Nov 13, 2018, 12:10 am
Last edit by: Scotflyer80
Currently these aircraft are based in LHR T5. The registrations are:
A320neo
G-TTNA
G-TTNB
G-TTNC
G-TTND
G-TTNE
G-TTNF
G-TTNG
G-TTNH
G-TTNI
G-TTNJ
G-TTNK
G-TTNL
G-TTNM
G-TTNO
A321neo
G-NEOP
G-NEOR
G-NEOS
G-NEOT
G-NEOU
G-NEOV
G-NEOW
G-NEOX
G-NEOY
G-NEOZ
A320neo
G-TTNA
G-TTNB
G-TTNC
G-TTND
G-TTNE
G-TTNF
G-TTNG
G-TTNH
G-TTNI
G-TTNJ
G-TTNK
G-TTNL
G-TTNM
G-TTNO
A321neo
G-NEOP
G-NEOR
G-NEOS
G-NEOT
G-NEOU
G-NEOV
G-NEOW
G-NEOX
G-NEOY
G-NEOZ
NEOs and a couple of SH changes
Jan 1, 2018, 10:02 am
#76
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,477
I think the screens are overhead screens every 3-5 rows depends on where you sit. It is not that heavy to carry and it rarely goes wrong as nobody touches that thing (unlike the seat back screens).
Jan 1, 2018, 10:16 am
#77
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,477
more seats = more opportunity to sell a seat cheaper to steal from competitors = when fully sold there might be more revenue if you are lucky; and
more seats = extra cost per plane = extra cost to calculate take-off weight = extra cost per trip due to added weight and emergency equipment
However, more revenue does not mean more profit. If you have to have a higher cost to chase the rubbish yield then you are defeating the object to make more money.
And your equation TV screens + moving map + video equipment = no extra revenue = does not justify the extra weight carried is not true neither.
Overhead screens at this moment is a competition differentiate point, an USP when you compare to easyJet, Ryanair etc.. It does not cost extra as the fees are previously negotiated and maintenance is in-house (at least currently). I don't think then weight of the overhead screen is heavier than a normal Y seats. The heavy ones everyone talks about is the seatback screens which can add a lot of weight to the plane. Take away the USP, you will have to work harder to sell more seats.
As I said math is wonderful. There is nothing wrong to believe (More seats = more passengers = more revenue = justifies the additional weight carried), as BA is doing successfully with its Club World product and that is how they made money. But in the case of short haul business, the math might be different.
Jan 1, 2018, 10:55 am
#78
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: London
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 847
This is probably one of the G-GATx fleet in its existing configuration. Does the seatmap show row 1 on the left hand side only?
Jan 1, 2018, 10:57 am
#79
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: From ORK, live LCY
Programs: BA Silver, EI Silver, HH Gold, BW Gold, ABP, Seigneur des Horaires des Mucci
Posts: 14,214
Jan 1, 2018, 10:59 am
#80
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: From ORK, live LCY
Programs: BA Silver, EI Silver, HH Gold, BW Gold, ABP, Seigneur des Horaires des Mucci
Posts: 14,214
Show me someone who will pay 1p more to go on a plane with TV screens and a moving map.
Jan 1, 2018, 11:25 am
#81
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: London
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 1,683
Except on short haul like MAN/CDG/AMS, you are talking about £5 per person per sector (revenue wise) to carry 75KGs per adult with 23KGs hand luggage and 23KGs hold luggage and the 50Kgs of the seat. So BA will carry almost 200KGs per added passenger to get the £5 revenue per flight. And for the $50,000 seats cost, you need to sell 10,000 tickets to just to cover the cost of the new seats. Then you start to recover the added fuel costs...Your myth is that more seats = more passengers = more revenue. This does not happen unless you have a perfect market condition (i.e., unlimited demand). The real condition is more like:
more seats = more opportunity to sell a seat cheaper to steal from competitors = when fully sold there might be more revenue if you are lucky; and
more seats = extra cost per plane = extra cost to calculate take-off weight = extra cost per trip due to added weight and emergency equipment
However, more revenue does not mean more profit. If you have to have a higher cost to chase the rubbish yield then you are defeating the object to make more money.
And your equation TV screens + moving map + video equipment = no extra revenue = does not justify the extra weight carried is not true neither.
Overhead screens at this moment is a competition differentiate point, an USP when you compare to easyJet, Ryanair etc.. It does not cost extra as the fees are previously negotiated and maintenance is in-house (at least currently). I don't think then weight of the overhead screen is heavier than a normal Y seats. The heavy ones everyone talks about is the seatback screens which can add a lot of weight to the plane. Take away the USP, you will have to work harder to sell more seats.
As I said math is wonderful. There is nothing wrong to believe (More seats = more passengers = more revenue = justifies the additional weight carried), as BA is doing successfully with its Club World product and that is how they made money. But in the case of short haul business, the math might be different.
more seats = more opportunity to sell a seat cheaper to steal from competitors = when fully sold there might be more revenue if you are lucky; and
more seats = extra cost per plane = extra cost to calculate take-off weight = extra cost per trip due to added weight and emergency equipment
However, more revenue does not mean more profit. If you have to have a higher cost to chase the rubbish yield then you are defeating the object to make more money.
And your equation TV screens + moving map + video equipment = no extra revenue = does not justify the extra weight carried is not true neither.
