British Airways is reportedly in talks with both Airbus and Boeing over a potential wide body aircraft order…
In this post:
British Airways looking for Boeing 777 replacement
While British Airways has nicely been modernizing its long haul fleet with new Airbus A350s and Boeing 787s, the Boeing 777 is still the backbone of the carrier’s long haul fleet. The airline has nearly 60 Boeing 777s in its fleet, including 777-200ERs and 777-300ERs.
While the 777 is still a very capable jet, British Airways’ 777 fleet is among the oldest out there, at an average of nearly 20 years old. Nearly two-thirds of British Airways’ 777s were delivered in 2001 or earlier — specifically, the airline took delivery of a batch of these between 1997 and 2001, and then took delivery of the remaining jets between 2009 and 2021. The older ones are almost exclusively the 777-200ER variant.
With British Airways’ oldest Boeing 777s being nearly 30 years old, Bloomberg is reporting that parent company IAG is in discussions with both Airbus and Boeing over a new wide body aircraft order. As of now, we can only speculate as to which aircraft British Airways will select.
Which aircraft could British Airways order?
So, which aircraft will British Airways likely order to replace older Boeing 777-200s? British Airways has been modernizing its long haul fleet with new Airbus A350s and Boeing 787s — the airline flies the A350-1000, 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10.
I would think that British Airways would want to pick up more A350s or 787s. However, in the interest of being thorough, I should mention:
- British Airways has 18 Boeing 777-9s on order, but those are larger aircraft; with the plane still not certified, I can’t imagine the airline would be looking to order more of those right now, especially as a 777-200ER replacement
- While the A330-900neo is another new long haul jet, I doubt British Airways is even considering ordering those planes, and further diversifying its long haul fleet
Now, the big question is which variant of the Airbus A350 or Boeing 787 British Airways selects. If the airline wanted as close of a replacement for the 777-200ER as possible in terms of capacity and range, the Airbus A350-900 or Boeing 787-9 would be the logical choice:
- British Airways doesn’t yet have any Airbus A350-900s in its fleet, though it’s an incredibly capable plane
- British Airways currently has 18 Boeing 787-9s in its fleet, so an order top up seems logical; however, this would likely represent a slight decrease in capacity compared to the 777-200ER
Alternatively, London Heathrow is capacity controlled, and the economics of the larger variants of these planes is excellent:
- British Airways currently has 18 Airbus A350-1000s on order (two of which are yet to be delivered), and the airline could simply order more of those planes
- British Airways currently has 24 Boeing 787-10s on order (only seven of which have been delivered); the plane has great economics, but doesn’t quite have the same range as smaller variants of the jet
I could see British Airways going either direction here. A 787-9 or A350-900 makes sense, as does a 787-10 or A350-1000 order. Regardless of which aircraft British Airways selects, the improvement in emissions will be significant.
Bottom line
British Airways’ Boeing 777 fleet is among the oldest out there, with dozens of the planes having been delivered in the late 1990s. The airline is now looking to replace some of these aircraft, and in particular, the 777-200ERs.
British Airways already has Airbus A350s and Boeing 787s in its fleet, so additional orders of those planes seems logical enough. Perhaps we’ll finally see British Airways order the A350-900, as it’s the only A350 or 787 variant that the airline doesn’t yet fly. I could also see the airline ordering more A350-1000s or 787-10s, though. I’m curious to see how this plays out…
What plane do you think British Airways will order?
I can see a mix of A350-1000s and 787-10s. Most of BAs older 772s were early version 200ERS that didn't even have the ER designation, they were originally referred to as IGWs, and in fact didn't configure them with crew rests as they were used for flights under 10 hours, which the 78X can do easily.
I really don't care. After a terrible experience with them several years ago I have no desire to fly with them anytime soon.
777s would seem to make sense as there would be minimum retraining for cockpit and ground crew already familiar with earlier versions of the triple seven. As many components would be interchangeable, it would also provide for economies of scale.
I'll miss the 773s. When the plane is clean, it's a beauty. Here's to more 787-10s and eventually the 777x.
Club World suites on the A350 is an excellent product. I'm a fan of the 787 but the A350 gets the nudge in terms of additional width/spaciousness/comfort and layout.
Boeing is in a good position to get some deals from Airbus & Boeing. That will sway their decision for sure.
Some brand new 747-800’s would nice
Given the production line is already closed and the last aircraft was handed over in December 2022 that's a no...why would they want to order an aircraft that is more expensive to operate than the 787 and A350 variants on offer anyway.
It seems to me that the US FAA is Airbus biggest supporter. While all Boeings designs are bogged down in their certification fiasco Airbus has free reign to sell their products in the USA.
you should be asking yourself why Boeing can't get the certification process right and the answer probably involves that Boeing was free to self-certify a lot of things which the FAA will no longer allow them to do after the 2 MAX crashes.
I don't want to go to deep into the argument but let's not forget that Boeing released the MAX to airlines w/o fully disclosing the computerized controls that the MAX had.
you should be asking yourself why Boeing can't get the certification process right and the answer probably involves that Boeing was free to self-certify a lot of things which the FAA will no longer allow them to do after the 2 MAX crashes.
I don't want to go to deep into the argument but let's not forget that Boeing released the MAX to airlines w/o fully disclosing the computerized controls that the MAX had.
Let's also not forget that the 777X blew out a door during testing - which an FAA inspector was watching.
Or that Boeing moved 787 production to Charleston and then blundered a number of production issues.
So, yes, the FAA changed the rules but Boeing proved it required much more oversight than it had and they have not done well adapting to the new regime.
The 787 appears for now to be back on track, the MAX is flying, and the 777X might be in service in 2 years.
Airbus,
Airbus, quite frankly, has not had near as many engineering or production problems over the past 5 years.
and their products, including the A350-1000, were designed from the ground up to outperform Boeing's offerings.
If British Airways opts for more 777Xs over the A350-1000, it will be because of desired aircraft size. If BA opts for more A350-1000s, it will be to take a middle of the road approach to capacity w/ greatest operational...
Airbus, quite frankly, has not had near as many engineering or production problems over the past 5 years.
and their products, including the A350-1000, were designed from the ground up to outperform Boeing's offerings.
If British Airways opts for more 777Xs over the A350-1000, it will be because of desired aircraft size. If BA opts for more A350-1000s, it will be to take a middle of the road approach to capacity w/ greatest operational flexibility. If BA opts for more 787-10s, they will be seeking the smallest size and least performance of the 3 large widebodies but the best economics.
Given that BA has already ordered all 3 and is flying 2 of them, I don't think they will go wrong.
Is the Boeing 777-200 still a production option? If so, a version with updated engines would be the perfect solution for BA, utterly reliable and long lasting.
You can still buy the freighter. The -200 non ER is not a capable aircraft though.
and, no, you can't buy a 777 with new engines other than the 777X which is considerably larger than the 777-200ER.
Boeing is getting efficiency out of the 777 family by stretching it and putting new generation engines.
The A330NEO is a direct size replacement of the A330CEO w/ new generation engines that are nearly identical to what is found on the 787-9. Airbus improved the wing of the A330CEO for the A330NEO among other parts of the enhancements
Tim, I sincerely would appreciate advice as to what niche the new generation of 330's NEO's fit into a fleet mix compared to the 787-8 or 350's? What role does it fill?
Either way, for BA purposes...I'd see this leaning towards the 350-900/1000's...unless Boeing substantially undercuts the pricing for the 787-9/10's. Delivery timing of course also plays a role.
The A330NEO is predominantly being bought by low cost carriers with Delta and TAP the few global carriers that have bought it.
For TAP, the A330NEO is their new generation longhaul while for Delta they already had a fairly large fleet or A330CEOs, they won the maintenance rights to overhaul the Rolls Royce Trent 7000 engines on the A330NEO as well as the related Rolls powered 787 engine, the Trent 1000.
Delta uses its A330NEOs...
The A330NEO is predominantly being bought by low cost carriers with Delta and TAP the few global carriers that have bought it.
For TAP, the A330NEO is their new generation longhaul while for Delta they already had a fairly large fleet or A330CEOs, they won the maintenance rights to overhaul the Rolls Royce Trent 7000 engines on the A330NEO as well as the related Rolls powered 787 engine, the Trent 1000.
Delta uses its A330NEOs on routes up to 12 and occasionally 13 hours but they have used A330CEOs on routes that long. The A330NEO has comparable fuel burn and size to the B787-9. But most importantly for Delta, it is a low acquisition cost aircraft which matters to Delta more than some other airlines - but also explains why Delta has a higher return on invested capital rating than most global airlines.
The A330NEO is a competent aircraft but is an either/or in size with the 787-9 and forms a good smaller "sibling" to Delta and could for other airlines to the A350.
