Has BA overstretched itself on the long haul fleet ??
Jul 23, 2018, 9:16 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Programs: BA Exec Club - Demoted to Bronze and re-promoted to Silver alongside AC Elite 50K (gold) in 2022
Posts: 393
Has BA overstretched itself on the long haul fleet ??
My first ever thread so please be gentle!!
I live in Toronto and fly BA home to London 6-7 times a year. I track the two daily flights (three in the summer flights with the seasonal LGW route) on a regular basis, especially before I fly out of curiosity and to look for patterns around unreliability.
I've been struck reading on here (and elsewhere) for a couple of months now on the number of long haul BA flights which are delayed till the next day from BA's home base. There have been cancellations for a while now (say on the second daily LA service) where I guess demand isn't there - or is it to deal with a shortage of LH aircraft?
I accept that the 787-900 issue is contained and mitigated by the wet leased Qatar A330's. But with a diverse long haul fleet of 4 major types - 747s (in 2 or 3 configs), 777s - 200, 200ER and 300ER with mixed configs, two types of dreamliner and the A380s - does it leave BA vulnerable to short term shortages with some fairly small fleets (A380 and 777-300ER)? With only 12 x A380s, I've noticed some overnight delays where clearly no spare was available. Also, one day last week - 2 x 777's were delayed overnight with no reason given ie didn't return to gate with a fault with one of them being a YYZ. (which is what caught my attention). With this number of cancellations and delays out of it's home base - I wonder whether the fleet is stretched and a fragile schedule with availability of spare aircraft being non existent! The shorthaul operation at Gatwick is a clear exception mopping up the Monarch slots - but with Titan, PrivatAir, Cityflyer covering there, with 1or 2 a day during the week (and Cityflyer at weekends), the Qatar 330s at Heathrow, this appears an expensive leasing operation which is more than covering the summer peaks. I know having spare aircraft sitting there just in case is expensive, and I assume pilots and crews are not a driving factor - but I'm curious!
Thoughts?
I live in Toronto and fly BA home to London 6-7 times a year. I track the two daily flights (three in the summer flights with the seasonal LGW route) on a regular basis, especially before I fly out of curiosity and to look for patterns around unreliability.
I've been struck reading on here (and elsewhere) for a couple of months now on the number of long haul BA flights which are delayed till the next day from BA's home base. There have been cancellations for a while now (say on the second daily LA service) where I guess demand isn't there - or is it to deal with a shortage of LH aircraft?
I accept that the 787-900 issue is contained and mitigated by the wet leased Qatar A330's. But with a diverse long haul fleet of 4 major types - 747s (in 2 or 3 configs), 777s - 200, 200ER and 300ER with mixed configs, two types of dreamliner and the A380s - does it leave BA vulnerable to short term shortages with some fairly small fleets (A380 and 777-300ER)? With only 12 x A380s, I've noticed some overnight delays where clearly no spare was available. Also, one day last week - 2 x 777's were delayed overnight with no reason given ie didn't return to gate with a fault with one of them being a YYZ. (which is what caught my attention). With this number of cancellations and delays out of it's home base - I wonder whether the fleet is stretched and a fragile schedule with availability of spare aircraft being non existent! The shorthaul operation at Gatwick is a clear exception mopping up the Monarch slots - but with Titan, PrivatAir, Cityflyer covering there, with 1or 2 a day during the week (and Cityflyer at weekends), the Qatar 330s at Heathrow, this appears an expensive leasing operation which is more than covering the summer peaks. I know having spare aircraft sitting there just in case is expensive, and I assume pilots and crews are not a driving factor - but I'm curious!
Thoughts?
Jul 23, 2018, 9:22 am
#2
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Programs: Tufty Club (Gold), BAGA Gymnastics level 4, 440yds swimming certificate
Posts: 2,533
The 787 engine replacement issues are the biggest problem here. Even with the cancellations and subs, the remainder of the fleet is fully stretched that they cant cope with a few recent 777 engine incidents, which otherwise would have been quickly recovered with a spare aircraft. Theres no spare today on any fleet, but that's unusual.
