¿Some idea of BA B787-10 routes?.....¿only USA?

As these aren't due for another two years, I doubt BA have given it too much thought yet.
But yes, replacing 744's on East Coast US would be a logical option.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them start swapping the 747s with 78X or A35K. Not all flights, but I could see them using 78X on LHR-JFK, MIA, LAS, PHX, YYZ. But again, it would all be about demand, so maybe seasonal flights with 747s still?

Although East Coast US seems like a logical fit, I would imagine that BA would still keep 744s on shorter, high-demand routes like LHR-JFK and LHR-BOS. Obviously the former is much busier than the latter, but – even with DY starting service to LGW as well as MT and VS to MAN – BA still does pretty well in BOS.

I can see them doing ORD, PHX, DFW, EWR, MIA, YYZ over the Atlantic

I think they'll see a few -10's and A35K at YYZ and the likes. Maybe one or two at JFK. EWR too perhaps? More 744's like the remaining BNL's are due to go next, but saying that BNLY just came from a C check.

We can speculate but we won't know until BA announce it.

Tel Aviv and Cairo pop in mind as these will free the B789 and 772 that can be used to expand. I can also see DXB and RUH. They will mostly replace current medium haul 772 and 747 routes

EK006 wrote:

Tel Aviv and Cairo pop in mind as these will free the B789 and 772 that can be used to expand. I can also see DXB and RUH. They will mostly replace current medium haul 772 and 747 routes

Wouldn't they just send the 787-10's to expand? Although I didn't expect them to send the -9's to Cairo.

They have a lot of 747 capacity to replace if many are due to leave the fleet. So it would seem natural that these new aircraft coming in will replace some of these.

Arion640 wrote:

Wouldn't they just send the 787-10's to expand? Although I didn't expect them to send the -9's to Cairo.

They have a lot of 747 capacity to replace if many are due to leave the fleet. So it would seem natural that these new aircraft coming in will replace some of these.

They will upgauge B787-9 routes that are performing well to the 787-10, and use those to try new markets. Too risky to jump on a new route with a 300+ seat aircraft. However, they will mostly be replacing the B744 except for those 18 that are being refurbished to the Super High J standards.

The longest route BA flies is LHR-SCL, which is 6,281nm. Well within the range of the 787-10. They can / will fly the 787-10 to pretty much any route in their network that they see fit. Unlike the A380, I don't see it relegating to a select few.

It might make sense to deploy these on longer routes where the fuel efficiency gains will be at their maximum. That way, previous generation aircraft can be deployed on shorter routes to mitigate their fuel thirst.

kaitak744 wrote:

The longest route BA flies is LHR-SCL, which is 6,281nm. Well within the range of the 787-10. They can / will fly the 787-10 to pretty much any route in their network that they see fit. Unlike the A380, I don't see it relegating to a select few.

LHR-SCL is BA's longest sector, its longest current route is LHR-SIN-SYD. Somehow I doubt we will see it in SYD but you never know!

Gemuser

kaitak744 wrote:

The longest route BA flies is LHR-SCL, which is 6,281nm. Well within the range of the 787-10. They can / will fly the 787-10 to pretty much any route in their network that they see fit. Unlike the A380, I don't see it relegating to a select few.

I think LHR-SCL is a little far for the -10, given they are planning to install first class on them I think they will remove some destinations from the list.

Arion640 wrote:

EK006 wrote:

Tel Aviv and Cairo pop in mind as these will free the B789 and 772 that can be used to expand. I can also see DXB and RUH. They will mostly replace current medium haul 772 and 747 routes

Wouldn't they just send the 787-10's to expand? Although I didn't expect them to send the -9's to Cairo.

They have a lot of 747 capacity to replace if many are due to leave the fleet. So it would seem natural that these new aircraft coming in will replace some of these.

The 787-10 have more capacity than that 787-9 and less range, so BA Will likely send smaller aircraft if they were to open more long haul routes in the future.

Places that are served by the 747 like DEN,LAS&PHX for example will probably get them.

pablo359 wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

Wouldn't they just send the 787-10's to expand? Although I didn't expect them to send the -9's to Cairo.

They have a lot of 747 capacity to replace if many are due to leave the fleet. So it would seem natural that these new aircraft coming in will replace some of these.

They will upgauge B787-9 routes that are performing well to the 787-10, and use those to try new markets. Too risky to jump on a new route with a 300+ seat aircraft. However, they will mostly be replacing the B744 except for those 18 that are being refurbished to the Super High J standards.

Yes you are right, but they probably would of upgaged Cairo to 777 only by now, if it was peforming that well. They have sent 747's there in the past.

How is SCL peforming, does anyone know?

Replacing 744's with 7810's is quite a drop in capacity.Can it be inferred that the 744's to these 'secondary'(if that's a fair word) routes are running at lower than desirable load factors? If load factors were forecast to be higher I imagine they would have gone for more 351's.

How long are BA intending to run their 744's? Clearly 2 -3 more years if they are waiting for these -10's esp if they have just done a c check.
But I don't think they have ordered enough a/c to replace all of the remaining 744 fleet have they?

18 A350s are meant to replace 18 mid-J B747 so it's fair to say that B787-10 won't be flying on trunk routes currently operated by mid-J B747s simply because they don't provide necessary capacity. My bet is that B787-10s will start replacing oldest B772s and perhaps allow to upgauge large volume B789 routes (NRT, PVG, DXB, EWR, DEL, BOM, BOS).

Should of pipped Qantas at the post on the Perth-London direct flights

lhrsfosyd wrote:

18 A350s are meant to replace 18 mid-J B747 so it's fair to say that B787-10 won't be flying on trunk routes currently operated by mid-J B747s simply because they don't provide necessary capacity. My bet is that B787-10s will start replacing oldest B772s and perhaps allow to upgauge large volume B789 routes (NRT, PVG, DXB, EWR, DEL, BOM, BOS).

BA have said the 772's will get a 30 year lifespan. However more 772's are planning to go 10 abreast Y than what's currently at gatwick. Its possible that they will replace some LHR based 777's with 7810's and then send more aircraft over to Gatwick.

lhrsfosyd wrote:

18 A350s are meant to replace 18 mid-J B747 so it's fair to say that B787-10 won't be flying on trunk routes currently operated by mid-J B747s simply because they don't provide necessary capacity. My bet is that B787-10s will start replacing oldest B772s and perhaps allow to upgauge large volume B789 routes (NRT, PVG, DXB, EWR, DEL, BOM, BOS).

¿Is possible LHR-NRT with a B787-10?

Can the 787-10 do LHR to South America, GRU/GIG/EZE? (sorry, I know that's not North America and a bit off topic, but I am curious re: range)

VC10er wrote:

Can the 787-10 do LHR to South America, GRU/GIG/EZE? (sorry, I know that's not North America and a bit off topic, but I am curious re: range)

I'd of thought so. If the 77E can do it then the 7810 should be able too as well.

As has already been stated, the 18 mid-J 744's in the fleet are being replaced by a similar number of A35K's. Of course, that doesn't mean that those routes currently operated by mid-J 744's will automatically get A35K's in the future. We know that the A35K will feature a new business class product, so I would expect to see them used on routes where BA has more completion. So, for example, routes like SIN-SYD, HKG and HND could see their 77W's displaced by A35K's. The 77W's could then move across to the likes of PHX and CPT to replace the 744's. The 78X's are more difficult to predict, but I really don't think that BA bought them with the likes of GIG, GRU and EZE in mind. Much will depend on the configuration, but I see US/Canada East Coast and Middle East/India as more probable.

Arion640 wrote:

If the 77E can do it then the 7810 should be able too as well.

The 787-10's range is a couple of hundred kilometres less than that of the 777-200ER.

Motorhussy wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

If the 77E can do it then the 7810 should be able too as well.

The 787-10's range is a couple of hundred kilometres less than that of the 777-200ER.

You are correct, but London to Argentina is 7291 miles, 787-10 range is 9438.6 miles. Should be able to do it full no problem.

My guess is the 772ER routes without a first class. EZE, BLR, MAA, BOM, EWR, PHL, and some Caribbean routes come into mind.

Arion640 wrote:

Motorhussy wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

If the 77E can do it then the 7810 should be able too as well.

The 787-10's range is a couple of hundred kilometres less than that of the 777-200ER.

You are correct, but London to Argentina is 7291 miles, 787-10 range is 9438.6 miles. Should be able to do it full no problem.

You sure? Boeing's website gives a range of 7400 miles/6430nm/11910km. But in practice I'm not sure the 78X can make anywhere near that, its performance is better than the A333 but not by much more. EZE is one of BA's longest routes, exceeded only by SCL.

MrHMSH wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

Motorhussy wrote:

The 787-10's range is a couple of hundred kilometres less than that of the 777-200ER.

You are correct, but London to Argentina is 7291 miles, 787-10 range is 9438.6 miles. Should be able to do it full no problem.

You sure? Boeing's website gives a range of 7400 miles/6430nm/11910km. But in practice I'm not sure the 78X can make anywhere near that, its performance is better than the A333 but not by much more. EZE is one of BA's longest routes, exceeded only by SCL.

A quick google says 15,190km and Wikipedia is the source. Now of course wikipedia is wikipedia but I wouldn't of thought they would be that far wrong but It looks like they are way out in accordance with Boeings Website.

Arion640 wrote:

MrHMSH wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

You are correct, but London to Argentina is 7291 miles, 787-10 range is 9438.6 miles. Should be able to do it full no problem.

You sure? Boeing's website gives a range of 7400 miles/6430nm/11910km. But in practice I'm not sure the 78X can make anywhere near that, its performance is better than the A333 but not by much more. EZE is one of BA's longest routes, exceeded only by SCL.

A quick google says 15,190km and Wikipedia is the source. Now of course wikipedia is wikipedia but I wouldn't of thought they would be that far wrong but It looks like they are way out in accordance with Boeings Website.

I am almost certain that those figures are for the 787-9, which we already know has the range to make any current BA route (it flies to SCL which is the longest). But the 787-10 is not a true long hauler. Wikipedia gives a range of 6430nm/1108km, which is virtually the same as the ones I've given. You can use it on longer routes, but there's little point when the A350 and 787-9 will be on hand.

Interesting that no one has mentioned NBO?

The east coast of North America, Caribbean islands, and the north
Mediterranean