glideslope wrote:

The same applies to Airbus. Just sayin........

Except that Airbus does not have its cash cow grounded and with a huge halo of bad publicity (a death trap, basically) hanging over its head. I bet IAG got to name the price of this commitment. Boeing was desperate for good news and IAG threw them a lifeline. Good for them!

If you think the 737 is a deathtrap then I certainly hope you don't set foot in a car, bus, motorcycle...

No I do not think the Max is a Death Trap. I was agreeing with the point that IAG did step up to the plate to assist Boeing during a very bad point in time from a publicity standpoint, and Boeing reciprocated. I try to stay out of these discussions for many reasons. The Max is not an inherently unstable design. All large diameter fans pitch up with power application. The triggers in these incidents were faulty AoA inputs. It does not require MCAS to fly. MCAS should have been implemented in the exact same manner as it was in the KC-46 (which performs without anomalies) with input from both AoA sensors (later stage of development.) Only Boeing knows why they choose this path. Boeing made mistakes, took short cuts and has allot of work to do. I put most of the responsibility for the Lion Air crash on Boeing. ET 309 as far as I'm concerned was recoverable if the crew had disengaged the AT, and had not violated procedure (that they knew) by powering the stab trim again. No 737 is going to manual trim at 340kts.

This time next year the Max will be flying and be as safe as any aircraft in the sky. PAX will have mostly forgotten, and Boeing will go on to sell all they can manufacture.

These are simply my opinions. I will not comment on this anymore.

glideslope wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

dcajet wrote:

Except that Airbus does not have its cash cow grounded and with a huge halo of bad publicity (a death trap, basically) hanging over its head. I bet IAG got to name the price of this commitment. Boeing was desperate for good news and IAG threw them a lifeline. Good for them!

If you think the 737 is a deathtrap then I certainly hope you don't set foot in a car, bus, motorcycle...

No I do not think the Max is a Death Trap. I was agreeing with the point that IAG did step up to the plate to assist Boeing during a very bad point in time from a publicity standpoint, and Boeing reciprocated. I try to stay out of these discussions for many reasons. The Max is not an inherently unstable design. All large diameter fans pitch up with power application. The triggers in these incidents were faulty AoA inputs. It does not require MCAS to fly. MCAS should have been implemented in the exact same manner as it was in the KC-46 (which performs without anomalies) with input from both AoA sensors (later stage of development.) Only Boeing knows why they choose this path. Boeing made mistakes, took short cuts and has allot of work to do. I put most of the responsibility for the Lion Air crash on Boeing. ET 309 as far as I'm concerned was recoverable if the crew had disengaged the AT, and had not violated procedure (that they knew) by powering the stab trim again. No 737 is going to manual trim at 340kts.

This time next year the Max will be flying and be as safe as any aircraft in the sky. PAX will have mostly forgotten, and Boeing will go on to sell all they can manufacture.

These are simply my opinions. I will not comment on this anymore.

I was talking to dcajet. He's the one the one that called it a deathtrap.

Strato2 wrote:

How much money is Boeing paying IAG that they have agreed to take these planes?

One thing is certain I will not board an IAG jet in the future as there is high propability to end up travelling with the Max.

probably around -50 million a plane.

Waterbomber2 wrote:

Risky timing for this order. Not so much for Boeing, very much for BA/IB.
The public opinion is very low about the MAX, what does it say about IAG ordering an aircraft that no one wants to fly on?

For me this order is political to pressure some institutions (but apparently this board is censoring the B-word) and I don't see it materialising.

However, if Boeing can get this order to firm, it would be a huge huge deal.

How exactly is there political pressure exerted by the US Government or President on a publicly traded European airline company? If this were possible, why wasn't there pressure before the MAX crashes to force these airlines to buy more Boeing aircraft?

As for timing and public opinion, this is being WAY overblown. There will certainly be some poeple who are afraid or refuse to fly on a MAX in the first few weeks after it is ungrounded. Assuming no major incidents, the average flyer will go back to not knowing the difference between an A320 and a 737.

Certainly, more than 3 years after the ungrounding perception won't be an issue at all.

Revelation wrote:

RandWkop wrote:

VV wrote:

Why are people so obsessed by containers on single aisle aircraft. Get over it.
Does Ryanair have issues with containers?

Do you know how expensive it is to carry a lot of baggage in Europe?

