Speednews is reporting that Virgin has pushed back delivery of the A380
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Skagness on the beach
Posts: 882
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speednews is reporting that Virgin has pushed back delivery of the A380
Here is the direct quote:
VIRGIN ATLANTIC is deferring delivery of its first A380 (six ordered) by 18 months from mid-2006 to early 2008 to
ensure it says that new cabin features are ready and airport facilities (citing LAX) will be ready to handle the aircraft.
VIRGIN ATLANTIC is deferring delivery of its first A380 (six ordered) by 18 months from mid-2006 to early 2008 to
ensure it says that new cabin features are ready and airport facilities (citing LAX) will be ready to handle the aircraft.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Crawley
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a long experience of dealing with inflight service issues, including the specification and sourcing of equipment. It is completely and utterly incomprehensible to me that any airline can possibly say that it will take several years to get the inflight service designed. To say in spring 2004 that a new aeroplane delivery needs to be delayed for 18 months for inflight service planning reasons defies all credibility.
Equally to say that ground facilities at LAX are a problem is also incomprehensible. The maximum time needed at LAX will be say 18 months.
LHR will be the Virgin base for the A380. That will be ready in 2006.
I do not know exactly what schedules are planned for the A380 but if you start with the highest density routes in the VS network you begin with JFK. If you assume that there would be a twice daily flight to JFK and a daily LHR-HKG-SYD you have used up all six aircraft on order.
This suggests to me that there is some other reason why this order is being delayed, Perhaps the aircraft itself is behind schedule, although it is unimaginable to me that a company of the competence of Airbus would have a delay of this magnitude. Perhaps it is because Virgin is beginning to realise that the investment in these aircraft is very risky?
Whatever an announcement at this stgae that a long delay is being planned does not seem to make much sense.
Equally to say that ground facilities at LAX are a problem is also incomprehensible. The maximum time needed at LAX will be say 18 months.
LHR will be the Virgin base for the A380. That will be ready in 2006.
I do not know exactly what schedules are planned for the A380 but if you start with the highest density routes in the VS network you begin with JFK. If you assume that there would be a twice daily flight to JFK and a daily LHR-HKG-SYD you have used up all six aircraft on order.
This suggests to me that there is some other reason why this order is being delayed, Perhaps the aircraft itself is behind schedule, although it is unimaginable to me that a company of the competence of Airbus would have a delay of this magnitude. Perhaps it is because Virgin is beginning to realise that the investment in these aircraft is very risky?
Whatever an announcement at this stgae that a long delay is being planned does not seem to make much sense.
Self Loathing Froggy
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: elsewhere
Age: 18
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Les Echos" (French financial paper) is reporting today that this has to do with rumours about the A380 being overweight by ten tons or so, which would compromise its long range capacity. (website here but only the summary is available for free 
)
Bit surprised that these rumours haven't been posted here before.
)Bit surprised that these rumours haven't been posted here before.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to me that Virgin is seeing lots and lots of problems with this latest effort from Airbus during its intro period, and doesn't want to be involved in any of it!
Don't blame 'em!
Cheers
Don't blame 'em!
Cheers
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The keys to Virgin's point of view seem to be not that the airports slated to take the A380 aren't going to be able to, nor that the aircraft won't be flying, but that the level of service possible at scheduled introduction would not reflect the ambitions of the airline.
The airline has quite ambitious plans for the environment within the aeroplane, and for the level of service delivery throughout the passengers' "travel experience" (yes, I know...!). There do seem to be problems with suppliers not being able to deliver the fully-specced interior at scheduled rollout (Virgin was burned badly in the J2000 fiasco and is in no hurry to repeat the experience) and, while LHR, JFK and LAX all say that they can handle the aircraft from 2006, what they don't say is that there will be considerable compromises in the service offered initially. Virgin wants more than just a parking space and a lot of buses....
They also say in their press releases that they have already exercised some options on the A340-600, are looking at more, and are assessing other options to take up the slack. I would suggest that the B777 is closer than you think.....
The airline has quite ambitious plans for the environment within the aeroplane, and for the level of service delivery throughout the passengers' "travel experience" (yes, I know...!). There do seem to be problems with suppliers not being able to deliver the fully-specced interior at scheduled rollout (Virgin was burned badly in the J2000 fiasco and is in no hurry to repeat the experience) and, while LHR, JFK and LAX all say that they can handle the aircraft from 2006, what they don't say is that there will be considerable compromises in the service offered initially. Virgin wants more than just a parking space and a lot of buses....
They also say in their press releases that they have already exercised some options on the A340-600, are looking at more, and are assessing other options to take up the slack. I would suggest that the B777 is closer than you think.....
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
under_exposed, the height difference is probably negligable in this example. And the size of the upper deck is irrelevant, the original posted queried doing it in high winds. In that case, it wouldn't matter if it was a 744 or A380, or indeed upper or lower deck, winds would affect all slides.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Retford, UK
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking as regular SLF long-haul, and given how long all the processing can take for a 747, I am dreading travelling on an A380.
Chief areas of concern would be mammoth queues and delays for check-in, gate, de-planing, immigration, carousel and customs.
I can readily understand Virgin's desire not to let their passengers be "beta-testers" for the handling of A380s. The debacles that will surely occur will hopefully make sure that things are smoothed out by 2007.
- Michael
Chief areas of concern would be mammoth queues and delays for check-in, gate, de-planing, immigration, carousel and customs.
I can readily understand Virgin's desire not to let their passengers be "beta-testers" for the handling of A380s. The debacles that will surely occur will hopefully make sure that things are smoothed out by 2007.
- Michael
Controversial, moi?
And of course it couldn't be that plans are announced with a big fanfare, and all the attendant publicity, before being quietly delayed or dropped.
No, not at all likely.
Now where did I put my copy of the unauthorised biography......
No, not at all likely.
Now where did I put my copy of the unauthorised biography......
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: sussex
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Word from virgin is that they've been trying to sell the slots and may plump for the 777.........best they get the paint brushes out and start removing that silly '4 engines for safety' from the side of their cowlings.Seem to remember good old harry goodman buying MD11 slots with a view to an easy profit !
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I very much doubt Virgin is in the business of ordering aircraft for the relatively trivial justification of trying to profit from delivery slots. Given the huge amount of work that is going on at Virgin for the A380, it would make no sense. Leave that kind of rubbish to car enthusiasts with money to burn!
As for the '4 engines 4 longhaul' logo, I believe that is an Airbus trademark - Virgin's 747s don't carry it, though they do have one saying 'the power of 4'.
As for the '4 engines 4 longhaul' logo, I believe that is an Airbus trademark - Virgin's 747s don't carry it, though they do have one saying 'the power of 4'.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Cave Creek, Arizona - USA
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation Week: VS B777-300ERs
The latest issue of AW&ST mentions that ILFC is negotiating a deal with Virgin for B777-300ERs to replace A340-300s. Just curious if anyone has more info. Thanks.
eal401- good point. Can the 744 offer more options because of the more limited number of people (on a full flight) being assisted by the cabin crew and the four (two on shorter legs) pilots who are next door? Let's ask one of our 400 pilots.