From 'Queen of the Skies' to Queen of the Scrapheap: British Airways chops 747 fleet as folk stay at home
- Reference: 1594994526
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/07/17/british_airways_747_axed/
- Source link:
The only flights its remaining fleet of 747-400 plane will be making will likely be to the dismantlers.
It's a sad but inevitable end for the aircraft's service at the UK airline. Retirement had been beckoning for a while, and the dramatic downturn in the aviation sector due to the COVID-19 pandemic simply accelerated things. Recovery of passenger numbers to 2019 levels is not expected until 2023/24, according to the airline.
The elderly and thirsty planes were originally to have been phased out as they reached the end of their working lives.
While the 747-400 is no longer made, Boeing still churns out its successor, the 747-8, although production is almost certain to cease before long. British Airways is highly unlikely to be placing an order any time soon.
BA says farewell to the 'Queen of the Skies'
In an announcement heavy on hand-wringing, the airline highlighted the Airbus A350 and Boeing 787 aircraft recently added to its fleet, which it said were "around 25 per cent more fuel-efficient than the 747." Other than noting its larger passenger capacity, British Airways did not comment on the fate of its other heavyweight, the Airbus A380 two-deck aircraft.
The first BOAC (British Overseas Airways Corporation) 747 flight took place on 14 July 1971, and the first British Airways 747-400 flew in July 1989. Thirty-one years later the axe is swinging.
The company had decorated four of its 747s in liveries from yesteryear, including the BOAC brand to celebrate its centenary a year ago.
Sadly, the interiors and service continued to be very much from this century; while British Airways claimed to have refurbished the cabins of some of the aircraft, this hack's enduring memory will be of bits of trim dropping off during an impressively hard landing.
Although British Airways will no longer be flying the 747, it will linger on a little longer at some airlines, such as Lufthansa. Others, including United, have already sent their jumbos out to pasture.
Take-off crash 'n' burn didn't kill the Concorde, it was just too bloody expensive to maintain [2]READ MORE
As for British Airways' other long-haul, four-engined aircraft, the Airbus A380, hope remains that flights might resume for the double-decked monster. British Airways pilots have reported that [3]simulator training for the aircraft has continued , even as the airline prepares [4]to swing the jobs axe . Airbus itself has already pulled the plug on the A380, with production due to end shortly.
British Airways has a rich history of killing off beloved aircraft. [5]Concorde was retired in 2003 as passenger numbers fell and maintenance costs increased, although it did not contribute to the democratisation of air travel in quite the same way as the 747.
So, a proposed farewell then to the British Airways 747-400. No flowers. ®
Get our [6]Tech Resources
[1] https://mediacentre.britishairways.com/news/17072020/british-airways-says-farewell-to-the-queen-of-the-skies
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2018/05/01/geeks_guide_to_britain_concorde/
[3] https://twitter.com/DaveWallsworth/status/1279470920650891264
[4] https://babetrayal.com/
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2018/05/01/geeks_guide_to_britain_concorde/
[6] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Once...
When I became an old bloated plutocrat I always tried to travel upstairs. Some aircraft had a bar up there...
Re: Once...
Yes back in 1993 on the way back from San Francisco the BA check in lady asked my brother, Dad and I if we had ever sat upstairs on a 747? Nope!
So we got put upstairs. Nothing fancy but it was cool to be able to watch the pilots if you leaned into the aisle. Also as it was only 30 or so people it was a bit more relaxed and you got a toilet just for upstairs.
Was something to remember. The in flight film was King Ralph, not so memorable.
I also remember on the flight over I walked up to the front of the 747 (club class I guess, it was empty) so I could stand for a few seconds right behind the nose cone right at the front of the plane. I got out before anyone saw me. Though back then people were a bit more relaxed about stuff.
BOAC
BOAC is really Better On A Camel. I once flew BOAC trans-Atlantic. We had to land at Gander, in Newfoundland, part way across.It seems that someone didn’t tighten a fuel tank cap or something similar, and we were losing fuel. And someone else who should have been paying attention didn’t notice until it was too late to turn back. We just barely made it to Gander. On getting back to the UK, there were tales in the newspapers about cracks in wings. Don’t know if the aircraft I was on was one of the cracked but still flying, but it wouldn’t have surprised me.
Re: BOAC
Here was me thinking it stood for Boeing Only Airways Corporation
Seats from the 1970s, entertainment screens made from potato, cabin cooling systems from before computers on board were a thing, no at seat power, rattly as fuck, so noisy I'd put ear plugs in under my noise-cancellers to try and get some quiet, those ridiculous pull-out-remotes-on-a-string that always break and a fit + finish quality that would make a man afeared for his life when flying.
BA 747-400s: You will most definitely not be missed.
But you don't fly BA for the modern, clean, well-equipped aircraft.
You fly it for the nostalgic, 1970s we're a nationalised industry with a union, customer service
I am going to really miss the 747, the First Class cabin feels more private compared to the 777 in First. Yeah the IFE was old, but i was too busy eating and getting drunk or sleeping to have time for that.
Bloody awful
And I say that as someone who was trapped in a 787 windows seat from Amsterdam to Chicago by two very large German ladies who fell asleep and I couldn't get out.
Would still rather have that experience that sit in a busted out BA 747
It's crazy to think how long the 747 has been in service, especially when compared to the A380.
Won't be missed.
As for British Airways' other long-haul, four-engined aircraft, the Airbus A380, hope remains that flights might resume for the double-decked monster.
Why? The BA ones have the most uncomfortable cattle-class seats I've suffered on any modern BA aircraft, worse even than those on the 747 which were old but at least had more than a few mm of padding over a rigid plastic base. Feeling my arse beginning to go numb as we crossed Ireland on the way to SFO did not give me hope for a good flight, no matter how smooth and quiet the aircraft itself was.
I'd have more hope that the demise of hub & spoke travel, with it's double dose of security theatre and connections that are always too tight or too long, would kill off the need for all those monsters. A point-to-point A350 or 787 is a more comfortable way to fly. Air France had already started to retire their A380s even before the COVID-19 drop in traffic.
Re: Won't be missed.
The 787 to San Jose is great. Especially in Business.
Seeing a 747 at the gate during the last decade has always been disappointment twinged with mild dread.
Contrary to previous commenters, I've always like the 747. I've spent more time on it as a passenger than on all other aircraft combined (although I haven't flown as much in the past decade as I did prior to that) and for some reason I remember my flights on a 747 as more comfortable. Not sure if it was the way the aircraft handled (it always seemed more... well, stable, somehow, than more recent designs) and the seats never left me quite as wrecked after a 10+ hour flight than what I experienced on Airbuses and the like. I'll miss the 747.
Interesting Wing Arrangement (article image)
That left-hand wing looks a bit short!
Someone needs more practice at photoshopping...
Re: Interesting Wing Arrangement (article image)
Er, port...
We just left port, with a cargo of red port wine.
Second Life?
I am curious if these aircraft are going to end up in a boneyard or if a freight carrier will pick them up on the cheap for a conversion. The latter has been a popular option over the past few years, but I have to wonder if the freight folks have had their fill.
Re: Second Life?
I think there are so many sitting around they can't give them away.
Re: Second Life?
The 747-436's (which are what BA's actually are) are quite old among 747-400s. If one were looking for a conversion airframe, you'd probably look elsewhere (e.g. find a 20 year old one instead of a 30 years).
Also, there have been freighter conversion programs since about 2000, and _those_ aircraft are now being (or have been) retired, too.
Re: Second Life?
There are so few passengers flying at the moment, it's causing a problem for freight which normally tags along for the ride. Converting a few jumbos to take a full cargo load, is probably cheaper than running normal services with cargo and mostly empty seats.
So Long!
I took my first plane trip on a 747 from Chicago (ORD for you aerobuffs) to L.A (LAX) in 1971 on TWA!
RIP both TWA and 747s
Concorde
Concorde wasn't retired because BA's load factors were dropping or maintenance was getting expensive.
Concorde was retired because Air France's load factors had dropped, and Air France's maintenance costs were problematic.
Because of the age of the design and the very few aircraft that entered service, spare parts were in short supply from about 1990 or so. In order to keep BA's twice-daily London-New York flights, BA needed at least 3 operational aircraft (one to operate BA001 and BA002, one for BA003/4, one spare), although they usually had 4 in order to support the odd charter and the winter Barbados flights (when they were doing those), which they supported by moving parts around their 7 aircraft.
New York-Paris was never as busy a route, so Air France only operated one round trip a day (needing one aircraft plus a spare) and did a lot more charter work, which needed another 1+1, but not every day. This was fine until the crash, at which point AF only had 4 aircraft remaining, so they couldn't move parts around as BA was doing.
And then politics entered the mix: once Air France decided they could no longer support their Concorde operations, they could have sold the aircraft to someone else (Branson publicly offered to buy at least one, but that was probably just grandstanding), and certainly BA was interested in buying parts from the AF fleet if it was going to be grounded. However, grounding the fleet would have pushed costs from Airbus (former Aerospatiale former Sud Aviation) and BAE (former BAC) all onto BA instead of sharing between AF and BA, plus French national pride/ego wasn't keen on the Brits continuing to operate the thing when they weren't (even though... "The E shall stand for England" -- an obscure reference to the naming of the thing). So AF refused to sell their airframes, Airbus pulled the plug on the airworthiness certificate, and the first supersonic age came to a close.
(Some years later, the USAF bragged that the F-22 could "supercruise" -- fly supersonic without afterburners -- at Mach 1.8. Whoo-de-doo: I've "supercruised" at Mach 2.0 while enjoying a Johnny Walker Blue Label, on G-BOAG and G-BOAF).
Once...
I got to sit upstairs in a 747.
Flying back from Detroit I checked in early due to the availability of a lift to the airport for a BA flight. Unfortunately the project budget didn't run to Business Class (even though we were entitled to it under Company rules) but BA had a couple of 747s with Cattle Class upstairs. Being early and looking fairly respectable I was offered a seat up there. It was cosy but they only allocated 2 of the 3-across seats and we had our own very attentive steward. The only downside was whenever anyone went to the facilities they had to brush past the pull-down projector screen (Titanic was showing, which dates when this was).
Crossing the Atlantic every week for several months was sheer hell but I've got a few stories from the experience such as probably travelling on the fastest every DC-10.