Jury Still Out on A380
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 5th Dimension
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jury Still Out on A380
Growing pains or fundamental flaws? The giant new A380 has had its share of problems, leading some to question whether its launch was premature. (EPA Photo)
Singapore. An engine blowout, smoke in the toilet and most recently, an alert of a possible problem with the rudder which is part of the aircraft's tail.
Dubbed the "new queen in the sky" when it made its grand debut in October 2007 with Singapore Airlines (SIA), the Airbus 380 superjumbo has been grabbing the headlines for all the wrong reasons lately.
On Nov 4 last year, a Qantas A-380 headed for Sydney made a U-turn to Changi Airport because of engine trouble six minutes after take-off.
All 459 passengers and crew on board escaped unhurt but the giant bird landed with a hole in one of its four Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engines after a mid-air explosion ripped off parts of the casing, raining debris over Batam.
The mishap triggered a massive probe led by Australian air safety regulators. Emergency engine checks and swops were done on not just Qantas' fleet but SIA's and Lufthansa's as well, both of which also power their A-380s with the Trent 900.
A design fault in the engine has been identified as the likely cause of the blowout.
Just as the dust was settling, another headline.
On an SIA A-380 flight from Hong Kong to Singapore on Jan 31, cabin crew reported the smell of smoke coming from one of the toilets.
There was no fire but on landing, engineers detected burn marks on the wiring below the toilet.
A week later: another SIA superjumbo in trouble, this time an aircraft sitting in Zurich preparing to depart for Singapore last Monday.
Before it could take off, crew members received a systems alert of a fault with the rudder control system. The plane was grounded for several days before the problem was fixed and the aircraft flown back to Singapore.
The glitches have left travelers wondering and worrying. Is there something terribly wrong with the double-decker jet or is the A-380 suffering from teething pains one would expect for any new aircraft type?
Experts we spoke to were inclined towards the latter. They added that while the hiccups have caused airlines and travelers much inconvenience, the probes into the incidents have so far not suggested that there could be serious safety flaws with the A-380.
Still, a few admitted it had crossed their minds that perhaps the extreme pressure Airbus was under to deliver an aircraft that was already two years behind schedule, could have led to a premature debut.
Kunal Sinha of consulting firm Frost & Sullivan said: "While it is not uncommon for new airplanes to have teething problems after entry into service, the frenetic pace of electronic system failures that have forced the grounding of the A-380 poses questions about the quality and maturity of the airplanes that have thus far been delivered."
He added: "Still we think this is all part of the learning curve and there is no reason to lose confidence in the safety and efficiency of the A-380."
David Chambers, regional vice-president (Asia-Pacific and India) for technology company Sabre Airline Solutions, said: "Both Airbus and Boeing have faced issues in the past when they have introduced a new aircraft so it's not surprising that there have been some challenges with the A-380."
Old-timers may remember that on Jan 21, 1970, the very first Boeing 747 commercial flight from New York to London had to be aborted when the aircraft, which was already on the runway, encountered engine overheating.
A plane switch and six hours later, the flight got off the ground.
Putting a new aircraft into service is challenging enough but more so for a machine as complicated as the A-380, experts said.
It is the biggest commercial jet ever built with a significant 25 per cent of the aircraft (by weight) made up of composite materials instead of the usual aluminium, to help cut weight and boost efficiency.
Other firsts: new-generation fuel-efficient engines, new production methods such as laser beam welding instead of manually fastened rivets to hold pieces together, state-of-the-art aerodynamics that, among other benefits, reduce drag which in turn reduces fuel consumption.
There is more: advanced on-board information systems that provide swifter troubleshooting and reduced maintenance costs.
Each A-380 has about 500km of wiring - the distance from Singapore to Ipoh - which drives, among other things, the in-flight entertainment systems.
The 43 aircraft now flying with five airlines - SIA, Qantas, Lufthansa, Emirates and Air France/KLM - have completed more than 24,500 flights and carried more than nine million passengers.
As more of the superjumbos take to the skies and Airbus and its partners continue to iron out the glitches, there should be fewer operational disruptions, experts said.
Still, what has happened so far will cost the European plane-maker dearly, they warned.
