EK 380s
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I realize we live in times when huge sums of money, usually referring to bailouts, debts, and the like can make one a bit numb to the sheer number of zeroes on the figures being tossed about...but...
...even so, referring to something causing losses of (take your pick) 30 or 50 million dollars a month as "a blip", has gotta be one of the more amusing understatements in awhile. Sort of up there with calling a defect that grounds them for a month at a time "a bit broke". Spin, baby, spin.
Heck, 50 million here, 50 million there, before you know it, we're talking some REAL money...
Gimme a break. About the only statement I've read I agree with, is that Clark is playing high-stakes poker all right. And only a fool thinks that poker players can only win (even when they are playing with as stacked a deck as EK's got).
Sorry A380-Dude, buddy. (Can I call you buddy? Since you call me mate.) Where exactly am I wrong? The facts on the costs and the grounding times are from the article quoting Dear Leader, not my opinion. I think all of the night turns to HYD are starting to do your head in...
...even so, referring to something causing losses of (take your pick) 30 or 50 million dollars a month as "a blip", has gotta be one of the more amusing understatements in awhile. Sort of up there with calling a defect that grounds them for a month at a time "a bit broke". Spin, baby, spin.
Heck, 50 million here, 50 million there, before you know it, we're talking some REAL money...
Gimme a break. About the only statement I've read I agree with, is that Clark is playing high-stakes poker all right. And only a fool thinks that poker players can only win (even when they are playing with as stacked a deck as EK's got).
Sorry A380-Dude, buddy. (Can I call you buddy? Since you call me mate.) Where exactly am I wrong? The facts on the costs and the grounding times are from the article quoting Dear Leader, not my opinion. I think all of the night turns to HYD are starting to do your head in...
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Land of Milk and Honey
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moving on from the 'ours is better than yours' argument, which I don't quite get - an aeroplane's an aeroplane to me and the commercial aspect of it I leave entirely up to someone else - I'll fly what they tell me to fly - does anyone have any idea on the latest in-house rumours about 380 deliveries/command upgrades etc, for those of us who are waiting patiently in the queue?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Land of Milk and Honey
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks very much guys, info is greatly received...will be interested to see the effect of retirements vs effects of deliveries on 'bus courses for new joiners...
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 3rd Rock from the Sun
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No it's a one off anniversary flight for 25yrs service (or something similar) into LGW apparently.
A regular 380 service will probably start next July when both 380 piers are completed at the North terminal.
A regular 380 service will probably start next July when both 380 piers are completed at the North terminal.
Err...how is that even slightly relevent, Sandhound?
The 747-400 is a contemporary of the A300-600.
How much are THEY selling for?
The 747-400 is a contemporary of the A300-600.
How much are THEY selling for?
Sand,
Yes I read the article, and I can't see that anywhere- in fact quite the opposite.
Can you quote the bit that has anything bad to say about the 747-8?
Yes I read the article, and I can't see that anywhere- in fact quite the opposite.
Can you quote the bit that has anything bad to say about the 747-8?
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: earth
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be careful what you wish for ....
If fuel-cost is the argument, then you can throw the 380 into the same bin as the other four-legged/four-engined dinosaurs.
Was there a comparison to the T7's fuel figures in the article? No, and for good reason because there is no way any of the dinos can get the better ratio on any route.
And please don't come up with that 'comfort' or 'prestige' bs. In this article there was reference only to fuel burn vs. passenger number.
So if you want to boast the 380 you can do it comparing with a 60 year old design, but if you take a more recent Boeing chunk, you took the wrong intersection.
If fuel-cost is the argument, then you can throw the 380 into the same bin as the other four-legged/four-engined dinosaurs.
Was there a comparison to the T7's fuel figures in the article? No, and for good reason because there is no way any of the dinos can get the better ratio on any route.
And please don't come up with that 'comfort' or 'prestige' bs. In this article there was reference only to fuel burn vs. passenger number.
So if you want to boast the 380 you can do it comparing with a 60 year old design, but if you take a more recent Boeing chunk, you took the wrong intersection.
Last edited by glofish; 23rd Jun 2012 at 08:35.
Sand,
In an all ecconomy layout, as per Air Austral, the 777-300er can carry 600 pax.
Fuel per pax does indeed come out in the A380s favour, by a whopping 1%.
IF you fill it!
In an all ecconomy layout, as per Air Austral, the 777-300er can carry 600 pax.
Fuel per pax does indeed come out in the A380s favour, by a whopping 1%.
IF you fill it!
fatty,
Err- but didn't they ALSO order 165 777s?
Have a look and you'll see I haven't championed one over the other. I HAVE corrected when people have said things I thought inaccurate.
Fact is, both aircraft have their place and both can produce good profits on the right route.
Err- but didn't they ALSO order 165 777s?
Have a look and you'll see I haven't championed one over the other. I HAVE corrected when people have said things I thought inaccurate.
Fact is, both aircraft have their place and both can produce good profits on the right route.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well that's great news and the taxi pattern will be easy to work out if it cant get under the bridge!
Had to love this simple maths equation.... and the 380 is not in its high density config.
Malaysian Airline System, which received its first A380 last month, will consume 1,181 barrels of fuel flying the 494-seat aircraft to London from Kuala Lumpur, according to Maybank Kim Eng Securities analyst Wong Chew Hann.
The carrier's 359-seat 747-400s use about 999 barrels of fuel on the same route, he said. Fuel accounts for about a third of airlines' costs, according to the International Air Transport Association.
Had to love this simple maths equation.... and the 380 is not in its high density config.
Malaysian Airline System, which received its first A380 last month, will consume 1,181 barrels of fuel flying the 494-seat aircraft to London from Kuala Lumpur, according to Maybank Kim Eng Securities analyst Wong Chew Hann.
The carrier's 359-seat 747-400s use about 999 barrels of fuel on the same route, he said. Fuel accounts for about a third of airlines' costs, according to the International Air Transport Association.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: ex-DXB
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After completion of the LGW bridge, BA especially flew in a LHR based 747 for the sole purpose of being the first operator to "taxi in"under the bridge.........in order to beat Virgin to it.
Sound familiar?
Good 'ol play-ground tactics
(we used to burn-up under the bridge at the end of each sim - good fun)
Sound familiar?
Good 'ol play-ground tactics
(we used to burn-up under the bridge at the end of each sim - good fun)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ooh Ooh My ones bigger than yours.
For Pete's sake girls!
This playground mentality is frankly worrying, when you consider that you are supposed to be responsible for Xxx people's lives, xxx million$ worth of Jet + other things like company prestige etc.
Bottom line, we NEED all our aircraft to F###ing fly full and our "Adult" Commanders to carry the right amount of fuel..........for each sector and as the Commander, YOU, not dispatch are responsible for the uplifted fuel.
Now Bloody well GROW UP. Jeez.
Hat, coat, door.
This playground mentality is frankly worrying, when you consider that you are supposed to be responsible for Xxx people's lives, xxx million$ worth of Jet + other things like company prestige etc.
Bottom line, we NEED all our aircraft to F###ing fly full and our "Adult" Commanders to carry the right amount of fuel..........for each sector and as the Commander, YOU, not dispatch are responsible for the uplifted fuel.
Now Bloody well GROW UP. Jeez.
Hat, coat, door.