I understand that BA has ordered some A380s, A350-1000s, B777-300ERs to replace the B 747-400s though the B 747-400s will be around for sometime.

How many firm/option orders of A380 did BA order? I believe they need more than what they have ordered and I believe they will order more in addition to exercising the options. I know this has been discussed before but it seems that the market is ever changing

BA currently has 12 A380s on order. I would be extremely surprised if the number stayed at 12, particularly given the congestion at the airline's main hub.

I don't know how many options it has, but if you look at the number of routes currently operated by 744s, not all of these will (or can) be replaced by A350s and 77Ws without losing capacity; BA won't want to give ground to other carriers and of course, to operate daily services on some long haul routes such as HKG, LAX and (in particular) South Africa, you need more then one aircraft to sustain such an operation.

I would also be surprised if BA were not among the customers for the A380-900 when it is eventually launched.

I believe so, considering the chances of having a new runway at LHR or a new airport in London in this century. Using larger aircraft is the only way to free slots and open new destinations.

BA has seven options on A380s.

Willie Walsh said it was "unlikely" only last month BA would take additional A380s beyond the committed 12.

IAG Says 777X A 'Perfect Fit' For Parts Of Network (by waly777 Mar 19 2013 in Civil Aviation)

=

Can easily be a way to negotiate a better deal.

I believe they will have up to 30 A380s at one point

Funnily enough, that was the only "point" in the interview on which they didn't print a direct quote from WW.

Th article also quotes WW later on as saying:

Quote: BA has 12 A380s on order, the first of which will arrive later this year. Walsh says he can “see a case for increasing that, but we think 12 is a good [fleet] size.”

WW isn't a riddle speaker. What he is very clever at is saying something from which people try and draw quite differing interpretations.

Seeing 12 as a good size is in the same league as saying the 777-9X would be perfect for some of the BA network. Yes, 12 is a good size, yes the 777-9X might be perfect, but that in no way implies 12 is the final fleet count nor is his comment about the -9X a signal that they will add them to the fleet; there may be another offering just as perfect but for more routes or more easily integrated into the fleet.

I did find the article at the time somewhat skewed subjectively towards shining a beacon on the -9X rather than an objective report of the actualy situation. Time has somewhat proven that suspicion to be, up to now, somewhat correct.

12, or indeed 19, should BA exercise all their options, will not be sufficient to satisfy full coverage of the destinations planned, nor allow for future increased demand.

BA could very feasibly be holding out for the fabled -900 to cover the major demand heavy trunk routes on the network.

What BA can't hold out for is expansion of the LHR infrastructure. The only means therefore to maintain or increase market share at LHR will be to increase capacity. To suggest they are going to retrench to smaller capacity twins without further VLA investment is therefore misguided.

If the -900 fails to ever launch, BA require an A388 fleet of 26+ according to my back of hand sums.

Time will tell.   

Rgds

I have very little doubt that we will see more than 12 A380s at BA in the near future.

Regardless of the 744 fleet replacement you also have to start to consider replacement for the oldest of the 772 fleet, as well as the potential need to free up some longhaul frames to move to LGW for any expansion of the longhaul at that base.

There will also be a need fairly soon for a high(er) capacity aircraft for use on domestic routes and some of the higher capacity Euro feeder routes (AMS), now either this will be a brand new 787, or perhaps a refitted 772 ? Either way, these aircraft will need to be found from somewhere !


cs

The main problem with the A380 fleet with BA is A380 sized stands in T5 LHR. Too many aircraft and you have no where to park them.

One trouble with a -900 is that it might not offer the correct mix of seats for various routes, Take JNB LHR BA have 2 x 744 within 90 mins. A 380-900 might well have the space of these two 744 more or less but the 744 have 14F and usually 70J. Are you going to configure a 380 in 28F and 140J ? I doubt this will work but those two 744's usually go out full in F and J so that high yield revenue could be lost. The extra Y seats even on the 744 are often not sold or go out with a low yield. If this scenario applies on many BA routes then I see a problem for the A380-900 with BA and perhaps others.

Other than the already announced A380 routes where are these beasts going to be deployed to warrant extra orders ?

