Article - EK CEO Wants Another 40 A380s On Top of 90 Ordered
 

I just found this story on another forum. Sounds like some great opportunities for pilots in the region. :cool::ok::cool::D

UPDATE 1-Emirates Airline's Clark says wants more Airbus A380s | Reuters

By Alwyn Scott

Sept 27 (Reuters) - Confirming growing demand for the world's largest airliner, a top executive of Emirates Airline said on Thursday the company would be willing to buy another 40 Airbus A380 jets, but that the fast-growing Dubai airport where the airline is based is short of room for them.

Emirates Airline President Tim Clark had already said the airline wants another 30 A380s, on top of 90 already on order. Increasing that number to 40 suggests demand is rising for the A380 made by the Airbus unit of Europe's EADS.

Emirates, by far the largest customer for the A380, whose list price is $390 million, had 23 of the superjumbo jets in service at the end of August.

Clark, speaking at an industry conference in Seattle, said there are seven A380s waiting in Hamburg, Germany, for delivery as part of the normal deliver schedule. He is not worried about his airline's strong growth being affected by recession in Europe, slowing growth in China and unrest in the Middle East. Dubai, he said, "is a honey pot. There is no place better, except maybe China."

Clark has been ratcheting up his demand for the 525-seat A380 jet since he surprised the aviation world in 2010 by saying the airline could buy 120 of the aircraft.

Emirates, one of Dubai's most prized assets, has continued to grow rapidly despite a regional debt crisis followed by a wider recession affecting the airline industry and high fuel prices.

"We don't cancel orders," Clark said. "We get on with it."

If Emirates carried out its ambition of operating a fleet of 130 A380s, adding 40 to its current order of 90, it would control a fleet worth over $50 billion at list prices and extend its dominance as the European planemaker' s largest customer.

Regarding the development of a revamped Boeing Co 777, Clark said that the first of its fleet of 777-300-ER jets are due to be retired in 2017, and Emirates would like to replace them with the updated 777, which promises much greater efficiencies.

Given that deadline, he said it was a good time to start "bellyaching" to get a new jet started. "I'm hoping to see it sooner rather than later."

A Boeing official said the company is developing options and "when we are satisfied with the risks, costs and schedule, we intend to present a plan for offering the airplane to customers that would enter the market late this decade."

It sounds pretty good! Interviewed in May and still swimming

Hubris.

If you hurry and collect your Provident Fund pennies you might get out of there before Nemesis arrives.

Betting the farm a little, on the hope of more freedom rights, isn't he?

Already has the rights, just wants to put more seats on the bigger routes.

I remain unsure as to whether there is enough traffic globally to justify one carrier operating up to 130 A380s...well, I am sure, it's just not the answer Tim Clark has come to...my money is that there'll be order swaps from 380's to smaller aeroplanes before this is all over.

Then again, people probably said that about the 747 when it was introduced...

It's one thing to get and train the pilots for all of these, but who the hell is going to fix them?

Engineering staff is already spread so thin they cant even afford to have a guy with a badly broken leg being booked off from duty so they get the clinic docter (paid by EK) to cut his sick leave by half!!:mad::ugh:

Isn't it funny that he would say this in Seattle - he's trying to boost the order book for the Seattle rival or make Boeing cut back on some pricing!

DXB can't accommodate the current number of aircraft, where would he want these gas guzzlers parked?

You know what they say when it's too good to be true, ............!!

Gas Guzzlers? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Parked????...you only want a fraction of the fleet parked in Dubai at any one time on Maint. and/or turn around, the rest should be working.

Gas Guzzlers.... always surprises me that statement, anyone ever bothered to see how much a 390 pax 744 consumes per hour?

Stupid boy :{

I think it may be more in reference to the main twin jet in the company Caynine, not a 744. Then again I could be wrong....... but I thought the A380 only became the most efficient per seat mile when it was crammed with a 600+ 2 class config. I think Air Austral even considered a single class 700+ but then the reality of where the bags go kicked in-let alone the freight (sorry donpizmeov-couldn't resist that one ;) )

Sorry clear to land... Couldn't resist;

How much cargo do you carry on the 777 on a summer day to SFO?

Suppose 400pax at average 115kg (pax+bag)= 41150kg. How much payload left on the 773ER for cargo with a TO at 42C?

More than a 380 :O:O

Sorry, couldn't resist either!

Nice one helen!!

Once more: Not talking yield, but simply download the flightplans of the parallel flights to a couple of destinations.
If you are capable of calculating and extrapolating, then you will see why the 380 is a gas guzzler.

You may add fuel to reach the West Coast, but you need to add around 35 tons to add 1 hour of range ..... Is that worth it?

The beancounters are not stupid, neither is Airbus. If they can make money, they'll serve the WC with the dugong.

But concerning efficiency and fuel burn, I will admit an apology here once I will see a 380 flightplan to LA with the same ratio-numbers as a 77W.
Until then, I concur with fuel guzzler.

Airlines don't exist without passengers and what do they prefer?

wrong!

it's the 90 premium class passengers that make the difference in revenue.
no room for any relevant cargo on a full 77 to the us west coast.
the 77 often leaves with empty seats, in summer, just to be able to carry the luggage of the lucky pax that made it...

tz

For the same price, they'll take the shower, certainly. As long as the companies charge the same, they'll take the more fancy stuff, if there's a choice. However, for a discount of a couple of dirty hams they will board anything!! That's what it is today.
It's the company who can provide the most fancy ride at the same price that makes the cut. OK, some premium passengers prioritise schedule and frequency, but in general it's the price that matters.

That lead me to what I said earlier, that there will be a limit to what EK can afford with respect to the added luxury versus the higher consumption on the A380. At the moment, with the 'wow'-factor, the dugong product seems to work out.
I simply stated that with a predicted erosion of the numbers and price paid by premium passengers and with the assumed increase in fuel price, there will be a line crossed where the dugong costs too much.

Let's hope that both effects do not happen, with the number of 380's on order.



There's another thing:
It's not entirely correct to compare the 77W on the West Coast routes. It has never been designed for such routes and Boeing never propagated it for that. In contrast Airbus has boasted the dugong for the ULR.
The real product for such routes are the 77L or the 345 and there the verdict of fuel guzzling is known.
So basically the performance, precisely the capability of full cabin versus all the bags and some cargo, should be compared between a 77L and a 380.
Now logically enough the higher number of seats might speak for the dugong, but the almost any-day capability of the 77L to take full load might speak for a double 77L shift.
That's for the bean counters, again, or as a matter of fact for the station managers, they quite often do not agree!! But don't compare a aircraft that was not designed for a route with another one that has (all though today the earlier still performs better .....)

Good price, timing, reasonable service and IFE.

Oh, and to be on time.

halas

The abridged EK history,

It all started with the 737 and the 727. These were great. But Airbus then invented the A300/A310. The worlds first twin engined widebody. The beasts carried the same load in two trips that the 737/727 carried in three, and for almost the same fuel burn. The PAX were also carried in greater comfort. The PAX rejoiced, the bean counters rejoiced, and the 737/727 crew spent their time flying the crappier routes awaiting their time to become bus drivers.

In 1996ish some early model 777s appeared. Not much is known about these as they were only allowed to fly of a night time, when it was considered there would be enough lift in the air to let them become airborne.

In 1999ish the A330 arrived. In two trips it carried the load that took three trips for the A300/A310, and at almost the same total fuel burn. The PAX were also carried in greater comfort. The PAX rejoiced, the bean counters rejoiced and the A300/A310 crew flew the crappier routes, and eventually only freighters, while the A330/340 crews flew throughout Europe, Australia and North America.

Then the 773ER was born. This aeroplane carried in two trips what the A330/340 carried in three, and at almost the same fuel burn. It also carried the PAX is greater comfort. The PAX rejoiced, the bean counters rejoiced and the A330/340 crews ended up flying the crappier routes, while the B777 crews flew throughout North America, Europe, Asia and Australia.

Then the A380 was born. This aeroplane could carry in two trips what the 773ER would carry in three, at almost the same total fuel burn (26000kg/hr/2x380 vs 25800kg/hr/3x777). It also carried the PAX in greater comfort. The PAX rejoiced, the bean counters rejoiced and the A380 crews ended up flying throughout Europe, North America, Asia and Australia, while the B777 crews....well you get the idea. :E

The Don