Emirates Moves NY A380s To Toronto, Bangkok
 

Apparently the rumours were true. This article from AW&ST, although slightly inaccurate, explains:


Emirates this summer is planning to redeploy the Airbus A380s currently assigned to the carrier's twice daily service between Dubai and New York Kennedy as it adapts to shifts in demand and limitations of an air services agreement between the UAE and Canada.
Starting June 1, the carrier will allocate one of the two A380s currently serving New York to its thrice-weekly route to Toronto, while the second ultra-widebody assigned to JFK will be placed into service on one of Emirates' twice daily flights from between Dubai and Bangkok.
At the same time, Emirates will start operating Boeing 777-300ERs to New York in a move that effectively swaps the capacity currently assigned to Bangkok and Toronto.

Just reading article in globeinvestor.com talking about the same thing.

Well gosh this is interesting!!:rolleyes:

EK's always changing types on the network to satisfy changing demand.. Not really a big deal. 380'll do JFK again when demand picks up again..

are u single and handsome
 

Happy st Patricks Day. hope you are enjoying life. joanne

The earlier they start using the big thing for what it was designed for, instead of showing off on long range destinations, the better!:ugh:
Its a f:mad:g "people mover" so use it for BKK, DEL, BOM etc with full load and it will pay off!!:ok:

EY network starting to hit in.

Or possibly the recession in the US:rolleyes:

Despite current (perhaps short term, while the Oz flights remain full?) plans for the Whale to operate daily direct to Sydney as of 1st May, I've heard rumours that your suggestion has sunk in with the Powers That Be in EK and that the One Eightly (sorry, couldn't resist that:)) the 380 will be used more on 7 hour sectors rather than the ULH flights in future. Something about its inability to carry any freight (or a full complement of pax and baggage) if there are any weather requirements at destination on a 13 hour sector.

...and the mind-boggling extra fuel burn (for not a hell of lot more payload) when compared with the Boeing 'light twin' on a ULH sector. If the uplift and burn figures I've had quoted to me by Whale drivers for JFK and SYD direct to DXB services are accurate, (as I'm sure they are), the PR man they've employed to spin the Whale as a "green" aeroplane will need to be creative in the extreme to sell that line to the public.

On the positive side, everyone who flys in it says it's a winner in the passenger comfort stakes. Recently out of LHR, the Whale went tech and some of its pax were transferred to one of the original 773s with the really basic original "first class" seats. I'm told the FC pax, fresh from the cubicles, were highly unimpressed, as I suspect we'd all be.

bus driver, I think the magic phrase for ULR ops, to use your own words, is: "if you fill up the 380".

With the exception of the Sydney flight, we just aren't getting full loads at present. The JFK loadings have ben appalingingly low. Toronto, (aka Mumbai-on-Lawrence) should be a winner.

Big difference is the 14F & 76 J class seats which makes money. Pax love it and the noise level compared to anything else is impressive.

The 7-10 hr flights will be the best for the 380. Does not like the ULR sectors.

Yup - if you can fill those F and J seats then it probably makes money (compared to the 777). If you can't............................

Can they fill those J seats on a BOM?????????? Or would they reconfigure??? Or have the next few arrivals reconfigured???

Great, we have a plan to sort out the first 5 aircraft now what are we going to do with the other 53 when (more than likely if) they come?

Yes, the 380 is a great aircraft... the problem is gettin it flying...ask our engineers....I will not repeat their words on this forum.

The only reason they are shifting equipment is the unreliability of the whale.
Bangkok is being served by 6 other flights/day I believe, so plenty of alternatives when it breaks down (once again). YYZ is thrice weekly so... very easy going.

I was in JFK a few weeks ago and our dispatcher informed us that the A380 only had 7000kgs more payload than our B777-300ER.

Is this true?

If so then that only equals about an extra 70 pax inc bags and makes me wonder what is the point of this aircaft apart from the old "my c@ck is bigger than yours" esp with an order of 50+ airframes.

3reds - just take a look at an OFP on GABI, and check the DOW versus the limiting TOW. It's actually quite impressive payload on the 380......

well 380 driver. It's obvious you're trying to kill the time at home isn't it... 1 flight a month, pretty boring ain't it?
Good luck to you.

Let's not mention the shower mishap over the atlantic, nor the 180 with all the seats flat in J and F.

Well on second thought. I d better shut up. I could end up in jail these days by puttn Dubai in a bad spotlight. :ugh:

BTW : Good move by EK to start BKK with 380. Pretty sure F and J are going to be full...:E

Payload is fine - it's just that it maxes out on volume before you get to the max payload - the cargo bays are just too small, once you get all the PAX bags in then there's hardly any space left for freight.

LR3,
Why annoyed? What have they done and when can the rest of us expect the same?
IH

LR3 - you've been annoyed with EK since the day you started posting.. Nothing new today then:}

It's the DOWs that interest me. 178 tonnes for a tripler versus 300 tonnes for the Whale... for not a hell of a lot more payload - (and, from what I've heard, a lot less room in the holds for freight and pax baggage). That's an awful lot of extra metal the engines have to drag into the air before that metal starts earning any income. "Green?" Hardly.

Bus driver, I admire your unbridled enthusiasm for the aeroplane you've only recently strapped your butt to. The closet cynic in me wonders if you'll retain that enthusiasm after a year or three of enduring EK's current crop of rosters.

Keep discovering.