BA665/31OCT - B777 from LCA
Oct 30, 2020, 7:07 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: DWC
Programs: OWS, *A G
Posts: 626
BA665/31OCT - B777 from LCA
Currently in Cyprus on a holiday with return booked for tomorrow. After hearing about the government removing Cyprus from the travel corridor list last night, I was envisioning vast amounts of Brits trying to get back tomorrow before the quarantine restrictions go into effect.
Upon checking in today I noticed my allocated seat became a K seat and quickly realised the flight was now planned to be operated by a 777. Currently seated in a CW seat.
Quite an upgrade from the NEO we came out on.
Upon checking in today I noticed my allocated seat became a K seat and quickly realised the flight was now planned to be operated by a 777. Currently seated in a CW seat.
Quite an upgrade from the NEO we came out on.
Oct 30, 2020, 10:14 am
#3
Join Date: Jul 2019
Programs: BAEC Bronze, Mucci recipient
Posts: 1,785
Enjoy! I have never really understood why BA don't put the widebody planes on these longer routes as routine at least for some of the flights if not all.
I know there is an issue with a demarkation between Club Europe and Club World and that it is also determined by the cargo possibilities but I would happily pay a bit more for a proper long haul CW seat on these routes even with CE catering or the box currently on offer. They could also reduce the number of flights to make it worthwhile.
I know there is an issue with a demarkation between Club Europe and Club World and that it is also determined by the cargo possibilities but I would happily pay a bit more for a proper long haul CW seat on these routes even with CE catering or the box currently on offer. They could also reduce the number of flights to make it worthwhile.
Oct 30, 2020, 2:00 pm
#4
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: KSA
Programs: BA LTG, UA Gold, EK Silver, Hilton LT Diamond, Marriott LT Titanium, IHG Plat
Posts: 1,242
I am going to Cyprus this weekend - probably in the minority in terms of Brits arriving in LCA. Leaving from FRA on LH in J so no need for a PCR test (as I have been in Germany all month). Given the quarantine situation I might well be in Cyprus for sometime.
Also, I see BA are now running 6 flights on the 31st - up from the 3 that were planned. One is a 777 but all the others are A320's. This seems pretty stupid given most are full - why not put on more 777's instead of 320's
Also, I see BA are now running 6 flights on the 31st - up from the 3 that were planned. One is a 777 but all the others are A320's. This seems pretty stupid given most are full - why not put on more 777's instead of 320's
Oct 30, 2020, 2:15 pm
#5
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: 59K
Posts: 2,301
Indeed 3 x 321 NEOs with 600 seats (even with 10 rows of club each) burn less fuel than a single 77W carrying 297.
That’s before the other much higher operating costs of a 777.
Its not remotely stupid not to put a 777 on over a 320/1.
Oct 30, 2020, 3:00 pm
#6
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: BER
Programs: BA GGL, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 1,843
Sending a 777-300 needs 50t of fuel on a round trip. You gain 90 odd seats over a 321 NEO that will burn 16t of fuel. 787 would be double the fuel for sake capacity.
Indeed 3 x 321 NEOs with 600 seats (even with 10 rows of club each) burn less fuel than a single 77W carrying 297.
That’s before the other much higher operating costs of a 777.
Its not remotely stupid not to put a 777 on over a 320/1.
Indeed 3 x 321 NEOs with 600 seats (even with 10 rows of club each) burn less fuel than a single 77W carrying 297.
That’s before the other much higher operating costs of a 777.
Its not remotely stupid not to put a 777 on over a 320/1.
Oct 30, 2020, 3:46 pm
#7
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Scotland
Programs: BA Silver, Hilton Diamond, BD Blue (RIP)
Posts: 1,981
That's partially true but I think a lot of us don't really compute quite how close a Euro Traveller A321 Neo comes to some BA long haul birds. The Neo has 210 seats, assuming 5 rows of CE. A 777-200 (not by any means the smallest BA long haul aircraft) has 300-350ish depending on config. For that you have a huge uplift in fuel burn, crew, fees etc. There may also be the issue that BA long haul pilots are far more likely to be furloughed. It's probably easier to spin the Airbus operation up and down depending on demand.
Oct 30, 2020, 3:51 pm
#8
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: 59K
Posts: 2,301
Staff wise, a 777 will take more staff to turn round than a 321, with, different, more expensive airport equipment, need 3 times as many cabin crew and the same number of pilots. All this extra cost for 90 extra seats.
Last edited by Jumbodriver; Oct 30, 2020 at 3:59 pm
Oct 30, 2020, 4:01 pm
#10
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: 8,948
All of the fees you mention are simply proportional to Max Take off Weight. For a 77W this is 347t for a 321NEO it’s 89t. The 77W will therefore cost nearly 4 times as much in ATC fees and Landing fees.
Staff wise, a 777 will take more staff to turn round than a 321, with, different, more expensive airport equipment, need 3 times as many cabin crew and the same number of pilots. All this extra cost for 90 extra seats.
Staff wise, a 777 will take more staff to turn round than a 321, with, different, more expensive airport equipment, need 3 times as many cabin crew and the same number of pilots. All this extra cost for 90 extra seats.
I dare say the hold space may make the difference, at least on the outbound.
M
Oct 30, 2020, 4:06 pm
#11
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: 59K
Posts: 2,301
These flights are repatriation flights organised at short notice to accommodate a high passenger load in 1 direction, Cargo isn’t a factor, I’d be surprised if there’s any/much extra available at 24hrs notice.
Its not the same as the regular widebody on Shorthaul ops we have seen recently that are for very specific, very high value freight.
Its not the same as the regular widebody on Shorthaul ops we have seen recently that are for very specific, very high value freight.
Last edited by Jumbodriver; Oct 30, 2020 at 4:16 pm
Oct 30, 2020, 4:56 pm
#12
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Hertfordshire
Programs: BA Gold, Accor Diamond, IHG Diamond
Posts: 553
Sending a 777-300 needs 50t of fuel on a round trip. You gain 90 odd seats over a 321 NEO that will burn 16t of fuel. 787 would be double the fuel for sake capacity.
Indeed 3 x 321 NEOs with 600 seats (even with 10 rows of club each) burn less fuel than a single 77W carrying 297.
That’s before the other much higher operating costs of a 777.
Its not remotely stupid not to put a 777 on over a 320/1.
Indeed 3 x 321 NEOs with 600 seats (even with 10 rows of club each) burn less fuel than a single 77W carrying 297.
That’s before the other much higher operating costs of a 777.
Its not remotely stupid not to put a 777 on over a 320/1.
Oct 30, 2020, 5:06 pm
#13
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: 59K
Posts: 2,301
