Airbus ready to ace A380 if it fails to win EK order.

[Metro man]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airbus-a380/airbus-ready-to-phase-out-a380-if-fails-to-win-emirates-deal-sources-idUSKBN1EL11L

PARIS (Reuters) - Airbus is drawing up contingency plans to phase out production of the world’s largest jetliner, the A380 superjumbo, if it fails to win a key order from Dubai’s Emirates, three people familiar with the matter said.

The moment of truth for the slow-selling airliner looms after just 10 years in service and leaves one of Europe’s most visible international symbols hanging by a thread, despite a major airline investment in new cabins unveiled this month.

“If there is no Emirates deal, Airbus will start the process of ending A380 production,” a person briefed on the plans said. A supplier added such a move was logical due to weak demand.

Airbus and Emirates declined to comment. Airbus also declined to say how many people work on the project.

Any shutdown is expected to be gradual, allowing Airbus to produce orders it has in hand, mainly from Emirates.

It has enough orders to last until early next decade at current production rates, according to a Reuters analysis.

The A380 was developed at a cost of 11 billion euros to carry some 500 people and challenge the reign of the Boeing 747.

But demand for these four-engined goliaths has fallen as airlines choose smaller twin-engined models, which are easier to fill and cheaper to maintain.
Emirates, however, has been a strong believer in the A380 and is easily the largest customer with total orders of 142 aircraft, of which it has taken just over 100.

Talks between Airbus and Emirates over a new order for 36 superjumbos worth $16 billion broke down at the Dubai Airshow last month. Negotiations are said to have resumed, but there are no visible signs that a deal is imminent.

Although airlines such as British Airways have expressed interest in the A380, Airbus is reluctant to keep factories open without the certainty that a bulk Emirates order would provide.

Emirates, for its part, wants a guarantee that Airbus will keep production going for a decade to protect its investment.

A decision to cancel would mark a rupture between Airbus and one of its largest customers and tie Emirates’ future growth to recent Boeing orders. European sources say that reflects growing American influence in the Gulf under President Donald Trump, but U.S. and UAE industry sources deny politics are involved.

There are also potential hurdles to a deal over engine choices and after-sales support.

SAFETY NET

Yet if talks succeed, European sources say there is a glimmer of hope for the double-deck jet, which Airbus says will become more popular with airlines due to congestion.

Singapore Airlines, which first introduced the A380 to passengers in 2007, showcased an $850 million cabin re-design this month and expressed confidence in the model’s future.

Airbus hopes to use an Emirates order to stabilise output and establish a safety net from which to attract A380 sales to other carriers, but has ruled out trying to do this the other way round, industry sources said.

As of the end of November, Airbus had won orders for 317 A380s and delivered 221, leaving 96 unfilled orders.

But based on airlines’ intentions or finances, 47 of those are unlikely to be delivered, according to industry sources, which halves the number of jets in play.

Airbus needs to sell at least another 30 to keep lines open for 10 years and possibly more to justify the price concessions likely to be demanded by any new buyers.

To bridge the gap, Airbus plans to cut output to six a year beyond 2019, from 12 in 2018 and 8 in 2019, even if it means producing at a loss, Reuters recently reported.

Chief Operating Officer Fabrice Bregier confirmed this month Airbus was looking at cutting output to 6-7 a year.

If Airbus does decide to wind down production, some believe Emirates will ask Airbus to deliver the remaining 41 it has on order and then keep most A380s in service as long as possible.

Even so, some A380s are likely to be heading for scrap.

Reporting by Tim Hepher; Editing by Mark Potter
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
#BUSINESS NEWSDECEMBER 27, 2017 / 10:29 PM / UP

[Dropp the Pilot]

Monsieur Hubris, may I introduce Monsieur Nemesis?

What a pointless squandering of capital and talent this entire exercise has been.

[TURIN]

Not really. Its a great ride. Smoothest and quietest airliner I've ever flown on.

[jolihokistix]

"ready to ace" = ready to axe?

[sealear]

I'm more worried about what EK is going to do with 150 odd of these things when they reach the end of their lifespan?

[yardman]

Return most of them to the lessor.

[glofish]

And that's the real reason for the controversy. No one in his right mind would want to be a lessor for this relict no more, least AB themselves! EK could buy them on their own, but know better than anyone else why not, even if it was for the ridiculous dumping price they got the first lot (once again, thank you European taxpayer).

