As the years tick by, BA’s fleet of 777-200ERs are getting older. With the oldest aircraft being over 21 years old. Although retirement isn’t looking immediately likely.

What aircraft do we think would replace fleet? Could we see an increased order of 787-9s or 10s?

Also, what do we think would replace the 300ERs in the fleet? A350-1000?

Regards,

BAWLGW

787-9 and -10s for the shorter 777 routes, A350-900s for the longer flights.

777-300ERs are too far out to tell, but the A350-1000 looks like a perfect fit, maybe the 787-10. But so far out in the future it could just as well be a yet to be developed plane like the A350neo-1100 or 787-11.

BAWLGW wrote:

As the years tick by, BA’s fleet of 777-200ERs are getting older. With the oldest aircraft being over 21 years old. Although retirement isn’t looking immediately likely.

What aircraft do we think would replace fleet? Could we see an increased order of 787-9s or 10s?

Also, what do we think would replace the 300ERs in the fleet? A350-1000?

Regards,

BAWLGW

In regards to 777-300ER replacement we won't see that for a long time they're relatively new. BBy the time they're ready for the replacement the A350 program would be outdated

Lets see - 777-200ERs, with BA's publicly announced 30 year life policy for them, don't require deliveries to start until 2027.
Right now they're going through a refurbishment, so BA really don't plan to replace them any time soon.
300-ERs - well the last 3 BA has on order haven't even been delivered yet, and you're worrying about replacements already.
Why not come back and ask the question in about 2022 for the 200ERs, and quite a lot later for the 300ERs. Thing is, the model range Airbus and Boeing offer changes subtly over time, if you don't want planes until 8 years in the future, it's better to wait a little and see what changes appear in the 787 and A350 series in the next 3 or 4 years first.

JQ321 wrote:

In regards to 777-300ER replacement we won't see that for a long time they're relatively new.

I'm not so sure. I seem to remember that when BA first took 777-300ERs there was talk of them being a relatively short-term solution. And don't forget that more than half of them are leased.

I see the B777X in the future BA fleet............

BA is nicely positioned to take the Ultrafan engined A350NEO in the middle of the next decade. The GE engined 772ERs will be the next batch to leave and they have got life in them yet.

The three oddball 772A aircraft are being replaced by 773ERs incoming and shuffling of the fleet.

pabloeing wrote:

I see the B777X in the future BA fleet............

I seriously hope not.

PM wrote:

pabloeing wrote:
I see the B777X in the future BA fleet............


I seriously hope not.

I think that following the termination of the A380, 777Xs are pretty much a certainty; indeed, I thought they were pretty likely even before then. BA had spoken about a need for larger aircraft, but couldn't agree on pricing with Airbus; with the A380 and 747-8 dead, the only VLAs in town are the A35K and the 777-9. As an existing 777 customer, BA would not find it that difficult to incorporate the 777X into its fleet (certainly a lot less difficult than the A350.)

They won't need to replace the A380 for a while; indeed, they might even try and pick up a few secondhand, if the price is right, but the 777X will certainly figure in their plans. Given the numbers that they need to replace (c.50 777-200s and 30 744s), the numbers they have already ordered are not sufficient to match the capacity of aircraft that will need to be replaced.

VSMUT wrote:

787-9 and -10s for the shorter 777 routes, A350-900s for the longer flights.

777-300ERs are too far out to tell, but the A350-1000 looks like a perfect fit, maybe the 787-10. But so far out in the future it could just as well be a yet to be developed plane like the A350neo-1100 or 787-11.

I think A359s are seriously unlikely; the 789 can do the ULH flights, with the 35K doing routes that require a higher capacity acft; the A359 are too close in capacity.

pabloeing wrote:

I see the B777X in the future BA fleet............

And I do not. Like some other here, I see more 787 (-9 &-10) and A350 (-900 & -1000). Now it will depend if BA wants one big order or to proced by increment.

By increment, BA longhaul fleet would look like :
- 20 A380 (if 2nd hand market works otherwise, add 12 A351 or 781)
- 12 788
- 30 789
- 25 781
- 20 A359
- 30 A351

In one big order, I feel A350 would be the winner considering IAG position:
- 20 A380 (if 2nd hand market works otherwise, add 12 A351)
- 12 788
- 18 789
- 12 781
- 30 A359
- 45 A351

It's interesting as you get different stories depending on who you listen to. Rumours suggest the current COO would have binned the A350 if it wasn't too late when he joined the airline. Others say the A350 order was to leverage Boeing in giving a big discount on the 777X.

