ATL refuses to accomodate A380
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's fighting talk, managed nav, to say that to an Englishman! The fact you were rattling on about cabotage in your earlier post hints at the true point of this post, i.e. nothing to do with Atlanta, everything to do with sticking the needle into our latest wonderplane. Why are you so negative when there is no US competitor even on the drawing board?
As for cabotage, don't lets start on that. Every US carrier already enjoys full cabotage between each major European city then onwards to the USA. Requests for even very limited reciprocity meet with squeals of outrage from you guys. And that's before we even talk about "Fly America". Chapter 11 and many millions of bucks from Federal Aviation Security Subsidy (sorry funding -mustn't mention the "sub" word)
As for cabotage, don't lets start on that. Every US carrier already enjoys full cabotage between each major European city then onwards to the USA. Requests for even very limited reciprocity meet with squeals of outrage from you guys. And that's before we even talk about "Fly America". Chapter 11 and many millions of bucks from Federal Aviation Security Subsidy (sorry funding -mustn't mention the "sub" word)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Asia
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And most Europeans don't give a flying **** about the US. Is it really that painful to some that Airbus is now market leader?
It's about as interesting as which football team is the best.
Che
It's about as interesting as which football team is the best.
Che
PPRuNe Supporter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Devon, UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Steady now ladies and gents, otherwise it becomes mudslinging and not reasoned discussion. ManagedNav was just pointing out that not only does he hope that the A380 is successful as a passenger aircraft, but that he also believes that it will make an excellent cargo aircraft as well.
Back in the adult world, does anyone know of any current types which do not have a freight conversion programme under way or at least being studied? The only one I can think of is the A340 but perhaps someone knows of a programme for that as well?
Back in the adult world, does anyone know of any current types which do not have a freight conversion programme under way or at least being studied? The only one I can think of is the A340 but perhaps someone knows of a programme for that as well?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Che Guevara.....The feeling is mutual.
And yes, it is painful to see an inferior aircraft manufacturer in front merely because of it's cost-effectiveness....
TallBloke....
You are a gentleman indeed.
The only one I can think of is the A319/320. But now that I said that, there might be an operator in S. Florida that is running freight with them....
Good trivia question!
Wait!
The B-737?
And yes, it is painful to see an inferior aircraft manufacturer in front merely because of it's cost-effectiveness....
TallBloke....
You are a gentleman indeed.
The only one I can think of is the A319/320. But now that I said that, there might be an operator in S. Florida that is running freight with them....
Good trivia question!
Wait!
The B-737?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ShotOne:
Do you blame us?
"Airline cabotage is the carriage of air traffic that originates and terminates within the boundaries of a given country by an air carrier of another country. Rights to such traffic are usually entirely denied or severely restricted. Under 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g), we may authorize a foreign air carrier to carry commercial traffic between U.S. points (i.e., cabotage traffic) under limited circumstances. Specifically, we must find that the authority is required in the public interest; that because of an emergency created by unusual circumstances not arising in the normal course of business the traffic cannot be accommodated by U.S. carriers holding certificates under 49 U.S.C. section 41102; that all possible efforts have been made to place the traffic on U.S. carriers; and that the transportation is necessary to avoid undue hardship to the traffic involved (an additional required finding, concerning emergency transportation during labor disputes, is not relevant here)."
"...strongly opposes cabotage and changing U.S. laws which now prohibit foreign carriers from conducting domestic flights within our country. The U.S. market is attractive to foreign carriers because it represents 40 percent of worldwide aviation traffic. Most other countries have just a fraction of that amount. It is doubtful U.S. carriers could significantly benefit from a scheme that grants all the European Community (EC) carriers rights to U.S. domestic routes and gives U.S. carriers rights to intra-EC routes."
If we enjoy the amount of cabotage in the EC that you claim, I suggest you change the laws over there. Apparently it is worth your (the EC) while to let it happen.
"Fighting talk" not necessary; you're out....
Do you blame us?
"Airline cabotage is the carriage of air traffic that originates and terminates within the boundaries of a given country by an air carrier of another country. Rights to such traffic are usually entirely denied or severely restricted. Under 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g), we may authorize a foreign air carrier to carry commercial traffic between U.S. points (i.e., cabotage traffic) under limited circumstances. Specifically, we must find that the authority is required in the public interest; that because of an emergency created by unusual circumstances not arising in the normal course of business the traffic cannot be accommodated by U.S. carriers holding certificates under 49 U.S.C. section 41102; that all possible efforts have been made to place the traffic on U.S. carriers; and that the transportation is necessary to avoid undue hardship to the traffic involved (an additional required finding, concerning emergency transportation during labor disputes, is not relevant here)."
"...strongly opposes cabotage and changing U.S. laws which now prohibit foreign carriers from conducting domestic flights within our country. The U.S. market is attractive to foreign carriers because it represents 40 percent of worldwide aviation traffic. Most other countries have just a fraction of that amount. It is doubtful U.S. carriers could significantly benefit from a scheme that grants all the European Community (EC) carriers rights to U.S. domestic routes and gives U.S. carriers rights to intra-EC routes."
If we enjoy the amount of cabotage in the EC that you claim, I suggest you change the laws over there. Apparently it is worth your (the EC) while to let it happen.
"Fighting talk" not necessary; you're out....
Plaything of fine moderators everywhere
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: On the beach
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wino, why would you object to your tax dollars being spent on improving airport facilities in order to improve trade and competitiveness (by way of more efficient aircraft) when they are currently being spent propping up a bloated set of majors that are down on their knees?
Just like you'll never convince me that the current mess in the desert is about anything other than oil, you'll never convince me that this is anything other than Concorde protectionism Mk II.
Just like you'll never convince me that the current mess in the desert is about anything other than oil, you'll never convince me that this is anything other than Concorde protectionism Mk II.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Around
Age: 56
Posts: 572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tallbloke
To the best of my knowledge, only the A300B4, A300-600 and A310 have been subject to cargo conversions. There are, to my knowledge, no plans to convert any other Airbus types at the moment, and the only new-build freighters Airbus are promoting is the A300-600 and A380.
Both the A330/340 and A32x series are probably still to expensive for conversion.
ManagedNav
Gawd you are one seriously sore looser; have you got shares in Boeing or is it just an American inferiorty complex rearing it's ugly head? Inferior manufacturer my arse!
Both the A330/340 and A32x series are probably still to expensive for conversion.
ManagedNav
Gawd you are one seriously sore looser; have you got shares in Boeing or is it just an American inferiorty complex rearing it's ugly head? Inferior manufacturer my arse!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: I wish I knew
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely it's an economic matter. When the 747 commenced operation, LHR and others were upgraded so that they could retain their position as the most attractive airports. The same will happen for the A380. If someone wants to reject a facility upgrade on the principle that it doesn't serve the national interest, good luck to them. It is their right. However, they may find that they start to lose market share.
ManagedNav
How are Airbus inferior? You mean like McDonalds? I can cook a better hamburger than McDonalds (personal opinion) but it doesn't mean that I could compete with them in a business sense. I prefer Boeing to Airbus (personal opinion), but that doesn't mean that buying Boeing is necessarily better in a business sense. That's the nature of life....
Cheers,
LP
ManagedNav
And yes, it is painful to see an inferior aircraft manufacturer in front merely because of it's cost-effectiveness....
Cheers,
LP
Join Date: May 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sorry Biggles, but if it was about oil, we'd be tapping it by now. I think it is more about exercising control over a region that is full of people hell-bent on killing "infidels".
Although a disaster to some, we actually have positioned ourselves in a way that just might make countries like Syria and Iran think twice about striking out at us either directly or indirectly.
Other countries prudently saw that we were not ****ing around and decided to be cooperative.
If it was about oil, we'd be occupying Alberta, Canada instead.
Back to the Boeing/Douglas vs. Airbus issue...
Flip Flop...There is no such thing as an American inferiority complex...
I have flown all three and consider the Airbus to be the most "cheaply" made.
If you have flown anything other than an Airbus, then let\'s debate the merits of each of them. I suspect you have not because if you have, you would be unique in the pilot world if you choose the Airbus over a Boeing or Douglas aircraft.
Although a disaster to some, we actually have positioned ourselves in a way that just might make countries like Syria and Iran think twice about striking out at us either directly or indirectly.
Other countries prudently saw that we were not ****ing around and decided to be cooperative.
If it was about oil, we'd be occupying Alberta, Canada instead.
Back to the Boeing/Douglas vs. Airbus issue...
Flip Flop...There is no such thing as an American inferiority complex...
I have flown all three and consider the Airbus to be the most "cheaply" made.
If you have flown anything other than an Airbus, then let\'s debate the merits of each of them. I suspect you have not because if you have, you would be unique in the pilot world if you choose the Airbus over a Boeing or Douglas aircraft.
Last edited by ManagedNav; 2nd Feb 2005 at 10:05.
Back to Atlanta .....
It's not really surprising that Atlanta doesn't see the need to invest for the A380 at the moment because it's operators are unlikely to want to take it there - which is probably where the Atlanta officials started with their decision. For example, I don't think there is a single operator of passenger 747s into Atlanta today. So their past investment for 747s is currently wasted too.
The A380 will get used by European and Asian airlines to go to the main US gateways like JFK or LAX. That is where the volume is. The mid-continent US hubs like Atlanta or Dallas, despite their major role in US domestic connecting traffic, do not handle much international traffic in comparison. And what they do handle is principally on the airline whose base is there - Delta at Atlanta, American at Dallas, etc. The handful of overseas operators that go to these places and who have 747s in their fleets use their secondary types, 777s or 340, to go there.
US operators are unlikely to take the A380 because they subscribe to the smaller-aircraft approach (note how few currently have 747s) for a range of reasons we have gone into many times before. They also have no money, which I believe Airbus might be expecting in return for their aircraft !
It's not really surprising that Atlanta doesn't see the need to invest for the A380 at the moment because it's operators are unlikely to want to take it there - which is probably where the Atlanta officials started with their decision. For example, I don't think there is a single operator of passenger 747s into Atlanta today. So their past investment for 747s is currently wasted too.
The A380 will get used by European and Asian airlines to go to the main US gateways like JFK or LAX. That is where the volume is. The mid-continent US hubs like Atlanta or Dallas, despite their major role in US domestic connecting traffic, do not handle much international traffic in comparison. And what they do handle is principally on the airline whose base is there - Delta at Atlanta, American at Dallas, etc. The handful of overseas operators that go to these places and who have 747s in their fleets use their secondary types, 777s or 340, to go there.
US operators are unlikely to take the A380 because they subscribe to the smaller-aircraft approach (note how few currently have 747s) for a range of reasons we have gone into many times before. They also have no money, which I believe Airbus might be expecting in return for their aircraft !
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: T2
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe AF have already stipulated that they intend to serve ATL with the A380 to avail of the DL feed/connections? They have a close relationship with DL through both operators membership of Skyteam.
Bear Behind
ManagedNav are you a troll or what? If not then YOU my friend, are evidently unique amongst Americans in having an inferiority complex! As for Atlanta not wanting the A380, well fine! If they don't want the thousands of dollars they'd earn from each flight, or if they can't make the business case work, then more power to their elbow! The point is that the aircraft will fly, it will enter service and it will come to other east coast airports. That means that the passengers coming off of the A380s in other east coast airports will transfer onto domestic flights operating out of those very same airports and not out of Atlanta, so I guess it will only be a matter of time before they wake up and smell the coffee.
Inferior aircraft manufacturer? Hahahahahaha! I have had the pleasure of working on both Boeing and Airbus aircraft and have found the quality of both to be excellent. Of the more recent metal, the Airbus ones have the edge. I haven't worked on an airframe in a couple of years, but I've very recently driven some of the hunks of cr@p coming out of Detroit and find it hard to believe that anyone could seriously infer that a U.S. manufacturer of heavy metal these days is superior to a European one. Don't forget the lineage that Airbus has - de Havilland, Messerschmitt, Sud Aviation, CASA, Hawker, Supermarine, Blohm und Voss, Fokker, Focke-Wulf. Now, about building aircraft - you really telling us the Europeans don't know how to design and build quality aircraft?
Up until a (very) few years ago the U.S. used to be a massive force of good in this sad little world of ours. What, I ask myself, has happened when they hate everyone so much?
Inferior aircraft manufacturer? Hahahahahaha! I have had the pleasure of working on both Boeing and Airbus aircraft and have found the quality of both to be excellent. Of the more recent metal, the Airbus ones have the edge. I haven't worked on an airframe in a couple of years, but I've very recently driven some of the hunks of cr@p coming out of Detroit and find it hard to believe that anyone could seriously infer that a U.S. manufacturer of heavy metal these days is superior to a European one. Don't forget the lineage that Airbus has - de Havilland, Messerschmitt, Sud Aviation, CASA, Hawker, Supermarine, Blohm und Voss, Fokker, Focke-Wulf. Now, about building aircraft - you really telling us the Europeans don't know how to design and build quality aircraft?
Up until a (very) few years ago the U.S. used to be a massive force of good in this sad little world of ours. What, I ask myself, has happened when they hate everyone so much?
Trash du Blanc
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What, I ask myself, has happened when they hate everyone so much?
I worked in KATL for a long time. They're still growing to accomodate the turboprops that have been gone now for 5 years. No one will ever accuse that city of overly managed growth. They'll catch up - they can even occasionally shine, as in the 1996 Olympics.
Atlanta's got its own time zone - 1965. (Better than 1955 as in Memphis).
Take a look at my (American) company - launch customer of the cargo A-380, operator of the A-300/310 all over the world, just signed a deal for ATR feeders. Those 380 cargo ships will have great big US flags on the tail. We're with you on this one.
And by the way, whatever hurt the Concorde also killed the SST, throwing thousands out of work in Seattle.
Bear Behind
Huck, don't get me wrong - I love the U.S. and I love the people. As a matter of fact every year for the last 6 years that's where I've taken my vacation (variously north, south, west and some cute little islands). But when I read what's written here by various of our cousins about how they hate the French and the Germans and the Iraqis and the Brits can go stuff themselves and everyone else is so backwards they don't merit a mention... There's nothing but bile flowing towards anything or anyone that isn't American.
