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

How Can BA compete to SYD without the A380?

How Can BA compete to SYD without the A380?

Old Oct 30, 04, 12:40 pm
  #61  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: EXT
Programs: BA Bronze
Posts: 1,351
If you're over the atlantic in a twin and you lose an engine then you very quickly become a single. In a 747 you don't!
BAW845_Matt is online now  
Old Oct 30, 04, 12:53 pm
  #62  
dnw
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 5,338
Originally Posted by BAW845_Matt
If you're over the atlantic in a twin and you lose an engine then you very quickly become a single. In a 747 you don't!
...but that single is by design as capable of getting you to a safe landing site as the remaing 3 on a 747. Its the age old Branson argument that just doesn't cut it in practice!
dnw is offline  
Old Oct 31, 04, 5:24 pm
  #63  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 920
Yes and the two engined ETOPS certified aircraft has a lot more resilience in the event of a cargo hold fire than the four engined aircraft. But then "4 engines 4 long haul, 2 enines 4 fire safety" was never likely to catch on.

BA aren't buying the A380 because:
1) We haven't got any money.
2) We can only use them on a handful of Asian routes, which means they would arrive at LHR in the morning then sit around all day until the evening departures. Poor utilisation.
3)They would be entirely dependend on one regions economy. SE Asian economic downturn = fleet of expense white elephants.
4)There is no second hand market for the aircraft. If you need them you can afford to buy them new.

Now on the subject of dildos, surely Virgins A340-600s are the most phallic of aircraft? They've even painted them silver!
Panic Stations is offline  
Old Oct 31, 04, 5:38 pm
  #64  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: London
Posts: 3,459
Originally Posted by Panic Stations
Yes and the two engined ETOPS certified aircraft has a lot more resilience in the event of a cargo hold fire than the four engined aircraft.
But aren't BAs 744s maintained to ETOPS standards anyway?
Disco Volante is offline  
Old Oct 31, 04, 5:50 pm
  #65  
dnw
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 5,338
Originally Posted by The Disco Volante
But aren't BAs 744s maintained to ETOPS standards anyway?
Maintenance is just that. It cannot change an original design. ETOPS twins have more designed-in safety features than quads.
dnw is offline  
Old Nov 1, 04, 2:17 am
  #66  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: TUL Lifetime Plt AA 2.8m
Posts: 154
The 380 will be massive looking when it's nose is next to the airport window - just like an aircraft carrier is impressive up close. I think most people will be so taken with the size that they won't take the time to consider ugly. (More like a flying suppository than an anatomical symbol to me.)

The main concern that I have is an note I read about the over weight issue. Seems that A decided to set strict weight restrictions on the fittings that the airlines put in - especially seats. To me that means cutting comfort in First & Business and plastic seats from IKEA in cattle car.

Unfortunately SQ has some very strict performance guarantees form A that will have to be met or the program is in serious trouble for the initial years.

I'll give the 380 a few years in the air before leaving the 747 world I know & love.
kenm is offline  
Old Nov 1, 04, 10:36 am
  #67  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Programs: statusless these days
Posts: 20,149
Originally Posted by The Disco Volante
But aren't BAs 744s maintained to ETOPS standards anyway?
I guess that depends on how you define it. The engines of each ETOPS a/c have to be checked/serviced by different mechanics (or, "engineers") so that one mechanic won't make the same mistake on both engines (goes back to when a L-1011 for EA(?) had all 3 engines fail because a single mechanic used the wrong washers on all 3 engines).
YVR Cockroach is online now  
Old Nov 1, 04, 12:34 pm
  #68  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Programs: AA EXP, BA GLD, FT < 30 y
Posts: 2,106
Winter housecleaning!

Last edited by CharlesMD; Jan 23, 05 at 2:02 pm
CharlesMD is offline  
Old Nov 1, 04, 1:17 pm
  #69  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Programs: statusless these days
Posts: 20,149
Originally Posted by CharlesMD
What is the safety difference between a 777 and a 747 for cargo hold fires?
ETOPS cargo hold fire suppression equipment has to last a full hour, or something like that, [i]vs./[i] much shorter (15 mins?) for non-ETOPS.
YVR Cockroach is online now  
Old Nov 5, 04, 6:12 pm
  #70  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold4life, ICH RA, Hyatt Gold and others
Posts: 644
Talking 4 engines 4 long haul myth

Originally Posted by The Disco Volante
But aren't BAs 744s maintained to ETOPS standards anyway?
It is a fact not widely publicised that if you lose 2 engines on a 747 the other 2 wont do you much good...so you may as well start off with 2!!
Mutu is offline  
Old Nov 5, 04, 7:00 pm
  #71  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 317
Originally Posted by dnw
Maintenance is just that. It cannot change an original design. ETOPS twins have more designed-in safety features than quads.
You'll have to define which quads.. The A340 can be ordered with exactly the same ETOPS features as the A330.

Originally Posted by CharlesMD
In MS Flight Sim 2004 I can get a much faster rate of climb out of a 744 with a full fuel load than a 777 with a full fuel load (although that could just be my bad virtual piloting!).
If you are using the default MS flight models, you can't draw any conclusions..those flight models have an extremely tenuous link to their real-life counterparts.
CTPremEx is offline  
Old Nov 5, 04, 7:05 pm
  #72  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 14,531
Mutu, what are you talking about? I've been on a 747 that lost not only two engines, but also a 4 foot section of its wing tip. It flew fine for 30 minutes or so (including climbing from takeoff to 25,000 feet or so, circling, dumping fuel and landing).

I have also been on a A310 that lost an engine halfway across the Atlantic and flew for at least an hour afterwards.
hfly is offline  
Old Nov 5, 04, 7:14 pm
  #73  
Moderator, CoronaVirus and Hilton Honors
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: on a short leash
Programs: some
Posts: 71,052
hfly - can you please post all your itineraries so I can make sure I am never on the same flight?

Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Nov 5, 04 at 7:15 pm Reason: my bad - wrong FTer :o
Kiwi Flyer is offline  
Old Nov 5, 04, 8:14 pm
  #74  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 14,531
Planes lose engines all the time. The bad 747 thing was in the late 80's on Pan Am, The A310 was the next year, also on Pan Am. When an engine goes there is a little pop that most people don't recognize or pay attention to. My father had been in the Air Force when young and pointed it out to me once. Anyway, I have probably been on a dozen or more a/c that have lost an engine. Generally speaking if its a 3-4 engine plane and its anything near close to its destination they continue on and say nothing. Most times I have quietly asked the fa, generally they go forward, come back and quietly come back and told me its true, but nothing to worry about (which it isn't). My last bad experience was a couple of years ago when a CX A340 had an engine actuallt BLOW UP (flames and all) on take off.
hfly is offline  
Old Nov 5, 04, 8:32 pm
  #75  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, NY
Programs: BAEC Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Gold, AMEX Platinum (US)
Posts: 18,313
An engine fell off a rather ancient 747-100 only last week! To be found somewhere in MI

My Dad was on a VS 747 when the engine fell off over Scotland and had to return to LHR. I guess there are some balancing/yaw issues.
Fraser is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: