BA orders new planes

AndyG · Post by **AndyG** » 27 Sep 2007, 19:19

Well, they may have rolled it out Techy, but they had to cut some corners to do so. After rollout it was taken back into the shop to remove all of the mushroom head rivets and exchange them for the proper counter sunk versions!!

Andy

Post by **Garry Russell** » 27 Sep 2007, 19:25

The roll out was more about the date than a finished aeroplane

Garry

jonesey2k · Post by **jonesey2k** » 27 Sep 2007, 19:25

Cant wait to fly on a BA A380! :yipeee:

Post by **Garry Russell** » 27 Sep 2007, 19:27

Why not try to get on the first public service with it and get your claim to history

Garry

petermcleland · Post by **petermcleland** » 27 Sep 2007, 20:03

cstorey wrote:In any event, I do not think that Concorde was quite the white elephant in real terms that Peter considers it to have been.

Hang on Chris I did not say the Concorde was a White Elephant...I said the A380 was a White Elephant. If airbus think they have problems with it now, just wait till it start to operate into airports and utterly wrecks their infrastructure, causing massive delays to EVERYBODY. Personally I think it would be a jolly good idea to cancel it right now, but I guess I'll just have to wait and say "I told you so!"

Concorde?...Wonderful aeroplane and operated extremely well. It also started to make money towards the end

Post by **Garry Russell** » 27 Sep 2007, 20:07

Peter

Surely the airports will adapt like they did when the 747 came on stream needing extensive infrastructure modifications? :think:

Garry

Techy111 · Post by **Techy111** » 27 Sep 2007, 20:36

And most Airports that are to recieve the new A380 have already tested this out with the Test Airframes and your right .....BA's only A/c to come in with a profit was the Concorde

techy

forthbridge · Post by **forthbridge** » 27 Sep 2007, 21:05

Interesting theories. It will be interesting to see how things unfold. Of course history tells us that (usually) one company or other gets it wrong in the direction they choose to go - look at the VC10 - and airports expanding for the 707. So it could go either way. Environmentally, all other things being equal it makes more sense to shift more passengers per flight, saving money on fleet sizes and aircraft movements.

An argument against this is the public are used to frequent services. Could Easyjet offer ridiculously low fares for 500 skulls on one flight as opposed to 4 seperate flights? Would it be worth it? or is there more benefit in actually offering differing departure times/more frequent services?

That's about the only thing that I can personally see the Superbus being good for, and so far it isn't being ordered in enough quantity to make any real difference in terms of efficiency for a major airline.

And it could just be the case that if cheaper fares are available because of the Giant, it will attract even more flyers, and nullify any perceived benefits in terms of movements, etc....

Hot_Charlie · Post by **Hot_Charlie** » 27 Sep 2007, 22:03

Techy111 wrote:Yeah you right cstorey this from Boeing website....

"We’re now targeting first flight for somewhere in the mid-November to mid-December timeframe. "

Techy

Blimey. So it's now slipped from August to "when it's ready" to November/December. Nice to see Boeing finally remove the smoke and mirrors and be honest. In service by May 2008? Really...

cstorey · Post by **cstorey** » 27 Sep 2007, 23:04

Peter : apologies - I attributed someone else's comments ( replying to yours ) to you . Nonetheless, have you actually seen A380 in the air? - it is most impressive , much nicer looking than the photos, and amazingly quiet

BWS as always

Chris

Classic British Flight Sim

BA orders new planes

Re: BA orders new planes

Re: BA orders new planes

Re: BA orders new planes

Re: BA orders new planes

Re: BA orders new planes

Re: BA orders new planes

Re: BA orders new planes

Re: BA orders new planes

Re: BA orders new planes

Re: BA orders new planes