Damn! Please stop this madness about containers on short haul flights in Europe.

I think the question was asked because BAs T5 has an infrastructure which can only work with container loading. Hand loading would require a lot of changes. I may be wrong.

There's a long running meme here on a.net that suggests 737 is not acceptable due to its lack of containers despite loads (sic) of evidence otherwise, now augmented by this IAG deal for 200 frames.

Here's a charming thread from the past: viewtopic.php?t=1371679

It seems like the era of the container fetishist is coming to an end.

Isn't it the case that BA uses containers at T5 exclusively, whereas T3 is bulk or containerised, as is LGW? If that is the case and the 737s are destined for LGW it doesn't disprove that BA needs container-capable aircraft at LHR (T5).

Congratulations Boeing and IAG!
I think this is a good idea, because of lessons learned from the MAX problems. Southwest pilots suggested to diversify the fleet and not put all eggs in one basket, because if something like this happens to your aircraft family of choice, your basically done. I think any single fleet-operator should think twice aftter the MCAS issue and go for the competitors product too, like RY, SW, B6, AS, Frontier, Spirit etc.

IAG made a wise decision and the 737 is the more efficient <1h leg aircraft. B6 and others should do something like that too as they have many <1h routes, to have the most efficient aircraft fullfil it`s particular routes they are best at while not getting knocked out completely if an MCAS style problem arises.

I think this has also some upsides while looking at the brexit mess. Not good to be too dependant on EU products when the divorce will be in anger without deal.

So dear MOL - place an AB order to get more cards on your hand to play with too

I think Boeing will learn from this very expensive lesson and come out of this desaster as a better company than it was. At least I hope so- even if I am a little biased towards airbus.

Boeing74741R wrote:

Wow, like some others on here I certainly didn’t see this coming!

Assuming it’s across the IAG group, it’ll be interesting to see how this fits into BA for example given they’ve got neo’s in the fleet already and more on order. Could LGW be a candidate to become a MAX base to replace some/all the A319/320’s there given it’s non-containerised and, to all intents and purposes, a self-contained operation?

Whatever the reason (my hunch is that in light of the recent groundings an offer too good to turn down was made), it’s exactly the sort of lift Boeing need at this time. I’m not worried about the future of the A320 series in the IAG fold though given the current neo’s in the fleet/on order and the other order placed today for A321XLR’s for Aer Lingus and Iberia.

We all know where Aer Lingus Is sending the 321 xlr but what about IB? Do you think they will try to cover African or Asian routes?

o0OOO0oChris wrote:

Southwest pilots suggested to diversify the fleet and not put all eggs in one basket, because if something like this happens to your aircraft family of choice, your basically done.

Amazing that they never thought of that when WN got rid of the 717's to DL or all the years they were employed there when they only had 737's or when they were negotiating their contract they never gave up something to encourage fleet diversity.
I guess my overall point is that I would not use the public speaking of a workgroup or mangement who are in negotiations or having a fall out as justification for a point of view, I regard it as political speak.

A few thoughts have crossed my mind.

1) All the experts on this site and aviation "in the knows" and not a single rumour before this was announced? Right.....makes me believe this was a impulse buy, which of course we all know they would have gotten the best price available and probably great slots due to JET airways cancellation

2) Lufthansa , AF/KLM, Easyjet, Ryanair and Wizz must be thinking "where are they going to put 200 extra planes in Europe?". Its a statement isnt it?

3) Could this mean a Norweigan bid from IAG could be coming? They have MAXs, max trained pilots and 787s.......

Well I'd say this is a strategic move by Boeing. Switching between types with a large fleet isn't that big of a deal.
BA have done it before. And Boeing desperately needed a blue chip customer. Airbus made strategic
moves with Delta ... Boeing is now just doing the same thing. I wouldn't be surprised if they made them an
offer too good to say no to. That being said Boeing needs to get these changes right or this will backfire
badly.

MrHMSH wrote:

BAorAB wrote:

So even in their darkest times Boeing manages to outsell Airbus by about $100M in the first 2 days! LOL


Who saw this coming?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... nd=premium

To add insult to injury, most of IAG narrow body fleet had been Airbus A320 in recent decades. Great wrestle back for Boeing!

Since the order isn't firm, not quite.

Not all LOIs turn into orders. (See indecisive ME3 carriers, or carriers gated by their respective governments.) But if you think an LOI of this size from BA isn't going to turn into a firm order your capacity for denial is extraordinary.