[sealear]

Ah ok thanks for clearing that up.

[nolimitholdem]

Not really. Its a great ride. Smoothest and quietest airliner I've ever flown on.

I heard there was this plane called the "Concorde" once, was apparently the fastest airliner ever operated. It cost lots and lots of money to develop, and the people who made it and operated it were very very proud of it.

I don't believe it's in service anymore. Something about economics or whatever.

[Bus Driver Man]

Not really. Its a great ride. Smoothest and quietest airliner I've ever flown on.
Designing and producing the smoothest and quietest airplane doesn't guarantee a succes story. It's a fact that Airbus is far from being break-even with the A380 and as long as no-one else is interested in buying them, the potential A380 life-saving NEO engines and PLUS wingtips will never be produced.

It's a useful aircraft for congested airports where slots are hard to get, but is it worth the high investment to get those extra seats which have a high operating cost?
It would probably make more sense for Airbus to focus on stretching the A350 to compete with the B777X.

[atakacs]

Concorde was in a very, very different category in may ways. Yet I still believe that revenue was covering operational costs when it was axed (and every effort made to insure it would never fly again - I'm not sure what was the impetus for that but this is not the topic at hand here).

As for the 380 I am sure it is a very profitable aircraft on the "right" connection (ie when full). How good of a job Emirates does on this is anyone's guess... Any yes it is a very nice ride passenger wise.

We are witnessing a poker game between Emirates and Airbus - future will tell who will flinch first !

[cerbus]

Yes the Concorde was an entirely different animal. It was paid for by the taxpayers and given to BA and AF for free and the Airlines still couldn’t make it turn a profit.
When it burns as much fuel as a 747 but carries 3 1/2 times LESS pax it’s tough to make it work especially when you are route limited and do not enjoy economies of scale.

[Jet II]

As for the 380 I am sure it is a very profitable aircraft on the "right" connection (ie when full).


I'd love to see the figures for seat yield as when the 380 came into service the guys on the Line were shocked at how much more fuel it used than the 777 for the same route - and it had to leave behind freight.

I suspect that the number of routes where the 380 is a clear winner over a twin jet is extremely limited (much like Concorde) which probably explains the lack of orders from airlines around the globe.

[Schnowzer]

We all know the Trip wins hands down on direct operating costs. The value proposition has nothing to do with those operating costs but rather slots.

The average 380 carries 150 pax more than the Trip so if the 380 were to replace the Trip into London everyday, Emirates would lose nearly 1,000,000 passengers/year. Or need 4 extra slots and 6 more aircraft, 60 crews, support etc. etc.

[Odins Raven]

We all know the Trip wins hands down on direct operating costs. The value proposition has nothing to do with those operating costs but rather slots.

The average 380 carries 150 pax more than the Trip so if the 380 were to replace the Trip into London everyday, Emirates would lose nearly 1,000,000 passengers/year. Or need 4 extra slots and 6 more aircraft, 60 crews, support etc. etc.

When the 380 was originally being mooted, wasn’t this the objective of the aircraft - translatlantic shuttling between slot-constrained major airports? It does that job VERY well.

The problem is that more and more airlines are exploring point to point services rather than hub and spoke. The modern less-patient pax wants convenience as well as low fares. The likes of a 787/350 can do that.

When EK ordered 120 of these behemoths, I don’t think it was out of arrogance or ego, just a lack of foresight to see the amount of competition in the region and with far eastern carriers linking Europe and Asia.

I’d be interested to know how many are leased from non-Dubai Companies and how many are actually owned by the airline/Dubai - if it’s mostly overseas lessors then I’d be worried more for them than EK!

[glofish]

When the 380 was originally being mooted, wasn’t this the objective of the aircraft - translatlantic shuttling between slot-constrained major airports? It does that job VERY well.

True, but this objective did not allow enough units to be sold to get a break-even. Airbus therefore tried to lure operators into believing that it could do just as well in competing with twins on all routes by their sheer pax number, especially by implementing more high revenue pax (you know, the ones that pay Y, get upgraded and drunk at the bar ....)

The problem is that more and more airlines are exploring point to point services rather than hub and spoke. The modern less-patient pax wants convenience as well as low fares. The likes of a 787/350 can do that.

They are not 'exploring' that. It was Boeing's antithesis to the above since the beginning and most operators apparently made a better assessment of the future than EK and AB.