Already, the Qantas engine blowout has made a dent in the earnings of British engine giant Rolls-Royce, which said on Thursday that net profit slumped 73 per cent to £480 million (S$990 million) last year, partly because of costs linked to problems over the reliability of its aircraft engines.
Airbus has a far bigger problem, said Mr Shukor Yusof, an aviation expert at Standard & Poor's Equity Research.
After spending more than US$15 billion (S$20 billion) to design and build the A-380, it may never sell enough of the superjumbos to recover the investment, much less make a profit.
Demand has not taken off due to the changing market dynamics, he said, and the preference is clearly for mid-sized aircraft offering 250 to 350 seats.
Rising fuel prices is also not helping the four-engined aircraft.
Mr Shukor said: "And that's why despite a three-year delay, the Boeing 787 has not been severely affected by cancellations."
The aircraft with a capacity of between 210 and 290 seats depending on model and configuration is expected to enter into commercial service later this year.
Airlines have already ordered more than 800 of the aircraft and more than 500 Airbus 350s - another mid-sized plane that Airbus is now developing.
"How many for the A-380 since the October 2007 launch? 240," said Shukor, "and 90 of that is from Emirates which is almost 40 per cent of the total!"
Break even point for the A-380 is easily more than 450 planes, experts said.
The recent problems will just add to the woes of Airbus, which is already financially hard-pressed.
"Even before the economic crisis," Sinha, "the A-380 was clearly oversized and oversold. The programme was a bit doomed from the very beginning and the airplane is incompatible with today's air travel trends.
"On top of that, the current negative publicity has further downgraded the brand equity associated with Airbus and the A-380."
Shukor added: "This is an exceptional aircraft in terms of technology and dynamics but it has cost a lot for Airbus to develop. From a passenger perspective, I like the A-380 and consider it a success notwithstanding the Rolls-Royce engine fiasco and other teething problems. But from an investment perspective, the A-380 so far is a nightmare for Airbus."
Singapore. An engine blowout, smoke in the toilet and most recently, an alert of a possible problem with the rudder which is part of the aircraft's tail.
Dubbed the "new queen in the sky" when it made its grand debut in October 2007 with Singapore Airlines (SIA), the Airbus 380 superjumbo has been grabbing the headlines for all the wrong reasons lately.
On Nov 4 last year, a Qantas A-380 headed for Sydney made a U-turn to Changi Airport because of engine trouble six minutes after take-off.
All 459 passengers and crew on board escaped unhurt but the giant bird landed with a hole in one of its four Rolls-Royce Trent 900 engines after a mid-air explosion ripped off parts of the casing, raining debris over Batam.
The mishap triggered a massive probe led by Australian air safety regulators. Emergency engine checks and swops were done on not just Qantas' fleet but SIA's and Lufthansa's as well, both of which also power their A-380s with the Trent 900.
A design fault in the engine has been identified as the likely cause of the blowout.
Just as the dust was settling, another headline.
On an SIA A-380 flight from Hong Kong to Singapore on Jan 31, cabin crew reported the smell of smoke coming from one of the toilets.
There was no fire but on landing, engineers detected burn marks on the wiring below the toilet.
A week later: another SIA superjumbo in trouble, this time an aircraft sitting in Zurich preparing to depart for Singapore last Monday.
Before it could take off, crew members received a systems alert of a fault with the rudder control system. The plane was grounded for several days before the problem was fixed and the aircraft flown back to Singapore.
The glitches have left travelers wondering and worrying. Is there something terribly wrong with the double-decker jet or is the A-380 suffering from teething pains one would expect for any new aircraft type?
Experts we spoke to were inclined towards the latter. They added that while the hiccups have caused airlines and travelers much inconvenience, the probes into the incidents have so far not suggested that there could be serious safety flaws with the A-380.
Still, a few admitted it had crossed their minds that perhaps the extreme pressure Airbus was under to deliver an aircraft that was already two years behind schedule, could have led to a premature debut.
Kunal Sinha of consulting firm Frost & Sullivan said: "While it is not uncommon for new airplanes to have teething problems after entry into service, the frenetic pace of electronic system failures that have forced the grounding of the A-380 poses questions about the quality and maturity of the airplanes that have thus far been delivered."
He added: "Still we think this is all part of the learning curve and there is no reason to lose confidence in the safety and efficiency of the A-380."