Surely SFO has got to be in the running ?


cs

Quoting cornishsimon (Reply 12): Other than the already announced A380 routes where are these beasts going to be deployed

HKG, LAX, SIN, JNB, SFO, MEX, PVG, MIA, GRU

These were the routes bandied around some 6 or so months ago behind closed doors. There were 10, but the last one eludes me right now. JFK was mentioned, though only as a possible consolidator of the 174 and 176 into one. I understand that was less to do about capacity and more to do with releasing a peak arrival slot for another purpose.

Irrespective of whether BA do invest more heavily in the A380, this month's orders can leave no-one in doubt that BA will have an impressive, modern and streamlined long haul fleet moving forwards by way of the B787, the A350 and of course, the A380.

Rgds

It doesn't sound like BA will have anything like the fleet of A380s that they had of the 747, which must be disappointing for Airbus. Indeed the A380 programme has rather been sidelined by the big twins, and seems a bit dependant on EK...

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4): Willie Walsh said it was "unlikely" only last month BA would take additional A380s beyond the committed 12.

BA went from "the 777X is perfect" to "there might still be a place in the fleet for the 777X" in just a few days. Frankly, I can't see how BA will only have 12 A380s in the long-term. The constraints at LHR more than anything demand otherwise.

Quoting Lofty (Reply 8): The main problem with the A380 fleet with BA is A380 sized stands in T5 LHR. Too many aircraft and you have no where to park them.

Assuming BA knows how to schedule its planes, most of the time, most of the fleet wouldn't be there.   

Quoting Lofty (Reply 8): The main problem with the A380 fleet with BA is A380 sized stands in T5 LHR. Too many aircraft and you have no where to park them.

I believe a new satellite terminal will be built where the fuel farm currently stands. This will be entirely A380.

I believe BA will have up to 30 A380s at some stage.

Will they fly the A380s to SYD?

Quoting blueshamu330s (Reply 13): HKG, LAX, SIN, JNB, SFO, MEX, PVG, MIA, GRU

Why MEX? Is it that busy? Could we add CPT, JFK & YYZ?

You can bet on it that BA will have more than 12 A380s in the future. They are even one of the perfect airlines for the A380-900. Twenty A380-800s and ten A380-900s by 2025 seem very likely to me. Also: I am sure that soon after 2020 Airbus will introduce vastly improved engines for the whalejet minimizing the chances of a 777-9X.
Secondary role goes to the A350-1000, now that they have ordered them I bet the 77W´s stint in the fleet will be a relatively short one. And 777X and A3510 in one fleet? Well, only that: to me that makes much less sense than A380 and 748 together now.

Quoting Lofty (Reply 8): The main problem with the A380 fleet with BA is A380 sized stands in T5 LHR. Too many aircraft and you have no where to park them

Good fleet planning should ensure they are in the air as much as possible. You would rarely have to park more than a handful at LHR at anyone time. and remember BA are not averse to towing aircraft to remote stands during long layovers like they have done regularly, particularly from T3.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 3): BA has seven options on A380s.

And I expect them to convert these options. But not any time soon.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4): Willie Walsh said it was "unlikely" only last month BA would take additional A380s beyond the committed 12.

Well, since then his opinion already shifted quite a bit. But I have no doubt the B777-X will also make it into the IAG-fleets of BA and most likely also IB. Leaving less room for the A380-potential. But still I see growth potential for the A380 in BA's fleet.  .

Quoting clydenairways (Reply 9): I think they will wait until the larger A380 is launched and this will become their main A380 variant.

The A380-900 would be great on a slot restricted airport as LHR. And would be one hell of a plane. And the new CASM benchmark for a long time to come imho.   

Quoting scbriml (Reply 15): BA went from "the 777X is perfect" to "there might still be a place in the fleet for the 777X" in just a few days. Frankly, I can't see how BA will only have 12 A380s in the long-term. The constraints at LHR more than anything demand otherwise.

I agree with you completely.  .

Quoting na (Reply 19): Twenty A380-800s and ten A380-900s by 2025 seem very likely to me.

  

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 21): The A380-900 would be great on a slot restricted airport as LHR. And would be one hell of a plane. And the new CASM benchmark for a long time to come imho.

As it´ll for sure have improved engines, so no one will be able to touch the numbers of such a plane for sure for a very long time. Maybe it´ll change the game again towards VLAs.

Quoting United Airline (Reply 5): I believe they will have up to 30 A380s at one point

You'd be wrong alas, BA don't want any more and frankly may struggle to effectively deploy the 12 that are coming. It's not as simple as congested hub therefore bigger aircraft. You can all bet on 30 A388s as much as you like, they're looking closely at the B777-X with great interest. The A388 will be great for BA but it seems unlikely they're going to order a pile of them. 2 x B744s per day does not = 1 A388 so no for growth you'd be looking at routes that have 2 B744s or a B777 / B744 mix to upguage, the HKGs and LAXs of this world. They're not looking at making LHR-JFK an A388 shuttle for example.
I could be wrong but that's what I am hearing.

Quote: Will BA Order More A380s?

IMO it's a bit too soon to give you a simple yes or no. Like other carries, BA will have to discover the performance and capabilities of the whalejet first. I can see them ordering more if the A380 match or exceed their expectations, but not in the next few years.

BA will take delivery of 3 A380 aircraft this year and another 5 next year. Before we know it, LHR will be crowded with A380's.

Quoting United Airline
"I believe BA will have up to 30 A380s at some stage.

Will they fly the A380s to SYD?"

I think this will be a very long time coming. They downgraded SYD to a 77W to try and make the route more viable. With the schedule and the distance you basically need three aircraft to operate the schedule. That is a massive investment especially for such a large premium bird as the A380. There would be many,many better options for BA's 380's before SYD in my opinion.

Quoting clydenairways (Reply 23): The only problem with your question is that it is taking about NOW, and a lot of other people on A-net also make the same mistake. The real question should be what is the POTENTIAL for MEX over the next decade or two. This is what Aircraft orders are for. Not today but the future !

okay then, is there so much potential for MEX in the future?

Quoting skipness1E (Reply 24): BA don't want any more

I agree about 30 being too much. 30 A380's is a lot! But they have 7 more options so their is a possible future where the BA staff have foreseen a fleet of 19 whalejets.

I think their strategy is panning out nicely.One has to recall the situation all those years ago when BA ordered their 747's. There wasn't much choice for a long range large capacity aircraft. I have little doubt that even then many routes were pushed to fill 744's.But economies of scale etc.

It is a very different situation now where the range of aircaft available (with the necessay range) is very broad so one can tailor a fleet to real demand.

Taking options into account 19 380's sounds about right (out of the 55 744's). Then you have the 773er's , the 351's and the 789's. You quickly get to a total replacement number. But this time you will have far higher average load factors (particularly if you mix and match throughout the year) and save an oil field of fuel to boot!

Well done them.

I sometimes think that we expect airlines like BA, which are traditionally very conservative with their AC planning, to place large bulk orders. Look at how BA ordered the 744. Almost in batches of 15 and they soon came to be the largest operator of the type. As mentioned above BA needs to see its preformance for itself.

That is what happened with the 77W. They originally ordered 6, they are now up to 12. BA likes to see it before they belive it.

I have no doubt that the fleet will not increase in time.

Quoting APYu (Reply 20): Good fleet planning should ensure they are in the air as much as possible. You would rarely have to park more than a handful at LHR at anyone time. and remember BA are not averse to towing aircraft to remote stands during long layovers like they have done regularly, particularly from T3.

One of the problems is that if you look at the list of destinations favoured by a-netters making their suggestions as to BA's use of the 380 is that many have late evening departures and, more importantly, early morning arrivals at LHR. Consider these:

Quoting blueshamu330s (Reply 13): HKG, LAX, SIN, JNB, SFO, MEX, PVG, MIA, GRU

HKG: BA025 d. 18:30
HKG: BA027 d. 21:55
HKG: BA026 a. 04:50
HKG: BA028 a. 05:40

LAX: BA279 d. 09:40
LAX: BA283 d. 12:05
LAX: BA269 d. 16:15
LAX: BA278 a. 09:55
LAX: BA282 a. 12:00
LAX: BA268 a. 15:45

SIN: BA011 d. 19:15
SIN: BA015 d. 21:15
SIN: BA012 a. 05:00
SIN: BA016 a. 05:30

JNB: BA055 d. 19:10
JNB: BA056 d. 21:20
JNB: BA056 a. 05:15
JNB: BA034 a. 08:15

SFO: BA285 d. 11:45
SFO: BA287 d. 14:00
SFO: BA284 a. 09:20
SFO: BA286 a. 10:50

MEX: BA243 d. 14:05
MEX: BA242 a. 14:00

PVG: BA169 d. 11:55
PVG: BA168 a. 16:10

MIA: BA207 d. 11:15
MIA: BA209 d. 13:35
MIA: BA206 a. 06:40
MIA: BA208 a. 10:00

GRU: BA247 d. 21:50
GRU: BA246 a. 07:20

So, for example, half or eight of the current arrivals listed above are between 04:50 am and 08:15 am.

