Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > British Airways | Executive Club
Reload this Page >

Why is Buenos Aires an old 777 when Santiago is a newer 787?

Why is Buenos Aires an old 777 when Santiago is a newer 787?

Old Jan 18, 20, 2:54 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 104
Why is Buenos Aires an old 777 when Santiago is a newer 787?

LHR-EZE comes in at 14hrs
LHR-SCL is about 14h30m

Pretty similar flight times.

Then why is EZE on their oldest, most worn out 777s? Surely people going that far on an ultra-long haul flight need better comfort than a 20 year old plane?

SCL get a much more modern 787.

I think the 787 is great for that distance, due to the cabin pressure etc.
demolineux is offline  
Old Jan 18, 20, 3:00 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 260
The overriding consideration for BA is capacity. The 777-200ER is a significantly larger aircraft than the 787-9. The 787-10 is roughly equivalent but does not have as much range.
Starship73 is offline  
Old Jan 18, 20, 3:00 am
  #3  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 7,679
BA really don't allocate aircraft based on passenger comfort, or at least that's only a minor factor on most routes. Much more important are scheduling and fuel efficiency, and capacity matched to demand in the respective cabins. I expect the economics of the 787 were what enabled the SCL launch, but as it grows it might eventually end up on a 777 (by which time, they might all have the new cabins).
Starship73 likes this.
Ldnn1 is offline  
Old Jan 18, 20, 3:05 am
  #4  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Brighton. UK
Programs: BA Silver / VS /IHG Spire & Ambassador
Posts: 11,439
I’m sure none of the current 777s have the same interiors as when they were bought however many years ago.

a 20 year old plane does not mean its worn out, 20 is positively young compared to some of the 747s
UKtravelbear is online now  
Old Jan 18, 20, 3:09 am
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: LON
Programs: BAEC, Accor
Posts: 1,622
Wouldn't cargo capacity and demand also have a significant impact into fleet choice. Passengers are only part of the equation for the airline.
plunet is offline  
Old Jan 18, 20, 3:10 am
  #6  
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: 42,245
I would expect that EZE will in due course move to one of the newer aircraft before too long. Maybe more next year than this, BA runs its fleet very tightly. My last trip to EZE a few months ago was on one of the 777-200ERs, and apart from the IFE it was fine, in good condition and clean. Being 3 class also avoids the "dorm" effect.

It's still good for cargo, which is another factor here.
HIDDY likes this.
corporate-wage-slave is online now  
Old Jan 18, 20, 3:19 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,883
LHR-SCL is a much newer route only due to the economics of the B789.
richardwft is offline  
Old Jan 18, 20, 3:37 am
  #8  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Either below the Ockham stack or below the approach to SDKY
Programs: UA 1MM/*G. AA EXP for 1 more year. Then, who knows?
Posts: 5,159
Also, the 787 is an absolutely awful experience in WT.
Passmethesickbag is offline  
Old Jan 18, 20, 3:39 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London
Programs: BA Silver
Posts: 1,495
Its interesting that Norwegian are now flying to EZE in a new 787
if thinking of flying Y or W......
allturnleft is offline  
Old Jan 18, 20, 6:00 am
  #10  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: SE1, London
Posts: 21,909
If the much documented engine issues weren’t affecting the 787 fleet I imagine EZE would have long since gone 787-8.
Swanhunter is offline  
Old Jan 18, 20, 6:51 am
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,580
Because BA does not have any old 787s?
FlyingScientist is offline  
Old Jan 18, 20, 7:04 am
  #12  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, A3*G, Mucci de l'expertise des Apps
Posts: 2,761
EZE, rubbish pax yield, no need for F, competing against Norwegian, from a pax load point of view what it needs is a B788...BUT...loads of cargo which the B788 would never fit, so add this to the pax requirements of the route and what it really needs is a 3-class B772 to carry all that, which unsurprisingly is exactly what BA sends.

What IFE they are offering or how old the cabin is vs the flight length has absolutely zero impact on the decision making process, all that matters is fitting the right distribution of the 5 classes of freight namely F, CW, WTP, WT, Pallet class.
M60_to_LGA likes this.
Airprox is online now  
Old Jan 18, 20, 7:54 am
  #13  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Programs: BAEC Gold; Hilton Gold, IHG Spire, Marriott Titanium, Wyndham Diamond
Posts: 467
Revenge for the Falklands War.
M60_to_LGA likes this.
Mordac is offline  
Old Jan 18, 20, 10:11 am
  #14  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London
Programs: plenty - ggl, ccr, etc, etc.
Posts: 1,548
Originally Posted by demolineux View Post
LHR-EZE comes in at 14hrs
LHR-SCL is about 14h30m

Pretty similar flight times.

Then why is EZE on their oldest, most worn out 777s? Surely people going that far on an ultra-long haul flight need better comfort than a 20 year old plane?

SCL get a much more modern 787.

I think the 787 is great for that distance, due to the cabin pressure etc.
Santiago has F cabin paid demand - the other route doesn’t perhaps?
DFB_london is offline  
Old Jan 18, 20, 10:50 am
  #15  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Argentina
Programs: BAEC/IB
Posts: 38,000
Members of the HIDDY clan came to visit their far flung family members in November on a 'decrepit' BA 777....in Y!! There were no complaints at all which I found surprising given their background.

We use IB because of the better timings. Think they have an A350 on the route now.
HIDDY is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: