Emirates Grows in 2009/New Destinations Merged
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: BCN
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiley:
Emirates seeks A380 and 747-8 weight control
okey, it's more than 1 year old stuff, but still, my internal sources said there are still problems. "We are very pleased to see that there is a definitive weight-reduction programme over the next few years to reduce the manufacturer empty weight by a few tonnes." - says Tim Clark in this article.
i was told that footrests are removed on Economy Class because of this issue.
and now, EK is considering to remove the second water tank for First Class showers because there are less consumption as predicted. of course, more landing weight = more tax to be paid.
i don't know if these rumours are true or not, that's why i asked.
z
Emirates seeks A380 and 747-8 weight control
okey, it's more than 1 year old stuff, but still, my internal sources said there are still problems. "We are very pleased to see that there is a definitive weight-reduction programme over the next few years to reduce the manufacturer empty weight by a few tonnes." - says Tim Clark in this article.
i was told that footrests are removed on Economy Class because of this issue.
and now, EK is considering to remove the second water tank for First Class showers because there are less consumption as predicted. of course, more landing weight = more tax to be paid.
i don't know if these rumours are true or not, that's why i asked.
z
of course, more landing weight = more tax to be paid.
Less DOW doesn't mean more landing weight, just more available useful load.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: South of North
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have also heard a rumor that EK's insistance at putting 1st and bix class on the upper deck is causing structural issues. As is having the shower and E&E bay in close proximity.
Apparantly the other 380 operators are not having anywhere near the number of problems.
Apparantly the other 380 operators are not having anywhere near the number of problems.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: BCN
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
more weight.... and more fuel to burn.
as far as i know, you have to pay by weight (or categories of that), so apart of fuel consumption airlines want to reduce because of that as well, i suppose.
anyway, i think it's not by accident that they want reduce weight... yep, maybe it's because less dry operating weight -> more load, but i really feel it's for fuel saving.
z
p.s.: i did a small research now, and it seems, according to several forums and articles, that fuel consumption expectations met the practice, after months of operation! cool.
as far as i know, you have to pay by weight (or categories of that), so apart of fuel consumption airlines want to reduce because of that as well, i suppose.
anyway, i think it's not by accident that they want reduce weight... yep, maybe it's because less dry operating weight -> more load, but i really feel it's for fuel saving.
z
p.s.: i did a small research now, and it seems, according to several forums and articles, that fuel consumption expectations met the practice, after months of operation! cool.
Last edited by zerozol; 24th Feb 2009 at 21:11.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: In the CRC
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was article in one of the newspapers a few months ago in which Tim Clark said that he wanted the A380 DOW down a few tonnes so that the aircraft would be able to operate the DXB - US West Coast flights.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: BCN
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Air passenger traffic across the Middle East has been hit by the economic crisis as fewer travellers take to the skies, a report by aviation chiefs reveals"
Middle East air traffic falls amid global slump - Travel & Hospitality - ArabianBusiness.com
i really hope that we will hit the bottom soon and then restart to be well...
Middle East air traffic falls amid global slump - Travel & Hospitality - ArabianBusiness.com
i really hope that we will hit the bottom soon and then restart to be well...
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Headline
The headline of the article is incorrect- probably written by a sub-editor without a clue.
If you actually read the article, it says traffic growth declined to 3.6% That is, ME traffic grew, but the rate of growth was less than last year.
I suppose if they had gone with the headline "ME air traffic grows despite global turmoil" it wouldn't have fitted in with the herd-mentality pervading journalism today. It's almost enough to turn one into a conspiracy theorist...
If you actually read the article, it says traffic growth declined to 3.6% That is, ME traffic grew, but the rate of growth was less than last year.
I suppose if they had gone with the headline "ME air traffic grows despite global turmoil" it wouldn't have fitted in with the herd-mentality pervading journalism today. It's almost enough to turn one into a conspiracy theorist...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: BCN
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to ferris:
with your words, "if you actually read" my post, you could see i never said ME air traffic decreases...
anyway, 3.6% growth facing with last years respective 10and something percent is not really a good sign. besides that, you're absolutely right about journalism - i know it from the inside.
but this phenomen doesn't change the facts (percentages)...
with your words, "if you actually read" my post, you could see i never said ME air traffic decreases...
anyway, 3.6% growth facing with last years respective 10and something percent is not really a good sign. besides that, you're absolutely right about journalism - i know it from the inside.
but this phenomen doesn't change the facts (percentages)...
Join Date: May 2008
Location: pit
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
zerozol
less DOW and more load does save fuel, i.e. the fuel consumed per payload. Same same, but different i hear some say....
It is the kg fuel vs. kg load where the A380 fails. You can have a 13 ton/hour burn if you haul some 90 tons as the whale was basically designed. If it's actual state only allows 66, then it doesn't really qualify for a medal.
