A380 Vs 747 Production

[Wizofoz]

I read a very interesting statistic in Flight today.

In its first year of production after initial deliveries, Boeing delivered 100 747s.

In the TWO AND A HALF YEARS since the first A380 deliveries, Airbus has deliverd just 23.

Will they EVER be able to produce the aeroplane at a commercially viable rate? And if they can, how many Airframes would now constitute break-even for the program?

[20driver]

A380 Performance

Not wanting to get into the A vs B stuff but I was wondering if it had gotten out how the A 380 was doing in terms of fuel consumption per passenger km. On target, above, below? I know SQ drives a hard bargain, are they happy?
I'm suspect some would people kill their grannies for less but any whispers out there?

20driver

[Wizofoz]

Can;t speak for SQ but EK are, overall, happy with the Aircraft. I think it burns more than predicted, but it has enourmous passenger appeal, and filling 18 F and 72 J seats brings in a lot of revenue!!

I think it will make money for the Airlines that operate it. My question was relating to whether it will ever make money for the company that builds it!

[Taildragger67]

I seem to recall reading that break-even will be at around 400-450 airframes. I have little doubt they'll achieve that - one day - but my thinking is that that number can only ever slip upwards, and will do the longer it takes to achieve, given the cost of operating and maintaining the supply chain infrastructure (whether 1 airframe gets built or 1000).

[ATC Watcher]

If my memory serves me well the 400 break even figure was before the wiring problems . Nobody ( outside eads that is ) knows the exact cost of that re-wriring, the 2 years delay ( salaries paid in non-revenue years ) no to mention the penalties. My guess is that the 400 recovery figure is now well passed .
But in the long run they will sell large numbers and recover , the 747 is a 40 years old design afer all , time to move to new technology.

[parabellum]

Before they laid the first keel, so to speak, the break even was around 269 I believe, but now thought to be around 500. It will never be a commercial success as it fits very nicely into a niche market of long haul carriers who require far less numbers than they did of the B747, as they now have the whole B777 family giving huge flexibility, not to mention the A330 and A340-500. It is also rumoured that Boeing will soon be producing the B787!

A380, technically superb, maybe, huge passenger appeal, definitely but commercially, for Airbus, a dinosaur.

[TURIN]

Bit early to bury Airbus isn't it?

I think I'll give it a few years before making rash statements about whether or not it's a dinosaur......

Flight tests between February and December revealed several problems, the most significant with the engines, which were underpowered for the increase in weight and size that had occurred since earlier designs. The engine problem hadn't been solved by the time the plane entered service in January 1970, and airlines experienced one delay after another because of engine troubles. At one point early in 1970, Boeing had some 30 planes parked at its plant that could not be delivered until Pratt & Whitney had corrected the deficiencies of its JT-9D engine. It took a year before the engine problems were solved. In the meantime, too little money was coming in, the country was experiencing an economic recession, and new orders were drying up. The company almost went broke.

Eventually, Boeing began to recoup some of its investment. Sales took off in the late 1970s and by the 1980s, the 747's usefulness had become apparent.

From http://www.centennialofflight.gov

[goldeneye]

When the 747 entered service in the 70's it represented a massive increase in capacity for airlines, as there was really nothing available that compared.
No we have the B747, A340, B777 etc.

The A380 has much more competion to consider than B747 v A380 on launch.

[tigger2k8]

i thought the 747 launched when demand was high for larger planes? the A380 basically launched in the recession when airlines were suffering (and orders were cancelled).. probably not the best timing in the world.. i too will wait a few years before i make my mind up, but it would be a shame for such an amazing aircraft to never "takeoff"

[ab33t]

I believe there are many more niche markets the 380 could fit into , freight being another one as their are loads of 747F's that are due for retirement.

[rigpiggy]

kind of like retiring the 727'sa

[Dani]

it's been said several times but it keeps on getting forgotten:

Primary target of EADS' A380 production is not only making money but sealing the money inflow for Boeing in the Jumbo market. The 747 in all its versions was a huge money making machine, without much input, delivering cash flow, which could be used to dump other markets with cheap offers.

That has gone, and Boeing doesn't seem to be able to fight in this niche market. So Airbus has now more market force in all other markets.

I don't know insight figures, but I could imagine that A380 never has to make money to make money.

Dani

[MUFC_fan]

The A380 has much more competion to consider than B747 v A380 on launch.

There is no other aircraft that can compete with the A380 for size.

As people have said, the 747 was a HUGE aircraft in the 1970s but look at it now - it is almost 'bog-standard.'

In 20 years time the A380 will be in a similar position...