Jul 23, 2018, 10:00 am
#3
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: London
Programs: BA Silver
Posts: 1,279
I have been woken up over the last few nights from 777's flying overhead on a very delayed late approach to LHR at around 0030. Looking them up on flight radar it appears they are heavily delayed TLV and DXB services I did wonder if the fleet was stretched.
Jul 23, 2018, 10:16 am
#4
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 63,735
Welcome to Flyertalk Mikey Mike Mike and welcome to the BA forum, it's good to see you here, and I hope we will see more of you. And thank you for the interesting question.
BA have made money by having a tight control on costs. That causes moaning in various quarters here, but it does allow for an expanding airline, in terms of routes and equipment, and no airline can take their right to exist for granted. Unless you work for Alitalia that is. Plenty of airlines have gone to the wall in the last year due to poor management. So running a tight fleet isn't a bad idea on one level. But there are additional factors this year
- the Monarch slots being too good an opportunity to miss
- 787 issues - and shortage of quick replacements. If Qatar wasn't being blockaded the problems would be greater.
- Norwegian and other low cost longhaul options, where BA fears the loss of important revenue (e.g. return fares versus LCC single fare options)
- LHR really being full at the moment
- Making heaps of money on full A380 services, one of only 2 airlines to manage that, downside being when things go wrong there's a lot of people on fairly inexpensive tickets needing to be reaccommodated.
- Need to continuously recruit more cabin and flight crew. 2017 was BA's busiest year for that, but I gather 2018 will break that record.
But the glass is half full, the other side of this is that more people - perhaps from backgrounds where this wasn't previously possible - get to travel, work, meet up with friends and relatives. I was reading a book the other day about how people went from Europe to New Zealand for work opportunities. Until about 1980, the assumption was that for a parent, seeing their (adult) children and (non adult) grandchildren departing from LHR to Auckland would generally be the final time they would ever see them. A sobering thought.
BA have made money by having a tight control on costs. That causes moaning in various quarters here, but it does allow for an expanding airline, in terms of routes and equipment, and no airline can take their right to exist for granted. Unless you work for Alitalia that is. Plenty of airlines have gone to the wall in the last year due to poor management. So running a tight fleet isn't a bad idea on one level. But there are additional factors this year
- the Monarch slots being too good an opportunity to miss
- 787 issues - and shortage of quick replacements. If Qatar wasn't being blockaded the problems would be greater.
- Norwegian and other low cost longhaul options, where BA fears the loss of important revenue (e.g. return fares versus LCC single fare options)
- LHR really being full at the moment
- Making heaps of money on full A380 services, one of only 2 airlines to manage that, downside being when things go wrong there's a lot of people on fairly inexpensive tickets needing to be reaccommodated.
- Need to continuously recruit more cabin and flight crew. 2017 was BA's busiest year for that, but I gather 2018 will break that record.
But the glass is half full, the other side of this is that more people - perhaps from backgrounds where this wasn't previously possible - get to travel, work, meet up with friends and relatives. I was reading a book the other day about how people went from Europe to New Zealand for work opportunities. Until about 1980, the assumption was that for a parent, seeing their (adult) children and (non adult) grandchildren departing from LHR to Auckland would generally be the final time they would ever see them. A sobering thought.
Jul 23, 2018, 10:27 am
#5
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Brighton UK
Programs: BAEC-Silver, AMEX-BA Prem' Plus & Standard, Accor Gold, HH-Silver, IHG,IBIS On Business
Posts: 955
As @A P Yu said the dreamliners became a bigger issues when problems were found with the package B as well as the package C engines( or is that the other way around I forget). Whilst making clear I dont work for BA ( or any other airline for that matter) 'she-who-must-be-obeyed' works at LGW so I am privy to some of the machinations and gossip of the place from time to time and broadly speaking it's understood that BA's LGW Ops are quite stretched at present after they won all the ex-Monarch slots which they have to ensure are used or they risk losing them and you can bet your bottom dollar that EZYJ will snap those up as they were annoyed at not being the successful bidder and are currently LGW's Prime #1 airline ( in pax and flights obviously NOT on class 
) so in that regard BA have no option but to bring in as many leased aircraft as is necessary to maintain the slots.
There is a densification / refurb' program for the 777 fleet based at LGW as well so that is continually( I presume it's a 1 in 1 out process?) taking at least one of the fleet out of rotation at a peak time of the year as LGW is primarily a leisure traveller airport and often referred to, slightly insultingly for those of us whom have it as their home airport, as "the bucket & spade airport".
I found BA's purchasing effort of leasing three 777's at Farnborough this year a but wet although I'm sure they know what they're doing( he says with no hint of sarcasm at all lol) and I agree with the OP that having planes sat around doing sod all probably isn't very good business sense "if a plane's on the ground it's costing money not making money" but I do generally agree that maybe the fleet, large as it undeniably is, could still maybe do with a little filling out to cope better with the size of the network BA services. As a prime example look at the cancellation of the route to Calgary this winter which we've seen on this forum has caused pax no end of issues for those who can't pass through the US ( While empathetic to those who don't want to go via the US imho it's very different to those who can't).
) so in that regard BA have no option but to bring in as many leased aircraft as is necessary to maintain the slots. There is a densification / refurb' program for the 777 fleet based at LGW as well so that is continually( I presume it's a 1 in 1 out process?) taking at least one of the fleet out of rotation at a peak time of the year as LGW is primarily a leisure traveller airport and often referred to, slightly insultingly for those of us whom have it as their home airport, as "the bucket & spade airport".
I found BA's purchasing effort of leasing three 777's at Farnborough this year a but wet although I'm sure they know what they're doing( he says with no hint of sarcasm at all lol) and I agree with the OP that having planes sat around doing sod all probably isn't very good business sense "if a plane's on the ground it's costing money not making money" but I do generally agree that maybe the fleet, large as it undeniably is, could still maybe do with a little filling out to cope better with the size of the network BA services. As a prime example look at the cancellation of the route to Calgary this winter which we've seen on this forum has caused pax no end of issues for those who can't pass through the US ( While empathetic to those who don't want to go via the US imho it's very different to those who can't).
Jul 23, 2018, 10:42 am
#6
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Brighton UK
Programs: BAEC-Silver, AMEX-BA Prem' Plus & Standard, Accor Gold, HH-Silver, IHG,IBIS On Business
Posts: 955
@C-W-S Brilliant post as ever. I do wish the whole Norwegian problem would just go away and Herr Kjos would just give in and take IAG's money. That way BA get a ton more 787's to play with ( admitting that the master plan would be to keep NAS 'as is' for at least the short-medium term) and Mr Kjos would be able to retire an extremely rich young( ish) man although let's be honest he's not a poor boy at present.
I admire his holding out to a degree but with the problems NAS are facing he's getting close to the point where what he get's out of the deal risks going down not up. For those unaware it's generally regarded as a 'when' will IAG buy them out not an 'if' with the caveat that of course time can change everything and no deal is done till the ink hits the paper.
*** Apologies for going slightly off topic ***
I admire his holding out to a degree but with the problems NAS are facing he's getting close to the point where what he get's out of the deal risks going down not up. For those unaware it's generally regarded as a 'when' will IAG buy them out not an 'if' with the caveat that of course time can change everything and no deal is done till the ink hits the paper.
*** Apologies for going slightly off topic ***
Last edited by TWCLAM; Jul 23, 2018 at 10:46 am Reason: IAG are looking to buy NAS not BA in particular so changed all ref's to it
Jul 23, 2018, 12:15 pm
#7
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: England
Programs: BAEC Gold, UA Mileage Plus, Hotels.com Gold, Marriott Bonvoy Platinum, Pizza Express Gold
Posts: 600
@C-W-S Brilliant post as ever. I do wish the whole Norwegian problem would just go away and Herr Kjos would just give in and take IAG's money. That way BA get a ton more 787's to play with ( admitting that the master plan would be to keep NAS 'as is' for at least the short-medium term) and Mr Kjos would be able to retire an extremely rich young( ish) man although let's be honest he's not a poor boy at present.
I admire his holding out to a degree but with the problems NAS are facing he's getting close to the point where what he get's out of the deal risks going down not up. For those unaware it's generally regarded as a 'when' will IAG buy them out not an 'if' with the caveat that of course time can change everything and no deal is done till the ink hits the paper.
*** Apologies for going slightly off topic ***
I admire his holding out to a degree but with the problems NAS are facing he's getting close to the point where what he get's out of the deal risks going down not up. For those unaware it's generally regarded as a 'when' will IAG buy them out not an 'if' with the caveat that of course time can change everything and no deal is done till the ink hits the paper.
*** Apologies for going slightly off topic ***
Jul 23, 2018, 12:33 pm
#8
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: LHR/ATH
Programs: Amex Platinum, LH SEN (Gold), BA Bronze
Posts: 4,489
@C-W-S Brilliant post as ever. I do wish the whole Norwegian problem would just go away and Herr Kjos would just give in and take IAG's money. That way BA get a ton more 787's to play with ( admitting that the master plan would be to keep NAS 'as is' for at least the short-medium term) and Mr Kjos would be able to retire an extremely rich young( ish) man although let's be honest he's not a poor boy at present.
I admire his holding out to a degree but with the problems NAS are facing he's getting close to the point where what he get's out of the deal risks going down not up. For those unaware it's generally regarded as a 'when' will IAG buy them out not an 'if' with the caveat that of course time can change everything and no deal is done till the ink hits the paper.
*** Apologies for going slightly off topic ***
I admire his holding out to a degree but with the problems NAS are facing he's getting close to the point where what he get's out of the deal risks going down not up. For those unaware it's generally regarded as a 'when' will IAG buy them out not an 'if' with the caveat that of course time can change everything and no deal is done till the ink hits the paper.
*** Apologies for going slightly off topic ***
OP, yes BA has overstretched itself, it needs more planes but no slots at LHR. Maybe medium term with the new runway and an expansion of LGW, but to be honest LGW is quite full too.
It's a bit similar with TK as how they cannot expand due to IST being full, but now with the new IST they have made several major new orders.
I don't think BA can expand it's fleet much, even if it wanted to. I doubt it is a matter of money as they have a ton of cashish and they are literally printing money in LHR with some routes. The 787 issues make things even worse!
Another one, the pilot shortage issue is not going away, but they can make that easier by subsidizing people to learn how to fly as 120,000 GBP or so to learn how to fly from inception to flying for BA as a FO is really expensive.
Jul 23, 2018, 12:36 pm
#9
Join Date: Mar 2015
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 689
A diverse fleet does mitigate risk if there is a problem specific to an aircraft type (or engine), part of the reason they buy both Airbus and Boeing. I'm sure they could have picked the A350-1000 or the B787-10, instead of both, but it comes down to hedging your bets. For the short haul fleet, 737's can't handle cargo containers, which is used for passenger baggage (had the advantage as it speeds up loading/unloading, and prevents badly loaded loose cargo shifting in flight), hence the all Airbus narrow body fleet for LHR and LGW.
Summer is the peak season, so the airlines goal is have as many aircraft up in the air making money. But some of the long haul fleet is going to be ongoing maintenance - the Cardiff maintenance base is going to be flat out busy, but even these staff are going to at reduced capacity as the staff are going to be staring to take off their summer family holidays - industry in the UK does slow down during July/August because of it. Better than the like of France or Italy, where industry just shuts down.
The 787 situation as we know isn't helping things, but a lot of man hours are put in to keep the older frames in the fleet in service, and it doesn't help when General Electric is having problems overhauling/supplying spare GE-90's - BA pay to hold spare engines for each engine type they lease at the LHR Maintenance Base, most airlines don't, relying on the engine supplier supplying the spare in good time. With 2 GE-90's failing in the 2 weeks ago, they probably awaiting at least one replacement, which puts at risk another 777 out of action if it needs an engine swap and BA are waiting for GE to supply it.
Summer is the peak season, so the airlines goal is have as many aircraft up in the air making money. But some of the long haul fleet is going to be ongoing maintenance - the Cardiff maintenance base is going to be flat out busy, but even these staff are going to at reduced capacity as the staff are going to be staring to take off their summer family holidays - industry in the UK does slow down during July/August because of it. Better than the like of France or Italy, where industry just shuts down.
The 787 situation as we know isn't helping things, but a lot of man hours are put in to keep the older frames in the fleet in service, and it doesn't help when General Electric is having problems overhauling/supplying spare GE-90's - BA pay to hold spare engines for each engine type they lease at the LHR Maintenance Base, most airlines don't, relying on the engine supplier supplying the spare in good time. With 2 GE-90's failing in the 2 weeks ago, they probably awaiting at least one replacement, which puts at risk another 777 out of action if it needs an engine swap and BA are waiting for GE to supply it.
Jul 23, 2018, 12:53 pm
#10
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London, Prague, Dubai
Programs: BA Silver, * Alliance Gold, Emirates Gold AMEX Plat'm, Marriott Titan'm, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 1,127
@C-W-S Brilliant post as ever. I do wish the whole Norwegian problem would just go away and Herr Kjos would just give in and take IAG's money. That way BA get a ton more 787's to play with ( admitting that the master plan would be to keep NAS 'as is' for at least the short-medium term) and Mr Kjos would be able to retire an extremely rich young( ish) man although let's be honest he's not a poor boy at present.
I admire his holding out to a degree but with the problems NAS are facing he's getting close to the point where what he get's out of the deal risks going down not up. For those unaware it's generally regarded as a 'when' will IAG buy them out not an 'if' with the caveat that of course time can change everything and no deal is done till the ink hits the paper.
*** Apologies for going slightly off topic ***
I admire his holding out to a degree but with the problems NAS are facing he's getting close to the point where what he get's out of the deal risks going down not up. For those unaware it's generally regarded as a 'when' will IAG buy them out not an 'if' with the caveat that of course time can change everything and no deal is done till the ink hits the paper.
*** Apologies for going slightly off topic ***
Kjos is a business man, if he's not, he's in the wrong profession. I will never forget my Economics lectures at Uni. His wisest word's were "you are either in business for fun or profit, take your choice". Herr Kjos knows what he has. He has slots, airframes, crew and infrastructure. Either IAG pays him or Lufthansa will. IMHO
Jul 23, 2018, 3:11 pm
#11
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Brighton UK
Programs: BAEC-Silver, AMEX-BA Prem' Plus & Standard, Accor Gold, HH-Silver, IHG,IBIS On Business
Posts: 955
Wouldn't argue with any of that. BA / IAG went soft ( buying shares slowly[ sort of] until they reached the point they had to declare it so as not to look like aggressive interlopers and/or to comply with law and it's widely known that they didn't want to be/ appear aggressive as the 'Norks' ( as an ex marine I have plenty of friends and time in the country and it's how they [ Norwegians], from personal experience at least, will refer to themselves to non Norwegians) have a very reasonable love for their emerging and successful ( at inception at least) airline. Of course IAG view NAS as a direct threat on the JFK route but when the likes of EZY/ U2 signed a transit agreement with them it really changed the game and made IAG shudder about the implications of how pax would choose to fly that route, ex-UK, when the cost/ benefit matrix for BA V NAS was skewed highly in NAS favour ( imo, a worse product but for the money acceptable. I wouldn't myself but it's undeniable why many would). They picked LGW over LHR for a very good reason. They knew they weren't offering a BC product they were offering a low-cost Transatlantic option with a fleet that made it doable( not for the 1st time and we've all seen the failures trying to do the same thing over the years), The prices alone made them garner awards with pax willing to forgive the downsides over the costs but it's been clearly shown within the industry that NAS lacks GH cohesion when things go wrong and they dont have policies, that are effectively applied, to redress 'pax issues' or infrastructure to maintain that positive image( they have been fined by LGW on more than one[as far as I am aware but not in a position to know upto date day-by-day figures, 40+] occasion for costs involved to prevent lack of staff absence when things go wrong leading because of canx flights/ massively delayed and no GH staff to deal with it on more than one occasion) to the kind of behavior by, rightfully, disgruntled pax that any major airport would allow . From personal knowledge LGW staff both Sec, Airside & Landside Ops have had to hunt down GH staff and at times enforce to them their commitment to their obligations regarding canx/ majorly delayed flights. Of course pretty much every airline is guilty of 'running away' when the poo hits the fan but I feel confident in saying that NAS approach when things go wrong will end up coming back to bite them even amongst leisure travellers
Whilst certainly you will probably have a better understanding than myself having an economics major which I dont hold I think he ( Kjorn)is one of the newer breed
who likes
to have fun along the way( in a different way to how it was in 80's or even part of the 90's) while clearly being highly committed to his holdings. I just fear that he will hold out longer than is maybe sensible because I wouldn't want the airline to reach it's, fast approaching, apex and become a fire sale and risk staff unnecessarily. Please don't get me wrong the chap is more successful than I could ever hope to be but history shows us that sometimes humility serves the end cause better. If you look at NAS's dependency on the 787( which they've dealt with very well to a degree) and their over stretch on aircraft against their balance sheet / more planes than they can effectively use that isn't a solid base when you're already a rich man who doesn't need the money but risk 10,000+ staff's job's over. Baring in mind the Norwegian Gvmnt also has a stake and their protectionist stance about anything Norwegian I think he's playing a dangerous game. NK Gvmt will support keeping the airline a Norwegian enterprise but that will fast evaporate if NAS collapses due to an avoidable overstretch and collapse, the first part of which they are already in.
Whilst certainly you will probably have a better understanding than myself having an economics major which I dont hold I think he ( Kjorn)is one of the newer breed
who likes
to have fun along the way( in a different way to how it was in 80's or even part of the 90's) while clearly being highly committed to his holdings. I just fear that he will hold out longer than is maybe sensible because I wouldn't want the airline to reach it's, fast approaching, apex and become a fire sale and risk staff unnecessarily. Please don't get me wrong the chap is more successful than I could ever hope to be but history shows us that sometimes humility serves the end cause better. If you look at NAS's dependency on the 787( which they've dealt with very well to a degree) and their over stretch on aircraft against their balance sheet / more planes than they can effectively use that isn't a solid base when you're already a rich man who doesn't need the money but risk 10,000+ staff's job's over. Baring in mind the Norwegian Gvmnt also has a stake and their protectionist stance about anything Norwegian I think he's playing a dangerous game. NK Gvmt will support keeping the airline a Norwegian enterprise but that will fast evaporate if NAS collapses due to an avoidable overstretch and collapse, the first part of which they are already in.
Jul 23, 2018, 5:40 pm
#13
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Programs: BA Exec Club - Demoted to Bronze and re-promoted to Silver alongside AC Elite 50K (gold) in 2022
Posts: 393
Thanks for the very interesting "off topic" discussion about Norwegian which is a whole discussion in itself and is not operationally impacting poor LHR long haul reliability. I see from another site that the 777's being densified are now taking about 35 days a piece plus the journey to/from Singapore. Also with the repainting of the 777 fleet, I can see how the 777 fleet is stretched. (Qantas have an odd wobble too on the A380s and 747s being small and/or aging fleets.not
I accept that having aircraft sitting around is good business - but neither is two flights delayed overnight, with the on costs of hotels, or losing the business or buying seats on other carriers. My perception is it's got worse this summer and the season for the summer LH programme doesn't excuse the delays and cancellation. I specifically took the DreamLiners out if of the picture as there is a planned workaround. (even though they have gone from 3 to 2 x 330s in recent weeks but could pick a couple more routes to ease it further)
I exclude Gatwick as well from the discussion as I can see why IAG would take the slots, and wet lease despite the online reviews being terrible for people who feel misled by buying a BA flight and having it subbed. The core of the issue for me is having so many smaller fleets of LH aircraft which if you factor in a spares maintenance leads to little margin for error. I work in mass transit, and the spares ration for subway trains (which I accept don't fall out of skies) - is 10% as best practice on a stable train fleet. I can see the commercial advantage of different types of aircraft, and different configurations, for commercial flexibility but a lack of spare aircraft may not be good business. (I'm talking about one spare) At the risk of raising Norwegian (again), you only have to see the bad press they get when they sub in, and I'd hate BA to go the same way. I fly home in 13 days time to London and it will be interesting to see how it goes YYZ. Expanding the thread, I also don't accept the cabin crew or cockpit crew issue are valid as they know what they're operating and their attrition of staff leaving / retiring so I really think it's the aircraft which are the issue. (you can increase mixed fleet by running extra courses but I know pilots are in short supply. Expanding on the thread, I've enjoyed the LGW to YYZ service and to have experienced crew over 25 who know what they are doing in biz is a bonus. It's great to see three rotations a day in the summer with choice with 3 x 777s some peak days. I do miss the 747 on the route which was how I arrived in Toronto in 2014. And looking ahead, they've pruned back the winter to YYZ (as well as Calgary) with two dreamliners only and no first class on some days. With WestJet, Air Canada Rouge and Air Transat offering seasonal choices from LGW and Primera doing Stansted - the summer is plentiful. Lets hope BA don't stuff the year round customers this winter with a lack of seats.
