Will the A380 ever fly....

[Payscale]

What happens too the beautiful A380 in these times of crisis. Will it be launched? Who will be the launch customer? Emirates was supposed to but on the www.airbus.com (http://www.airbus.com) site,
there are no orders for it...

[Plane Speaker]

It will for sure. However I believe it's programme will be delayed somewhat.

[Reimers]

Payscale,

are you suggesting that this crisis may last until 2006 when the first deliveries are due?

[The Guvnor]

Before September 11, Warren Buffett was forecasting an eight year recession. You can imagine how long that's been extended to now!

Given the law suits being launched against BA and VS today regarding DVT, I suspect that airlines may well not be able to afford the A380 any more and that it will simply become a rather expensive white elephant.

[sanjosebaz]

Payscale: You must be reading a different page to me!... http://www1.airbus.com/media/orders_n_deliveries.asp
shows 48 orders. (Suppose they may not be firm though)

[ 29 October 2001: Message edited by: sanjosebaz ]

[moggie]

Of course it will fly - becuae the tired old 747 airframe can not be stretched out forever. Ok - it is a big projest with lots of bits and pieces made by lots of different companies and may end up a bit late because of any number of reasons. However, ground breaking projects are almost always hit by problems at some stage.

The design is well under way, the manufacturers want to build it and we will have 40 years to get our money back (look how long the B747 has been around) so we can afford to take the long-term view.

Of course the American industry would like it to fail A) because Boeing aren't building it b) becuaes the Europeans are building it and c) because Boeing aren't building it!!! Look at the green eyes of envy that followed Concorde as it made it's technologically brillaint but commercially flawed way into service. We are a lot better at this "co-operation" stuff these days, even if it means working WITH the French.

It will fly, it will sell and it will make money in the long run. Even if the A380 does not return a profit it will roll into A340/330/320 sales because of fleet commonality.

[Stonebird]

It will certainly fly. The flying industry is like it was before the introduction of the 747, fuller aprons, too few gates, too few slots, taxiway congestion, etc etc...too many FLIGHTS.

The solution is (and was, with the 747), bigger aircraft.

British Aerospace & EADS own the shares..and they're at bargain prices at present.

:D

[recceguy]

Will the Sonic Cruiser ever fly in this time of crisis ?

[Payscale]

Lots of great answers!
I was lokking at the launch customer EK...no orders anmore. AF is surposedly delaying theirs...Virgin also. So lets see. They won't develop with firm-firm orders.

[jetjackel]

As long as the current situation continues no insurance company will insure it. Airbus is dreaming. The Boeing "high speed" mid size jet is the answer.

[Epsom Hold 2]

JetJackal, get real. The A380 carries only 15% more pax than the 747. Last time I checked, 747s are still flying so why not the A380? Anyway, insurance companies are making a killing, Lloyds are trumpeting at the moment about how great it is to be a Name cos they're charging like the light brigade. I predict insurance companies will be falling over themselves to get some A380 action.

The +15% thing is important to remember whatever the objection (insurance premiums, baggage claim, whatever). This is simply a logical step in the development in aviation. The 747 was 150% bigger than the 707, and was probably too big for the time (it killed Pan Am and did all kinds of damage to the balance sheet at other airlines) and really wasn't the right size til the 80s or even the 90s - the 400 is the best seller of the series. If Boeing have got cold feet then I don't see why that makes Airbus' judgement so bad all of a sudden. If we're having a recession now then it makes the A380 even better timed (the 747 turned up at the beginning of a recession), even better 'cos the world's economy will start to boom and pax will be hitting the skies in record numbers just as the A380 enters service.

Can't see the point of the Sonic Cruiser btw, I think airlines'll have to look far and wide to find pax willing to pay a premium just to save an hour across the pond. Add traffic jams and taxiway queues (not to mention getting stuck behind an A380 in the air) and the time saved is negligable. And the actual flying bit is the least stressful part of the journey. Get me to the airport an hour faster or halve the time spent at the airport and I'll pay whatever you ask. To spend an hour less upstairs being fed and watching movies isn't worth much ££. Who gets off a trans Atlantic flight (Concorde pax notwithstanding) and goes straight into a meeting anyway? Find hotel, stagger round town trying to fight jetlag sounds more familiar.

[Dropp the Pilot]

In every tragedy we can find some good. In this case, we can look forward to an end to Airbus' tiresome and insulting A380 advertising campaign.

This ludicrous device was never going to be built anyway, but the current situation gives Airbus a chance to bow out.....I was going to say gracefully but I think you would have to admit there is nothing that Toulouse la Truck does in a graceful manner.

[Rommel]

Of course it will fly.

Epsom Hold 2 is quite correct in his synopsis.

The Boeing Sonic Cuiser has a market too,but the A380 will go ahead,and will be a world beater,I for one certainly hope to fly it.

Ive flown 744 and 777,great machines but so will the A380,if the 330 is anything to go by.
:cool: :cool:

[BEagle]

One of the problems of air travel is that it's First and Business who provide the revenue, and Cattle who suffer.

Historically there has been a surplus of capacity and multi-class seating. In Europe, the single class low-costs are taking a bigger slice of the lower end of the market whilst First/Business is slumping.