Hopefully the A380 will give the industry the kick in the pants or the shot in the arm it needs to get itself moving again. It might just spur growth and yes, it might well feed hundreds of thousands of passengers onto U.S. airlines out of U.S. hubs. Now in what way is that so bad? We all get jobs! Bits of it are made in the U.S. - in fact I bet with EA engines on it it's 50% of it. So U.S. jobs on a European programme - could we say the same about Boeing programmes - half are in Europe? I'd bet not.
Hopefully the A380 will give the industry the kick in the pants or the shot in the arm it needs to get itself moving again. It might just spur growth and yes, it might well feed hundreds of thousands of passengers onto U.S. airlines out of U.S. hubs. Now in what way is that so bad? We all get jobs! Bits of it are made in the U.S. - in fact I bet with EA engines on it it's 50% of it. So U.S. jobs on a European programme - could we say the same about Boeing programmes - half are in Europe? I'd bet not.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Of the more recent metal, the Airbus ones have the edge."
Panda, I don't know who peed in your cheerios but I never said anything durogatory about any group except the French.
Regarding your quote above, you might have an argument; but one can hardly call an Airbus "heavy metal".
Don't confuse someone with an opinion based on experience flying all three types with someone having an inferiority complex. It seems that your thin-skinned ego can't take any kind of opinion that would dare challenge the allmighty Airbus. My opinion is that the craftsmanship of the 320 in particular sucks. You can disagree with productive counterpoints, or you can resort to calling names like a little schoolgirl.
Panda, I don't know who peed in your cheerios but I never said anything durogatory about any group except the French.
Regarding your quote above, you might have an argument; but one can hardly call an Airbus "heavy metal".
Don't confuse someone with an opinion based on experience flying all three types with someone having an inferiority complex. It seems that your thin-skinned ego can't take any kind of opinion that would dare challenge the allmighty Airbus. My opinion is that the craftsmanship of the 320 in particular sucks. You can disagree with productive counterpoints, or you can resort to calling names like a little schoolgirl.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ummm... In terms of passengers moved, Atlanta is the busiest airport in the world. Still, as noted, it's not exactly a prime candidate for the A380.. The bulk of their traffic is between second-tier destinations. It's not like JFK or the West Coast airports, which see a bunch of long-haul traffic from around the world.
I'm sure if Delta or someone else came to them, expressed their desire to bring A380s through ATL, and produced some interesting revenue numbers, Atlanta would accommodate the Skytanic in a hurry.
But why spend money if there's no market?
I'm sure if Delta or someone else came to them, expressed their desire to bring A380s through ATL, and produced some interesting revenue numbers, Atlanta would accommodate the Skytanic in a hurry.
But why spend money if there's no market?
Bear Behind
Who's name calling? Not this little schoolgirl, that's for sure.
And yes, I'd call the A345, A346 and A380 heavy metal, would you not? In fact Boeing are fond of claiming that Airbus aircraft are too heavy. Some may even be so.
As for "durogatory" (sic), I wasn't just referring to you, but since you admit starting the name calling... (I'm a Brit with experience on 2 of the 3 manufacturers you name, by the way, and I do have the gall to stand up to you and tell you that I don't agree. Hopefully you won't invade my little island in retaliation).
"I suspect you have not because if you have, you would be unique in the pilot world if you choose the Airbus over a Boeing or Douglas aircraft." There you go. There's the inferiority complex right there. Unique in the world. Well, now there's two of us. So he's not unique, then, is he?
"If we enjoy the amount of cabotage in the EC that you claim, I suggest you change the laws over there." And that's just plain old arrogance - who are you to tell anyone they should change their laws?
Have a nice day and see you in JetBlast - if this thread survives at all (which I don't think it really should any more).
And yes, I'd call the A345, A346 and A380 heavy metal, would you not? In fact Boeing are fond of claiming that Airbus aircraft are too heavy. Some may even be so.
As for "durogatory" (sic), I wasn't just referring to you, but since you admit starting the name calling... (I'm a Brit with experience on 2 of the 3 manufacturers you name, by the way, and I do have the gall to stand up to you and tell you that I don't agree. Hopefully you won't invade my little island in retaliation).
"I suspect you have not because if you have, you would be unique in the pilot world if you choose the Airbus over a Boeing or Douglas aircraft." There you go. There's the inferiority complex right there. Unique in the world. Well, now there's two of us. So he's not unique, then, is he?
"If we enjoy the amount of cabotage in the EC that you claim, I suggest you change the laws over there." And that's just plain old arrogance - who are you to tell anyone they should change their laws?
Have a nice day and see you in JetBlast - if this thread survives at all (which I don't think it really should any more).