ReplySubscribe
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Palty
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 386
Just to weigh in here, again no one knows for sure
however I do have to agree with some of the above posters here, that the best aircarft replacement for the LGW B777-200 would probably be the A350-900 the question would be, would BA order them brand bew or take older ones from e.g. IB? that we wouldnt know, but it would be a great replacement in terms of aircraft type.
Reply
Mark Hopwood
Join Date: Oct 2022
Posts: 4
BA Fleet Long haul replacement
If you consider the issues raised here, recent IAG statements and decisions and the state of the two suppliers so suspect BA will want to split the risks it faces by placing Airbus and Boeing orders. I think they will also want to add resilience to the fleet and have scope for modest fleet expansion.
I would therefore not be surprised to see an order for 12 Boeing 787-10 with GE engines and the slightly increased range. Such aircraft could serve nearly all LHR long-haul routes with BA retaining the option to
allocafe 777x, 787-9 or A350-1000 aircraft to longer routes which shouldnt be ignored but are not a significant proportion of the operation.
The 18 777x will add significant capacity when they arrive and preserve First class. BA would have to determine if they wanted to keep a common four class layout on 787-10 or specify the new batch to be J P Y only with more economy seats creating an additional subfleet at Heathrow but replicating the 777 fleet at LHR with no First class. Less sub-types at LHR would be good but BA commercial types may not want more first class capacity?
in order to spread risk Id then expect BA to acquire, say, 15 Airbus A350s for LGW which gives scope for growth at LGW. There is some debate about whether A350-1000 can be accommodated at LGW but I think the 9 abreast A350 seating vs 10 on a 777 means they would want a -1000 version to replicate capacity.
BA might take the view that the 777x capacity increase might permit some 777-9s to be ordered as 777-200 replacements?
Watch out for curved balls like second hand A380s, moving 787-8s to MAN to reinstate long hail routes or even A321XLRs and 777-x order.
Reply
Pilot37
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: London
Programs: BA GGL / GfL
Posts: 3,547
Originally Posted by Mark Hopwood
Watch out for curved balls like second hand A380s, moving 787-8s to MAN to reinstate long hail routes or even A321XLRs and 777-x order.
I think the time for 2nd hand A380s possibly coming into the fleet have past. TG, AF, EY, LH and MH all had cheap frames going post Covid and BA didnt bite. Ive heard of silly money being required to refit any A380 to another airlines interior specs, so that may have something to do with it.
MAN will be left to EI, they are slowly building a reputation with 2 long-haul routes and the A321XLRs, when they arrive, definitely could see more destinations added out of MAN.
BA typically have not been an airline for buying used airplanes either. The 10 x Gatwick A320CEO planes aside, I can only think of aircraft in the fleet which were not ordered by BA arriving via another carrier being acquired, so I think they prefer to have the plane specd to their standards and then are very happy to sweat the asset for 25yrs+
Interesting times ahead for the long-haul fleet outlook!
Pilot37
Last edited by Pilot37; Aug 10, 2024 at 6:18 pm
Reply
BlueThroughCrimp
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Dundee
Programs: BA Plastic. HH Diamond. Speedwell Bar Lifetime Platinum.
Posts: 1,499
Originally Posted by Pilot37
I think they prefer to have the plane specd to their standards and then are very happy to sweat the asset for 25yrs+
Getting Northwest Airlines vibes with the BA 777s being the new NWA DC10s
Reply
TedToToe
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: London
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 2,319
Originally Posted by sigma421
At the risk of getting into the realms of total speculation, is an A330neo order for a combo of EI, BA Gatwick and Level a possibility?
For as long as LGW longhaul remains BA mainline, I cannot see the A330neo working as a sub-fleet and, no doubt, BALPA would resist any moves to switch it to Euroflyer!
Reply
KARFA
Ambassador, British Airways; FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Leeds, UK
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, GfL, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,033
Originally Posted by TedToToe
For as long as LGW longhaul remains BA mainline, I cannot see the A330neo working as a sub-fleet and, no doubt, BALPA would resist any moves to switch it to Euroflyer!
your faith in BALPA's abilities to resist anything is, I think, overestimated
Reply
JCO1406
Join Date: Apr 2023
Posts: 354
Originally Posted by sigma421
At the risk of getting into the realms of total speculation, is an A330neo order for a combo of EI, BA Gatwick and Level a possibility?
They're more likely to order a new variant, such as the A359 rather than a new aircraft type. And why would they go for the A330neo when they already have the B787-9 which is the same in passenger numbers, but has more range.
Reply
opus99
Join Date: Jan 2019
Programs: BA Exec Club
Posts: 1,058
Originally Posted by JCO1406
Thinking about it, I think we will be seeing more A350s ordered along with the 787-10s. The 787-10 does not have the range to cover the G-YMM* routes. Currently, we've only seen the 787-10 provide expansion rather than replacing frames, and it could stay that way.
So basically the 777-9 (and maybe the 787-10) would replace the G-VII* series and G-RAES. Alternatively, the 77W (and maybe the 787-10) replace the G-VII* and G-RAES routes and the 777-9 does the 77W routes. Either way, there will be a lot of extra capacity provided on these routes.
The G-YMM* series would be replaced by the A350. Then again, the 787-10 could potentially cover some of the shorter G-YMM* routes, whilst the A350 does the longer ones.
The Gatwick fleet would be replaced by the A350 as it would have the range to do longer routes. I very much doubt that they will move the Gatwick operations over to Heathrow as there is barely any slots left, unless they build the third runway which we know is not happening any time soon.
