Manc94

Air Belgium to wet-lease A330-900neo to BA for BA295/BA294 LHR-ORD-LHR from 1st July 2023 - November.

J30/21W/235M

Source:Twitter @MZulqarnainBut1

Tafflyer

Oh good. I can remember Air Belgium wet leasing for BA on LHR-CAI a few years ago on a 777 I believe. Better than native BA in almost every way.

Calum

2-4-2 in Y which will be a pleasant surprise to some.

mikeyfly

At least a plan is coming together for the long haul aircraft shortage

South London Bon Viveur

I am intrigued at what lies behind the decision to make this rotation the Air Belgium wet lease, as opposed to any one of the other long haul destinations. Notwithstanding the positive comments above, and that I have no beef with (and frankly no real knowledge of) Air Belgium, ORD strikes me as one of the more "premium" routes (though that is just a hunch and nothing more) and I would have thought that a wet lease might be better used for a less premium route, for reasons of brand protection/recognition in an important market.

Ldnn1

The length of the route and probably the timings play a significant part in it I imagine. This will be just one aircraft going back and forth, so maximum utilisation with minimum complexity will be important. The capacity presumably fits as well.

In general (with a few exceptions) I would say airlines are not as concerned as FTers think they are about which aircraft fly on which route from the customer perspective. Focus is more on the operational, revenue and cost fit.

Prospero

I have added a seat map for the Air Belgium A330-900neo to AeroLOPA. I have a forward booking on the BA295 for October. The flight is still showing in MMB as an A350 but I expect this may change sometime during the weeks ahead

Cw novice

Have just had this pop up:

Air Belgium to operate BA Chicago flights until November, apparently

Links on Head for Points may pay us an affiliate commission. A list of partners is here.
We have run another article today discussing how squeezed British Airways is for long haul aircraft, and how the situation is unlikely to be fixed until 2027.

Here is one way that the airline is trying to give itself some added flexibility.

According to Twitter reports (from an excellent source but not confirmed by British Airways), Air Belgium will be operating one of the two daily Chicago flights.
This will be a wet lease (Air Belgium will also provide the pilots and crew) and will run from 1st July until some point in November.

The flight to be switched will be BA294 / BA295 between Heathrow and Chicago.
Full article here:

https://www.headforpoints.com/2023/06/07/air-belgium-to-operate-british-airways-chicago-flights/

oxtailsoup

What are the guidelines if you take a downgrade from F to J (no F on Air Belgium) and changing to the later flight is not convenient? Cash ticket with BAH and double TPs offer. Thanks

1Aturnleft

You'd be bound by the terms and conditions of your package (BA Holiday) and what they constitute as a a minor or a significant change. Requesting a swap out to BAH to a BA operated F earlier in the day via a East Coast hub with AA connection to ORD shouldn't meet with any resistance however.

JTXC

I am surprised at the route choice. I would have thought they would go for a less low-status city like YYZ or YUL.

oxtailsoup

Thank you. For convenience I’d be ok with taking the J seat, just unsure how they would adjust the cost I guess.

flarmip

You would be entitled to reimbursement under the Mennens formula - for a long-haul flight such as this, you get 75% of the fare plus carrier surcharges back on a pro-rata basis (based on the percentage of the overall trip distance that the affected leg makes up).

However, it might not be entirely straightforward getting that reimbursement, seeing as:

1. You've booked a Holiday rather than just a flight. Any effective discount by combining the flight with the other elements might be deducted from the fare, although to be fair, you are quoted an all-inclusive price when booking, so that is probably not entirely unreasonable.
2. BA might try to refuse reimbursement on the claimed basis that you have "accepted" this change, or that they provided more than 14 days' notice. Neither are valid grounds for refusing reimbursement, but that doesn't stop them trying it on.
3. BA might try to exclude the carrier surcharges from the amount reimbursed. This often makes up a significant proportion of the total fare, albeit less so for most F fares. As long as the carrier surcharge depends on the class of travel (it obviously does in this case), a recent CJEU case made it absolutely clear that it must be considered when calculating the applicable reimbursement.

For now, I'd advise getting a PDF showing the details of your fare and booking from the Finnair site (it will email it to the address registered on the booking). This clearly shows the breakdown of fare and carrier surcharges so that you know whether BA have got their calculation right, if it comes to it.

Definitas

Does anyone have a feel for when MMB will show the revised seat plan? We are flying LHR-ORD in J on BA295 in late July and in CS YYZ-LHR return

andymcdonnell

Still no sign of this showing on MMB but yet the 295 no longer seems bookable for the dates I looked at in July in business (I assume as there’ll be less seats)