SEU wrote:

A few thoughts have crossed my mind.

1) All the experts on this site and aviation "in the knows" and not a single rumour before this was announced? Right.....makes me believe this was a impulse buy, which of course we all know they would have gotten the best price available and probably great slots due to JET airways cancellation

2) Lufthansa , AF/KLM, Easyjet, Ryanair and Wizz must be thinking "where are they going to put 200 extra planes in Europe?". Its a statement isnt it?

3) Could this mean a Norweigan bid from IAG could be coming? They have MAXs, max trained pilots and 787s.......

200 frames.. impulse buy...
oh man. ROFL

Totally out of the blue. Not even the so called aviation "analysts" saw this one coming.

As has been said already, the fanboi worshipping/crying is really embarrassing. Unless folk own shares or work for Boeing or Airbus, why would they really care that much?! The corporate hero worshipping is quite disturbing to read sometimes. It wouldn't surprise me if some folk this evening will be sobbing in bed, while other folk will be drunk on "happiness" over a corporate decision. Strange, strange people.

MIflyer12 wrote:

MrHMSH wrote:

BAorAB wrote:

So even in their darkest times Boeing manages to outsell Airbus by about $100M in the first 2 days! LOL


Who saw this coming?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... nd=premium

To add insult to injury, most of IAG narrow body fleet had been Airbus A320 in recent decades. Great wrestle back for Boeing!

Since the order isn't firm, not quite.

Not all LOIs turn into orders. (See indecisive ME3 carriers, or carriers gated by their respective governments.) But if you think an LOI of this size from BA isn't going to turn into a firm order your capacity for denial is extraordinary.

We'll have to wait and see, but I'm not in denial, the order isn't firm and the planes haven't been delivered yet. Until we're nearer the time they'll be assembled/delivered it's still just a possibility.

MrHMSH wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

MrHMSH wrote:

Since the order isn't firm, not quite.

Not all LOIs turn into orders. (See indecisive ME3 carriers, or carriers gated by their respective governments.) But if you think an LOI of this size from BA isn't going to turn into a firm order your capacity for denial is extraordinary.

We'll have to wait and see, but I'm not in denial, the order isn't firm and the planes haven't been delivered yet. Until we're nearer the time they'll be assembled/delivered it's still just a possibility.

I must say, if it was a way of hard balling Airbus into a better deal for IAG, then it would be a master stroke negotiation tactic from Willie Walsh. I doubt it is and will probably turn into a monster order for Boeing.

Breathe wrote:

MrHMSH wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

Not all LOIs turn into orders. (See indecisive ME3 carriers, or carriers gated by their respective governments.) But if you think an LOI of this size from BA isn't going to turn into a firm order your capacity for denial is extraordinary.

We'll have to wait and see, but I'm not in denial, the order isn't firm and the planes haven't been delivered yet. Until we're nearer the time they'll be assembled/delivered it's still just a possibility.

I must say, if it was a way of hard balling Airbus into a better deal for IAG, then it would be a master stroke negotiation tactic from Willie Walsh. I doubt it is and will probably turn into a monster order for Boeing.

Um...yeah. Because major corporations normally announce large orders publicly as a negotiating tactic. I'm pretty sure that would violate numerous regulations because of the effect it has on stock prices.

To negotiate, a company would strategically leak things. For example, IAG would have leaked that they were on the cusp of placing the order with Boeing to send a message to Airbus.

Currently such a bad time for this plane.... I assume they got a great deal on them.

VV wrote:

nickllhill wrote:

Am I being silly in thinking.. These can’t go to BA at Heathrow as they can’t take containers?

Why are people so obsessed by containers on single aisle aircraft. Get over it.
Does Ryanair have issues with containers?

Do you know how expensive it is to carry a lot of baggage in Europe?

Damn! Please stop this madness about containers on short haul flights in Europe.

Someone clearly does not understand the Terminal 5 Baggage system. Good job getting angry about airplane suitcase boxes by the way.

MrHMSH wrote:

Revelation wrote:

RandWkop wrote:

I think the question was asked because BAs T5 has an infrastructure which can only work with container loading. Hand loading would require a lot of changes. I may be wrong.

There's a long running meme here on a.net that suggests 737 is not acceptable due to its lack of containers despite loads (sic) of evidence otherwise, now augmented by this IAG deal for 200 frames.

Here's a charming thread from the past: viewtopic.php?t=1371679

It seems like the era of the container fetishist is coming to an end.

Isn't it the case that BA uses containers at T5 exclusively, whereas T3 is bulk or containerised, as is LGW? If that is the case and the 737s are destined for LGW it doesn't disprove that BA needs container-capable aircraft at LHR (T5).

There is a reason BA kept the 737s at Gatwick. Correct me if I am wrong but the 757s never went to T5 either right? I suppose Heathrow will modify the system? Or BA will use the small 737 containers

Knowing Willie who, loves a "deal", the Seattle boys gave him the deal of a lifetime. Boeing needs an order and one from IAG for 200 plans certainly makes a statement. There must be lots of A319 headed for retirement. Good luck to both BA and Boeing on this one.

This is a huge order for both Boeing and IAG. Like the other posters, I see this as a very opportunistic purchase by IAG, at what is likely Ryanair bargain levels.

Fair play, most people will have forgotten about the issues it has now by the time any IAG airlines operate any.

musman9853 wrote:

Strato2 wrote:

How much money is Boeing paying IAG that they have agreed to take these planes?

One thing is certain I will not board an IAG jet in the future as there is high propability to end up travelling with the Max.

probably around -50 million a plane.

Closer to $30m would be my guess.

That Heavy heavy Discount though, LOL.

I get how these dirt cheap plane going to their LCC like Level and Vueling. Cause they needed it.
I mean, look at Ryanair. The MAX problems is the exact same opportunity for many airlines to get heavy discount, just like back in the day during 9/11.

And since A320neo and A321neo/XLR are selling like hot hot cakes. Airbus wouldn't mind.

Top ten anime plot twists.


I genuinely could not foresee this coming. We should have known something was up when we saw the low order numbers for NEOs. My guess is BAs short haul fleet will focus on 737 MAX9s on the lower end as LHR is famously crowded, and perhaps to give some spread between the A320 fleet, A321 NEOs on the higher end, and A320 NEOs at the lowest. It will be nice to see 737s in the BA livery again.

aerohottie wrote:

musman9853 wrote:

Strato2 wrote:

How much money is Boeing paying IAG that they have agreed to take these planes?

One thing is certain I will not board an IAG jet in the future as there is high propability to end up travelling with the Max.

probably around -50 million a plane.

Closer to $30m would be my guess.

Yeah, between $30 - $40 millions at max sounds reasonable to me for MAX8 and MAX10. There is no way IAG would purchase 200 of them at $50 millions.

speedbird52 wrote:

Top ten anime plot twists.


I genuinely could not foresee this coming. We should have known something was up when we saw the low order numbers for NEOs. My guess is BAs short haul fleet will focus on 737 MAX9s on the lower end as LHR is famously crowded, and perhaps to give some spread between the A320 fleet, A321 NEOs on the higher end, and A320 NEOs at the lowest. It will be nice to see 737s in the BA livery again.

I thought all of the MAX would go to Vueling and Level. Since it is listed that each of them would get 50 MAX8 and 50 MAX10. So BA wouldn't get any.

Hello, I am a frequent bystander on Airliners.net forums since 1998. This is may very first post. During the past 20 years or so, this forum has been an amazing source of learning for me. It has also been, in many occasions, a big source of amusement ... especially when I stumbled on threads with animated A vs B discussions. I start my active life on this forum by saying that I’m not surprised at all by the IAG order (LOI) for the Boeing 737 Max at this year Paris airshow. It's what Boeing was looking for in order to keep afloat its reputation. It's what airlines wanted to maintain a healthy competition among Airbus and Boeing. Finally, it's what many passengers needed to regain faith in the safety of the aircraft. The assumption is that when the LOI will be firmed up once the aircraft is cleared to fly again (it will), the travelling public will assume that IAG is more than confident that the MAX is safe to fly on (and it will be). For the reasons I stated above, I was sure even before the show started that the 737 MAX would get ordered by at least one major airline/airline group. The size of the LOI surprised me, though! However, I personally believe that we will have to wait until the MAX is once again up high and running in the big blue sky to see more major order coming in for Boeing. Even earlier if Boeing is willing to sell the sale the palne to other major airlines at the same favorable conditons they sold it to IAG ... whatever they might be (man ... its a long time that I wanted to insert this smalie in a post on this aviation forum). That is my first two cents ... please be kind with me.

ewt340 wrote:

aerohottie wrote:

musman9853 wrote:

probably around -50 million a plane.

