Advantage: BA
January 29th, 2008
Since the September 2007 order, British Airways has rarely been out of the media spotlight.
From the news in early January 2008 that the carrier was to press ahead with its own new premuim off-shoot, OpenSkies to the recent Boeing 777-200ER crash landing to the countdown to the big move over to Terminal 5 - British Airways is certainly walking into the competitive arena with a renewed sense of being able to raise its game and rise to the challenge.
Having ordered a plethora of Airbus A380’s and Boeing 787’s, CEO Willie Walsh took time out to share his thoughts on the second phase of the ongoing fleet renewal project the airline is undertaking.
An order may occur by the end of 2008.
“Quite honestly I don’t think we’ll be going back to look at the 747-8 again. I wouldn’t rule it out completely but, no, I don’t think so.”
With a fleet of 57 Boeing 747-400’s to replace, the A380-800 certainly gives weight to the strategy of maximising slot usage at an already slot-constrained Heathrow Airport - an airport that will get even busier as Open Skies takes effect this Spring.
Image copyrighted and owned by BOEING777 and FleetBuzz.com
With the A380 winning part of the BA order after Airbus tabled a revised offer just days before the 747-8I deal was due to be firmed up by the BA Board, BA’s next target is to fill the void beneath its A380 fleet, while having an airplane family sized larger than the current 777-200ER family, of which it has four due for delivery in 2009.
“…we felt we needed greater clarity in terms of the Airbus A350 XWB and Boeing’s plans in relation to the 777“.
Incidentally, this was the same reason the airline rejected out of hand the A350 in the first order made last September, largely on the basis that since the A350XWB relaunch at the Farnborough Air Show in 2006, Airbus had done very little to stabilise and clarify the airplane to the British Airways board.
While the last Boeing 777’s ordered by the carrier were to be powered with Rolls Royce Trent 800 engines, unlike the first batch that were powered by the GE90, BA is understood to be leaning towards the 777-300ER, exclusively powered by the GE90-115B engine as an interim solution until the A350-1000 variant and possible 787-10 are more fully defined.
It is not yet clear whether British Airways would take 777-300ER’s on lease or place an entirely new order. What is clear is that the airline is still not satisfied with what is currently on offer.
The bigger question is not whether British Airways selects one over the other - given the setbacks faced by the 787 so far, will Boeing be prepared to gamble on a fourth model in the 787-10, or move to supplant the existing 777 longer range family with an all new airplane - one that will perhaps be more attractive to those customers who have thus far shied away from the 747-8I.
As we know, engine technology has not yet matured enough for either Airbus or Boeing to launch a new range of narrowbody airplanes - part of the the key to an all new A350 rival and true 777 replacement also lies in the availability of more efficient engines.
The level of urgency to secure BA’s order will not be lost on either manufacturer - neither one will want to miss out.
It’s a question of whose product fits the bill better. Right now, neither has an advantage over the other.
Sphere: Related ContentEntry Filed under: 787 First Flight, 787 Orders, 787 Premiere, 787 Rollout, Aeroplane, Aerospace, Air Transport, Air Travel, Airbus, Airbus A350, Airbus A380, Airlines, Airplane, Airplane Order, Airplanes, Airport, BA, BAA, Boeing, Boeing 747-8, Boeing 747-8I, Boeing 777, Boeing 777-200LR, Boeing 777-300ER, Boeing 787, Boeing 787 Order, Boeing 787 Orders, Boeing 787 Premiere, Boeing 787 Rollout, Boeing Orders, British Airways, Dreamliner, Dreamliner First Flight, FleetBuzz.com, Open Skies, Randy Tinseth, Richard Aboulafia, Travel
10 Comments Add your own
1. Boeing Investor | January 29th, 2008 at 9:23 am
Walshs biggest error this far is the A380.
Once his number-crunching buddies come back to him with figures of increased cost and a huge hole in its fleet currently covered by the 747-400, it will be too late to do anything about it.
Electing not to lock in 747-8I positions now will be another costly mistake.
2. Aurora | January 29th, 2008 at 10:45 am
If cargo is any consideration, BA better be taking another look at the 748I. The A380 isn’t going to contribute much to the bottom line for cargo operations. Of course, Willie could always be the launch customer for the A389?
3. BCal | January 29th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
Wiilie Walsh says “I don’t think we’ll be going back to look at the 747-8 again…” but I think this is just calling Boeing’s bluff hoping that they (Boeing) might come back with a more attractive financial deal.
4. Chris Wallace | January 29th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
The advantage that the A380-800 offers BA is they no longer have to trade Club World and World Traveler seats for each other like they do on the 747.