Most 777-200ERs have at least 10 years left. The 777-200s will leave the fleet to be replaced by 777-300ERs from Q3 2020. Most, if not all 4-class RR LHR based 777-200ERs are going to be converted to 3-class aircraft, dropping First. The first batch of A350-1000s are also coming without First in a 3 class configuration. That could well be an intended replacement over time. The 787-9 is almost exactly the same capacity wise as a 4-class 777-200ER. That's virtually a ready made replacement with a 20% fuel burn saving and as all 787-9s have crew rest facilities they wouldn't be restricted like the current unbunked GE 777-200ERs.

The Heathrow-based replacements for the 777-200ER are quite straight forward therefore with a mix of 787-9/10s and A350s. The 777X isn't completely necessary. The difficult bit might be replacing the LGW based 777s. They'll want to keep it to one type, so A350 or B787 but not both. The 787-9 would be a big capacity reductiom versus the new densified 777s and at some airfields (notably SJO and LIM) it might not have the performance. The 787-10 I don't think will have the legs to take a full load to MRU, or LIM for that matter. The A350-1000 might be too big for somewhere like SKB or GND? I'm not sure. But again, I've heard of performance difficulties with the Cathay A350-900 between HKG and LGW so the -1000 would definitely struggle with LIM and SJO.

BA seem very happy with the 787 (engine issues aside) and I can see a big top up order at some point. The 777-300ER may well grow in numbers if some relatively cheap short term leases pop up. It's a decent, capable aircraft that suits just about anywhere on the BA LHR network.

An order should happen sometime this summer/autumn - but that's been said for the past 18 months now!

pabloeing wrote:

I see the B777X in the future BA fleet............

I am shocked.

kaitak wrote:

the only VLAs in town are the A35K and the 777-9

And BA has A35Ks on order with lots of options.

kaitak wrote:

I think A359s are seriously unlikely; the 789 can do the ULH flights, with the 35K doing routes that require a higher capacity acft; the A359 are too close in capacity.

You would think, but a growing number of airlines have ordered or are already operating both the A359 and the 789. The A359 is clearly giving them something the 789 can't.

I'm going to bet on the 787-10

Reason being that BA doesn't have many ULH routes, so they don't desperately need the range. BA also has low-density cabins, which increases the range of the aircraft. And the 787-10 has lower costs than the A350-900.

So, take a 78J, give it 12 First, one extra row of Club World relative to the 787-9, keep Premium and Economy roughly the same as the 787-9, and you've got a great replacement for the high-premium 777-200ER config. Presumably the other configs could be replicated in the 78J, too.

It just makes more sense for BA.

And it isn't like they'd want to fly direct to Australia; they can let Qantas do that for them.

When are the first BA 77Es planned to leave? As much as I have read, only the old 77"A" oddballs have an official retirement date set for them. Will the older 77Es leave together with the last 744s which were built around the same time in the late 90s?

Still too many comparisons on here of the 350 v the 787.
The 787 is closer the 330. The 350 more towards the 777.

They are quite different machines.

mig17 wrote:

pabloeing wrote:

I see the B777X in the future BA fleet............

And I do not. Like some other here, I see more 787 (-9 &-10) and A350 (-900 & -1000). Now it will depend if BA wants one big order or to proced by increment.

By increment, BA longhaul fleet would look like :
- 20 A380 (if 2nd hand market works otherwise, add 12 A351 or 781)
- 12 788
- 30 789
- 25 781
- 20 A359
- 30 A351

In one big order, I feel A350 would be the winner considering IAG position:
- 20 A380 (if 2nd hand market works otherwise, add 12 A351)
- 12 788
- 18 789
- 12 781
- 30 A359
- 45 A351

With the 2nd hand A380s.. could BA be looking to take QR’s 380s? Yes, they have different engines.. but they have a mix of engines on the 777 fleet.

BAWLGW wrote:

mig17 wrote:

pabloeing wrote:

I see the B777X in the future BA fleet............

And I do not. Like some other here, I see more 787 (-9 &-10) and A350 (-900 & -1000). Now it will depend if BA wants one big order or to proced by increment.

By increment, BA longhaul fleet would look like :
- 20 A380 (if 2nd hand market works otherwise, add 12 A351 or 781)
- 12 788
- 30 789
- 25 781
- 20 A359
- 30 A351

In one big order, I feel A350 would be the winner considering IAG position:
- 20 A380 (if 2nd hand market works otherwise, add 12 A351)
- 12 788
- 18 789
- 12 781
- 30 A359
- 45 A351

With the 2nd hand A380s.. could BA be looking to take QR’s 380s? Yes, they have different engines.. but they have a mix of engines on the 777 fleet.