Closer to $30m would be my guess.

Yeah, between $30 - $40 millions at max sounds reasonable to me for MAX8 and MAX10. There is no way IAG would purchase 200 of them at $50 millions.

Curious if you could expand on why that price range "sounds reasonable" to you?

ewt340 wrote:

I get how these dirt cheap plane going to their LCC like Level and Vueling. Cause they needed it.

And AirAsia
And easyJet
And Wizzair
And Spirit Airlines
And Frontier
And Indigo
And JetSmart
And Volaris

I see your point about LCC’s ordering dirt cheap aircraft.

Hamlet69

I have a different but somewhat related point: What will happen to all the Maxes that Boeing is currently churning out? How would they ensure that whatever modifications/fixes are mandated by authorities are actually taken up? What if the fixes are beyond just software changes? What if the EASA takes a different opinion and prolongs the grounding in areas of its jurisdiction?

dcajet wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

dcajet wrote:

Except that Airbus does not have its cash cow grounded and with a huge halo of bad publicity (a death trap, basically) hanging over its head. I bet IAG got to name the price of this commitment. Boeing was desperate for good news and IAG threw them a lifeline. Good for them!

If you think the 737 is a deathtrap then I certainly hope you don't set foot in a car, bus, motorcycle...

Tell that to the relatives and loved ones of the 300+ folks that died in 2 737 MAX accidents in the space of 5 months. See what they think of your largess.

That said, I am certain that once the appropriate fixes are introduced the MAX (or whatever name it receives moving forward) will get to serve an exemplary career with hundred of airlines.

What next, tally up the count from nearly every airframe and wave it in peoples faces every time they fly?

Calm down.

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... g-737-max/
"Boeing said the deal is worth just over $24 billion at list prices. The real value of the planes after standard discounts in the industry, according to data from aircraft-valuation firm Avitas, is about $11 billion."

This assumes 54% discount I guess? Not that much but more than typical?

Noticeable in its absence in IAG’s media release is any reference to MAX. The airline group is obviously very aware of and sensitive to PR fallout associated with the name. They have referred to their MAX order as that of the Boeing 737 -8 and -10.

They’re not prepared to kiss the shadow.

https://www.iairgroup.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/newsroom-listing/2019/iag-signs-letter-of-intent-for-200-boeing-737-8-and-737-10

IAG signs letter of intent for 200 Boeing 737-8 and 737-10

Congratulations to Boeing.

x1234 wrote:

With the MASSIVE range of the B737Max7 (7100km full payload), this can fly low volume routes in EMEA as far as DXB, LOS, ACC, GYD, IKA, etc. Basically BA now has a narrow-body for routes that previously required a wide-body.
Example routes: http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=LHR-ISB;+L ... PVD;&DU=km

I sense Europe, Middle East, Africa & Mid-West/East Coast USA/Canada expansion.

You forgot to figure in ETOPS & north atlantic winds. The 737-7 would be hard pressed to do do the midwest routes from LHR.

speedbird52 wrote:

VV wrote:

nickllhill wrote:

Am I being silly in thinking.. These can’t go to BA at Heathrow as they can’t take containers?

Why are people so obsessed by containers on single aisle aircraft. Get over it.
Does Ryanair have issues with containers?

Do you know how expensive it is to carry a lot of baggage in Europe?

Damn! Please stop this madness about containers on short haul flights in Europe.

Someone clearly does not understand the Terminal 5 Baggage system. Good job getting angry about airplane suitcase boxes by the way.

If you can't go to terminal 5 then don't go there.

Order makes total sense for IAG as Option on LHR runway 3. If it opens as per the consultation (which also launched yesterday by coincidence), then BA can pull Airbi from across IAG to pounce on the new slots while Vueling / Level leave marginal routes. Or some of the planes can be used to punish competitors (let’s say LH moves 30 planes to LHR then Vueling / Level have 50 to put into FRA). If Runway 3 is late or abandoned they have a great LCC. Either way they create a ton of value.

IAG still has enough neo on order to replace all the ceo's that are needed for BA's LHR T5 operations. The neo's now destined for Vueling can always be transfered to BA, so there's no problem there.