When EK ordered 120 of these behemoths, I don’t think it was out of arrogance or ego, just a lack of foresight to see the amount of competition in the region and with far eastern carriers linking Europe and Asia.

You may call it lack of foresight, i however call it arrogance when you belittle the competition, like Timmy did when pretending that they were less skilfully managed in not going for the dugong. Just as i call it arrogance when AAR boasted on an interview that EK needed even bigger airframes, because when 'we open the doors, they flock in'.

[notapilot15]

We all know the Trip wins hands down on direct operating costs. The value proposition has nothing to do with those operating costs but rather slots.

The average 380 carries 150 pax more than the Trip so if the 380 were to replace the Trip into London everyday, Emirates would lose nearly 1,000,000 passengers/year. Or need 4 extra slots and 6 more aircraft, 60 crews, support etc. etc.

That is assuming 380s always have 100% load factor.

[Jet II]

We all know the Trip wins hands down on direct operating costs. The value proposition has nothing to do with those operating costs but rather slots.

The average 380 carries 150 pax more than the Trip so if the 380 were to replace the Trip into London everyday, Emirates would lose nearly 1,000,000 passengers/year. Or need 4 extra slots and 6 more aircraft, 60 crews, support etc. etc.

But on the London route when it went all 380 EK had to lay on a freighter to to take in the cargo that didnt fit on the 380 (unlike the 777). What London does have are the premium passengers to support the operation (unlike a lot of other destinations).

The yield calculations must be very interesting

[GoreTex]

Jet II,
dont forget EK had to block 100 seats to make it to LAX, DFW and IAH

[Schnowzer]

That is a load of bunk put about by the Boeing brigade. The 380 carries 3/4 of the 777-300 cargo and flies full to all those destinations if they sell the seats.
Jet II,
dont forget EK had to block 100 seats to make it to LAX, DFW and IAH

[General Dogsbody]

Jet II,
dont forget EK had to block 100 seats to make it to LAX, DFW and IAH

Incorrect, no blocked seats on the 380 TO of FROM those destinations!

[recceguy]

dont forget EK had to block 100 seats to make it to LAX, DFW and IAH

Coming from the same sources as WMD in 2003 .....:rolleyes:

[777-Up]

Given the previous investment & government support, I'd be surprised to see the A380 program cancelled. Manufacturer is making good money on other programs & there's still a reasonable chance demand for the machine will pick up.

Needs to cut fuel burn by 15-20%, which is technically possible today, with larger winglets & geared turbofans.

[Odins Raven]

True, but this objective did not allow enough units to be sold to get a break-even. Airbus therefore tried to lure operators into believing that it could do just as well in competing with twins on all routes by their sheer pax number, especially by implementing more high revenue pax (you know, the ones that pay Y, get upgraded and drunk at the bar ....)



They are not 'exploring' that. It was Boeing's antithesis to the above since the beginning and most operators apparently made a better assessment of the future than EK and AB.



You may call it lack of foresight, i however call it arrogance when you belittle the competition, like Timmy did when pretending that they were less skilfully managed in not going for the dugong. Just as i call it arrogance when AAR boasted on an interview that EK needed even bigger airframes, because when 'we open the doors, they flock in'.

I’m not an Airbus lover, and I’m actually a career Boeing guy. I was just pointing out that the 380 does some things well, in that niche market. I just think it’s silly when a bunch of professionals all getting paid the same irrespective of type flown, start arguing A vs B. It’s almost like some management trolls deliberately come on here starting that argument to distract from the real issues ;-)

By the way I do agree about the arrogance of AAR and I doubt any pilot of any nationality in EK would defend his actions.

[glofish]

I’m not an Airbus lover

...same here and for that matter not overly enthusiastic about Boeing either ...

I was just pointing out that the 380 does some things well, in that niche market

... and i agreed with you ...

I just think it’s silly when a bunch of professionals all getting paid the same irrespective of type flown, start arguing A vs B

... so you're saying that we should only discuss our prime working tool if paid less than the others??
We're never asked about what we as professional end users think would be the best tool, we might not be experts on all the aspects, true, but we might give some valuable inputs. However the outcome of wrong airframe on wrong route decisions will always trickle down the food chain and be visible on our pay cheque. So then please, dear Odin, allow us at least to talk about that on a aviation rumour forum. Or give us your definition of the appropriate themes we dare bringing up on here!:ugh:

[donpizmeov]

Gloie do the 70 blocked y class seats each night from ADL to DXB, or the 40 blocked y class seats from DXB to DAL each day, (and it's more blocked in summer time) have any effect on our pay cheque?
The 772lr burns more fuel per seat than the 380. So I guess that ain't too good for the pay cheque either. This will improve when they all change to two class though I guess.