But companies know that people and their time are hugely expensive and are not keen on air travel in the current era - at least, not on 'public transport' scheduled flights.

Perhaps the airlines should look at some polarisation of flights. Reconfigure some 747s with a single class 38" pitch interior with some IFE and offer it as Economy Plus. But for long-range First and Business, a radical new approach is needed. I would go for 'fractional flight ownership' between private and secure lounges in aircraft configured above current Business standards BUT only available to 'approved' customers whose companies would be required to be shareholders in the scheme and to provide guarantees for their passengers.

There would, of course, still be some 'normal' multi-class flights available for general travellers.

[ 31 October 2001: Message edited by: BEagle ]

[The Guvnor]

All over the world, airlines are downsizing their aircraft in order to give the high yield business class passenger what s/he wants - and that's frequency. Look at BA for example: dumping 744s in favour of 777s.

The A380 was envisioned as a mass-transit mover (despite what all the publicity blurb said about shops, lounges, bedrooms etc - those will never be seen outside VVIP versions). With the DVT situation, the cost (at more than quarter of a billion dollars each) is just too much for most airlines to handle.

And Payscale - if you think that whale of an aircraft is beautiful, you need your eyes checked! :D :eek: :D

[Covenant]

I remember threads before the current crisis where the almost unanimous received wisdom was that the future of the airline industry lay in more airports, shorter hops and smaller planes. This was used by our erstwhile Airbus detractors to argue that the super-large aircraft was a white elephant and that Boeing have it right with their smaller, faster new approach.

Well, how times change! The crisis means that we will now have permanently higher security levels with longer check-in (and therefore gross journey) times and higher costs, which makes short-hops flights less attractive than before. These days, as has been amply demonstrated in recent threads, it doesn't even make sense for a business traveller to fly fron NYC to DC, with the train being faster, cheaper, more comfortable and, many feel, more secure. However, the same people are now arguing that this new environment still favours Boeing and that the A380 will never sell.

It just goes to show that you can make any argument fit the conclusion you want to reach! :rolleyes:

[Taildragger67]

Epsom Hold 2 - the people who get off a transatlantic & go straight to a meeting are all those bods on the 09.00 United, AA & BA flights out of LHR which get into JFK at lunchtime & rush out of the terminal as fast as possible. Like myself.

Guvnor - seen this:

EADS Says A380 Jetliner Development on Schedule

Paris, Oct. 31 (Bloomberg) -- Airbus SAS's A380 is "already
a commercial success'' and there's no question within European
Aeronautic, Defense and Space Co. about whether to continue
funding development for the 550-seat plane, EADS said.
"There's no debate on the future of the A380,'' Chief
Executive Philippe Camus said in a faxed statement.
Camus' comments come in response to an article published in
French daily Le Monde that raised questions about the future of
the plane's development, said EADS spokesman Rainer Ohler.
BAA Plc, the biggest airport operator, also said that Airbus
may postpone the A380's introduction for a year, according to the
Independent newspaper. Airlines and airports are contending with
falling demand after last month's terrorist attacks in the U.S.
Carriers have announced more than 100,000 job cuts worldwide.
Deutsche Lufthansa AG last month delayed the order of as many
as 15 of the superjumbo jets, worth as much as $3.6 billion.
Le Monde yesterday reported that some analysts were "very
pessimistic'' about the introduction of the A380, slated for the
spring of 2006. The newspaper cited Schroder Salomon Smith Barney.
It also said that managers within EADS were arguing about the
plane's development.
"There have been no changes to the orders for the A380,''
Ohler said. "No change at all.''
EADS reiterated its commitment to the new aircraft even
though it has said Airbus will drop plans to increase aircraft
production and will cut expected plane deliveries for three years
following the terrorist attacks.
Airbus expects to win 100 orders for the A380 by early next
year. Airport operators will have to widen runways and build new
terminal accesses to accommodate the aircraft.
EADS shares recently rose 3 cents, or 0.2 percent, to 12.63
euros after earlier today falling as much as 4.2 percent.

[sanjosebaz]

Hey Guv! Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Compare and contrast the A380's sleak looks with those of the Shorts 360, for example (which was clearly designed by someone who had left his french curves at home) :D

Edited 'cos URL link fails to cope with long URLs. :( Pity - the example photo was from arliners.net, so you can find one for yourself.

[ 31 October 2001: Message edited by: sanjosebaz ]

[ZK-NSJ]

well if its engines are anything like
the a340's it will never get off the ground.

[compressor stall]

In essence, both sides of this argument are half right.

Passengers want frequency. That can be reached with more A330ish sized aircraft flying more often from more regional centres.

However with increased frequency comes congestion. Planes will have to be bigger to accommodate capped movements. Many hubs are already full, so the only way there to get more people out is to make the planes bigger.

Boeing and Airbus have both identified niche areas of the future aviation market and I believe there is room for both. Both manufacturers have designed aircraft that will be in demand, for entirely different reasons.

[ 04 November 2001: Message edited by: compressor stall ]

[SK]

Emirates has placed an order for an additional 15 A380s plus 10 options. Here is the Reuters story, as reported on Yahoo:
http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/011104/la338657_1.html

:)