A380's Short Life
 

Is this the beginning of the end for the dugong?
http://tu.glgroup.com/7TOm6dDlp0SvJyfXkb3VEw>
Have a look at all the links within the artical. They all have the same general theme.
Crow.

Was speaking to an engineer in LAX recently who made the following comparison.

When a 747 400 lands it is met by one or sometimes two engineers.

When an A380 arrives it met by a team of between ten to fourteen engineers.

An orphan fleet with no second-hand market. [deleted]
Just as well he didn't order those those old technology triplers, imagine the financial position QF would be in!

Whilst not wishing to defend Dixon in any manner, the A380 was ordered by Strong.

Similar conditions economically were around in the '70's following the launch of the B747. And similar sentiment was made by media and commercial commentators, yet that aircraft is arguably the cornerstone of Boeing's success.

Not sure the A380 is dead yet.

The 747 will still be around the the dugong will be long gone.

As a Punter I like to fly point to point, I can't stand being hubbed through the east coast then the west coast of the US or Singapore.

The twin jet is the future of commercial aviation, just wait for the 777 and 737 replacements :}

I'd be taking those articles with a grain of salt as they appear very pro american

trent 972
 

Trent 972, my bad. Reference removed in original post.

It's coz the traditional big dickers have been outsized and need something else to cover their new found insecurity.

The future success of the A380 is directly related to "YIELD", when initially launched it was presented as a 550 seat 3 class aircraft, with tangible gains in increased revenue per seat mile, before service entry it had morphed into a 460-470 seat 3 class aircraft, with an approximate fuel burn of 12 tonnes/hour, versus 10 tonnes/hour for a 747-400 with 400'ish seats, the economic benefits initially touted are no longer there, once you factor in increased Air Nav charges, landing fees etc......time will tell, I can only assume that Boeings 747-8 will offer better potential "YIELD"....

I agree it is a Pro-American article. Boeing is also supported by big goverment contracts and when they don't go Boeing's way they get all upset and cry wolf(eg the 330 tanker).
The 747-8 freighter is the world leading freighter without a doubt, but I don't see the pax version enjoying the same commercial success. Boeing had the chance in the 90's to build the 747-500/600 but were to arrogant to believe airlines wanted it, and when Airbus started with the 380 program they still downplayed it.
It was only after the 380 became a reality that Boeing decided to revamp the Jumbo and publish some figures that poo-pooed the 380. At the end of the day the 747 is a great aircraft but its time has come and gone. The 380 is here it has had a slow and shaky start (so did the 747) but I believe when the world economic situation improves in the next few years airlines will need the 380.

There is no doubting the 777 is a fantastic bit of kit and that it was QFs (Dixon mainly) biggest mistake in not buying them, but as more airports reach capacity surely 2 380 flights rather than 2 777/747 flight will make sense.

The 380 is here and will be for a while.

The "GLG Expert Contributor" that writes those article is a well known ex-Airbus employee (Doug McVitie), and another a Boeing hatchet man (Saj Ahmad). Both have a well known anti-Airbus pro-Boeing writing styles.

The GLG Group put a disclaimer at the top of each article "Analyses are solely the work of the authors and have not been edited or endorsed by GLG."

The people use that forum and post anonymously as they would not get anywhere if they used their real names, the industry has already dropped their analysis as they lack objectivity.

When I travel to LA (Business Class) I always hope work puts me on the A380.

I'd rather travel on it than the 747. There is acres more room. Everything seems newer (probably because it is - this feeling may fade) and more reliable.

For now, as a customer, I know which one wins.

Er... no, not quite. Boeing recognised that the development costs of a super large aircraft would be a lot, they studied the market and voiced doubt about the viability of the SLA but still offered Airbus a chance to go 50/50 on a project, now for the 'arrogance', Airbus refused.

Boeing cancelled their project as they didn't see the market for it, Airbus thought they were producing a B747 replacement requiring similar numbers, but the 747 replacement was already out there in the various forms of the B777 and to a lesser extent the A330 and A340-500. The airlines that operate the A380 like it because it fills a relatively small niche market but that market isn't ever going to be big enough to make the A380 pay back what it owes. 200 sold, over 500 needed to break even.

Boeing offered a revamped B747 but at a fraction of the development cost of the A380 as they already had most of the tooling and a lot of similarity with the tried and tested B747 airframe. Just the size of the order book for the B787 show which way development is going and it isn't going the way of the White Elephant.

Thank you Charlie, you make my point for me. The A380 is perfect for the niche market that QF long haul and SQ long haul, on some routes, serve.

There is no doubting the A380's immense passenger appeal, or the fact that technically it is state of the art but commercially it is doomed.

Surely any half-decent business manager can turn that into $$$ ?

And yes, am witness myself to many people who actively seek the A380 out- and pay to do so.

I make sure my flights to the USA are booked on the dugong. The 747 can't compete from a passenger point-of-view.

But what is the diffference?
 

I am trying to see what is so different from a passenger viewpoint. All the passenger knows is seat width, seat pitch, entertainment sytem, meals & toilet availability. Actually, what else is there? Granted, newness and cleanliness are important but how many passengers think about that when booking flights?

A relative who recently did Sydney to London on a Singapore 380 was not even aware that he was on a "different" aircraft to the normal (yes, he is not as interested in aviation as us bloggers here)

I am of course referring to the area where most of the pax sit.

Not in economy there isn't. If anything, I think the new seat design actually limits the amount of effective leg room, making the 15 hours across the pacific more uncomfortable in QF economy on the 380 compared the 744.

"Granted, newness and cleanliness are important but how many passengers think about that when booking flights?"

Actually as much as it pains me to say it, I know about 10 earthlings who booked flights knowing they would be on the A380, not all of them flew with QF.