[glofish]

don

Check Trips, it's not as dramatic. ADL no blockage the next weeks, IAH and DFW 20 seats, MCO 30. But you're right, the T7 has its limitations. It delivers the promised performance nicely though, but EK simply takes it further than designed, therefore some blocked seats. But that's what i mentioned with wrong airframe for wrong destinations: It was not constrained to Airbus! The difference is that a T7 will not punish you as much as a 380 when not full, just as a 330 will punish you even less. It all comes down to what i always said (and the dugong fans never gave me credit for): The 380 has its profitable routes, but not as many as EK thought and Airbus pretended.
A healthy mix gives each airframe a reasonable chance to be profitable. Therefore i welcome the 787 order over more and too many dugongs.

[Jet II]

Given the previous investment & government support, I'd be surprised to see the A380 program cancelled. Manufacturer is making good money on other programs & there's still a reasonable chance demand for the machine will pick up.


Not sure about that, only this week Korean announced that they were parking up their 380 fleet, Malaysian are doing the same. For Airbus to invest an awful lot more money in a project that is already in the red I think they would like to have a few more orders than 35 from EK.

On the bright side, EK must be getting a stonking deal on the price of each airframe, which also factor's into the yield equation.

[777-Up]

Nobody is sure. Nobody can be until it happens, or not. It's likely part of negotiations.

Manufacturers don't 'leak' info like that, unnecessarily, without an objective.

Lots of other machines to fly if the tap is shut off. My money is on the line staying open.

[GoreTex]

Incorrect, no blocked seats on the 380 TO of FROM those destinations!

I tried to be sarcastic, I heard that story every day from the 777 guys when EK announced that the 380 will take over the LAX route

[General Dogsbody]

I tried to be sarcastic, I heard that story every day from the 777 guys when EK announced that the 380 will take over the LAX route

I think the 777 Guys started the rumor saying 50 seats and it grew from there...

Either way its not true

[donpizmeov]

Actually GD, Goretex is well aware of this, and also is aware of how the 777 was blocking seats to LAX. He is camelier of the camels from Too Loose. He fully knows how much feed they need, how much they can carry, how far they can go, and is also very good at ensuring they don't throw a shoe mid journey. Perhaps a sarcasm header is needed from now on?

[notapilot15]

Why is so much confusion on blocked seats? Is this a successful misinformation campaign by management?

[saviboy]

Yes the Concorde was an entirely different animal. It was paid for by the taxpayers and given to BA and AF for free and the Airlines still couldn’t make it turn a profit.
When it burns as much fuel as a 747 but carries 3 1/2 times LESS pax it’s tough to make it work especially when you are route limited and do not enjoy economies of scale.
Not sure if air France ever made money with Concorde but BA certainly did for most of its operational time.

[bvcu]

another angle with EK is DUBAI , if there had been a much smaller 380 fleet the expansion would have virtually halted due to capacity at the main hub ? Perhaps if DWC had been developed on the original timescale then it might not be such a big problem. Common sense dictates slot restricted airports require fewer bigger aircraft . Unlike LHR which wants a new runway having recently allowed turboprops back in with hordes of narrow bodies:):)

[4runner]

Coming from the same sources as WMD in 2003 .....:rolleyes:

And WMD has what to do with what??? If you draw arcs with your tangents, remind me not to accept a circle to land with you.

[speed2height]

The Fuel per seat figures for the A380 (ie all seats occupied) over an 6000nm ULR are 8% worse than the 777-300ER.

The 777-9x and the 787-9 are both more efficient then either of the above. These new aircraft make it hard for anyone to buy and operate new A380's. The 787-9 burns 27% less fuel per km per seat than the A380.

A380 (3 class) - 3.16 per 100km (544 pax)
B777-300ER - 2.91 liters per 100km (365 pax) +8%
B777-9x - 2.85 liters per 100km (395 pax) + 11%
B787-9 -2.49 liters per 100km (294 pax) + 27%

If you can fill a A380 with pax - go for it, if you can't... park it and take a Boeing!

[glofish]

speed2height

Be careful, you're rattling a very holy, almost untouchable bush .....

[donpizmeov]

Are there many 364 seat three class 773s? Sounds like a fun flight.

[voice_of_peace]

AB have no reason to complain really. They have played a good hand with the 330,340 and 380. Those maint contracts and spares will keep them in good stead for decades to come.
If anyone should be crying it is Boeing who built the tractor/Cripple/John Deere 777. God knows they don’t make money on that ship once it has sailed. Most reliable money maker ever made. Not an AB or B debate. Flown both. Each great in their own way. Just observation.

[greenfields]

Gloie do the 70 blocked y class seats each night from ADL to DXB

Don, I don't know where you heard or who told you that, but it is complete and utter rubbish.

[donpizmeov]

Wish you would tell the station. Left behind with 70 empty seats. Payload restriction they said.

[Visual Procedures]

70 blocked seats and not getting on because of payload restrictions are 2 completely different animals.

Blocked seats mean the aeroplane probably can't do it, which to/from ADL they both certainly can.

Payload restrictions means the company chose to uplift cargo rather than a standby staff traveler. Unfortunately the 30t of 'meat' has the highest onload priority..

[fatbus]

Oh really?

[Monarch Man]

Don, when we’re you left behind in ADL? up too about 35C the tractor can take off at max gross out of ADL on 23 and 05. Forecast fog perhaps in DXB requiring extra fuel uplift? or more likely the precious meat rather than staff me thinks. I’ve never been performance limited out of ADL, which means you can take a full pax load and about 15 tonnes of cargo for a fairly standard ADL-DXB sector.

[pilotguy1222]

That is a load of bunk put about by the Boeing brigade. The 380 carries 3/4 of the 777-300 cargo and flies full to all those destinations if they sell the seats.

I believe that was in reference to the seats the 777 had to block on those flights.

interestingly on the fuel cost. Lets over exaggerate the fuel used by the 380 and under exaggerate on the 777-300ER on a DXB-JFK (2 month advanced purchase with 8 days before return) Lowest ticket price used.

380 - 200 tons @ current prices of $640 per ton. $128,000
399 x $1377 = $549,423
76 x $6030 = $458,280
12 x $12404 = $150,756
$1,158,459 - $128,000 = $1,030,459

777 - 90 tons @ same. $57,600
310 x $1377 = $426,870
42 x $6030 = $253,260
8 x $12404 = $99,232
$779,362 - $57,600 = 721,762

$308,697 is a substantial difference per flight, and that is with numbers skewed in benefit of the 777. Plus, if EK operates both types on the same route, you willpay more for a 380 ticket. Clearly biz seats are where most of the money difference is made.

The 777X promises to be an unbeatable machine, but with the ego in the bouncy castle, will it replace with 380 entirely? Will it have a bar/lounge. When business class and 1st class passengers fly from Japan to Seoul(example) to fly on the 380, EK would be stupid ( oh wait) to ignore those high yield passengers.

Eh, here is hoping I will not be in Dubai anymore when this all happens to find out the answers.

[harry the cod]

Those figures make many assumptions.

Firstly, they assume that the flight will be full of passengers paying optimal fares. Throw in some discounted economy tickets to fill the void and some Skyward's upgrades into both premium cabins and it starts to look less attractive. The maths also doesn't include the revenue created by an additional 15+ tonnes of cargo that could be carried by the B777.

Secondly, while highlighting the profit, you fail to mention the costs. Higher overflight fees and the increased cost of landing and handling. Those 10 extra cabin crew need to be factored in, as well as many other obvious costs such as twice the engine costs in maintenance/engineers. Finally, the higher cost of purchasing and leasing needs to be addressed as this effects the bottom line too.

There is no doubt that this amazing machine can be economical when assigned to high density routes and into key airports. However, the question remains whether the number we have in service, and still to come, will be detrimental to the future of EK. Airbus will not commit to keep the production line open unless Emirates guarantees a future order. Emirates will not guarantee a future order unless Airbus commits to keep the production line going for a minimum of the next ten years. When aircraft cease production, not only do parts and spares become harder to source and more expensive, but the manufacturers desire to support such obsolete equipment is diminished.

Whichever way this standoff goes, one of the participants will be left with egg on their face.

Harry

Edited to agree with comment below!

