Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Middle East
Reload this Page >

Boeing Mulls Stretching 777 to Knock Out Airbus A380

Middle East Many expats still flying in Knoteetingham. Regional issues can be discussed here.

Boeing Mulls Stretching 777 to Knock Out Airbus A380

Old 9th Jul 2016, 23:22
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 53
Posts: 1,692
I suppose that was my point - the A380 has 4 engines and much more space than even a stretched 777 will have, so the idea of those two competing is a bit weird IMHO.
I was very surprised to learn below the decks, the 777-300ER has a larger cargo area than the A380 and most operators of the two aircraft report higher revenue cargo numbers ($) for the twin compared to big bird.

I was told the 777 not only begins with a larger volume below, but once baggage is loaded on both aircraft, the A380's volume is further lessened in comparison.

One final note to share - the amount of "belly" space utilized fleet-wide adds up to around 40% of the global air cargo market.
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 00:18
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
LD3 capacity -

380 - 38 Approx 500 passengers
773 - 44 Approx 320 passengers

If the 380 filled it's cargo space full with passenger bags a 777, with the same number of bags per passenger, would have space for 20 LD3's of cargo.
misd-agin is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 03:32
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,774
Yes, and throw on alternate/hold/contingency/Capt add fuel. Nothing quite fills the shoes of a 4 holer.
West Coast is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 07:38
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 365
@ Andy_S,

Originally Posted by msbbarratt

I think that there's every chance of an A380neo and stretch at some point, which Airbus can trot out at almost any time they like.
You clearly missed the bit which said:

Airbus has been reluctant to make the multibillion-dollar investment for essentially one customer.
Also......

Originally Posted by msbbarratt

Airlines that have built up a large and loyal customer base won't be keen to risk losing that by squeezing them into a cramped 777 tube. A shiny new 777 would be expensive indeed if it results in 10% of the customer base choosing a different airline.
You do realise that Emirates operate more 777 than A380, right? 10 across seating as well.
I know all that, but ultimately one cannot ignore the fact that:

  • Passengers like the A380, and quite a lot of regular passengers avoid buying tickets on anything else especially 10-across 777.
  • Emirates and some other well placed operators have no trouble filling them. Emirates themselves have been quoted in various articles saying that a lot of their custom is repeat and regular business, exactly the type of business airlines like. The A380 also gives them the room to offer highly profitable exotic seats like the Residence, suites, etc.
  • Slot congestion at major airports is only going to get worse, meaning there will always be a need to a huge aircraft
  • Replacing A380 with, for example, a 10-across 777-? after many years of A380 operations would be a return to sardine packing, definitely a business gamble for the successfully busy A380 operators.

And I think that it'll come down to that. If the ME3 (and other operators) want to perpetuate their premium image beyond the lifetime of their A380s and still be able to carry a large numbers of passengers in a single flight, then it's hard to see what else they could buy.

It could descend into a game of cat-n-mouse. At the first hint of the A380 production line being closed up, Emirates or someone else will order a few to keep the line open. And if the operators and Airbus orgranise themselves then a NEO or stretch will be done.

An A380neo clearly is not going to happen in the near future, but the pressure for it will not be going away any time soon.

Of course RR can sort of do the neo all by themselves, simply by upgrading the -900 beyond all recognition. It wouldn't be the first time they've back-ported new tech to old engines (e.g. -524H-T), and they could always to a plug/pylon compatible new engine design.
msbbarratt is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 11:02
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 55
Posts: 906
Originally Posted by msbbarratt View Post
Replacing A380 with, for example, a 10-across 777-? after many years of A380 operations would be a return to sardine packing, definitely a business gamble for the successfully busy A380 operators.
And yet Emirates already operate the 10-across 777. Many more of them, in fact, than the A380 (as do the other two of the ME3). So it clearly works for them.
Andy_S is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 16:39
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: U.K
Posts: 183
As a passenger, if the choice is between a B777 and an A380, then there is no choice, A380 every time.
Selfloading is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 17:04
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 365
And yet Emirates already operate the 10-across 777. Many more of them, in fact, than the A380 (as do the other two of the ME3). So it clearly works for them.
Indeed, and they're just as cramped as everyone else's 10-across 777. The A380 also works for them too. It's a big contrast.

