BA 744 Replacement(787-10X/35X/777X)

qfa787380 · Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:03 pm

According to Bloomberg BA will start to look at replacing it's 744 fleet and the mentioned contenders are:

787-10X

A350-1000

777-X

No mention of 748I or more 380s, although the 12 already ordered 380s plus options will partially cover this.
No more VLAs for BA???
Boeing will have to come up with a formal announcement of one of the above as at the moment BA only have the 350-1000 as a true choice.

AA737-823 · Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:11 pm

Well, as we've seen in the recent past, Boeing doesn't necessarily HAVE to have an airplane officially announced before a major carrier announces a purchase....
So maybe BA will launch the 777X, and inform Boeing at a later date that Seattle had better start building it...

cosmofly · Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:18 pm

The final nail in the coffin for the current version of 748i?

Customers seem to really want Boeing to build 777X.

Stitch · Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:19 pm

Everything I heard was the 747-8 / A380-800 RFP was a "winner take all" RFP and the loser would not be considered going forward.

BA is a premium-heavy airline, so that may favor the 777X. If not the 777X, then I would expect the A350-1000.

The 787-10 could work for TATL and Africa, but I do not see it being an option for Asia, much less Australia.

qf002 · Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:49 pm

787-10X = very doubtful as a fleetwide replacement. They could however operate say half a dozen using it's (inevitably) excellent efficiency on high volume TATL routes.

777-X = if the 77W's are going to be here for 20 years then this seems like the best option to me.

A350 = also a strong contender, though the lower end of this size range can be plugged using 787s. A very strong possibility for long haul and would be perfect for LHR-Asia/Australia.

ikramerica · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:13 am

Boeing will still offer BA the 748, likely as an option in part of a package. Doesn't mean BA would have to say yes to all or nothing.

gigneil · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:37 am

Quoting qf002 (Reply 4):
A350 = also a strong contender, though the lower end of this size range can be plugged using 787s. A very strong possibility for long haul and would be perfect for LHR-Asia/Australia.

An A350-900R should be able to fly to everywhere in the world nonstop from LHR - if in fact the yield exists.

NS

wolbo · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:54 am

As an A380 aficionado I'm a bit disappointed that BA is not looking for more of them beyond the 12 they now have on order (+7 options). It was clear all along that BA would not be replacing their entire 50+ fleet of 747s with A380s but I was kinda hoping for a total of around 25-30. Without any additional A380 sales at BA it is not going to get easier for Airbus to reach break-even on the program (around 500). Come on Leahy, work your magic.

ferpe · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:58 am

With BA having 50+ of the 400+ seat 7300nm 744 the replacement does not need to be one aircraft model, in that case a mixture of:

- 388 seat 8000nm 777X

- 320 seat 6800nm 787-10X

would be very competitive. BA have sizable 787 and 777 fleets by then so these would only be new variants for them.

The only problem here is that neither model is launched today and given Bs conservative time-frames (very much needed after the 787 and 748) and the need to get the MAX in the market by 2017 once wonders when they would be available, 2018-2020? Can B get the 787-10X in the market before the MAX in say 2016 and then the 777X in 2018?

The 350-1000 is a one size fits all contender but is seems skewed a little in the wrong direction, 350 seats and 8400nm. It has the advantage of being launched and will have it's design freeze pretty soon, slots should be available from 2018 but there would be no commonality on the pilot or maintenance side.

Though I know little about the 744 usage and BAs future thinking of their network needs I think this is Bs to loose and could serve as the launch for both the 787-10X and the 777X.

[Edited 2011-09-19 18:01:56]

United Airline · Tue Sep 20, 2011 3:13 am

They will need more than 12+7 to replace 57 B 747-400s. Do expect them to order up to 30 at some point

flyorski · Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:19 am

Quoting United Airline (Reply 9):

They will need more than 12+7 to replace 57 B 747-400s. Do expect them to order up to 30 at some point

Except that they do not appear interested in further A380 aircraft to replace the bulk of the 744s.

United Airline · Tue Sep 20, 2011 5:49 am

They will need more than 19 I think. Maybe for expansion when the economy picks up again? It is unlikely that they will order 57 A380s but maybe at least 30?