BA could comfortably fit 458 people in an A380 with 12F seats between Door 1 and Door 2 on the main deck, 310 Economy seats aft of Door 2 on the Main Deck (with 32″ pitch instead of 31″), 96 Club World seats on the upper deck aft of Door 1 and 40 World Traveler Plus seats forward of Door 1 on the upper deck with 44″ of pitch instead of 38″.
So that is 26 more CW seats then the “High J” 744 (and 58 more then the “Low J”) and 47 more Y seats then the “Low J” 744 (and 133 more then the “High J”). That will allow BA to recover a lot of lost premium and economy traffic.
A 747-8I would, at best, give them two more rows each of Club World on the UD and LD at the forward plug and two more rows of WT at the aft plug. So the High J would go to 14F/94C/30Y+/197Y for a total of 335 seats. And the Low J would go to 14F/62C/30Y+/283Y for 389. There is just no way the 747-8I could offer lower CASM then the A380-800 with seat counts that much lower, especially on routes where CW is in demand.
Now let us talk of a widebody twin.
Depending on how they angled them, BA might just be able to fit four rows of FIRST suites (4 per row) between Door 1 and Door 2 on the 777-300ER. You can fit six rows of Club World (8 per row) between Door 2 and Door 3 (leaving space for lavs). You should also be able to fit two more rows of Club World plus five rows of Word Traveler Plus between Door 3 and Door 4. And then you can fit 120Y between Door 4 and Door 5 with 12 rows of 9, one row of 7 and one row of 5. So you’d have a total of 240 seats in a 16F/64C/40Y+/120Y configuration. That is only 16 more then a 77E and 51 below the “High J” 744. Now you could knock down a row of F and add back three rows of Y to get you to 263. So that might work a bit better.
An A350-1000 will have about 4% less floor space, so it will likely either give up a row of CW or 2 rows of WT, but it will still be close enough.
5. Jacobin777 | January 29th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
As of now, I do not believe BA is looking at the B748I…of course, dynamics change and the B748I has a lot to offer in terms of seats, especially between an A350-1000/B773ER and A380….
With Boeing, a lot is going to depend on “1st flight of the B787″..once they get that squared away, the could offer BA a B787-10 with the range Boeing were talking about (7200nm)….this would make it a very effective and efficient plane for BA…
All being said, I give it a 60:40 Airbus:Boeing shot…
6. keesje | January 29th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Good neutral editorial. I think for filling the gab between the A380 and 777 BA will use the 747-400 for the next 10 years, They´ll probably sing it out until something new comes along like a Y3 or A350-1100. No immediate need for a 777-300ER although it is a capable aircraft..
I have no doubt more A380´s will be ordered / options taken. In the end they have to replace 57 x 747-400s & fly preferably from slot restricted hubs with oil prices going north of $100/barrel. Airtraffic will tripple in the next 20 yrs according to Boeing and Airbus, and BA probably doesn´t want to surrender to much marketshare..
So 60 A380s in various version by 2025 doesn´t seem unlikely.
On the 747-8i, I don´t think BA is the only carrier that passed on it. Maybe BA wants to see how it performs in operation first.
7. Mike | January 29th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
It seems BA do have time but at some point they’ll have to commit and I believe it would be impractical to replace 57 747’s with 380s, especially being mindful of 772’s having replaced 747s in at least one application. There is definitely going to have to be another level above the 772’s which I believe will be the 748 or 77W unless they do have time to wait for the 777RS. The 350 m as way be too narrow in the fuselage as too, any 787 stretches to really be a replacement for 747s or 772’s.
Airframers must also be mindful of bending over to far to this Airline. It’s past is littered with the wreckage or near wreckage of more than a couple of Aircraft manufacturers.
8. Dougloid | January 30th, 2008 at 2:02 am
Mike said:
Airframers must also be mindful of bending over to far to this Airline. It’s past is littered with the wreckage or near wreckage of more than a couple of Aircraft manufacturers.
Absolutely right. Think Convair bending over for Howard Hughes.
The other point that Boeing777 made is narrowbody engine technology not being ready…I’ll take the points and the Pratt geared fan. If they pull it off, it will be a game changer.
9. Stratoliner777 | January 30th, 2008 at 7:22 am
I wonder if OpenSkies eventually gets 787s?
10. keesje | January 30th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Stratoliner777: I think 787-8 might be the right aircraft for OpenSkies and other smaller citypairs/destinations..
Mike: The A350-1000 will be only a little smaller then the B777-300ER. Seatsconfigurations will be 9 abreast in economy and 4 abreast in First like the 777. Club might be different, maybe 7 abreast. Cargo will be the same.
All for much less fuel / operating costs. Boeing has to counter the A350XWB at some point & not wait to long.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed