[Anonymous]

[Potakas]

BA’s first A380 took the production number MSN095 !!! Although it is still far away 2 or 3 years more…

Also BA will be the launch customer for the new Improved A380-800, with improved maximum take-off weight, thus providing a better payload/range performance

The option was introduced in order to counter a perceived strength of the 747-8I, the latest revision of the Boeing 747.

Another decent decision from BA in order to have the best they can from this aircraft.

Regards,

Potakas

[MartynSinclair]

do you know the stats for the improved 380 vrs the 747-8i?

[Potakas]

Martyn,
I found that the improved A380 will have its Maximum take-off weight increased by 4t, to 573t. and an additional 190km (100nm) range that will enable it to fly distances of 15,360km on MTOW-limited missions. (i believe those numbers would be with passengers and baggage)

When Boeing’s 747-8i has Maximum take-off weight 975,000 lb (442,000 kg) and maximum range (at MTOW) 8,000 nmi (15,000 km)
with 467 passengers and baggage.

Sources: wikipedia and

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/05/18/341926/airbus-poised-to-start-building-new-higher-weight-a380.html

Regards,

Potakas

[BlackTower]

What’s everyones guess for the intro route? VK?

[Potakas]

It’s too early but i would say the kangaroo route for sure (as they stopped the 747’s for fuel efficient reasons) , then i could say states as BA has the major part of the lhr-jfk route.

Regards

[Bucksnet]

The first one needs to be used on a short transatlantic hop that can be turned around in well under 24 hours. Anything longer will need 2 or more frames and will have to wait until after other deliverys have been made.

Any flights to Australia will need 3 frames. How about BA starting a new route to SYD? Say LHR-DRW-SYD and return. Darwin airport will probably need to be upgraded, but BA would be offering non-stop flights down under.

[VintageKrug]

I certainly do not know which route it will fly on first, but I doubt very much it would be Australia.

BA is relying on Qantas’s A380s to cater for increased demand and with the JSA shares costs and income with Qantas anyway.

I am not certain about the cargo carrying benefits of the A380, but that certainly drove the decision to focus the new 777-300ERs on the BOM route, as freight is a big moneymaker and regular 777s did not have enough capacity to meet demand on that route.

I would suggest that initially the JFK run will be used to give as many crew as possible experience flying the bird, then once a brace of them are delivered it would move to high frequency routes like HKG and other growth markets to provide much needed capacity increases at the slot-restricted LHR, and depending on market circumstances might allow a reduction in frequency in cases where you have two 747s leaving within a hour of each other.

[Bucksnet]

VK, Hong Kong is not a high frequency route; BA only flies there twice a day. I think you mean high demand route.

The trouble with HKG is that the required timings mean that whatever frames are used will spend most of their time on the ground. A waste of an expensive new asset like an A380. More likely to stay with 747s which are old and paid for, at least for a while.

[NTarrant]

I think you will find that on some days HKG has three 747’s. It is a high demand route, but it would be cheaper to fly two A380’s than three 747’s irrespective of time on the ground.

[Bucksnet]

BA dropped the third HKG flight ages ago, so there are only 2 now. However if the demand is there it would be cheaper in terms of direct flight costs, but you will need 4 A380s to operate a double daily service and they will be sitting on the ground most of the day at either end. It may therefore cost more than 6 747s that have already been fully depreciated. Maybe BA could use one on the morning LHR-TLV-LHR rotation to increase utilisation.

2 A380s a day to JNB would also be more efficent than the 3 flights a day now, but again the frames would spend most of the day on the ground at both ends, so changing the economics.

[avessman]

I’m not sure of the configuration BA will have on the A380s but with high amount of J-class, and not considering the cargo load, I think BA will use them on HKG and JFK and possibly JNB.

With a lower amount of J-class seats I think they will use them on LAX, JNB or CPT and maybe BKK.

[Deleted User]

I am sure BA planners are sitting well on the fence on this one. I would imagine its far too early to know for certain which route the 380 will run. Too many variables.

There is a discussion for NYC, prestige route, quick turnarounds, there is an argument for CPT, long route, straight back to London. I would doubt that BA would risk taking the 380 to BKK or SIN as that would mean onwards to Australia.

Perhaps there should be a prize awarded for the correct guess for BA’s first 380:

route:

config F / J / Y

flight number:

with a tie braker for the number of px & crew.

Any sponsors…………………………………..?

[robsmith100]

Personally i dont think the A380 can come any sooner.

From my understanding BA runs one of the largest 747 fleets with a total of 50 jets, With an average age of 15 years. With 15 of those jets having an age of between 18-20 years. . Speaking to a mate at BA he confimed that the A380 will be used on a high density route… which is yet to be confirmed.

[cityprofessional]

I think there was a BA announcement somewhere that said that the A380 would do routes like HKG, JNB and LAX/SFO, where consolidating 2 flights into 1 or 3 into 2 would help free up slots. JFK requires high frequency (i.e. one flight an hour) more than high volume in order to satisfy the business community. So my money would be on one of the former routes. Buying the high gross weight version strongly suggests that JNB (hot and high airport) is part of the plan

[Author]

Posts