David_itl · Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:10 am

Thought BA policy now was not to be a launch customer. Therefore, bye-bye 787-10X & 777-X.

col · Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:31 am

Quoting United Airline (Reply 11):
They will need more than 19 I think. Maybe for expansion when the economy picks up again? It is unlikely that they will order 57 A380s but maybe at least 30?

I think in the longer term BA will need a lot more than 30.

328JET · Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:34 am

The problem today is, that BA is not deciding their fleet plans - it is IAG...

And Iberia has a lot of influence in this decision and they have an Airbus-only fleet.

My guess is, that BA will NOT be the first customer of a new B777-version again...
But it doesn´t rule out an order of more B77Ws, for sure.

I could imagine follow-on orders for B77Ws, A388s and a new order of around 40 A35Js from 2017.

The B77X is too far in the future, the B787-10X is simply not capable enough to replace a B744.

qf002 · Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:38 am

Quoting ferpe (Reply 8):

With BA having 50 of the 400 seat 7300nm 744 the replacement does not need to be one aircraft model, in that case a mixture of:

- 388 seat 8000nm 777X

- 320 seat 6800nm 787-10X

That's not the BA scenario. Their 747s are 291/329 seat aircraft, while their 77W is 300 seats.

In reality, they would be really looking at something that would seat 300-320 in a similar density to the 329 seat 747s. Anything that fills more than one daily 747 today can have the A380 chucked at it (depending of course on configuration) and then they can tailor the rest of their fleet to fit routes where they can't quite fill a 747, but need something bigger than a 77E. To me the 779X will fit that role perfectly (with the extra space being filled with Y seats, and a row less W). It's that or the A351, which might lack capability and will lack commonality with the existing 77W fleet.

Quoting david_itl (Reply 12):
Therefore, bye-bye 787-10X & 777-X.

1. They don't have to be launch -- they could be the second customer behind EK or any other airline. Also, the 77X isn't exactly a totally new airframe that's going to be a big disappointment/have major issues at launch (at least, it shouldn't).
2. Plenty of airlines have defected -- the example that springs to mind is NZ who usually take the last off the line and are the launch customer for the B789...

Quoting United Airline (Reply 11):
They will need more than 19 I think. Maybe for expansion when the economy picks up again? It is unlikely that they will order 57 A380s but maybe at least 30?

Well we will have to see. But I personally see them aiming for a far more flexible and tailored fleet. A pile of 788/9s, 30-40 77X and 20ish A380s would do BA very nicely.

StickShaker · Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:09 am

Quoting david_itl (Reply 12):
Thought BA policy now was not to be a launch customer. Therefore, bye-bye 787-10X & 777-X.

The 787-10 will be a simple stretch of the 789 and would be viewed as a low risk investment by airlines who aren't fond of being launch customers. Having said that, the 787-10 is more of a 330/772 replacement (without the range of the 77E) rather than a viable 744 replacement.
I'm sure that BA would prefer a 777X but the EIS will be quite late in the decade - does that fit BA's timetable ?
744's are considered gas guzzlers in today's world, let alone 2018/20.

Regads,
StickShaker

na · Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:17 am

That sounds very bad. - a bunch of bland twinjets. Good god, Im afraid that the composition of most fleets in the 20s will make me turn away from aviation as a hobby, as it´ll be the most boring sight since civil aviation exists.

But I´m sure BA will order some more VLAs, a dozen or so more A380s should make sense for them. Even more so for its passengers.

United Airline · Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:19 am

Quoting qf002 (Reply 15):
Well we will have to see. But I personally see them aiming for a far more flexible and tailored fleet. A pile of 788/9s, 30-40 77X and 20ish A380s would do BA very nicely.

Maybe 25-30 I think. They need more than just 12+7. Even QF has 20+4

[Edited 2011-09-20 01:19:34]

CHRISBA777ER · Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:11 am

Quoting david_itl (Reply 12):
Thought BA policy now was not to be a launch customer. Therefore, bye-bye 787-10X & 777-X.

Agreed but as a poster above noted - the 787-10X (if Boeing launch and build it) is a simple stretch of the 787 and should be less stressful at EIS in terms of bugs and MX issues etc than say, a brand new plane. BA got their fingers burned in a big way with the GE90 on the 772s they took in 1995, and the 777 was initially an absolute dog for them.

They are big fans (like what I did there?) of the 777-300ER and I've no doubt they would prefer a 77WX if Boeing offered one.

My gut says they'll want 30+ of whatever type they take so there is considerable scope for a split order in my view. 10-ish A35Xs and ten or so 77WXs (or 77Ws if Boeing dont end up making the NG) to do the heavier stuff the A35X cannot do.

788, 789, A359, A35X, 77W/77WX and A380.

Compelling stuff.

BoeingVista · Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:15 am

Quoting david_itl (Reply 12):
Thought BA policy now was not to be a launch customer. Therefore, bye-bye 787-10X & 777-X.

They didnt enjoy being the launch customer for the 777A or GE90... But that was a long time ago.

warden145 · Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:18 am

Quoting na (Reply 17):
That sounds very bad. - a bunch of bland twinjets. Good god, Im afraid that the composition of most fleets in the 20s will make me turn away from aviation as a hobby, as it´ll be the most boring sight since civil aviation exists.

Sadly, that's the way it's looking to be going forward...the day's coming sooner rather than later when, other than the occasional A380, every airliner out there's going to be a twin. I know I'm in the minority on this board, but I'm dreading that day.

I still think the 747-8i would fit into BA's fleet (similar to how it'll be utilized by LH), but sounds like there's no chance of that happening...

I wonder how long it'll be before airlines start demanding large single-engine airliners?

shankly · Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:21 am

Quoting qf002 (Reply 15):
Also, the 77X isn't exactly a totally new airframe that's going to be a big disappointment/have major issues at launch (at least, it shouldn't).

er....just like the 748 then?

BA has not launched a jet since the 757 and is unlikely ever to do so again, particularly in its new format

Whilst BA has a record of keeping their jets for ever, its dilemma is that the 744's are more than getting on and how long can they afford to wait?

Boeing would be nuts not to offer some sort of rolling 77W/77X fleet....although Boeing have of course proven themselves to be nuts in recent years and might prove an easy picking for Airbus in a sweet 351/388 deal

N14AZ · Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:24 am

Quoting warden145 (Reply 21):
I wonder how long it'll be before airlines start demanding large single-engine airliners?

I heard one airline CEO from the Middle East is even demanding airliners without any engines. Wonder about the qataristics of such a plane...

parapente · Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:36 am

Reply 14. The problem today is, that BA is not deciding their fleet plans - it is IAG...

That hit the nail on the head. It will be an IAG purchase not a BA one - period. What that means I don't know in terms of orders but one has to stop thinking about an airline that (in terms of purchasing) does not exist any more.

In terms of VLA's the 19 they have on order/options will do for the moment. Might as well wait to see what a mark 2 might look like. (a 900 with XWB engines?) before ordering any more.

BA has about 50 772ers that will need replacing and probably about 20 744's (ie less 380's and 773er's). What the position is with the Iberia "bit" I do not know but it will be considered as one whole purchase of that I am sure.

CXB77L · Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:02 am

Quoting 328JET (Reply 14):
And Iberia has a lot of influence in this decision and they have an Airbus-only fleet.

They will order the best aircraft for the airline, regardless of which manufacturer it comes from. If anything, Boeing has the upper hand because BA's current long haul widebody fleet are all Boeings.

Quoting na (Reply 17):
That sounds very bad. - a bunch of bland twinjets.

It's the future. Get used to it. Quad-engined VLAs are a small niche market - the majority of airline fleets will consist of long haul widebody twins. Why use 4 engines when you can use a plane that has 2 engines to do the same job and use less fuel in the process?

Bongodog1964 · Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:09 am

Quoting shankly (Reply 22):
hilst BA has a record of keeping their jets for ever, its dilemma is that the 744's are more than getting on and how long can they afford to wait?

As has been explained many times in Anet, many of the BA 744's are comparitively young, roughly half the fleet was delivered from 1997 - 1999. BA documents show a life expectancy of 25 years for long haul planes, this puts their replacement out at 2022 - 2024, the early 772's fall due for replacement at the same time. If they convert the A380 options they will then have cover for the early 744's. If however they don't convert the options they won't.

par13del · Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:22 am

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 25):
They will order the best aircraft for the airline, regardless of which manufacturer it comes from.