David Chambers, regional vice-president (Asia-Pacific and India) for technology company Sabre Airline Solutions, said: "Both Airbus and Boeing have faced issues in the past when they have introduced a new aircraft so it's not surprising that there have been some challenges with the A-380."
Old-timers may remember that on Jan 21, 1970, the very first Boeing 747 commercial flight from New York to London had to be aborted when the aircraft, which was already on the runway, encountered engine overheating.
A plane switch and six hours later, the flight got off the ground.
Putting a new aircraft into service is challenging enough but more so for a machine as complicated as the A-380, experts said.
It is the biggest commercial jet ever built with a significant 25 per cent of the aircraft (by weight) made up of composite materials instead of the usual aluminium, to help cut weight and boost efficiency.
Other firsts: new-generation fuel-efficient engines, new production methods such as laser beam welding instead of manually fastened rivets to hold pieces together, state-of-the-art aerodynamics that, among other benefits, reduce drag which in turn reduces fuel consumption.
There is more: advanced on-board information systems that provide swifter troubleshooting and reduced maintenance costs.
Each A-380 has about 500km of wiring - the distance from Singapore to Ipoh - which drives, among other things, the in-flight entertainment systems.
The 43 aircraft now flying with five airlines - SIA, Qantas, Lufthansa, Emirates and Air France/KLM - have completed more than 24,500 flights and carried more than nine million passengers.
As more of the superjumbos take to the skies and Airbus and its partners continue to iron out the glitches, there should be fewer operational disruptions, experts said.
Still, what has happened so far will cost the European plane-maker dearly, they warned.
Already, the Qantas engine blowout has made a dent in the earnings of British engine giant Rolls-Royce, which said on Thursday that net profit slumped 73 per cent to £480 million (S$990 million) last year, partly because of costs linked to problems over the reliability of its aircraft engines.
Airbus has a far bigger problem, said Mr Shukor Yusof, an aviation expert at Standard & Poor's Equity Research.
After spending more than US$15 billion (S$20 billion) to design and build the A-380, it may never sell enough of the superjumbos to recover the investment, much less make a profit.
Demand has not taken off due to the changing market dynamics, he said, and the preference is clearly for mid-sized aircraft offering 250 to 350 seats.
Rising fuel prices is also not helping the four-engined aircraft.
Mr Shukor said: "And that's why despite a three-year delay, the Boeing 787 has not been severely affected by cancellations."
The aircraft with a capacity of between 210 and 290 seats depending on model and configuration is expected to enter into commercial service later this year.
Airlines have already ordered more than 800 of the aircraft and more than 500 Airbus 350s - another mid-sized plane that Airbus is now developing.
"How many for the A-380 since the October 2007 launch? 240," said Shukor, "and 90 of that is from Emirates which is almost 40 per cent of the total!"
Break even point for the A-380 is easily more than 450 planes, experts said.
The recent problems will just add to the woes of Airbus, which is already financially hard-pressed.
"Even before the economic crisis," Sinha, "the A-380 was clearly oversized and oversold. The programme was a bit doomed from the very beginning and the airplane is incompatible with today's air travel trends.
"On top of that, the current negative publicity has further downgraded the brand equity associated with Airbus and the A-380."
Shukor added: "This is an exceptional aircraft in terms of technology and dynamics but it has cost a lot for Airbus to develop. From a passenger perspective, I like the A-380 and consider it a success notwithstanding the Rolls-Royce engine fiasco and other teething problems. But from an investment perspective, the A-380 so far is a nightmare for Airbus."
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once the aircraft type "settles", it will do for aviation in the future what the 747 did in the 1970's.
It will become the clear money spinner for QF, SQ and EK, amongst others, providing a true 4 class offering without restrictions.
It will become the clear money spinner for QF, SQ and EK, amongst others, providing a true 4 class offering without restrictions.
Hey PittsS2A,
I assume your expert insight stems from years of actual airbus operation that has equipped you with the knowledge to pass judgement on a topic you know something about?
I assume your expert insight stems from years of actual airbus operation that has equipped you with the knowledge to pass judgement on a topic you know something about?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not so sure. By this time into production a lot more B747s were sold than there are A380s.The B747 was a quantum leap in capacity even in the early days of an upper deck lounge/bar. The B707 and DC8 was about a 140 seater in airline 2 class configuration, the B747 was 400+. The figures were dramatically different.