Overhead screens at this moment is a competition differentiate point, an USP when you compare to easyJet, Ryanair etc.. It does not cost extra as the fees are previously negotiated and maintenance is in-house (at least currently). I don't think then weight of the overhead screen is heavier than a normal Y seats. The heavy ones everyone talks about is the seatback screens which can add a lot of weight to the plane. Take away the USP, you will have to work harder to sell more seats.
As I said math is wonderful. There is nothing wrong to believe (More seats = more passengers = more revenue = justifies the additional weight carried), as BA is doing successfully with its Club World product and that is how they made money. But in the case of short haul business, the math might be different.
You take a made up number, revenue of £5, and then start to calculate things from it. Continually saying Math doesn't justify your made up numbers. All of your remarks about the screen costs are entirely fictional, of course maintenance has a cost, people have to be employed, or support contracts paid for. Saying a fee is previously negotiated doesn't mean that the said fee doesn't have to be paid currently.
In my experience CDG you use as an example is a business heavy route, certainly the entire plane seems to have status, I've several times paid in excess of 600GBP for CE on that route. With a small laptop bag and no checked luggage.
Jan 1, 2018, 11:33 am
#82
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Dundee
Programs: BA Plastic. HH Diamond. Speedwell Bar Lifetime Platinum.
Posts: 1,425
Jan 1, 2018, 11:54 am
#83
Moderator: Qatar Airways
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: LHR/NCE/MIA
Programs: BAEC GfL & GGL, SQ Gold, Amex Centurion, Mucci des Chevaliers des Bons Mots et Qui Savent Moucher
Posts: 8,949
It's worth saying that while the screens weigh, as does their cabling, I'd imagine more cable is needed to ensure every seat has it's own USB socket.
M
M
Jan 1, 2018, 12:46 pm
#87
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London, Babylon-on-Thames
Programs: BAEC Blue (back to Earth)
Posts: 1,508
We have not. I just ask that you bear with the crew as it’s different for all of us, and things are definitely going to take longer with a lot more running up and down the aircraft. I had my training the other week, I might not operate on one of these until the end of 2018 (especially the 321N).
That's an existing issue, making it worse isn't going to end well.....
Show me someone who will pay 1p more to go on a plane with TV screens and a moving map.
I quite like Ryanair, you know where you are, they're cheap. Now I pay more to fly BA, and yet pound for pound I don't get more.
No recline so stuck bolt uprightfor 2-3 hours at the end of the work day flying home, no coffee included, same seat pitch, no screen. The only thing I really use is Priority Boarding. What exactly are we paying more for in short haul Economy? It's not the speed of service, I have yet to experience a BoB flight which wasn't a flustered experience from a frustrated crew.
Last edited by skipness1E; Jan 1, 2018 at 12:56 pm
Jan 1, 2018, 1:16 pm
#88
FlyerTalk Evangelist, Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere between 0 and 13,000 metres high
Programs: AF/KL Life Plat, BA GGL+GfL, ALL Plat, Hilton Diam, Marriott Gold, blablablah, etc
Posts: 30,540
Jan 1, 2018, 1:21 pm
#89
Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club, easyJet and Ryanair
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK/Las Vegas
Programs: BA Gold (GGL/CCR)
Posts: 15,928
I have yet to be on a busy BoB service where the service was remotely approaching the standard of easyJet.
That's an existing issue, making it worse isn't going to end well.....
Me, it was a nice enhancement. Being airborne is that rarest of things where people literally don't know where they are. I could look up and see not only where I was but how far I had to go to destination.
I quite like Ryanair, you know where you are, they're cheap. Now I pay more to fly BA, and yet pound for pound I don't get more.
No recline so stuck bolt uprightfor 2-3 hours at the end of the work day flying home, no coffee included, same seat pitch, no screen. The only thing I really use is Priority Boarding. What exactly are we paying more for in short haul Economy? It's not the speed of service, I have yet to experience a BoB flight which wasn't a flustered experience from a frustrated crew.
That's an existing issue, making it worse isn't going to end well.....
Me, it was a nice enhancement. Being airborne is that rarest of things where people literally don't know where they are. I could look up and see not only where I was but how far I had to go to destination.
I quite like Ryanair, you know where you are, they're cheap. Now I pay more to fly BA, and yet pound for pound I don't get more.
No recline so stuck bolt uprightfor 2-3 hours at the end of the work day flying home, no coffee included, same seat pitch, no screen. The only thing I really use is Priority Boarding. What exactly are we paying more for in short haul Economy? It's not the speed of service, I have yet to experience a BoB flight which wasn't a flustered experience from a frustrated crew.
Jan 1, 2018, 1:27 pm
#90
FlyerTalk Evangelist, Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere between 0 and 13,000 metres high
Programs: AF/KL Life Plat, BA GGL+GfL, ALL Plat, Hilton Diam, Marriott Gold, blablablah, etc
Posts: 30,540
That’s broadly a very optimistic view of decision making. Over 90% of decision making is subconscious and all of it is complex ie virtually none based on a single factor. When people tell you they only book based on schedule it isn’t true, they wouldn’t past a certain price level or below a certain perception of safety etc etc. In flight entertainment including the maps are one of the many ingredients that participate in a passenger’s impression of a flight and thus their likelihood to choose the airline again. Approximating a pound value to it can be done with the right data but of course none of us (BA insiders included) have access to it. That said, yo can be reasonable confident that if some people who already have status benefit pay £100 more for a guaranteed empty middle seat they’d likely get anyway, a gin and tonic and five limp salad leaves with a sixth of a chicken breast then some undoubtedly pay a penny or a few for a moving map.
Last edited by orbitmic; Jan 1, 2018 at 2:50 pm