rdc1000And they’re ordering 2x 737-800s too. Looking to lease one or maybe two 777’s until 2013, and I think they’re likely to try and lease some 737s in the short term too.
rdc1000Surprised you lot haven’t blew your tops yet like you usually do with other members when they ask similar questions :rolleyes: :diablo: ;).
Perhaps you mean me? I haven’t been on for months….but hold my hands up at having a slight urge to blow my top at chornedsnorkack’s when he/she posts questions like this……I especially love the bit half way down the thread where he/she goes on to inform us of the wing sizes…..although usually this would come in the question as a statement. I’m also not sure of the benefit of the wing spans….you’re comparing Apples and Pears because each aircraft has a wing design based on the individual aircraft, so I’m not sure why we need this information. Payload, range, seat/mile costs, runway performance, purchase price, availability etc are probably better comparitors.
In fairness to chornedsnorkack, this is more of a question than I usually flip at, as normally they are merely statements drawn from vast wikipedia searches, and then we’re expected to comment as if there is actually a question.
Ok, rant over. I think the 777 is the best ‘cos it is…no…wait, maybe the MD-11 ‘cos it’s better looking…..no…wait, I like the A340 more, except that I didn’t like the air conditioning on one of them that Gulf Air operate….so therefore that must leave the Ilyushin…except it’s Russian….so I can’t think that’s best…..oh, I’m confused :confused:
In what respect would you like to know which is best chornedsnorkack?
BA clearly think that the 777 is best..for THEIR needs. Air France are a little undecided, as are KLM. For Lufthansa they think the A340 is best for THEIR needs, whilst Aeroflot likes them cheap (i.e. without import tax) and also has to shake hands under the table, so they like the Ilyushin….but are not that disillushioned, so have in the past also liked the 777. The problem is there are a LARGE number of factors which determine why one is better than the other to any airline, and I don’t think it would be possible for anyone to actually single out (on here anyway) which one is best, because whilst one may appear technically superior in one area, that may be offset by something else, or simply a better financial or support deal, which may offset marginally higher operating costs over the life of the airframe. Delivery times and general availability may be big influencing factors. It’s a complicated area.
Let’s not forget that the A330-300 has a MTOW not far off the IL-96’s, and has a much greater seating capacity, and for shorter range long haul routes should perhaps also be considered.
rdc1000Yes it can, by definition!
That’s a little bit selective and generalised! LOL
As I’m sure you understand, at some airports in the world, under certain conditions, aircraft are unable to take off at their MTOW….as illustrated here…you can’t just quote and reply to the bits that suit you :dev2:
However, my guess is you were being clever rather than accurate:rolleyes:
rdc1000I understand FR have been talking to MAN for just as long as EZY so there ciuld have been two sets of negotiating teams at MAN, neither of whom at liberty to disclose to the other airlines what was happening.
Yes, I understand FR/MAN negotiations have been ongoing for some time. EZY had slots allocated last year but never took them up.
rdc1000RYR and EZY expansion at MAN
…….
EasyJet and Ryanair lay out Manchester development plans
David Kaminski-Morrow, London (17Dec07, 10:51 GMT, 256 words)Budget carrier EasyJet is to develop the Manchester base obtained through its takeover of GB Airways as Irish rival Ryanair prepares to unveil its own route expansion from the airport.
EasyJet is to maintain the two aircraft and the six routes at Manchester acquired through GB Airways and will add another three aircraft by 2010. By then the carrier expects to be transporting 1.4 million passengers on its network from the northern UK city.
“At the time of the GB Airways announcement we didn’t know at the time what to do with Manchester,” says a spokeswoman for EasyJet.
But she says the carrier “recognises the strategic importance” of Manchester. The carrier expects to introduce the new aircraft by around winter 2008 and the spokeswoman says any new routes would be detailed nearer time.
Ryanair is also intending to unveil expansion plans at Manchester tomorrow. It is to host a briefing at the airport at which, it says, it will detail the airline’s “biggest-ever route expansion”.
But Ryanair head of sales and marketing Caroline Baldwin insists that the expansion is not in response to the EasyJet developments.
She states that the expansion is the result of talks with Manchester Airport’s operator and a continuation of its developments at other UK regional airports including East Midlands.
“It’s quite separate [from EasyJet],” she claims. “But it does add a little spice to things.”
EasyJet will also base another two aircraft at Liverpool where it already has eight jets. This will bring the airline’s Liverpool fleet to 10 by 2010.