Of course some juggling of the timetable is possible. But the demand for an early morning arrival slot from aircraft arriving from the south and east is very high partly because of the constraints on their (late evening) departure times. This demand is added to by aircraft transiting the North Atlantic but there are not the similar departure time constraints on these flights.

It is worth remembering that there are constraints on the number of hourly terminal passengers. International arrivals max at T5 is 3,750 passengers an hour. In the current Summer 2013 season this limit is already potentially (with 100 per cent load factors) reached on every day of the week except Monday in the very early morning period.

However evening departures or, indeed, departures at any other time of the day would probably not be impacted by T5 max passenger capacity which is 4,500 per hour (international plus CTA).

It is also worth remembering that T5 passenger capacity is not so much dependent on aircraft stands but much more on the maximum passenger throughput of facilities like immigration.

If you remember BA used to fly B747-100 / B747-200 / B747-400 / B767-300 / B777-200 / DC10-30 and of course the Concorde all on long haul. That changed to a B744 / B772 / B763 mix where the long range of the B744 was not used on half the routes it was used on, in a sense abusing the aircraft. In a sense.

Now we're heading back to a mixed long haul fleet of B744 / B772 / B77W / B763 / B788 / A388 with the A350 to follow, more tailored it seems than a one size fits all Jumbo fleet. Did I mention they used to fly TriStar 200s too? Ahhhhhhh......

* I didn't mention the Minbus as they've only got two and it's terribly niche  

I hope BA will launch the A380 to MIA sooner or later. BA did have 3x daily services to MIA. But I do believe AA added another MIA-LHR flight. Making BA reduce services to 2x daily.

Virgin Atlantic also has 1x daily service to MIA-LHR

Quoting VV701 (Reply 33): One of the problems is that if you look at the list of destinations favoured by a-netters making their suggestions as to BA's use of the 380 is that many have late evening departures and, more importantly, early morning arrivals at LHR. Consider these: Quoting blueshamu330s (Reply 13): HKG, LAX, SIN, JNB, SFO, MEX, PVG, MIA, GRU HKG: BA025 d. 18:30 HKG: BA027 d. 21:55 HKG: BA026 a. 04:50 HKG: BA028 a. 05:40 LAX: BA279 d. 09:40 LAX: BA283 d. 12:05 LAX: BA269 d. 16:15 LAX: BA278 a. 09:55 LAX: BA282 a. 12:00 LAX: BA268 a. 15:45 SIN: BA011 d. 19:15 SIN: BA015 d. 21:15 SIN: BA012 a. 05:00 SIN: BA016 a. 05:30 JNB: BA055 d. 19:10 JNB: BA056 d. 21:20 JNB: BA056 a. 05:15 JNB: BA034 a. 08:15 SFO: BA285 d. 11:45 SFO: BA287 d. 14:00 SFO: BA284 a. 09:20 SFO: BA286 a. 10:50 MEX: BA243 d. 14:05 MEX: BA242 a. 14:00 PVG: BA169 d. 11:55 PVG: BA168 a. 16:10 MIA: BA207 d. 11:15 MIA: BA209 d. 13:35 MIA: BA206 a. 06:40 MIA: BA208 a. 10:00 GRU: BA247 d. 21:50 GRU: BA246 a. 07:20 So, for example, half or eight of the current arrivals listed above are between 04:50 am and 08:15 am. Of course some juggling of the timetable is possible. But the demand for an early morning arrival slot from aircraft arriving from the south and east is very high partly because of the constraints on their (late evening) departure times. This demand is added to by aircraft transiting the North Atlantic but there are not the similar departure time constraints on these flights.

Always worth mentioning that despite certain destinations having multiple daily departures, SFO for example being 2x744 etc, theres nothing to say that SFO might not end up being 1xA380 & 1x772/3 / A350

with as Skipness pointed out a more diverse fleet, they can match capacity with demand more


cs