Also, A380plus interior when the new club seat goes in?

scbriml wrote:

pabloeing wrote:

I see the B777X in the future BA fleet............

I am shocked.

kaitak wrote:

the only VLAs in town are the A35K and the 777-9

And BA has A35Ks on order with lots of options.

kaitak wrote:

I think A359s are seriously unlikely; the 789 can do the ULH flights, with the 35K doing routes that require a higher capacity acft; the A359 are too close in capacity.

You would think, but a growing number of airlines have ordered or are already operating both the A359 and the 789. The A359 is clearly giving them something the 789 can't.

Airlines who are doing this are probably doing it so they can use it as leverage on current or future purchases from Boeing or Airbus.

StudiodeKadent wrote:

I'm going to bet on the 787-10

Reason being that BA doesn't have many ULH routes, so they don't desperately need the range. BA also has low-density cabins, which increases the range of the aircraft. And the 787-10 has lower costs than the A350-900.

So, take a 78J, give it 12 First, one extra row of Club World relative to the 787-9, keep Premium and Economy roughly the same as the 787-9, and you've got a great replacement for the high-premium 777-200ER config. Presumably the other configs could be replicated in the 78J, too.

It just makes more sense for BA.

And it isn't like they'd want to fly direct to Australia; they can let Qantas do that for them.

I think they are a probably wanting to remove first all jets except for the A380

garf25 wrote:

Still too many comparisons on here of the 350 v the 787.
The 787 is closer the 330. The 350 more towards the 777.

They are quite different machines.

See your point, but the 787 is a vastly different machine to the 747. And that doesn’t seem to stop airlines using the 787 as a replacement (Qantas, BA etc)

BA777FO wrote:

It's interesting as you get different stories depending on who you listen to. Rumours suggest the current COO would have binned the A350 if it wasn't too late when he joined the airline. Others say the A350 order was to leverage Boeing in giving a big discount on the 777X.

Most 777-200ERs have at least 10 years left. The 777-200s will leave the fleet to be replaced by 777-300ERs from Q3 2020. Most, if not all 4-class RR LHR based 777-200ERs are going to be converted to 3-class aircraft, dropping First. The first batch of A350-1000s are also coming without First in a 3 class configuration. That could well be an intended replacement over time. The 787-9 is almost exactly the same capacity wise as a 4-class 777-200ER. That's virtually a ready made replacement with a 20% fuel burn saving and as all 787-9s have crew rest facilities they wouldn't be restricted like the current unbunked GE 777-200ERs.

The Heathrow-based replacements for the 777-200ER are quite straight forward therefore with a mix of 787-9/10s and A350s. The 777X isn't completely necessary. The difficult bit might be replacing the LGW based 777s. They'll want to keep it to one type, so A350 or B787 but not both. The 787-9 would be a big capacity reductiom versus the new densified 777s and at some airfields (notably SJO and LIM) it might not have the performance. The 787-10 I don't think will have the legs to take a full load to MRU, or LIM for that matter. The A350-1000 might be too big for somewhere like SKB or GND? I'm not sure. But again, I've heard of performance difficulties with the Cathay A350-900 between HKG and LGW so the -1000 would definitely struggle with LIM and SJO.

BA seem very happy with the 787 (engine issues aside) and I can see a big top up order at some point. The 777-300ER may well grow in numbers if some relatively cheap short term leases pop up. It's a decent, capable aircraft that suits just about anywhere on the BA LHR network.

An order should happen sometime this summer/autumn - but that's been said for the past 18 months now!

I agree, the LGW fleet replacement will be a difficult task. However if they were/if to scoop DY’s slots after they go down the pan (??) or buy MT’s Gatwick operation I can imagine a order of 788 and use the extra slots to add frequencies and start up new destinations.

My personal feeling for BA’s future longhaul fleet is:

787-8
787-9
787-10
A350-1000
A380

At the moment BA’s longhaul fleet is a bit of a mess. Take the 777 for instance: there are so many different interior variations. Why not have the same interior seat map/template on all aircraft (787, A350 etc). After all they all have 4 sets of doors, so would be incredibly easy to have a High J and a Low J variant of each aircraft. Ultimately I can see BA taking F out of all their aircraft except for the 380s. The 380s could adopt the A380plus interior when the new J seat gets fitted. Never understood their upstairs/downstairs J philosophy on their 380s.