Airbus probably has to make a decision before too long on keeping the A330NEO going since it isn't selling terribly well but has probably broken even on development costs.
The GEnx engine could probably be easily put on the A330NEO but Rolls Royce has exclusivity until 2030. Airbus and GE have to decide if it is worth offering a second engine on the A330NEO.
Delta has said it wants to get into overhauling the GEnx engine which powers the 787 since it has sold much more than the Rolls Royce engine on the 787. I wouldn't be surprised if Delta is willing to buy a bunch of A330NEOs powered by the GEnx if they can win the maintenance overhaul to service the entire GEnx family.
The A330NEO does have more sales potential as more A330CEOs come to the end of their life.
"British Airways currently has 24 Boeing 787-10s on order (only seven of which have been delivered); the plane has great economics, but doesn’t quite have the same range as larger variants of the jet". I presume that's supposed to be smaller variants...
You can keep BA and there new plane it is new customer service levels which need to be achieved
They are a subsidiary of Iberia who seem happy with the A350 , which may influence their choice . However Aer Lingus A330s are also getting a bit long in the tooth so A339 is not out of the question.
BA is not a subsidiary of Iberia.
Yes, BA is not a subsidiary of IB. But BA/IB are like AF/KL...they acquire as a group. AI has completely different network and range requirements, so the 330 NEO's might be a fit for them.
Quite possibly… I was just rectifying an inaccuracy.
20 years is old? It is really about flight cycles, one takeoff and one landing.
I think that's the "average" age. There's quite a few in the late 20s I believe
Also need to factor when the aircraft can be delivered. Delivery takes years...part of fleet planning.
None of there will ever see LGW!
They will order whoever gives them the best price! Boeing is still in trouble with the FAA over deliveries of the 787 and the 777X, while a great airplane on paper, has not been flown in airline service and is years behind schedule. Plus no airline wants to be the launch customer for a new airplane with all the bugs to be worked out.
those who hold out hope for the 777-8 will find that, even if Boeing launches it, it will be as successful (which wasn't much) as the 777-200LR.
A stretch variant of an aircraft always sells better than the smaller model before it. In the case of the 777-300ER and -LR, the -300ER had 90% of the range and performance and 20-25% better operating seat costs. The same will be true w/ the 777-9 vs....
those who hold out hope for the 777-8 will find that, even if Boeing launches it, it will be as successful (which wasn't much) as the 777-200LR.
A stretch variant of an aircraft always sells better than the smaller model before it. In the case of the 777-300ER and -LR, the -300ER had 90% of the range and performance and 20-25% better operating seat costs. The same will be true w/ the 777-9 vs. the -8.
And unlike the -LR, there is a direct competitive model to the 777-8 and that is the A350-1000.
The A350, like the B787 is made with a majority of carbon fiber reinforced polymer materials so the end result is tons less weight. The A350-1000 weighs (or likely will weigh since the 777-8 is still a paper airplane) 40,000 pounds less than the 777-8.
The 787-9 and A330-900NEO use nearly identical engines, are similarly sized, but the A330-900 weighs 25,000 lbs more than the 787-9 which limits the Airbus' range.
The A330NEO is selling where it is - around 300 sales which is pretty good for a derivative model - because Airbus can price it cheaply after building 1500 A330s and because they spent just $2 billion on the enhancements compared to over 10X more for the 787 and even less for the A350.
The 777-200ER is a metal airplane so any new generation airplane (the A350 or B787) will have much better economics, typically 25% fuel burn savings. The 777X has a composite (CFRP) wing but metal fuselage - which should tell you (or anyone) that it cannot achieve the same fuel efficiency except by stretching the fuselage -which is what Boeing did - to carry more passengers and try to provide comparable fuel efficiency per seat but with a bigger aircraft.
The 777X is being ordered largely by single hub airlines, of which British Airways is one because of its size. The A350-1000 is still a large twin but has similar per seat economics to the 777X but with 40-50 less seats
At the rate the 787-10 are being delivered it will be another 20 years to fill just their existing order. Agonizingly slow.
I think it will be a combination of the 787-9, 10 and the 35k. They have all three in their fleet so they have the flexibility to optimise a combination that best suits their network needs of the future and accord them maximum agility.
I don’t see them needing to add a sub-type of 350-900s or the 330neos unless Airbus offers them a great deal- unlikely since Airbus’s pipelines are quite robust. Boeing is...
I think it will be a combination of the 787-9, 10 and the 35k. They have all three in their fleet so they have the flexibility to optimise a combination that best suits their network needs of the future and accord them maximum agility.
I don’t see them needing to add a sub-type of 350-900s or the 330neos unless Airbus offers them a great deal- unlikely since Airbus’s pipelines are quite robust. Boeing is likely to be far hungrier to gain market share and will be more aggressive.
I see a majority of the orders being concentrated on the 787-10- it is the best fit for BA to replace the 777-200s.
-Perfect capacity for BA given their 4 class premium heavy configuration on most routes
-Has sufficient range for pretty much all their routes- Boeing has recently made some adjustments to increase the MOTW and the premium heavy configuration of BA will anyways stretch the range.
-Approx 10% cheaper vs the 350-1000
-Lowest seat mile costs vs similar sized airliners.
BA has 350-1000s and the relatively newer 77Ws to tide over routes that need more range or capacity. I can see them adding a few 787-9s (replace the two class 777s) and possibly a few 350-1000s (for some routes requiring more range- Buenos Aries, Santiago, possibly Singapore, Johannesburg and Mexico) but I am sure they will push a huge quantity of 787-10s to lure Boeing into giving them a better price.
A350-900 is the logical
choice in terms of capacity, range, and comfort for long haul. A no brainer!
For capacity planning, how far out should an airline plan? Do you look at market demand for today, 5-10-20-30 years out? The airframe and engines seem to have long mechanical lives, but their economic lives seem to be driven by capacity needs and technical improvements (e.g., better fuel economy). Does passenger comfort count for anything?
given that airplanes are 20-25 year assets for most airlines and you have to place orders 3-5 orders in advance, the forward-looking window is 20-30 years.
There is no reason to buy a smaller aircraft when the larger "sibling" in family has better economics.
The primary reason the 787-9 still sells as much as it does is because it has the range that the 787-10 does not. There are a handful of orders for 787-8s...
given that airplanes are 20-25 year assets for most airlines and you have to place orders 3-5 orders in advance, the forward-looking window is 20-30 years.
There is no reason to buy a smaller aircraft when the larger "sibling" in family has better economics.
The primary reason the 787-9 still sells as much as it does is because it has the range that the 787-10 does not. There are a handful of orders for 787-8s that have come out since the 787-9 became available but very few airlines intentionally choose a smaller, less capable aircraft when its larger sibling has far better operating economics over the 20-30 years the plane will be used.
given that British Airways already flies all 3 variants of the 787 and the largest A350, there is little reason to "go small"
As others have commented, it’s extremely unlikely they would go for the 359, they need capacity given Heathrow slot restrictions, and they don’t need the range. They already have the 77Ws to handle premium ULH routes like Singapore and LA, and those will be supplemented with the 779s in a couple years. I suspect they will lean towards 787-10 over the A350-1000 for two reasons: They already have an F cabin on the 787s and...
As others have commented, it’s extremely unlikely they would go for the 359, they need capacity given Heathrow slot restrictions, and they don’t need the range. They already have the 77Ws to handle premium ULH routes like Singapore and LA, and those will be supplemented with the 779s in a couple years. I suspect they will lean towards 787-10 over the A350-1000 for two reasons: They already have an F cabin on the 787s and wouldn’t need to rework the seat or the cabin design at all or have multiple layouts on the A350, and Boeing is probably in a position to give IAG a better deal right now than Airbus.
Selfishly, I hope they pick the 787-10, since it’s a more comfortable aircraft to fly in J, it has F, and in premium economy the difference is really noticeable with the much better 7-across layout rather than the cramped 8-across on the A350.
Any possibility of a surprise 777-9 order? Or a really shocking 777-8 launch customer order to try to get Emirates not to abandon the 777-8?
I hope they go Boeing.
I really, really, hope they go with Airbus.
Don’t forget that Boeing is developing the 787 IGW for United and Air New Zealand
Flew First on a BA 772 a short while back. The F seats really showed their age. I could see scratches here and there, and just didn't feel competitive at all. Hope to see better products in future planes.
78J makes sense to the replace the 77E. BA has frames that can go long range (77W, 789 and A35J) so I don't see why they'd need the A359 for capacity and range. I would think the economics for the 78J would make more sense.
BA has the 35K. Not the J. Which begs the question, do you mean 789 or 78X?
Which ever plane they order LGW 777s are the oldest, so I bet LHR 777s will go to Lgw while lhr gets the new model
777
Who cares whether the aircraft is this or that? The only question that matters is whether BA continues to offer an F cabin.
“Who cares whether the aircraft is this or that?”
You must be be new here.
Welcome, noob!
Well, their F is like at the bottom of the entire world, I could not even find a worse one. I would rather see them focus on a better J product with A350s.
Would guess 787-10s or a split order with 359s. The 787-10’s range from London can operate nearly all the routes served by the 772. Range is about 1000km less, but that only puts the farthest flung destinations in SE Asia out of range (all of which can be reached by all their other long haul aircraft.
It will be 787-10 or 35K.
If you know anything about BAs network. They don’t need range. The 787-10 since joining the fleet has taken over 200ER routes, including JFK that was exclusively 777 and 747. That’s the first new Gen jet to do it. It’s obvious that is the crowned successor of the GE powered 777s. The RR powered 777s will be replaced by the 35K at a later date
Agreed - BA don't have many ULH routes beyond a couple to South America. They dropped several East Asian routes that have not returned after the pandemic.
The vast majority of their flights are under 10 hours in length.
there is no reason to add the B787-9 or the A350-900 if you are willing to operate the B787-10 and the A350-1000 and British Airways not only is willing to operate both larger models of those two aircraft families or already does.
The 777-200ER is not a long range aircraft by today's standards; it is medium range and the B787-10 can operate all most of the routes the 777-200ER operates including to all of...
there is no reason to add the B787-9 or the A350-900 if you are willing to operate the B787-10 and the A350-1000 and British Airways not only is willing to operate both larger models of those two aircraft families or already does.
The 777-200ER is not a long range aircraft by today's standards; it is medium range and the B787-10 can operate all most of the routes the 777-200ER operates including to all of the US and much of Africa which is a large portion of British Airway's route system. If range is a factor, esp. for the 777-300ER, the A350-1000 is a far better choice.
If very large size but less range is a factor, the B777-9 is the choice.
The 787-10 has great economics for 12 hour flights; the A350-1000 is heavier but the most capable ultra long range aircraft out there. The 777-9 has greater size but less range than the A350-1000.
At an airport like Heathrow where slots are very valuable, aircraft size and maximizing revenue is paramount.
BA will place an order for more B787-10s and A350-1000s on top of their B777Xs and placate European and US interests.
There is no reason to order a smaller version of an aircraft when a larger version is available.
I feel like the 777-8 could be in contention for the order as well. It’s bigger, about the size of the A35K, but Boeing promises even more range and efficiency than the A35K. I personally don’t think they’re gonna bite at the 789 for this replacement - it’s between the B78X, B778, A359, and A35K, depending on if BAW wants a 1-1 replacement or expansion in capacity.
the 777-8 will likely be the 3rd member of the 777X family after the -9 and the freighter.
For an airplane that is already years delayed in delivery and from a company that hasn't gotten a plane out the door on-time in decades, the 777-8 is a big risk. Most 777X orders are for the 777-9 anyway.
The A350-1000 is lighter, in-service, and still offers range which the 777-8 is claiming it can...
the 777-8 will likely be the 3rd member of the 777X family after the -9 and the freighter.
For an airplane that is already years delayed in delivery and from a company that hasn't gotten a plane out the door on-time in decades, the 777-8 is a big risk. Most 777X orders are for the 777-9 anyway.
The A350-1000 is lighter, in-service, and still offers range which the 777-8 is claiming it can match. Most airlines that want a plane in the 350 seat capacity and 9000 mile range have ordered the A350-1000
Wow… a comment from Tim Dumm that doesn’t brown-nose Ed Bastian! Whooda thunk!
As far as what plane BA will pick, it’ll be based solely on whether Airbus or Boeing offers a better deal than the other.
That "medium-range" 777-200ER is still flying 14-15 hour long sectors for other airlines, like Newark to Dubai and Dulles to Tokyo. Still a *very* capable aircraft.
By what definition is the 777-200ER not a long haul aircraft? The -200 wasn't but the ER is still hitting the long haul routes with ease.
By what means is the 777-200ER not a long range aircraft? The -200ER has a range of more than 13,000 km and mostly flies on flights which are 12 to 14 hours long.
considering that the B787 and A350 regularly hit 16+ hour flights as does the 777-200LR and -300ER and the 777X is intended to do so, the 777-200ER is the least capable of the "long range" aircraft - and also has the highest seat costs.