1010101

Seems to be those that are easier to re-accommodate passengers and those that aren't too far i.e it wouldn't cost a fortune to send a fuel thirsty 777 instead.

JDiver

We’re on BA 278 SJC-LHR (789) on 6 November. Are we likely to encounter this issue? My concern is if they switch in a 772 v 2 we have a CW seat reduction, not to mention no F, and we’re on award tickets. Will they notify us reliably? (At least then I can attempt switching to SFO if there’s capacity.)

I’m surmising BA would prefer dispatching 789s on these longer flights and fill shorter, e.g. US east coast, sectors with the more fuel hungry 777. Or am I merely Dreaming?

Can I help you

JDiver

A translation would be most useful, thank you.

I am inquiring because my travel companion has medical needs I attend to.

rapidex

To be honest I dont think anyone can give you a straight answer. There were 3 B787 parked at LHR the other day each minus an engine.When will the engines come back?,we dont know.

BA has 2 B747's in service that were supposed to be retired at the end of last years, but they soldier on.The simple answer is BA is short of long haul lift capacity and they are shuffling around what they have to plug gaps.Fingers crossed all will go well, but keep checking.

corporate-wage-slave

I think it may have been a suggestion to perhaps not overthink the issue. It's so difficult to predict that no-one in BA will know until much nearer departure. It's less likely to be a 777 swap than an outright cancellation, I suspect. Having said that I noticed that when the 787-9 pulled into to A18 last night from its long flight from Narita at 16:47 hrs, G-ZBKS wasn't scheduled out again (to LAX as it happens) until 16:55 hrs today. Given than BA usually work their aircraft so intensively, for her to have 24 hours off in the shed doesn't suggest a 787 operation that thin on slack. Now clearly a couple of outages could make a big difference to that, so keep checking back in your favourite FT forum for any 787 incidents. Otherwise we're not currently seeing a lot of longhaul short notice changes or cancellations. So all you can do is the occasional check of MMB. If you booked directly with BA (as opposed to AA or TA) then you should get notification of seat number changes, and an automatic email/text if it is cancelled. If you did book outside BA.com then cunning use of a seat alert notification on Expertflyer is a semi-workaround. But the big next stage is at t-72 hrs when the aircraft and service pass under FMU control, so that's a good time to check more carefully.

There is no such thing as a 772 v2 incidentally. It exists purely on seatguru and isn't accurate, thebasource is usually the better guide here.

dylanks

Also I don't think BA would ever put a 777 on the SJC-LHR route... they're more likely to cancel the flight than substitute a 777 in my opinion. I'm not sure if this is in part an attempt by SJC to reduce noise, but I think it's been about 10 years since a 777 intentionally flew to SJC.

CKBA

The BA229 LHR-BWI (and return) on Saturday was changed from a 788 to a 789 8 days out, so there is some mid-term planning going on.

JDiver

Thank you all.

This is an award booking using AA miles, seats selected using MMB. I’ll keep a careful watch, particularly as we get closer to departure.

sdsdriver

Hi.
I'm due to travel to LAX next April but BA moved me onto BA281 from AA109. It was only after looking up the flight details of 281 that I realized that it was on the Dreamliner and I was excited to be on the Dreamliner finally. I am a very nervous flyer but haven't said that I was still excited. But then I started reading about the 787 engine troubles and it got me feeling quite nervous about my upcoming trip. Is it as bad as the media are making out. The airlines that fly the 787 at the moment with the Rolls Royce engines, are they the ones that are fixed or are some of them still flying and waiting to be fixed? In other words could I be flying on BA281 next April on a 787 that's still waiting to be fixed? Any help from you guys would be much appreciated.
Thanks and regards,
Mark.

tinkicker

I'm slightly wary here if a technical answer will help you or not so feel free to stop reading now.

"Waiting to be fixed" is tricky , best to think of it like your car. There is a service book for your car that says something like 'change the oil every 10,000 miles'. So the day you change the oil are you just using it or are you "waiting" to change the oil.

Aircraft are the same, components are given a a fixed amount of time when they can be used and after that they have to be changed or inspected.
So, yes it is entirely possible that next year you could fly in a 787 with the original engine configuration. It's not so much that it is "waiting to be fixed" it's just that it has not yet reached the point where it needs to be fixed. The parked aircraft have got to the time when the new component is needed and, as production isn't as fast as demand, they have been taken out of service. Of course as time passes, more and more 'new' configuration engines are available and so your chances of being on an original config is reduced.

In short: some aircraft flying now have the new engine configuration, some have the old one. They will all be within the safety margin that the regulators are happy to sign off on.

george77300

Can I help you

corporate-wage-slave

I'm a big fan of the 787 (and indeed newer aircraft such as A380 and A350). And they all make flying a much better, more comfortable experience than the outgoing series of aircraft. You will arrive in LAX in much better shape as a result. I would have absolutely no concerns about this process, it's not at all unusual for new aircraft to go through something like this, and retro fits of various types happen all the time without much attention being given to them. And by April a lot of this will be trhough the system anyway so you will be fine. Have you been on an A380 yet? If that is flying on your date to LAX maybe call AA and ask if they will move you over to that service? For those who are a bit on edge about flying the A380 is so quiet, so smooth that it's a really good choice. And in terms of BA's product, the upper deck World Traveller and World Traveller Plus cabins are probably some of the best economy options going of any airline.

Dubh

We're back to the 789 now this week in AUH, with the Air Belgium unit now doing DXB. However my flights booking January have just gone from the 789 to a 772.