[FlyingStone]

AB have no reason to complain really. They have played a good hand with the 330,340 and 380. Those maint contracts and spares will keep them in good stead for decades to come.

How much revenue in terms of maintenance contracts and spares does a parked/stored aircraft bring? I really doubt Airbus predicted A380s will be start to be parked after 10 years.

[fatbus]

Another ek self bashing !

[The Range]

More info on the A-380

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-15/airbus-plays-chicken-with-one-of-its-biggest-customers?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=bd&utm_campaign=headline&cmpId=yhoo.headline&yptr=yahoo

[azhkman]

More info on the A-380

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-15/airbus-plays-chicken-with-one-of-its-biggest-customers?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=bd&utm_campaign=headline&cmpId=yhoo.headline&yptr=yahoo

What does the author mean at the end when he says he's halved the list price because customers don't pay for it?

[springbok449]

Payload restrictions out of ADL was never uncommon as EK often sent cargo across from MEL by road as the MEL sector was alway much busier than the ADL sector.

[pilotguy1222]

What does the author mean at the end when he says he's halved the list price because customers don't pay for it?

Just stating that for the article, he took the 380 list price and cut it in half, because no airline ever pays list price. Plus, the more your order, the bigger the discount.

[Deep and fast]

Having flown as a pax 4 sectors in a week on the A380, A350, 777 and 787 I can happily say the 380 was the best for passenger experience but that is only part of the story....
Sitting against the ****ter bulkhead on the 787 for 5 hours nearly killed my brain!

[TURIN]

I have to agree.
The Whale is the most comfortable ride i've ever had in an aeroplane.

[sealear]

Have you ever sat in the last economy row of the 380 near the toilets? Not so great. J class, different story!!

[skytrax]

36 more ordered today
Keep discovering

[Simplythebeast]

BREAKING Emirates to order 36 Airbus A380s worth US$ 16 billion | AIRLIVE.net (http://www.airlive.net/breaking-emirates-to-order-36-airbus-a380s-worth-us-16-billion/)

[Emma Royds]

To be strictly correct, it’s 20 firm orders and 16 options.

[atakacs]

What model is this order for? I guess 380plus? Is the neo still considered?

[donpizmeov]

Poor Gloie.

[Jack330]

Looks like a death sentence for ek ! Who knows, there must be something behind

[The Outlaw]

I wonder who they'll get tp fly them?

[Joker11]

So no profit share this year?

[Dixi]

I wonder who they'll get tp fly them?

Don't worry,The unmentionable has plenty of pilots ready to join

[4runner]

Airbus didn’t do itself any favours by designing a shiny jet with one mission. It can’t do cargo. Maybe one day, they’ll reinforce the floors or an STC will be generated for this. In the meantime, it’s a very niche airplane.

[flatfootsam]

The freighter was in development. The center section was manufacturered and all of the EIS work was more or less completed. It was the HGW version of the 380-900, the 1000 pax version, the -700 being the ULR version.

Fuselage loading was a complex problem. The early 380’s in development had no load allowance in the fdw class C cargo compartment due to load limitations;this was subsequently modified to a 2 g limit...miles off the CS25 requirements, but extrapolate that to the freighter loading issues with two decks and it was a nightmare in the making.

The ovoid fuselage, in conjunction with the floor loadings required resulted in unusual fuselage bending with the myriad of load requirements from UPS and FedEx, (SIA too from memory). A structures engineering problem with little or no leeway on weight increases with the circuitous catch 22 program management.

Can you fix it?
Yes
What’s the solution?
Reinforcing the structure
Does that mean more weight?
Yes
You can’t increase the weight (because my annual bonus is tied to the weight reduction program). Find another way
There is no other way
Excuse me...sound of head being buried in the sand

The 6 tonnes of titanium required for the F also contributed to the death knell of the variant as a huge amount of the global supply was purchased in advance by the Seattle aeroplane company and supply lines were looking dodgy.

A retrofit F version, a P to F conversion is possible, but for low load density, high volume cargo. The 380’s parked up are only half lifed, someone will come up with a bright idea...horse movers, flying hospitals, flying shuttles in China...

[recceguy]

Regarding this EK order, the disappointment of some is such a pleasure to read... At this level, the hate of any Airbus product is pathologic !

Airbus Beats Boeing in 2017 Orders With Late Selling Spree | Fortune (http://fortune.com/2018/01/15/airbus-boeing-orders-2017/)