About this quality vs. price thing: with the level of competition in the market long haul flights are remarkably good value for money, and getting cheaper. Once the price hits a certain low level it'll stop being a purchasing factor, and other things (schedule, ride comfort, in flight service) will become more of a consideration. Good ride comfort is harder to offer in an aircraft that makes no economic sense with 9 across, and is unpleasant at 10 across.
msbbarratt is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 17:25
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Originally Posted by Andy_S View Post
And yet Emirates already operate the 10-across 777. Many more of them, in fact, than the A380 (as do the other two of the ME3). So it clearly works for them.
Emirates also operate the '10 across A380'. Perhaps you only flew on the upper deck?
Ian W is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 17:48
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 3
10-across A380 beats 10-across 777 any day.
metrognomicon is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 18:11
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 55
Posts: 906
I don't understand your point. 10 across in the 777 and 10 across in the A380 are different things. msbbarratt has made the reasonable point that the 777 '10 across' configuration is generally perceived as being cramped and that by contrast the extra width on the A380 (even at 10 across) is a big selling point for the latter over the former. I've countered that since Emirates have more of the the 10-across 777 in their fleet than A380's the 777 must work for them; passengers clearly aren't put off to that degree.
Andy_S is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 22:56
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: US
Posts: 11
Flying wide bodies and being a pilot for 26+ years it's about $$$$ plain and simple. Four engines burn to much gas, more MX,more of everything that cost money. Cargo pays very well, we will bump pax for cargo if It pays (call it weight restrictions,,,) The A380 is dead it just has to fall over, special gates, runways and so on, no cargo variant. The 747 will hang on as a freighter till the big twins kill it too.

Ps as a whale driver it saddens me to say this.
crew101 is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 23:22
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kerry Eire
Age: 74
Posts: 609
Emirates does well out of its A380s because they move volume through the Dubai hub in a way few other airlines are set up to do. The configuration of their fleet has the widest range of seating choices from the super expensive suites to the basic economy, yet with a certain cache at even the lowest prices and certainly offering more comfort in economy than on a single deck wide body. Taking pax from other carriers' direct services by competitive pricing over Dubai fills the cheap seats, offers a massive influx of shoppers to Dubai Airport's duty free shops and puts the airline in the top rankings in a region where being top dog carries weight.

Emirates on its own has the clout to push Airbus into either continuing the A380 as is or improving the breed and as slot constraints grow not only on runways but in airspace, Airbus would be foolish to kill the project as other carriers may have to follow suit, sooner rather than later.

Last edited by philbky; 11th Jul 2016 at 05:07.
philbky is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 01:32
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 75
Posts: 0
Talking Stretched airplanes

IMHO- rather than stretch a 737 or make a new version 757- both single isle- an updated and slightly stretched 767 twin isle would be a major game changer. Wings of composite, a bit bigger engines can be added without the 737 limited clearance issues, and a few other tweaks- updated cockpit- enhanced fly by wire, etc could fill the ' passenger seat gap '

But since I'm not a jack swelch wannabee- or a mdc defense convert used to govt tit- I'm obviously wrong- power point rangers rule . .
CONSO is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 04:34
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Posts: 349
I am impressed by Boeing's decision to forego a double-decker - a decision made at least three times - and now it seems they will be proven right. The double deck (and the low cockpit) is what will prevent the A380 from getting a second chance as a cargo hauler. Airbus were warned. I have come to appreciate the misshapen La Grande Baleine du Ciel, when it has a good livery (rare, QATAR got it right), but it was always a solution to a problem that did not exist. I don't even think Boeing needs to make this 10X, but they probably should, and probably will. The A380 is already finished. And the 747-8 will fly on through the cargo-hauling nights, with the occasional passenger version a grand remembrance of things past, and reminder of things future.
deSitter is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 05:15
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 66
Posts: 3,273
Sadly, ticket price has become the overriding concern. I was booking a business trip recently and the travel tool wasn't letting me book my preferred flight because it cost $3 more than the lowest price option - seriously, three freeking dollars.
I've never flown Emirates - nor have most of my co-workers. We're allowed business class when traveling overseas, but Emirates Business price was so much higher than the competition that, even going to a meeting in Dubai, the travel tool won't allow Emirates. I've flown on an A380 - business class on Korean from LA to Incheon - and was very impressed. The A380 was noticeably quieter than the 777 that I came back on. In the future, given the option, I'll chose the A380 over a 777 if the price is similar. Problem is the price usually isn't similar.


Bottom line, if operators can fly 500 people on an A380 for 10 cents/mile, or 450 people on a 777 for 9 cents/mile, the 777 wins hands down, comfort be damned.
tdracer is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 11:20
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Originally Posted by philbky View Post
Emirates does well out of its A380s because they move volume through the Dubai hub in a way few other airlines are set up to do. The configuration of their fleet has the widest range of seating choices from the super expensive suites to the basic economy, yet with a certain cache at even the lowest prices and certainly offering more comfort in economy than on a single deck wide body. Taking pax from other carriers' direct services by competitive pricing over Dubai fills the cheap seats, offers a massive influx of shoppers to Dubai Airport's duty free shops and puts the airline in the top rankings in a region where being top dog carries weight.

Emirates on its own has the clout to push Airbus into either continuing the A380 as is or improving the breed and as slot constraints grow not only on runways but in airspace, Airbus would be foolish to kill the project as other carriers may have to follow suit, sooner rather than later.
Even though that is the story line from EK management, many expressed doubts about EK's ability to make money on many of its routes. Only time will tell.

EK is looking into Premium Economy as corporate travel spending is trending down.

If I understand correctly, Airbus already stopped (paper)work on A380NEO.

Name one slot restricted airport which badly needs all A380s. Please note only 1% LHR movements are A380. Similar numbers with DXB.
notapilot15 is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 11:47
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: se england
Posts: 1,297
EK does have lots of T7s and they compare poorly in all classes with the 380. But surely EK know that and as a rule the 380s go on higher yield destinations and the T7s dont.

Also some routes carrya large proportion of less well off but less bulky Asian pax who are probably OK with 10 abreast T7s and would nt want to pay any more than they had to for the 380. With Emirate big fleets the horses for courses approach probably works extremely well.

Economics for many others though favour the T7 especially the lower MX costs and the freight capability (one thing I think underestimated by AB when they launched the 380) What I would be interested to see -but am not holdign my breath is the premium pax view on the 380 vs T7 from premium heavy airlines like BA and AF , LH dont have T7s so hard to include them .

The T7-300 is a great efficient machine but havent Boeing learned that things can be stretched too far. 764 753 and 739 either didnt sell well or have other quite serious defects. So to replace the t&-300 it really needs anew aircraft and thats looking some way into the future and they will have to re evaluate the double deck all over again as to get 600 people onto a conventional twin aisle means a time difference between the front and back
pax britanica is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 13:08
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kerry Eire
Age: 74
Posts: 609
Name one slot restricted airport which badly needs all A380s. Please note only 1% LHR movements are A380. Similar numbers with DXB.
As you and I are both well aware there are a number of airports, Heathrow being one - thus the third runway debate, where slot growth is severely restricted or not available. Slots don't just depend on runway/ramp/gate space, they depend on when passengers are prepared to depart and arrive, much of which depends on geography, not to mention noise rules. Air space is also under pressure in many terminal areas and not a few routes where it is restricted for military or political reasons.

Nothing in my post stated that any airport badly needs all A380s. Your interpretation of my words
Emirates on its own has the clout to push Airbus into either continuing the A380 as is or improving the breed and as slot constraints grow not only on runways but in airspace, Airbus would be foolish to kill the project as other carriers may have to follow suit, sooner rather than later.
is ridiculous.

There is a physical limitation to the length a fuselage can be. Whilst non metal products can offer greater strengths than traditional aluminium, the need to rotate on take off increases undercarriage height and/or position in ratio to length of fuselage and gate space also militates against ever increasing lengths and wingspans - thus the 77X folding wingtips.

There comes a point where the only way to grow is up. The 747 started it, the A380 has developed the breed. There will be more to come.
philbky is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 13:37
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: europe
Posts: 112
The survival of the 380 is not about passengers liking it, its about accountants buying it.


4 engine aircraft make money when they are full. Empty and they cost a fortune.


2 engine aircraft don't make as much money full but don't cost as much to run empty.


380 is good for slot constricted airports, that's why only a hand full of airlines have bought it, it doesn't carry much freight, not just that it doesn't have the space below, it can also be trim problem. Airfreight can be 25% of an airlines profit, accountants won't turn their back on that when they are struggling to make a profit.


Then it comes to 24hr utilization fly it 8-10 hours (9 -10 hrs is the aircrafts sweet spot) turn it around for 2 hrs and it fly it home again and your using it, if the sector is not that long or longer then you've got to find somewhere else to fly it to or look at it costing money on a parking stand, then you're into the Intentional Miss Use Of Wide Body Airliners, most airlines with wide body aircraft do this. Dump 450 seats onto a 3hrs sector on a Tuesday afternoon in winter you are not going to make money, park it you're losing money!


Compromise and don't buy such a big aircraft, make money on the good days of the week and don't lose large amounts on the bad days.


EK do OK with the 380, they move a huge number of people due Dubai's geographical location, they are slot constrained at Dubai and to a hand full of their key destinations like LHR LGW SYD BNE and they can use the aircraft at a profit when its not going to slot constricted airports due to nature of their network.


Most other big airlines like BA AF LH don't have the vast network that EK has hence the limited number of 380s they have.


The 380 is dead in the water if it wasn't for EK it would be dead now, no manufacturer can run a production line without orders.


There could be another 60 380s roll off the production line and that will be it, there are no other airlines who would buy it, may be airbus will pull the pin sooner.
Enos is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 14:05
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Woodbridge, Suffolk
Age: 68
Posts: 91
The original quote, from Duncan Bluck, is "the intelligent mis-use of aircraft", and it was the policy that built CX from a little airline to a big one. The meaning is a little different - a classic example being CX's use of the 747 on the HK-Manila route and the HK/Taipei route, many years ago. Another way of looking at it is "Don't operate thin routes" - another CX-ism, from the RB211-524 era, is "Locate a spare engine at the end of the route, and then make the most use of it by running as many planes as possible on the route."
Methersgate is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.