PM wrote:

JQ321 wrote:

In regards to 777-300ER replacement we won't see that for a long time they're relatively new.

I'm not so sure. I seem to remember that when BA first took 777-300ERs there was talk of them being a relatively short-term solution. And don't forget that more than half of them are leased.

BA's 77W's were initially a short term interim plan proposed by Boeing due to delivery delays on the Dreamliners, but BA liked the performance they provided, and subsequently ordered more. So I think that initial plan has been dismissed.

BAWLGW wrote:

My personal feeling for BA’s future longhaul fleet is:

787-8
787-9
787-10
A350-1000
A380

At the moment BA’s longhaul fleet is a bit of a mess. Take the 777 for instance: there are so many different interior variations. Why not have the same interior seat map/template on all aircraft (787, A350 etc). After all they all have 4 sets of doors, so would be incredibly easy to have a High J and a Low J variant of each aircraft. Ultimately I can see BA taking F out of all their aircraft except for the 380s. The 380s could adopt the A380plus interior when the new J seat gets fitted. Never understood their upstairs/downstairs J philosophy on their 380s.

777-300ER going to be around until well after 2030, any "future fleet" needs to include them. BA currently has 12 77W plus 3 coming so they will have 15 777-300ER's. Its likely the 777-9 will be needed for its capacity and floor space, it would be a great 744 replacement.

BA can afford to take some time on this one. An A359neo could give them an operational advantage as the 772s start to be retired, but the big unknown for them is the fate of Heathrow's third runway.

If they remain slot constrained then sure, the 779 is attractive. If they can pick up more slots with a third runway then yes, taking A359neo gives them greater frequency across the Atlantic and commonality with IAG partners. Remember, BA have something like 70 flights a day going to North America. More 787-10s would work, but the potential of the Ultrafan has to be a big factor on aircraft that will still be about until the middle of this century.

If the 77Ws stay in the medium term then they'd work well down at Gatwick in a dense configuration. That could leave Heathrow with the full range of 787s and A350s - assuming the A380s become expensive to run - and probably mean that the pilots could be rated on all types, right?

BAWLGW wrote:

My personal feeling for BA’s future longhaul fleet is:

787-8
787-9
787-10
A350-1000
A380

At the moment BA’s longhaul fleet is a bit of a mess. Take the 777 for instance: there are so many different interior variations. Why not have the same interior seat map/template on all aircraft (787, A350 etc). After all they all have 4 sets of doors, so would be incredibly easy to have a High J and a Low J variant of each aircraft. Ultimately I can see BA taking F out of all their aircraft except for the 380s. The 380s could adopt the A380plus interior when the new J seat gets fitted. Never understood their upstairs/downstairs J philosophy on their 380s.

I think you'll need to add the 77W to that list - they'll be around for a while yet. No other aircraft type can carry cargo like that thing - that's why it's deployed to HKG, HND, SIN, GRU and others. The 3 new ones will be really useful too.

On the configuration issue, it is recognised that the 777 fleet has too many configurations - but the 747 only has 2 configs and all other long haul aircraft only have 1 per subtype. The A350 is likely to end up with 2 but it is becoming much more simplified.

I don't think we'll see First go. The 787-9 has 8 in First, a reduction from the 14 on the 747, 777 and A380. I think that's more likely to be the future than a wholesale withdrawel of First. The 4-class LGW 777s are retaining First despite their densification and I'd hazard a guess that many of the remaining RR powered 4 class 777s at LHR will be reconfigured for 3 class and make their way to LGW as 787-10s and A350s make their way to LHR. First is getting a significant investment at the end of this year into next year so it won't be leaving anytime soon. On certain routes it's a huge money spinner - many of them not served by the A380!

The 787-8 at LGW is a significant reduction in capacity versus the 3 class 777s there now (214 v 336). It may well be that the LGW 777 replacement is a mix of 787-8/9/10s but at the moment they're far too new (read expensively financed against paid off 777s!) to do anything other than LHR work. Maybe in 10 years time some older 787s will go to Gatwick as the A350 is just too much for some of the routes (BDA, ANU-SKB and UVF-GND). That's at least 10 years away though, the 777s have plenty of life left in them yet!

Andy33 wrote:

Lets see - 777-200ERs, with BA's publicly announced 30 year life policy for them, don't require deliveries to start until 2027.
Right now they're going through a refurbishment, so BA really don't plan to replace them any time soon.
300-ERs - well the last 3 BA has on order haven't even been delivered yet, and you're worrying about replacements already.

BA has 4 300ER on order. 3 to replace the non-ER 200 and one extra.

BAWLGW wrote:

My personal feeling for BA’s future longhaul fleet is:

787-8
787-9
787-10
A350-1000
A380

At the moment BA’s longhaul fleet is a bit of a mess. Take the 777 for instance: there are so many different interior variations. Why not have the same interior seat map/template on all aircraft (787, A350 etc). After all they all have 4 sets of doors, so would be incredibly easy to have a High J and a Low J variant of each aircraft. Ultimately I can see BA taking F out of all their aircraft except for the 380s. The 380s could adopt the A380plus interior when the new J seat gets fitted. Never understood their upstairs/downstairs J philosophy on their 380s.

What on earth are you going on about taking out F? BA's got F in all eight daily LHR-JFK flights, with none operated with A380s, because they make money on this premium business route. There are 772s with F to leisure places such as BGI and UVF because there are well-heeled people who pay for this.

BAWLGW wrote:

My personal feeling for BA’s future longhaul fleet is:

787-8
787-9
787-10
A350-1000
A380

At the moment BA’s longhaul fleet is a bit of a mess. Take the 777 for instance: there are so many different interior variations. Why not have the same interior seat map/template on all aircraft (787, A350 etc). After all they all have 4 sets of doors, so would be incredibly easy to have a High J and a Low J variant of each aircraft. Ultimately I can see BA taking F out of all their aircraft except for the 380s. The 380s could adopt the A380plus interior when the new J seat gets fitted. Never understood their upstairs/downstairs J philosophy on their 380s.

BA can not get the A380 into the JFK terminal at the moment so they will always keep a First class presence on that route with what ever 777//789/ A350 they have.

LGW could exclusively be served with the 787-9 and 787-10. The latter has range with full payload up to around 10 hours or 5000mi so will be fine for all the US and Caribbean destinations. Anything further can be served by the 787-9 which has almost as much capacity as the 777-200ER - around 300 seats in a denser 3-class config.

At LHR the three versions of the 787 can probably meet most requirements for now, until the 777-300ER needs replacing. The requirement for a larger aircraft with 5000 mile plus range is likely to be dealt with via the A359.

The one to watch is the anticipated 797. This could slot nicely into the 5-8 hour market serving points as diverse as Tel Aviv, Mumbai and Boston. It could even replace some short haul flying the way the 767 used to.

If I was a BA network planner, I would rationalise short-haul flying, upscale to A320 and A321 but reduce frequency, codeshare on most European routes with the B-end flag carrier and open more medium and long haul destinations where the real cash can be made.

To simplify the model I would also rationalise to two classes, business and economy but with two cabins in each, a budget and full service cabin with different seat configurations in each. This would enable a denser seating configuration in each aircraft. But more importantly it would reduce cost and complexity significantly, far better than doing what they seem to be doing now which is cutting back on product (which is madness IMO).

gunnerman wrote:

BAWLGW wrote:

My personal feeling for BA’s future longhaul fleet is:

787-8
787-9
787-10
A350-1000
A380

At the moment BA’s longhaul fleet is a bit of a mess. Take the 777 for instance: there are so many different interior variations. Why not have the same interior seat map/template on all aircraft (787, A350 etc). After all they all have 4 sets of doors, so would be incredibly easy to have a High J and a Low J variant of each aircraft. Ultimately I can see BA taking F out of all their aircraft except for the 380s. The 380s could adopt the A380plus interior when the new J seat gets fitted. Never understood their upstairs/downstairs J philosophy on their 380s.

What on earth are you going on about taking out F? BA's got F in all eight daily LHR-JFK flights, with none operated with A380s, because they make money on this premium business route. There are 772s with F to leisure places such as BGI and UVF because there are well-heeled people who pay for this.

You are forgetting that the new Club World seat enters service this year. And if it’s as good as it’s anticipated to be that this could make F null and void.

AndrewJM70 wrote:

LGW could exclusively be served with the 787-9 and 787-10. The latter has range with full payload up to around 10 hours or 5000mi so will be fine for all the US and Caribbean destinations. Anything further can be served by the 787-9 which has almost as much capacity as the 777-200ER - around 300 seats in a denser 3-class config.

At LHR the three versions of the 787 can probably meet most requirements for now, until the 777-300ER needs replacing. The requirement for a larger aircraft with 5000 mile plus range is likely to be dealt with via the A359.

The one to watch is the anticipated 797. This could slot nicely into the 5-8 hour market serving points as diverse as Tel Aviv, Mumbai and Boston. It could even replace some short haul flying the way the 767 used to.

If I was a BA network planner, I would rationalise short-haul flying, upscale to A320 and A321 but reduce frequency, codeshare on most European routes with the B-end flag carrier and open more medium and long haul destinations where the real cash can be made.

To simplify the model I would also rationalise to two classes, business and economy but with two cabins in each, a budget and full service cabin with different seat configurations in each. This would enable a denser seating configuration in each aircraft. But more importantly it would reduce cost and complexity significantly, far better than doing what they seem to be doing now which is cutting back on product (which is madness IMO).

Agree with you re upscaling to A320s and A321s. Also, interesting your idea about two classes! I believe we are starting to see that with Thompson Aerospace with their Vantage and Vantage XL products. Also, just to nit pick, BA at the moment are not cutting back onboard services.. new club service, new WTP service, new WT service etc

We don’t know much info regarding the 797 yet. But my current thoughts: why don’t BA just slot A321-LRs into the operation.. a much easier task IMO

readytotaxi wrote:

BAWLGW wrote:

My personal feeling for BA’s future longhaul fleet is:

787-8
787-9
787-10
A350-1000
A380

At the moment BA’s longhaul fleet is a bit of a mess. Take the 777 for instance: there are so many different interior variations. Why not have the same interior seat map/template on all aircraft (787, A350 etc). After all they all have 4 sets of doors, so would be incredibly easy to have a High J and a Low J variant of each aircraft. Ultimately I can see BA taking F out of all their aircraft except for the 380s. The 380s could adopt the A380plus interior when the new J seat gets fitted. Never understood their upstairs/downstairs J philosophy on their 380s.

BA can not get the A380 into the JFK terminal at the moment so they will always keep a First class presence on that route with what ever 777//789/ A350 they have.

The JFK terminal move will sort the A380 problem out.

Since when has BA said that it plans to abandon F? Although there won't be F in the 18 A350s which will feature the new CW seats, you can't assume that this will be so for the rest of the fleet. For instance the A350-1000s are set to replace some of the 345-seat 744s (and so need the capacity of 331 seats).

BAWLGW wrote:

readytotaxi wrote:

BAWLGW wrote:

My personal feeling for BA’s future longhaul fleet is:

787-8
787-9
787-10
A350-1000
A380

At the moment BA’s longhaul fleet is a bit of a mess. Take the 777 for instance: there are so many different interior variations. Why not have the same interior seat map/template on all aircraft (787, A350 etc). After all they all have 4 sets of doors, so would be incredibly easy to have a High J and a Low J variant of each aircraft. Ultimately I can see BA taking F out of all their aircraft except for the 380s. The 380s could adopt the A380plus interior when the new J seat gets fitted. Never understood their upstairs/downstairs J philosophy on their 380s.

BA can not get the A380 into the JFK terminal at the moment so they will always keep a First class presence on that route with what ever 777//789/ A350 they have.

The JFK terminal move will sort the A380 problem out.

There isn't a problem to sort out. LHR-JFK is a business route which requires frequency, and BA isn't going to substitute two daily flights with one daily A380 flight.

BAWLGW wrote:

garf25 wrote:

Still too many comparisons on here of the 350 v the 787.
The 787 is closer the 330. The 350 more towards the 777.

They are quite different machines.

See your point, but the 787 is a vastly different machine to the 747. And that doesn’t seem to stop airlines using the 787 as a replacement (Qantas, BA etc)

Qantas is about the only airline who publicly said they're replacing 747 with 787. BA IIRC said so for A35K but I believe not for 789.

Michael

scbriml wrote:

pabloeing wrote:

I see the B777X in the future BA fleet............

I am shocked.

kaitak wrote:

the only VLAs in town are the A35K and the 777-9

And BA has A35Ks on order with lots of options.

kaitak wrote:

I think A359s are seriously unlikely; the 789 can do the ULH flights, with the 35K doing routes that require a higher capacity acft; the A359 are too close in capacity.

You would think, but a growing number of airlines have ordered or are already operating both the A359 and the 789. The A359 is clearly giving them something the 789 can't.

Just as shocked to see you stumping for Airbus....

Like their current fleet I'm sure their future fleet will be a mismatch of aircraft unless A or B gives them a deal they can't refuse. Maybe Boeing throws the UK some support projects to make up for the losses after Brexit.

If the 3rd runway gets the final green light before BA looks at 777-200ER replacement, I can see BA ordering the 787 series to downsize and increase frequency. Otherwise, BA probably wants to order the 359, 35K and 777X in order to maintain or even grow capacity slightly.

mdavies06 wrote:

If the 3rd runway gets the final green light before BA looks at 777-200ER replacement, I can see BA ordering the 787 series to downsize and increase frequency. Otherwise, BA probably wants to order the 359, 35K and 777X in order to maintain or even grow capacity slightly.

The third runway at Heathrow may happen when Concorde II does, but as a practical matter BA doesn't need an intercontinental airplane smaller then a 787. The A350-900 is hardly small, many airlines from Cathay to Lufthansa to Delta seat 280 to 300 passengers. Having large fleets of 787, A350 and 777-9 achieves what ? There seems lots of crossover between the 787 and A350, BA's route system is not Cathay Pacific's needing 16 hour capable airplanes which the A350-900 does well but its too much plane for BA. The 787-10 is better for BA, it can fly from LHR to any destination is Asia and the Americas.

The coming A350-1000 is going to be an oddball, IAG should transfer them to Iberia as A340-600 replacements. BA's fleet will be fine with 787 and 777-9.

eamondzhang wrote:

BAWLGW wrote:

garf25 wrote:

Still too many comparisons on here of the 350 v the 787.
The 787 is closer the 330. The 350 more towards the 777.

They are quite different machines.

See your point, but the 787 is a vastly different machine to the 747. And that doesn’t seem to stop airlines using the 787 as a replacement (Qantas, BA etc)

Qantas is about the only airline who publicly said they're replacing 747 with 787. BA IIRC said so for A35K but I believe not for 789.

Michael

Virgin Atlantic as well. The 789 was actually a better fit at LHR than the 744s they were replacing.
The Obsession here for like-for-like is definitely peculiar. In the planning departments, a decent load on a 789 yields much better than a half empty 744 and also gives fares an upward nudge.

Why all this desire to replace an aircraft BA is investing in for a 30 year service life? The 777-200 fleet is also being rationalised to two layouts - one four class and one three class (the latter with ten-abreast in World Traveller).

BA's current plans over the next five years are to introduce the 787-10 and A350-1000 to replace the 747-436 whilst non-ER 777-200s will go through cascades from four additional 777-300ERs.

At that point BA will evaluate its fleet requirements and look at how it will replace 43 777-200ERs. That could well be through cascades, i.e. it brings in new aircraft at LHR and/or LGW to right size some routes based on where the market is at that point and moves some current LHR aircraft to LGW. That could include 16 777-300ERs!

Elshad wrote:

Andy33 wrote:

Lets see - 777-200ERs, with BA's publicly announced 30 year life policy for them, don't require deliveries to start until 2027.
Right now they're going through a refurbishment, so BA really don't plan to replace them any time soon.
300-ERs - well the last 3 BA has on order haven't even been delivered yet, and you're worrying about replacements already.

BA has 4 300ER on order. 3 to replace the non-ER 200 and one extra.

There seems to be a lot of incorrect facts and truly mad opinions.

1. - They have 3 777-300ERs on order (Not 4). These are being delivered two this year and the final one in 2020. These are to replace the last three 777-200 (non-ER).

Before anyone asks not literally. Three 200ERs will take over the 200 routes and the 300ERs will be used to upgauged the capacity on some 200ER routes.

2. - The A350 will have two seperate configurations. One three class (first deliveries) and another 4 class with first later. (There is a possibility this could change). The three class are replacing the higher capacity 52J 747s routes as they slowly get retired. As for the 4 class nobody knows yet. They are receiving 4 in 2019 (XWBA-XWBD) in a 56J/56W/219Y configuration. (With new CW Seat).

3. - The 777-200ERs are currently planned to be doing 30 years. (No plans to return any 777-300ERs either and they could easily do 30 years, no confirmation on length but not going soon). This means they have until 2026 ish before they need replacements. None ordered yet.

4. - Fleet Plans - IAG order planes for a certain timeline and don’t change much. (Except 747s staying a bit longer now.) This means that all orders are for planes arriving before Q1 2024 (both long and short haul including all neos currently ordered). Current retirements by that point on widebody front is (most, possibly all(?)) 747s and the three 777-200. They haven’t decided publically what is replacing the 777-200ERs yet. They are likely to do another widebody (and narrowbody) order in the next couple years. More A320neo family aircraft and majorly the 777-200ER replacement.

