BA Orders A380 , 787

But as sales have shown the 788 has captures a huge market and the -9 is selling out its slots aswell . Airbus have sized the 350 very well given that boeing allready had a successfull product with over 500 sales by the time airbus launched (or rather re-launched) . The A350 and 787 arent much different in Fues. width despite the XWB affix (this is nothing like a 330 , 777 difference) . The only thing that is different is the wing , the 350 wing is very well built for high capacity and around the -1000 , probably the sweet spot for the 350 wing is between -900 and 1000 varients (you would probably know better then me) , whereas the sweet spot for the 787 is much lower (in capacity/size) ie in between the 788 and 789 . Boeing can probably do a strech to a 787-10 but would most likely have to sacrifice on range/payload (with their standard 20% strech) . I beleive that if boeing is willing to spend 2-3 billion$ in developing a new wing , undercarriage for the 787 more optimized for HGW then they can compete well with the 350-900 and 350-1000 , given that the 350 is only about 5 inches (?) or so wider then the 787 IIRC .

What say you?

I say: well put!
Boeing aims foremost on its present customers of the B767 and those who have procured the A330-200 and -300, which Boeing acknoledges have sold well. It was in my opinion never intended to replace the B777-200, but the -10 would do so. Stretching it further would compromise the original plan.

Like always the airframers are making each others business difficult. The B787 caused Airbus to more or less replace the A330 earlier than planned. The A350 will cause Boeing to replace the B777 earlier than planned. Replacing the B777 is indeed difficult, as benefits would be low, I think ~10%.

So you think that in pax service four engines are dead save the A380?

Not dead per se , the 748 will (and has) sell well but nothing like what the 744 has done . My comments were more specific towards BA .

The 748 isnt going to sell like the 744 , thats a given , It is my opinion that the 380 will sell nothing like the 747 did (in time we shall see ) . Most airlines have shown that given competitive CASM’s (more imporantly RASM-CASM’s) they would rather move to a mid sized widebody then a VLA . The success of the 777 and the market that it virtually created is a attest to that . Now with the 350-1000 , and the imminent 787-10 the potential market will further fragment away from the 380 and the 748 . I expect the F version of the 748 to sell around 200 frames over ten years (starting the year of launch) , and the I version to sell around another 100 . Thats not stellar but given a modest development budget (2-4 billion) thats a pretty good ROI for boeing and keeps the foot in the door in the VLA market .

So you think that in pax service four engines are dead save the A380?
Can’t believe that.

That is what in my opinion Airbus is aiming at.

But as sales have shown the 788 has captures a huge market and the -9 is selling out its slots aswell . Airbus have sized the 350 very well given that boeing allready had a successfull product with over 500 sales by the time airbus launched (or rather re-launched) . The A350 and 787 arent much different in Fues. width despite the XWB affix (this is nothing like a 330 , 777 difference) . The only thing that is different is the wing , the 350 wing is very well built for high capacity and around the -1000 , probably the sweet spot for the 350 wing is between -900 and 1000 varients (you would probably know better then me) , whereas the sweet spot for the 787 is much lower (in capacity/size) ie in between the 788 and 789 . Boeing can probably do a strech to a 787-10 but would most likely have to sacrifice on range/payload (with their standard 20% strech) . I beleive that if boeing is willing to spend 2-3 billion$ in developing a new wing , undercarriage for the 787 more optimized for HGW then they can compete well with the 350-900 and 350-1000 , given that the 350 is only about 5 inches (?) or so wider then the 787 IIRC .

What say you?

The A350-1000 @ 325-350 seats (depending upon configuration) and the 7773ER @ the same would serve them well . But then again if they needed something higher then the 772er’s they would have ordered the 3er . Goin into the future i can see them with both 787-10 and 350-1000 @350 seats . With BA the 748 would most likely seat around 400-410 pax so a 2 holer 350-1000 should offer excellent RASM-CASM .

Some interesting comments from BA –

The A350-1000 wasn’t sufficiently defined for us to be confident to order the aircraft,” he says. “We also wanted more certainty about what Boeing’s response will be.”