I accept that having aircraft sitting around is good business - but neither is two flights delayed overnight, with the on costs of hotels, or losing the business or buying seats on other carriers. My perception is it's got worse this summer and the season for the summer LH programme doesn't excuse the delays and cancellation. I specifically took the DreamLiners out if of the picture as there is a planned workaround. (even though they have gone from 3 to 2 x 330s in recent weeks but could pick a couple more routes to ease it further)
I exclude Gatwick as well from the discussion as I can see why IAG would take the slots, and wet lease despite the online reviews being terrible for people who feel misled by buying a BA flight and having it subbed. The core of the issue for me is having so many smaller fleets of LH aircraft which if you factor in a spares maintenance leads to little margin for error. I work in mass transit, and the spares ration for subway trains (which I accept don't fall out of skies) - is 10% as best practice on a stable train fleet. I can see the commercial advantage of different types of aircraft, and different configurations, for commercial flexibility but a lack of spare aircraft may not be good business. (I'm talking about one spare) At the risk of raising Norwegian (again), you only have to see the bad press they get when they sub in, and I'd hate BA to go the same way. I fly home in 13 days time to London and it will be interesting to see how it goes YYZ. Expanding the thread, I also don't accept the cabin crew or cockpit crew issue are valid as they know what they're operating and their attrition of staff leaving / retiring so I really think it's the aircraft which are the issue. (you can increase mixed fleet by running extra courses but I know pilots are in short supply. Expanding on the thread, I've enjoyed the LGW to YYZ service and to have experienced crew over 25 who know what they are doing in biz is a bonus. It's great to see three rotations a day in the summer with choice with 3 x 777s some peak days. I do miss the 747 on the route which was how I arrived in Toronto in 2014. And looking ahead, they've pruned back the winter to YYZ (as well as Calgary) with two dreamliners only and no first class on some days. With WestJet, Air Canada Rouge and Air Transat offering seasonal choices from LGW and Primera doing Stansted - the summer is plentiful. Lets hope BA don't stuff the year round customers this winter with a lack of seats.
Jul 23, 2018, 8:01 pm
#14
Join Date: Mar 2015
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 689
And looking ahead, they've pruned back the winter to YYZ (as well as Calgary) with two dreamliners only and no first class on some days. With WestJet, Air Canada Rouge and Air Transat offering seasonal choices from LGW and Primera doing Stansted - the summer is plentiful. Lets hope BA don't stuff the year round customers this winter with a lack of seats.
Jul 24, 2018, 2:44 am
#15
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Lincoln, UK
Programs: BA Gold, TK, DL, IHG Diamond, HHonours Gold, Hertz Presidents Club
Posts: 497
Interesting question, I think that most successful business run at the limit in one way shape or another, and that's not to say that BA is successful in every way but it's been able to turn healthy profits, probably by running lean and your post is an example.
Going OT but what the oracle says is very true, my mother was a Ł10 pom and she didn't think she would come back to the UK (she did)
I now travel to Australia and New Zealand for work quite regularly, trips lasting 4-9 days and I think for very good value, the idea that people can 'flit' that far around the world is amazing.
If we do see QF complete operation sunrise then we might see long weekends to MEL yet!
. I was reading a book the other day about how people went from Europe to New Zealand for work opportunities. Until about 1980, the assumption was that for a parent, seeing their (adult) children and (non adult) grandchildren departing from LHR to Auckland would generally be the final time they would ever see them. A sobering thought.
I now travel to Australia and New Zealand for work quite regularly, trips lasting 4-9 days and I think for very good value, the idea that people can 'flit' that far around the world is amazing.
If we do see QF complete operation sunrise then we might see long weekends to MEL yet!