5. - The 787 and A350 are very different aircraft with different niches and capacity. The A350-900 is very close and most comparable to the 777-200ER and a good replacement both capacity and range. (No doubt why UA ordered 45 for their 777-200ER replacement). The 787-9 is noticeably smaller and the -10 that is very close capacity wise doesn’t quite have the payload/range trade off for the longest missions with full pax and more cargo. Also the 777-9X is noticeably larger than the A350-1000 I’d they need the capacity.

6. - Now for my predictions. Broadly speaking A350-900 to do the longer 777-200ER missions (South East asia, South America and Western half of USA) and the 787-10 for the shorter ME, East half of America and bit of Asia.

NB: Yes the 787-10 is far more capable than most people give it credit for. 6400NM with full pax and bags (more than BA would put on). But it also has a large for its soze hold and excellent for cargo which BA will want. So yeas it can do all BA’s destinations with full pax but it’s not optimum and cargo will be left behind. Hence the (larger) A359 likely for the longer missions.

No, there are 4 777-300ER on order. Look at page 167 of this: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.Fi ... 7686116875

It clearly shows a total of 16 300ER expected in 2020, compared to 12 now. So 4 on order.

By the time BA is looking at their 77W replacement, Airbus will likely have an ultrafan powered A350-1100 on offer as well as the improved A350-1000.

In the meantime, A359 and 787-10 combo looks most likely to replace the 77R.

FlyCaledonian wrote:

Why all this desire to replace an aircraft BA is investing in for a 30 year service life? The 777-200 fleet is also being rationalised to two layouts - one four class and one three class (the latter with ten-abreast in World Traveller).
s!

Some of the LGW 4 class aircraft are already ten abreast too.

jfk777 wrote:

There seems lots of crossover between the 787 and A350, BA's route system is not Cathay Pacific's needing 16 hour capable airplanes which the A350-900 does well but its too much plane for BA. The 787-10 is better for BA, it can fly from LHR to any destination is Asia and the Americas.

Can the 787-10 fly 13 hours including adequate reserves with a full passenger and freight load? No. And Buenos Aires and Santiago are further than Singapore.

[quote="george77300"][quote="Elshad"][quote="Andy33"]

2. - The A350 will have two seperate configurations. One three class (first deliveries) and another 4 class with first later. (There is a possibility this could change). The three class are replacing the higher capacity 52J 747s routes as they slowly get retired. As for the 4 class nobody knows yet. They are receiving 4 in 2019 (XWBA-XWBD) in a 56J/56W/219Y configuration. (With new CW Seat).

The BA A35K will then have a few more seats than QR and CX's A35Ks - nice to see that airlines are using the aircraft's potential. If BA goes for a four-class version as well, I'm guessing 299 seats - which is also pretty good.

I think as with the 747 replacement 'like for like' will need to take into account many changes which have occurred over the years. Just as the 747 was ordered in many cases as the only aircraft with sufficient range at the time. The 777 might well have been ordered because it ticked most of the boxes. If there had been a 788 size/ranged aircraft at that time as well, maybe the order would have been different for instance.

As BA tend to keep their aircraft longer than many people keep their spouse's. Many things need to be factored in, changes in aircraft availability and performance. In addition, things such as the third LHR runway and Brexit come to mind. To my knowledge, IAG/BA have a large number of options for the 787 and A350 which should cover most permutations.

Not being a fan of the 777, personally I would think that a combination of 787 and A350 models would cover the 777 replacement very well and be a much-improved customer experience.

Motorhussy wrote:

jfk777 wrote:

There seems lots of crossover between the 787 and A350, BA's route system is not Cathay Pacific's needing 16 hour capable airplanes which the A350-900 does well but its too much plane for BA. The 787-10 is better for BA, it can fly from LHR to any destination is Asia and the Americas.

Can the 787-10 fly 13 hours including adequate reserves with a full passenger and freight load? No. And Buenos Aires and Santiago are further than Singapore.

Every long haul plane BA has doesn't have to be able to fly to EZE and Singapore only some do, BA will have plenty that can. What if BA orders the new Boeing NMA(797) ? It will not fly more than 5,000 miles, that doesn't make it a bad plane.

The IAG Captial Markets Presentation was incorrect; there are only 3 77Ws to be delivered, not 4. They are also not due to enter service until Q3 2020, not 2019.