While the A350-1000 is the main focus of the Airbus offering for the next campaign, it will also include the A350-900, says Boyle. From the Boeing stable, he expects candidates to range from “evolutions of the 777-300ER to something more radically new, as well as the 787-10”.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/10/02/217311/more-ba-long-haul-orders-to-come.html

So no 748 in contention .

That is what in my opinion Airbus is aiming at. Many airlines operate B777/A340/A330, but no B767-200. So, they have a gab in the lower twin aisle region. Obviously they are comfortable with that. The A350 covers practically everything from A330-200 (would be A350-800) to A340-600/B777-300 (=A350-1000). It is also not totally impossible that the A350 gets another stretch, the infamous double-stretch. Looking at the numbers that would be possible, then of course with restrictions in payload range and considerable development cost. Thinkable earliest some years after the A350 goes into test and service.

What the Scottish traveller could do with in terms of US services is something going direct to the US west coast, Los Angeles and San Francisco are served well by BA from LHR, and Aer Lingus from DUB/SNN, still nowt from GLA/EDI/PIK etc….

Closest to that is Zoom frol Glasgow-Vancouver. Not quite the same for tourist wanting to go to Los Angeles or San Fran though.

But: B777 ~250pax @ 6500nm = 1.6 — the gap 777/380 is too wide w/o something in between. A 748 order is to be expected.

The A350-1000 @ 325-350 seats (depending upon configuration) and the 7773ER @ the same would serve them well . But then again if they needed something higher then the 772er’s they would have ordered the 3er . Goin into the future i can see them with both 787-10 and 350-1000 @350 seats . With BA the 748 would most likely seat around 400-410 pax so a 2 holer 350-1000 should offer excellent RASM-CASM .

Some interesting comments from BA –

The A350-1000 wasn’t sufficiently defined for us to be confident to order the aircraft,” he says. “We also wanted more certainty about what Boeing’s response will be.”

While the A350-1000 is the main focus of the Airbus offering for the next campaign, it will also include the A350-900, says Boyle. From the Boeing stable, he expects candidates to range from “evolutions of the 777-300ER to something more radically new, as well as the 787-10”.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/10/02/217311/more-ba-long-haul-orders-to-come.html

So no 748 in contention .

Quick’n dirty analysis of seat/miles:
12 A380 ~500pax @ 8000nm = 4.0×12=48
20 B744 ~330pax @ 7500nm = 2.5×20=50
Shows that overall capacity does not change, range basically identical.
Slots are safed, but frequency drops. Calls for 787 to fill-in at the non-peak time-slots. A380 should have slightly higher cargo capacity than 744.
But: B777 ~250pax @ 6500nm = 1.6 — the gap 777/380 is too wide w/o something in between. A 748 order is to be expected.

Very quick ‘n dirty. Depends on which model, of course, but you don’t seem to be looking at the bigger 777s, which is what you should compare with an A380 to judge the size of the gap.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/777technical.html

12 A380 ~500pax @ 8000nm = 4.0×12=48

I think BA’s seating would be in the 450-480 range much like the SQ 380’s

There will still be another 37 744s that would need to be replaced; the A380s are to be delivered 2012-2014 I believe.

The 37 744’s will most likely be replaced with a 2 holer , BA will also exercise their options on the 380 in a few years .

Therefore, there are a potential 90 aircraft order due in the next 18 months

I see a large order for 787-10 (15-20) and about a dozen A350-1000’s ordered here .

we would need to know exactly Boeing intends offering as an 787-10.

Airlines like BA , EK , QF have a much better idea on what boeing is considering to offer as the 787-10 . Also the desicion isnt due for some time , in which boeing can further refine its designs on the -10 . Boeing wont launch a -10 until they know for sure what the A350 ” will or wont be” , so expect a launch late next year or in 2009 . They can still meet delivery targets of 2013-2014 with that launch date .

Airbus has been giving specifications to airlines which they will have to ensure are, in the worst-case scenario, met.

