Comments on: Across the Aisle From British Airways’ Head of Environment

By: Albert

Albert — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 15:25:16 +0000

Oil prices actually haven’t gone up if you price it against gold. What has gone down is the value of the US dollars.

Anyway, that aside, I agree, this is a fairly cool initiative on BA’s part. Sure, they get some PR out of it, but at the same time this is a chance for some crank out there to test his (or her) alternative fuel on a real engine jet. This is not an opportunity that one encounters on a daily basis.

For the most part, I don’t think they’ll find anything, but who knows, it just may lead to something better.

By: Jonathan Heckman

Jonathan Heckman — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:43:50 +0000

Sue – I agree that this is a good initiative, however I do not think that airliners will have the capabilities that cars do, with alternative fuels, for quite some time. The only successful alternative fuel engine-powered flight that I know of is the Boeing Dimona.

By: Dan Webb

Dan Webb — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:09:37 +0000

Ah, ok, I see what you’re saying. Sorry.

By: CF

CF — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 15:30:11 +0000

Dan – I believe you’re right on that one, but in the past I’m guessing that would have been enough for CX to find another plane. They were fiercely loyal to Rolls, for whatever reason.

By: Dan Webb

Dan Webb — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 14:40:14 +0000

I’m not positive on this one, but I think GEs are the only option on the -300ER.

By: CF

CF — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 03:58:00 +0000

QRC – BA actually has both GE and Rolls engines for its 777s. I believe the ERs have the Rolls Trents while the others have GE90s. I haven’t heard anything about excessive problems on the Rolls. CX is indeed a very Rolls-loving airline, but they’ve got GEs on their 777-300ERs. So, they aren’t as married to Rolls as they used to be.

By: Dan Webb

Dan Webb — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 03:49:25 +0000

QRC – from the Rolls Royce Website:

“Trent 800 is the market leading engine on the Boeing 777 with a 41 per cent share.”

By: QRC

QRC — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 02:33:15 +0000

Cranky, your article made me think of Rolls Royce and specifically engines in general. On a recent taxi ride in Hong Kong, the driver (a local HK guy) was lamenting to me how CX insisted on using Rolls Royce engines for their 777s (actually I think they use them across the fleet). His idea was since management was comprised of arrogant Brits (quoting his Chinese) – he didn’t seem exactly fond of British people – they insisted on Rolls simply because it’s British and thus the choice was out of some national pride thing, instead of practicality. He also said hardly any other airlines use the engines, compared to say GE or Pratt&Whitney. It seems like here BA does and his argument was probably a bit over the top…anyhow, his complaint was it made CX flights delayed whenever they had engine problems around the world because many places didn’t have Rolls Royce engine parts in stock. Any truth to this?

By: Sue

Sue — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 21:10:13 +0000

that should say “if they don’t PICK up on this” sorry

By: Sue

Sue — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 21:09:00 +0000

listen: any major transportation company that is going public like this to find alternative energy sources has a big high 5 from me. The sooner we can –buzz words here–”reduce our dependence” on OPEC and The Middle East in general–and anybody ELSE driving up gas prices, I don’t CARE who they are– the better off we’ll be. Yeah, it’s the popular opinion–because it MAKES SENSE. Go BA, and since I already am a frequent flier on American, good for them! If they don’t ick up on this–WHEN it works–I’m switching miles programs.