Maybe EK would be well advised to draw its attention away from pilots BMI and rather work on the the whales numbers.
anyway, i think it's not by accident that they want reduce weight... yep, maybe it's because less dry operating weight -> more load, but i really feel it's for fuel saving
It is the kg fuel vs. kg load where the A380 fails. You can have a 13 ton/hour burn if you haul some 90 tons as the whale was basically designed. If it's actual state only allows 66, then it doesn't really qualify for a medal.
Maybe EK would be well advised to draw its attention away from pilots BMI and rather work on the the whales numbers.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zerozol- I wasn't having a go at you, or accusing you of agreeing with the article/headline. It was an all-stations "you". I suspect that there are lots of guys out there like me; I don't read the article if it is going to bore the crap out of me. As the headline is outright wrong, it would be easy to accept that ME traffic fell, and to mention it while leaning on the bar- "I read it in the paper". I only read the actual article because I found the headline's claim surprising- traffic numbers are a big part of my day
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: BCN
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hi ferris,
okey, got it. but i think it's good to read everything that can interest you, even if the title or the lead makes you crazy.
but, still, if the respective percentages aren't held, it's still a kind of traffic decrease, not? i mean, if the growth of last year isn't achieved, if the growth is less than last year's respective figures... in gross, it's a loss. or am i thinking in a wrong way?...
z
okey, got it. but i think it's good to read everything that can interest you, even if the title or the lead makes you crazy.
but, still, if the respective percentages aren't held, it's still a kind of traffic decrease, not? i mean, if the growth of last year isn't achieved, if the growth is less than last year's respective figures... in gross, it's a loss.
or am i thinking in a wrong way?...z
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dont tell me- you are a manager, right? What an utterly moronic post. If growth is less, then the gross traffic numbers are less?? 
Another one for the ignore list.
Another one for the ignore list.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: BCN
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hahahah, huhuhuh! you are such a funny person!
no, i'm not a manager, i'm quite far from that.
list of ignorance: sorry, it's not me who ought to be ashamed if you keep a list like this... just because i try to think openly. apart from the fact that you didn't answered to my question about numbers.
yes, if you think a little bit more - not only ignore articles just because of their title and people just because of their opinion - you can arrive to observe that 10-and-something % growth versus 3-and-something % is a fall in numbers. it's not rocket science, i suppose. yes, it's still growing, but lesser than before. nobody said the contrary. "numbers fall": that's the truth, according to respective percentages, either it hurts or not...
a small and silly but an effective example:
year x's traffic = 100,
year x+1's traffic is 10% more =110;
so, if year x+2's expected traffic is 10% more as well, that means: 110+11 (10%) =121.
but, if year x+2's realized traffic is only 3% more than last year's, that means: 113.3!
121 =expected versus 113.3=realizing, is it a fall in expected growth or not?...
that's what i'm talking about, not more, not less. plus, i'm not against EK or anything/anybody.
add that i'm not rocket scientist nor manager, i was average in mathematics and i'm on the domain of humanities.
you are such a funny person!no, i'm not a manager, i'm quite far from that.
list of ignorance: sorry, it's not me who ought to be ashamed if you keep a list like this... just because i try to think openly. apart from the fact that you didn't answered to my question about numbers.
yes, if you think a little bit more - not only ignore articles just because of their title and people just because of their opinion - you can arrive to observe that 10-and-something % growth versus 3-and-something % is a fall in numbers. it's not rocket science, i suppose. yes, it's still growing, but lesser than before. nobody said the contrary. "numbers fall": that's the truth, according to respective percentages, either it hurts or not...
a small and silly but an effective example:
year x's traffic = 100,
year x+1's traffic is 10% more =110;
so, if year x+2's expected traffic is 10% more as well, that means: 110+11 (10%) =121.
but, if year x+2's realized traffic is only 3% more than last year's, that means: 113.3!
121 =expected versus 113.3=realizing, is it a fall in expected growth or not?...
that's what i'm talking about, not more, not less. plus, i'm not against EK or anything/anybody.
add that i'm not rocket scientist nor manager, i was average in mathematics and i'm on the domain of humanities.
Last edited by zerozol; 2nd Mar 2009 at 12:31.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Budapest
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New destinations for Emirates in 2009?
Hi! Emirates Airlines already revealed their expansion plan for this year and according to rumors we will just see a maximum of three new destinations. Does anyone has information which destinations could be chosen or are under a market study?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: evicted
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only 1 new destination this fiscal year but still a hefty capacity increase in existing markets. Trying to entrench itself in markets that still have strong revenues like LOS, MNL, DAC, SYD, SIN, SFO, LAX.
New destinations are expansive. Cost of new staff, advertisment, equipment, and promotional fares. Adding additional frequncies on existing routes doesn't cost anything.
New destinations are expansive. Cost of new staff, advertisment, equipment, and promotional fares. Adding additional frequncies on existing routes doesn't cost anything.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wonder what Maurice Flannigan's concept of the word 'soon' is? He was quoted in the press here yesterday as saying Madrid and Barcelona will soon become EK destinations.............