For the last few years airbus has been offering many specs , and versions from a suped up 330 (narrower then a 787) to a 777 replacement . They said a few months ago (responding to a carson statement) that 350 design has been pretty much set , but now we know that they intend on using CFRP frames with some titanium or other AllI in high stress places much like Boeing . The 350 is still a moving target , airbus engineers are doing testing and through that will realize a lot of stuff and make changes which can effect what the final design will be like .

Could we contemplate long-term:

19 A380s
40 A350s (20 A350-10s, 20 A350-9s)
70 787s (40 788-8s, 30 787-9s)

This could be a possibility , however an eual possibility could be that instead of the 20 350-9’s they order 787-10’s. The 787-10 will be very similar to the -900 xwb and it would build BA a nice fleet of 787’s for commanility . If boeing go for a new wing on the 787-10 then the performance would most likely be somewhere between the 350-900 and 350-1000 , however if they go for the same wing then it would be slightly lower then the 359 .

I see it as –

20 A380’s
20 A350-1000’s
80 787’s ( 30 788’s , 30 789’s , 20 7810’s)

Don’t forget that they are initially replacing 20 744s and 14 767s with 12 A380s and 24 787s. There will still be another 37 744s that would need to be replaced; the A380s are to be delivered 2012-2014 I believe.

I imagine that if we take out the displaced fleet*, we end up with in 2014:

12 A380s
37 744s
50+ 777s
24 787s

Therefore, there are a potential 90 aircraft order due in the next 18 months – logically, you may say that the 787 should be a shoo-in but I’m not so sure given that we would need to know exactly Boeing intends offering as an 787-10. Although the A350-9 and A350-10 still have to design freeze, Airbus has been giving specifications to airlines which they will have to ensure are, in the worst-case scenario, met.

Perhaps we may end up seeing both 787s and A350s being ordered (seems to be getting to be quite a trend at the moment); 787s at the “lower” end of the passenger scale and A350s at the “bigger” end of it.

Could we contemplate long-term:

19 A380s
40 A350s (20 A350-10s, 20 A350-9s)
70 787s (40 788-8s, 30 787-9s)

Which implies futhers orders totalling 7 A380, 40 A350, 46 787; note I’m not expecting that do be done in one spending spree!

* assuming that for every new aircraft delivered, 1 “old” aircraft is retired/sold (apart from 2 787s which are replacing anything!)

Quick’n dirty analysis of seat/miles:
12 A380 ~500pax @ 8000nm = 4.0×12=48
20 B744 ~330pax @ 7500nm = 2.5×20=50
Shows that overall capacity does not change, range basically identical.
Slots are safed, but frequency drops. Calls for 787 to fill-in at the non-peak time-slots. A380 should have slightly higher cargo capacity than 744.
But: B777 ~250pax @ 6500nm = 1.6 — the gap 777/380 is too wide w/o something in between. A 748 order is to be expected.

Who will the 763 go to. I think that if GSM get there act together over the Long Haul of there bussiness they c ould get them. What about keepin ghte younger ones and maybe expanding from MAN or even having a GLA-JFK link in competion with US/CO/DL

I think GSM got burned by their long haul expansion and won’t be in any hurry to get back into those markets too soon, but who knows what the market will be like in a few years and let’s not forget that GSM have ‘ordered’ the 787 too…

As for BA re-establishing a GLA-JFK link… perhaps ? I still see no inclination for them to expand out of LHR or MAN in that respect, but as the rumours persist that maybe American Airlines will return with a 757 service to JFK and Northwest consider an eastern seaboard service, plus Delta switching the EDI-ATL route to EDI-JFK, there may be too many players in the Scottish market ?

What the Scottish traveller could do with in terms of US services is something going direct to the US west coast, Los Angeles and San Francisco are served well by BA from LHR, and Aer Lingus from DUB/SNN, still nowt from GLA/EDI/PIK etc…

Until the ‘spoke and hub’ mentality changes then I don’t see BA coming back to Scotland with direct trans-atlantic services for some time….