I disagree, they will order the a/c that is best for the group, your second comment ignores the fact that it is now two airlines and not one.

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 25):
If anything, Boeing has the upper hand because BA's current long haul widebody fleet are all Boeings.

So what a/c does BA stable mate have, how many and which OEM represents the bulk of their inventory?

Such are pertinent to the discussion, see the latest order from the AF/KLM Group for verification of how things differ when multiple airlines are involved in the group decision, the so called preference of AF against RR did not affect the order, so why should the IG group be any different?

Burkhard · Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:30 am

And after a year of speculation we hear that BA opts to take two more A380 from their options, 4 more B77W and delays the rest of the decision by another two years.

Airlines that opt for 77X, 787-10X and A350-1000 play a high risk game, and BA isn't well known to do so.

bill142 · Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:30 am

Quoting warden145 (Reply 21):
I still think the 747-8i would fit into BA's fleet (similar to how it'll be utilized by LH), but sounds like there's no chance of that happening...

Don't get down beat. There's a better chance of the 748 than you think.

JerseyFlyer · Tue Sep 20, 2011 10:33 am

I see some additional 77Ws for immediate replacement of a small subset of the 744s.

Beyond that I see long term BA cum Iberia fleet planning determining the mix. The A 350 seems ideally placed for this, given IAG's large combined fleet of 772s and 34xs. So the 3510 has the advantage for the rest of the 744 replacement, as it will be "common" with a much larger fleet of 359s that I see being needed later.

And I don't rule out additional 388s now, if only to allow some of the earlier ones in the delivery schedule to be passed to IB for high volume South America routes.

frigatebird · Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:20 am

This is one RFP neither Boeing nor Airbus wants to lose. There's more at stake than just the replacement of 747s IMHO. The next RFP will be for replacement of 777s. if Airbus wins with the A35J, they will be almost guaranteed of another big order for 359s, If Boeing wins with 779X they can expect a big order for 787-10s to replace 772s. Don't see the 787-10X as a contender to replace 744s

Airbus should be favorite to land this order though. Neither 787-10 nor 777X has been launched, although Boeing still has some time as the RFP is not out yet, and from earlier RFP's BA takes their time to decide. Boeing needs to play its cards in a very smart way to land this order. As said, BA won't be keen to act as launch customer for a 777X, but if they can mitigate that risk by offering 77Ws for lease, BA won't be stuck with 744s longer than they want. If the 779X takes longer to EIS than expected, Boeing can still offer 77W's to bridge the gap. What can Airbus do if the A35J gets further delayed? Offer A380's? They won't be keen to do that, I expect...

qf002 · Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:41 am

Quoting United Airline (Reply 18):
Even QF has 20+4

6 of which have been deferred because it's simply too much for now, of course (and if those 4 options happen then it’s not till mid-late next decade). QF is also a more hub focused airline, whereas BA has a more hub and spoke style network. My bet is that there are some flights where BA would be best dropping some capacity by swapping down a size from the 744 (but not as far as the 77E)

Quoting shankly (Reply 22):
er....just like the 748 then?

Not really. The 747 is an old and inefficient airframe, full stop. Nothing that Boeing can do will make it a competitive option in the face of the competition (being the A380 and 77W). The 77W has a great deal of potential to become even more efficient, and will stand firm against the A35J. It benefits from 30 years of aviation experience over the 747 design, and can easily have much of the latest technology integrated into it with relative ease.

scouseflyer · Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:54 am

Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 30):
And I don't rule out additional 388s now, if only to allow some of the earlier ones in the delivery schedule to be passed to IB for high volume South America routes.

A388s for IB is one of those things that's been talked about for as long as I've been a member on here (about 6 years IIRC) it would be great but I'm not going to hold my breath.

flipdewaf · Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:54 am

Quoting qf002 (Reply 32):

But surely the A350 benefits from nearly 20 years aviaton experience over the 777?

Fred

EPA001 · Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:54 am

Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 30):
And I don't rule out additional 388s now, if only to allow some of the earlier ones in the delivery schedule to be passed to IB for high volume South America routes.

That would be very nice.

.

But overall this one will be very interesting to watch. There are a lot of developments going on right now. It will be a very close contest for sure but I would expect a split Airbus/Boeing order here as well.

scbriml · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:04 pm

I can't see BA ending up with much less than 30 A380s in their fleet. Don't forget that their home base is one of, if not the most slot-restricted airport in the World. In that environment, I cannot see BA only operating 12 or 19 A380s.

If Boeing can get a solid definition of what the 787-10 and/or 777X will be, then BA will be able to chose from some very capable planes (but I have to say, IMHO the 787-10 looks to be the weakest of that bunch).

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this little tit-bit from the article:

Quote:
The London-based company also has 24 787-8s and -9s on order, though has yet to agree delivery dates, according to spokesman Philip Allport.

What's going on there? I appreciate no airline knows exactly when they'll get their -9s, but no agreed delivery dates for BA's -8s seems strange.

astuteman · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:12 pm

Quoting CXB77L (Reply 25):
Why use 4 engines when you can use a plane that has 2 engines to do the same job and use less fuel in the process?

Er..............

Because it doesn't?

An A380-800 has 70% more capacity than a 773ER but only burns about 40%-45% more fuel.

If Airbus ever stretched the current plane (and current engines) to an 80m A380-900, then it would offer 100% more capacity than a 773ER whilst burning about 50%-55% more fuel.

Throw Trent XWB's onto THIS plane and you get 100% more capacity than a 773ER for 40% - 45% more fuel.

A 777X won't overcome this difference, although it will close the gap.
But with a 72m wingspan, most of the extra flexibility the current 773ER enjoys has probably gone west as well

Rgds

shankly · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:17 pm

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 26):
BA documents show a life expectancy of 25 years for long haul planes, this puts their replacement out at 2022 - 2024,

That was the point I made. BA has a history of keeping its jets in service for their full economic life. However, has history not taught you a lesson? Expect the unexpected. BA's 742's were rolling along happily until 11-09-2001. The future economic viability of the 744 fleet now follows a much narrower path than was envisaged when they were ordered and entered service.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 32):
Not really. The 747 is an old and inefficient airframe, full stop. Nothing that Boeing can do will make it a competitive option in the face of the competition (being the A380 and 77W). The 77W has a great deal of potential to become even more efficient, and will stand firm against the A35J. It benefits from 30 years of aviation experience over the 747 design, and can easily have much of the latest technology integrated into it with relative ease

The use of the phrase "relative ease" and the Boeing Airplane Company, should not appear in the same sentence; at least for a while. The 77X may indeed be their chance to get back on track, but its going to need a seemless programme. Hanging a new wing is not a technological tweek or performance enhancement package

Gemuser · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:18 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 36):
I can't see BA ending up with much less than 30 A380s in their fleet. Don't forget that their home base is one of, if not the most slot-restricted airport in the World. In that environment, I cannot see BA only operating 12 or 19 A380s.

DING DING DING

Obvious when stated, isn't it.

Gemuser

par13del · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:21 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 36):
What's going on there? I appreciate no airline knows exactly when they'll get their -9s, but no agreed delivery dates for

Maybe because no one is mentioning the 767's in BA's fleet and are only talking about the 777's and 747.
I believe that BA is looking at the 787 as replacements for the 767 with the 787-9 being a more efficient a/c to the 777-200's but not a full replacement for the entire BA inventory.

Just a thought

CHRISBA777ER · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:22 pm

My reading of this order is that they have split the 744 fleet into two:

First tranche - high/mid density birds.

Second tranche - low density birds.

The idea is that the A380 replaces the high-density birds by offering a smallish number of extra seats but at considerably better comfort/room, and the mentioned trio take up the rest by maintaining the same seat density.

I can see BA ending up with 30+ A380s in due course, although I think the A389 makes more sense for them as the routes they can use an A388 on now would also suit an A389 in my opinion. I'd be surprised if BA ended up with more A388s than A389s.

scouseflyer · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:31 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 37):
If Airbus ever stretched the current plane (and current engines) to an 80m A380-900, then it would offer 100% more capacity than a 773ER whilst burning about 50%-55% more fuel.

Or to put it another way - 25% of the capaity of the A389 would be effectively free from fuel cost!

parapente · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:44 pm

I personnaly struggle to see what the 787-10 has to do with a 744 replacement.

Whether it be wing size,pavement loading ,range etc etc unless they change the aircraft substantially the 787-10 is a A333 HGW type aircraft. Nothing what so ever to do with a 747 class of aircraft.

748i yes,777-9 yes Airbus 350-1000 yes,but a stretched 787 no way.Yet clearly I am wrong as they mention this aircraft.Must be missing something somewhere!

Bongodog1964 · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:46 pm

Quoting shankly (Reply 38):
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 26):
BA documents show a life expectancy of 25 years for long haul planes, this puts their replacement out at 2022 - 2024,

That was the point I made. BA has a history of keeping its jets in service for their full economic life. However, has history not taught you a lesson? Expect the unexpected. BA's 742's were rolling along happily until 11-09-2001. The future economic viability of the 744 fleet now follows a much narrower path than was envisaged when they were ordered and entered service.

This isnt a vaild comparison, yes the 742's did go earlier than their planned 25 years due to the after effects of 9/11. They however went as part of a fleet reduction policy. The original plan was to run them on in conjunction with the 744's. In addition I believe that a number of 744's were cancelled and smaller 772's taken instead.

BA's latest (and last ever) financial report issued in 2010 still showed the 744's running on to the end of their life, I can't see that anything has changed in the past 12 months to alter this.

rheinwaldner · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:46 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 37):
although it will close the gap.

You defined the following corner stones (and I don't question them): 100% more pax for 45-50% more fuel
This means that in order to close the gap the 777X would have to burn 25% less fuel than the 77W.
Can this be expected?
I would say no. No 777 would ever catch up to the fuel burn/per seat of such an A380...

jfk777 · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:50 pm

Why doesn't BA order 20 777-300ER for early 744 replacements. 777 of some type will be prominent in BA's future fleet.

HUYfan · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:53 pm

I really think the A380 is the way forward for BA. There is scope, routewise (with small capacity increases), for a fair few more A380s. Pretty much any route with a 744 could cope with an A380 upgrade, and routes that have multiple daily flights could be consolidated a la Air France and Lufthansa. With no capacity gain at LHR likely for the next 10 years, capacity will continue to be a problem, and larger capacity aircraft will play an important role in BA's future.

Routes that could use the 380 include;

Beijing
Boston
Cape Town
Chicago
Dallas
Delhi
Dubai
Hong Kong
Houston
Johannesburg
Lagos
Las Vegas
Los Angeles
Miami
Mumbai
New York JFK
Phoenix
San Francisco
Sao Paulo
Seattle
Singapore-Sydney
Toronto
Vancouver
Washington

That could potentially constitute a fleet of A380s of 50+

Regards

Mike

Stitch · Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:59 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 36):
What's going on there? I appreciate no airline knows exactly when they'll get their -9s, but no agreed delivery dates for BA's -8s seems strange. {scratch chin}

Maybe BA is not sure when they want them? Since the wording is "yet to agree on delivery dates" as opposed to "has no clue on delivery date"...

Quoting parapente (Reply 43):
I personnaly struggle to see what the 787-10 has to do with a 744 replacement.

The 787-10 will offer a third more cargo capacity and a quarter less floorspace (roughly) than a 747-400. So if BA wants to increase their presence in the cargo market to North America, Africa and the Middle East, the 787-10 would give them the ability to do so.

Bongodog1964 · Tue Sep 20, 2011 1:02 pm

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 46):
Why doesn't BA order 20 777-300ER for early 744 replacements. 777 of some type will be prominent in BA's future fleet.

BA has already covered the replacement of the early 744's by ordering A380's.

All these suggestions of BA replacing 744's with smaller aircraft keep ignoring one fundamental point - lack of slots at LHR. If BA purchase smaller aircraft as replacements, they will being contracting their business.
A 773 is about a 10% reduction in capacity on a BA seating plan.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net