I am yet to be convinced that a once daily A380 service between city pairs will be as saleable for premium pax and freight, as twice or three times a day with a B777.
As a pax, even down the back, I will pay extra for the ability to arrive and exit the aircraft without half the world being with me.
Wunwing
I am yet to be convinced that a once daily A380 service between city pairs will be as saleable for premium pax and freight, as twice or three times a day with a B777.
As a pax, even down the back, I will pay extra for the ability to arrive and exit the aircraft without half the world being with me.
Wunwing
As a pax, even down the back, I will pay extra for the ability to arrive and exit the aircraft without half the world being with me.
In a 777 you would have more people in front of you to disembark, if you were seated up the back.
An A380 is basically two A330s flying in formation. When they board and disembark, they process the two decks via two different air bridges. So in fact, you are quite wrong. Think about it!
Where it will get you however, is being processed through our very efficient customs and border protection facilities
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am yet to be convinced that a once daily A380 service between city pairs will be as saleable for premium pax and freight, as twice or three times a day with a B777.
As a pax, even down the back, I will pay extra for the ability to arrive and exit the aircraft without half the world being with me.
Main deck has 346 pax, faster than a 744.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sombrero CA.
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Questions
Why is the Qantas pax config on an A380 only marginally higher than a 747?
Is the range of an A380 less than a 747?
If so by how much ?
How do the fuel burn rates of an A380 compare to a 747?
How do the cruise speeds compare?
How do the payloads compare?
Is the range of an A380 less than a 747?
If so by how much ?
How do the fuel burn rates of an A380 compare to a 747?
How do the cruise speeds compare?
How do the payloads compare?
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is the Qantas pax config on an A380 only marginally higher than a 747?
Financially, 1 business class seat yields 6 economy, without the weight penalty.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mostly at home
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For equivalent configurations, the A380 carries almost 50% more passengers.
A380 - 450
B747 - 310
Yes, we can work the numbers to get much more than that on a 747, but then we can do the same for an A380. For the premium market, those are the numbers.
The A380 has about the same range as a B747-400ER, cruise speed about 0.84 - 0.85
Each of the types has their advantages and disadvantages - depends what you want to use them for.
N
A380 - 450
B747 - 310
Yes, we can work the numbers to get much more than that on a 747, but then we can do the same for an A380. For the premium market, those are the numbers.
The A380 has about the same range as a B747-400ER, cruise speed about 0.84 - 0.85
Each of the types has their advantages and disadvantages - depends what you want to use them for.
N
They keep claiming .85 for the 380 but the 744 overtakes it every night on the race to Europe. What it does have is a beautiful wing and gets up high and out of the way very quickly and allows the 747 free passage underneath. Interesting to note that Airway L759 (Bay of Bengal) has a .84 or more speed restriction on it now.(no slower than .84 allowed). The real 'roadblocks' that 330 thing is out on another track. Maybe there is a God, the start of 'Bus-lanes'?
I had my first pax ride on the 380 recently, have to admit, much quieter than the 744, very nice. With a 330 though it's quicker by car.
I had my first pax ride on the 380 recently, have to admit, much quieter than the 744, very nice. With a 330 though it's quicker by car.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Heaven
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still like This tho'
Boeing overtakes Airbus on airline orders
Been a long time(if ever) since I operated on a Qantas 747 with total pax config of 310
Been a long time(if ever) since I operated on a Qantas 747 with total pax config of 310
Last edited by DEFCON4; 14th Feb 2011 at 02:30.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mostly at home
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BG
You answered your own question. .85 at F360 is slower than .85 at F300
Interestingly, the A380 guys think the same thing - they climb up high and out of the lower level battles. Seems the situation suits both sides.
N
You answered your own question. .85 at F360 is slower than .85 at F300
Interestingly, the A380 guys think the same thing - they climb up high and out of the lower level battles. Seems the situation suits both sides.
N
B747 - 310
Yes, we can work the numbers to get much more than that on a 747, but then we can do the same for an A380.
Yes, we can work the numbers to get much more than that on a 747, but then we can do the same for an A380.
Quite a lot of people!