Am I right that BA are the worlds Largest 747-400 operator?

James

Here is a list of 747 users with how many in the fleet and powerplant.

BA is the worlds largest user of 747-400s

British Airways (57) (RB211)
Japan Air Lines (41) (CF6)
Lufthansa (30) (CF6)
Qantas (30) (RB211/CF6)
United Airlines (30) (PW4056)
All Nippon Airways (23) (CF6)
Korean Air (23) (PW4056)
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (22) (CF6)
Singapore Airlines (22) (PW4056)
Cathay Pacific (21) (RB211/PW4056)
Thai Airways International (18) (CF6)
Air France (16) (CF6)
Northwest Airlines (16) (PW4056)
Air India (15) (PW4056)
China Airlines (15) (PW4056/CF6)
EVA Air (15) (CF6)
Virgin Atlantic Airways (13) (CF6)
Air China (12) (PW4056)
Malaysia Airlines (11) (PW4056)
Air New Zealand (8) (CF6/RB211)
Asiana Airlines (8) (CF6)
South African Airways (7) (CF6/RB211)
Corsairfly (6) (PW4056)
Philippine Airlines (5) (CF6)
Saudi Arabian Airlines (5) (CF6)
El Al (4) (CF6)
Aerolineas Argentinas (3) (PW4056)
Garuda Indonesia (3) (CF6)
Oasis Hong Kong (3) (CF6/PW4056)
Air Pacific (2) (PW4056)
Royal Air Maroc (1) (CF6)
Surinam Airways (1) (CF6)

Am I right that BA are the worlds Largest 747-400 operator?

James

Yes you are correct. They are the Worlds Largest 747-400 operator with 57 aircraft in service.

Am I right that BA are the worlds Largest 747-400 operator?

James

The step from B777 to A380 would be too large.

Don’t forget that they are initially replacing 20 744s and 14 767s with 12 A380s and 24 787s. There will still be another 37 744s that would need to be replaced; the A380s are to be delivered 2012-2014 I believe.

I imagine that if we take out the displaced fleet*, we end up with in 2014:

12 A380s
37 744s
50+ 777s
24 787s

Therefore, there are a potential 90 aircraft order due in the next 18 months – logically, you may say that the 787 should be a shoo-in but I’m not so sure given that we would need to know exactly Boeing intends offering as an 787-10. Although the A350-9 and A350-10 still have to design freeze, Airbus has been giving specifications to airlines which they will have to ensure are, in the worst-case scenario, met.

Perhaps we may end up seeing both 787s and A350s being ordered (seems to be getting to be quite a trend at the moment); 787s at the “lower” end of the passenger scale and A350s at the “bigger” end of it.

Could we contemplate long-term:

19 A380s
40 A350s (20 A350-10s, 20 A350-9s)
70 787s (40 788-8s, 30 787-9s)

Which implies futhers orders totalling 7 A380, 40 A350, 46 787; note I’m not expecting that do be done in one spending spree!

* assuming that for every new aircraft delivered, 1 “old” aircraft is retired/sold (apart from 2 787s which are replacing anything!)

Why should the A380 replace the B747?
I don’t see that happen.
The step from B777 to A380 would be too large.

And regarding the 787: The A350 is just too far out there to be ordered as something else than a political statement.

Who will the 763 go to. I think that if GSM get there act together over the Long Haul of there bussiness they c ould get them. What about keepin ghte younger ones and maybe expanding from MAN or even having a GLA-JFK link in competion with US/CO/DL

The 380 is a big suprise to me, They must be getting them cheap. It must be the first big order they have had for a while?
The 787 was expected because the 350 is still a paper plane. BA have been bitten by paper planes before, whilst the 787 hasn’t flown yet by the time BA get them everybody else would have worked the bugs out of them.

Rgds Cking

The 787 is a big surprise to me. They must be getting them cheap. The A380 was expected, because the 787 prototype is still just a shell with little or no wiring installed….:dev2:

Thanks for the info guys:cool: .

James