Source: Air Transport Intelligence news
rdc1000Every so often I have a period in which I don’t log onto this site…and I miss great threads like this, so many opportunities and comments…seems a bit late now!
rdc1000Your off to Newquay, doesnt the likes of Faliraki appeal to you Lukeylad.
Have you not been to Newquay? It is as trendy (if not more so for some) than Falaraki for most young people, damned happening place.
rdc1000Try Ryanair, I was talking to their HR department the other day, and you sound like a good candidate for one fo the schemes they run.
rdc1000I like it!
rdc1000Apparently her show is very good generally. Perhaps I need to watch the videos at home where I can play it with sound??!
rdc1000Could have been a weather balloon or someone firing small rocket type things which fell apart!
I blame Magpies for this behaviour!!
rdc1000Any firm information…or educated speculation..on 380’s destinations from Heathrow?
New York?
Where else in North America and Europe?BTW: The main NA routes are in the summer tourist season…is there a similar tourist season from the UK to Australia in Winter (Oz’s summer) to keep the planes busy the year round?
If you read the articles above they give an indication.
rdc1000At the end of the day if they were posting huge profits at this stage then something would be wrong, not the other way around.
Yes, damn those airlines like JetBlue who make profit from the outset (but then make losses later!).
rdc1000Ontime Performance: 80.5%
The only good side is, that there ontime performance isnt too bad :rolleyes:
Are you kidding?? LOL, 80.5%, most LCCs can beat that!! For a business orientated airline (long haul or not), I’d want to see that much higher.
And with their load factor at 67%, and the gap between revenues and operating costs, I suspect they may have a long term problem!
rdc1000Will be interesting, but I don’t expect decisions this or next year.
No, you’re right…
BA to decide on remaining long-haul renewal in 2008-09
Victoria Moores, London (27Sep07, 10:38 GMT, 454 words)British Airways (BA) will take a decision on replacement of the remainder of its Boeing 747-400 fleet in 2008-09, following today’s long-awaited Airbus A380 and Boeing 787 order.
The Oneworld carrier has ordered 12 Airbus A380s and 24 Boeing 787s, with options on seven more A380s and 18 more 787s. BA’s first 787 will arrive in 2010, followed by its first A380 in 2012. Both types will be Rolls-Royce-powered.
BA’s long-haul fleet comprises 57 Boeing 747-400s, 43 Boeing 777s and 14 Boeing 767s. The new aircraft will replace 20 of the 747-400s and 14 of its 767s.
But BA is still working on the replacement of the remainder of its 747-400 fleet. It lists the candidate aircraft as the 787-10, 777-300ER and A350XWB, but no mention is made of the 747-8.
A BA spokeswoman says a decision will be taken around 2008-09: “It is too early to comment on the next stage. We are concentrating on bringing the 787 and A380 into the fleet.”
Although the spokeswoman says that the configuration and network for the A380s and 787s is yet to be detailed, she lists Los Angeles, San Francisco, Singapore, Hong Kong, Johannesburg and BA’s Indian destinations as likely A380 routes. But she stresses that these are “not set in stone”.
The 787-8 and -9s will be used to replace some of BA’s 14 Boeing 767s. “The great thing about the [787s] is that they can be used for long- or short-haul routes. It is a very flexible aircraft and we will be looking at a whole host of opportunities,” says the spokeswoman.
BA says the new aircraft will complement one another in its long-haul fleet, strengthening its network strategy. They will also bring greater flexibility and significant economic benefits, through lower seat costs.
“The A380 will be used to provide more capacity for the airline’s key high-density markets and maximise use of scarce Heathrow slots. The 787 will be used to start new routes and increase frequencies in existing markets,” says the firm.
The spokeswoman says the A380 and 787 were selected as they suit the BA fleet plan and growth strategy, but she adds that environmental considerations were a deciding factor. “At London Heathrow that’s a key issue for us,” she says.
BA chief executive Willie Walsh says: “These aircraft set the gold standard when it comes to environmental performance in the key areas of CO2 emissions, local air quality and noise. They will contribute significantly to our target of improving fuel efficiency by 25% between 2005 and 2025.
“They are also much quieter than their predecessors, which is of vital importance at Heathrow. Both the A380 and 787 are rated as producing a quarter of the noise level of the 747-400.”
Source: Air Transport Intelligence news
Sign In
