Is there a market for the 380?

[panda-k-bear]

Hmm. Interesting statement. But then not everyone wants to fly the North Atlantic to a country with a population as low in density as the United Staes, do they? How many 747s fly into Kennedy or Chicago? Why did airlines continue buying 744s after the advent of the A340 and the 777? Note that all of the airlines I mentioned are 744 operators with relatively young fleets. Why do CX continue to add 744s? For range or for capacity?

Don't be so focused on the North American market - it isn't the be all and end all - it is misleading and not representative of what's happening elsewhere where the vast majority of the Earth's population live.

[Omark44]

I think we may be talking at cross purposes here Panda.

I know that several 747 operators have ordered the A380 but not in the same quantities that they ordered the B747 and the reason is that the B777 and A330/340 families are now doing the 747's job.

As far as operators are concerned there is a market for the A380 but only in limited numbers. This is not a manufacturers market.

[Wino]

Panda,

According to your arguements, Airbus should never have been able to sell a single copy of the A340. Afterall the 747 seatmile costs were lower and its bigger....


Refresh my memory, surely Virgin flew there A340s other places than the USA and its supposedly low population density...


Cheers
Wino

[Lu Zuckerman]

Just think!!!!!

Having worked on the design of the A-380 albeit the cargo handling system I think the A-380s time has come. It will most likely sell quite well until…..the first one goes in and the litigation starts. It has the potential of bankrupting the insurance carriers for the respective airline and if the crash was due to poor engineering it can bankrupt the insurance carriers for Airbus or Airbus itself.

[panda-k-bear]

One at a time, please...

Omark,

Logically these operators will end up operating more than half a dozen or so aircraft each - as populations grow, so will demand and the lower ticket price that could be offered due to A380 operating costs will surely drive demand even further. For example, how does the population of NYC compare today to that of 1969 when the 747 appeared?

Wino,

747s are too big for SOME routes - not all, though, by a long chalk. I would suspect (though I'm sure you will correct me) that VS flies/flew A340s to secondary US cities or used them to add a second frequency to major cities a la New York or LAX OR they were used to develop routes to new destinations and later replaced with 747s. Surely to God you can't think that the US has a high population density, can you? Compare the person per square mile ratio to that of Japan, Europe, Singapore, Hong Kong et al...

Lu,

You have a point but then nobody can predict what will happen in that respect and I'm sure nobody here wishes for that to happen just for one-upmanship, do they?

[Happy Landings]

I don't see any reason why the A380 wont be a great success. Airbus seems to be in a good position. I've seen the figures and 250 A380 sales does seem to be a realistic break-even point. Airbus has been very clever with their finances. The highly profitable single aisle program has already paid for most of the research and development costs. The sudden increase in demand for the A320 in the no-frills sector has helped to cushion the cash demands of the A380. Government grants have been very influential, especially in the building of facilities. Then consider all these new buildings Airbus have built to house the A380. Many of them are so efficient and environmentally friendly that they almost pay for themselves. Then lets look at modern technology, the use of machines and robots and new manufacturing techniques have led to massive cost savings, both in labour costs and in lead-time. The use of advanced auto-cad and computer simulation has made the A380 the quickest and cheapest aircraft Airbus has ever designed. Then Airbus managed to win the tanker deal, which is again mainly profit. Then the management team decided they were going to save 1.5 billion Euros in cost savings by 2006, and they seem to be on track for doing that. Finally, the biggest financial gain has been the clever idea of risk sharing. The manufacturers and suppliers of the majority of components are effectively providing the first 10 sets of aircraft parts for free, just to be a part of the A380 program.

So, finally I get to my point. If the A380 gamble pays off, which I personally am sure it will, and then after 250 A380's have been sold, Airbus will start making massive profits. (Think how many A320's you would have to sell to make the same profit as 1 A380) Now, with all that spare cash lying around a few years from now, Airbus will be able to start considering its next major project. And I personally believe that somewhere in the deep dark corners of Airbus there is a secret team, probably in the old Concorde office, coming up with a design for a super efficient, supersonic aircraft and in 10 - 20 years time, just maybe Airbus will have the market and the money to finance this program. And I reckon we'll all be still sat at our computers discussing with random strangers whether we think it will work or not!!!!!

As for Boeing, well the time will come for the 7E7 and looking to the future, more aircraft on more routes with more people, flying more often is only a good thing, especially for us regulars on this site!

Happy Landings

[Omark44]

Don't think you are really from Nottingam are you Happy Landings? - Tolouse perhaps?

[Wino]

Panda,

WHile there are vast area's of America that are quite empty.

If you looked at the population density of the northeast corridor and the west coast you would find population densities that are as high as anywhere in Europe....

The character of the USA is High densities seperated by vast distances. (It didn't take me that much different amount of time to commute to manchester UK when I was based there as it did when I was based in SFO...)

There are more large city/suburb combos from the USA on the top 50 listing then there are from the EU.... And they are seperated by greater distances.

Cheers
Wino

[Lu Zuckerman]

Tart is not the same thing as Tort.

To: panda-k-bear

You have a point but then nobody can predict what will happen in that respect and I'm sure nobody here wishes for that to happen just for one-upmanship, do they?

I spent 35 years analyzing aircraft systems for potential catastrophic failure points. In this position I worked to protect the safety of the occupants of the respective aircraft and as such the last thing I would like to see is the loss of an aircraft and its’ occupants. The point I was trying to make was that the loss of an aircraft can result in large payoffs by the airlines and the constructors and these payments are limited by international treaty. However if it can be proved that the airline was at fault say due to faulty maintenance the payments are unlimited and the same is true if it can be proved that the constructor was negligent in his design or other aspects of the aircraft construction these payments are also unlimited. This does not include pain and suffering.

I worked on one Airbus program where I identified two major design problems and I eventually brought them to the attention of the certification authorities (whistle blower) and nothing was done about these design problems. In this case if the airliner crashes due to either one of these problems Airbus would be in serious financial problems and the subcontractors would be bankrupted.

[readbackcorrect]

Less flight crews for larger gauge?

Will there be a consolidation, say reduced frequency of smaller gauge flights?

I hope the 380 doesnt harm pilot numbers.

Anyone seen any performance charts?

In operation 2006?

Is two years long enough for airport infrastructure to be ready?

Whats the wake turb separation for one of these things?