|
380 to 350?
|
It appears that an airline can't make a business plan which is dependant on an airplane that cannot possibly be operated at a profit. Who could have known?
|
Originally Posted by Dropp the Pilot
(Post 10377038)
It appears that an airline can't make a business plan which is dependant on an airplane that cannot possibly be operated at a profit. Who could have known?
|
I don’t understand where this ‘unprofitable’ idea coming from. It is profitable if you use it what it was designed for, which Emirates is doing. A380 is designed for a major hub airline. If you buy a few for prestige, without an actual operable plan (Malaysian, British, etc) then yes, it is not profitable. It has nothing to do with the aircraft itself. It has everything to do with the operation. For example: ATR-72 is profitable for regional short haul flights; not so much if you try to use it for oceanic flights. |
true, for unsubsidized airlines indeed it's not profitable...regardless, it looks like the "salvation order" placed by EK is now on the rocks again, and so is the A380 program
|
Whats happening with the 787s?
|
More information here:
Airbus Confirms Discussions With Emirates About A380 Order | Commercial Aviation content from Aviation Week Sounds like a lot of the problem is unhappiness with the performance of the Trent 900, and Rolls unwilling to do much about it. |
It's true that the Trents are part of the problem. If you removed two of them, removed the idiotic superstructure for the second floor and capped the seats at about 430 it would be a pure winner.
Like a 777. |
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 10377643)
More information here:
Airbus Confirms Discussions With Emirates About A380 Order | Commercial Aviation content from Aviation Week Sounds like a lot of the problem is unhappiness with the performance of the Trent 900, and Rolls unwilling to do much about it. Trent 700 still in production for A330 Trent 7000 ramping up as A330NEO production increases. Trent 1000 known issues still to be revised. Trent XWB for A350 in full swing by now I would think. Trent 800 gone like the Trent 500, but still supported along with quite a few RB211's still in service. Development of next gen "intelligent" engine for rumoured Boeing B797/NMA and next round of new design aircraft. Last thing they need is to start tweaking/redesigning/recertifying for what is more than likely a limited production run of aTrent 900 "-X". |
The other Rumor is that they are looking at 20 more 777X and cancelling the 787 order..
|
Originally Posted by ucankedi
(Post 10377055)
I don’t understand where this ‘unprofitable’ idea coming from. It is profitable if you use it what it was designed for, which Emirates is doing. A380 is designed for a major hub airline. If you buy a few for prestige, without an actual operable plan (Malaysian, British, etc) then yes, it is not profitable. It has nothing to do with the aircraft itself. It has everything to do with the operation. For example: ATR-72 is profitable for regional short haul flights; not so much if you try to use it for oceanic flights. I am ex EK, not a pilot, but a VP in IT. I was emailed every week the loads of all aircraft outbound from DXB. For an A380 to break even, it had to have 82% loads, most were around 77% with quite a few less than 60%. I flew many times in business class where out of the 76 seats available, only 10 or so were occupied. |
Replying to my own post here. "Emirates Airlines" haven't been profitable for many years. It's all creative accounting that makes them look like they are. Dnata makes all the money. Carry a few 1's and 0's across the balance sheet ("charging" dnata $$$$$$ to fly on EK) and it all looks good.
Glad I got out when I did. Toxic culture, toxic place. Too many people sucked into it and living with blinkers on. |
Regardless of what you say, still one of the best airlines to fly with. Recently flew with Lufthansa j class and was underwhelmed |
...but their business class is full and making profit.
|
Originally Posted by skeggman
(Post 10377887)
A380 is not now and has never been profitable for EK. For them it was, and still is, all about image.
I am ex EK, not a pilot, but a VP in IT. I was emailed every week the loads of all aircraft outbound from DXB. For an A380 to break even, it had to have 82% loads, most were around 77% with quite a few less than 60%. I flew many times in business class where out of the 76 seats available, only 10 or so were occupied. |
Originally Posted by sheikhthecamel
(Post 10379305)
Curious - Is the 82% passenger load factor figure an aggregate across all A380 routes on an annual basis? I would think that an A380 on a DXB - JED flight would have a different load factor break-even than DXB - LHR. Also it must surely be greatly dependent on how many bums are on the fancy seats upstairs?
Obviously not an exact science, but was used as a rough guide as to what routes were profitable (and could possibly take an extra flight) and which ones to either cut completely or swap for a 777. |
Any airline that can turn a profit on a route with an A380 will be able to make at least as much with a new-gen twin. So it seems as if closing the A380 production line is really a win-win-win for Airbus/Rolls/operators.
Surely there has been a discussion of some kind involving an A350 customer just up the road? |
Originally Posted by chuboy
(Post 10380593)
Any airline that can turn a profit on a route with an A380 will be able to make at least as much with a new-gen twin. So it seems as if closing the A380 production line is really a win-win-win for Airbus/Rolls/operators.
Surely there has been a discussion of some kind involving an A350 customer just up the road? With our incredibly low cost structure,ie Slave Labour surely the 380 has a much better chance of being profitable here then at any other airline. |
Originally Posted by skeggman
(Post 10380511)
Yes, that was aggregated across the fleet on a weekly basis, and took into account staff, fuel, maintenance, taxes, etc. And was usually based on economy being at capacity, and the rest (up to the magical 82%) across the top deck.
Obviously not an exact science, but was used as a rough guide as to what routes were profitable (and could possibly take an extra flight) and which ones to either cut completely or swap for a 777. |
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 20:21. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.