So until BA have confirmed their plans on the 777 replacements, we can only speculate. I think we could see an order for 6-12 more 787-10s next year, meaning BA has a fleet of around 12-18 787-10s with the GENX engines.
the -10 has the range to cover the vast majority of YMM routes
Reply
JW95
Join Date: Apr 2021
Programs: CX Asia Miles
Posts: 109
Originally Posted by etiene
If I recall the previous discussions [probably on this thread] correctly, there were issues with all of the other options. I think the 35K was too long for LGW gates and the 787 needed kit down route that wasn't available [number of ground power units?]. Is that right...?
Of the two, the 787 obstacle seems like the sort of thing that the destination airports might be made to pay for - at risk of the loss of the flight - which will no doubt appeal to the decision makers, but would require refitting as mentioned. If all the 789s get refitted to CS in the next 12-18 months it surely can't be likely that they'll head to LGW a mere handful of years later. I don't recall if the 359 also had issues at LGW, but that would be a new type etc. There's also the BA reluctance to put new kit at LGW. It does seem like at least one of these issues must be negotiated though, and pretty soon in airline planning terms.
Curious, re. the A350. Is this an issue specific to the gates BA use in the South Terminal? The A359 seems to operate without issue at Gatwick, and indeed we've had several airlines operate the type from both terminals - Cathay Pacific, Singapore Airlines, Qatar, China Airlines and Air Mauritius just to name a few. Regarding the A350-1000, again, VS had previously planned to station the leisure A350s at Gatwick to replace the 744s prior to LGW being closed. I don't recall any issues re. the aircraft being too long for gates being flagged up at the time, although like I say, I wonder if this is just a South Terminal-specific issue, rather than both terminals.
Reply
JW95
Join Date: Apr 2021
Programs: CX Asia Miles
Posts: 109
Originally Posted by zaphod424
Surely the range issues of the 787-10 could be resolved by simply moving the longer LGW flights (MRU and BKK) over to LHR. There are a few Carribbean flights curretly at LHR which one would think could be swapped over to LGW, that way the 787-10 could just operate a LGW network of routes to the Carribbean and North America, with the longer 'bucket and spade' routes operating out of LHR.
Agreed with Steve74. I think the days of BA considering a return to Bangkok from Heathrow are over. The airline struggled with this route towards the end, and signs of this were already on the wall (e.g. cutting the onward flight to SYD from BKK in 2012; down-gauging from the 744 to the 777-200 and eliminating First in the process; reducing frequency and making the route seasonal-only). They were also up against TG's double daily service (who operate newer 77Ws with F), plus Eva Air's service. The route- at least in BA's strategy, is far more leisure/holiday orientated now, hence the move to LGW. I think this was a sensible decision for the airline, BKK is a popular market for tourism, and the Y-heavy Gatwick 777s are seemingly a better a/c to serve it with versus the LHR long haul fleet. BA will also have no direct competition on LGW-BKK following Scoot's brief attempt at the route, so hopefully they can make it work. The route is already being increased to 5 weekly from January, so thats promising
Reply
JW95
Join Date: Apr 2021
Programs: CX Asia Miles
Posts: 109
Originally Posted by Palty
Just to weigh in here, again no one knows for sure
however I do have to agree with some of the above posters here, that the best aircarft replacement for the LGW B777-200 would probably be the A350-900 the question would be, would BA order them brand bew or take older ones from e.g. IB? that we wouldnt know, but it would be a great replacement in terms of aircraft type.
I have previously also wondered about the possibility of BA selecting the A359 for its LGW fleet replacement. This aircraft has been phenomenal for many airlines, and as others have mentioned, it is flagged up by Airbus as a direct replacement for the 777-200. From a passenger point of view, I absolutely love flying on it, super quiet and comfortable, a joy to fly on So on that basis, that could well be tempting for BA. However, the big issue (and question) for BA, going into the long term is, would they be willing to sacrifice on Y capacity by going for the A350-900? Yes, there is now the option for 10-abreast Y seating in the -900, but this has not been widely taken up. The cabin of the A359 also isn't as wide as the existing 772 (I think), hence why BA were more easily able to switch from 3-3-3 to the current (and more narrow) 3-4-3. Prior to the 777 refurb, BA had operated using the 3-3-3 layout in Y for many years, so I think they will really need to think hard about whether they would wish to go back to that with a potential order for A350-900s, and lose out on additional Y seat capacity in the process.
Reply
etiene
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: AMS
Programs: BAEC Silver, Flying Blue Gold, TK M&S Nobody
Posts: 2,668
Originally Posted by JW95
Curious, re. the A350. Is this an issue specific to the gates BA use in the South Terminal? The A359 seems to operate without issue at Gatwick, and indeed we've had several airlines operate the type from both terminals - Cathay Pacific, Singapore Airlines, Qatar, China Airlines and Air Mauritius just to name a few. Regarding the A350-1000, again, VS had previously planned to station the leisure A350s at Gatwick to replace the 744s prior to LGW being closed. I don't recall any issues re. the aircraft being too long for gates being flagged up at the time, although like I say, I wonder if this is just a South Terminal-specific issue, rather than both terminals.
Can't find the more concrete discussion now, but the one post on the other thread did allude to length issues at destinations rather than LGW. Also lists the 78X as possibly impacted. Maybe those in the know can confirm - though as noted this discussion belongs in the [somewhat dormant] speculation thread.
Reply
Show Printable Version
Email this Page
Reply Closed Thread
- First
- Prev
- 47 / 48
- Next
- Last
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Forum Jump
Contact Us -Manage PreferencesArchive -Advertising -Cookie Policy -Privacy Statement -Terms of Service -
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.