Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

ANA order A380

Old 2nd Jan 2016, 21:17
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 145
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
Skylon, if you describe the A380 as a complete failure, how would you describe the 747 800 passenger version?

Yes indeed Emirates have ordered a lot of them, but the 777X sales would not be looking very good with out the ME3 orders!
Boe787 is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2016, 21:41
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 384
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe not one airline, but it looks by far and away dependent upon EK for the program.
Yes, but the lions share have been ordered by a single airline......
The same applies to the 777x. Emirates are the largest customer so far, and are taking about half the total production (150 out of 306, sourced from Wikipedia today). Emirates so far have ordered 140 out of 317 A380s. It looks like the ME3 are here to stay, and that's how it's going to be for the foreseeable future. The manufacturers and all the other airlines are just going to have to accept that.

Compared to Airbus and these three A380s, Boeing managed to sell just 10 777x in 2015. So far total orders for 777x are about the same level as total orders for A380s. So far, so Even Stevens.

It took 11 years before the original 747 passed 317 orders and it went on to sell over 1500 airframes
Given that there's a whole lot more aviation going on these days compared to the early days of the 747, presumably that is meant as a qualitative comparison!

In terms of future design developments, the 777x has very little left in it, whereas the A380 has got a few options (more seats, better engines, stretch, lighter materials) to play with none of which are hugely risky or expensive. As more and more airports become slot constrained, the A380 is there waiting to steal the show.

The thing with Emirates is that we all know that they want to buy another 200 A380s, provided the deal is right and they can persuade RR and Airbus to do it. Now that is a serious, serious deal...

Emirates seem to able to fill up their A380s all day every day, and that can only be down to the nice ride for the passengers. It's easy to see why EK want more of the same. It's not clear that the same level of passenger satisfaction will be provided by the 777x

Last edited by msbbarratt; 2nd Jan 2016 at 22:03.
msbbarratt is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2016, 22:11
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 384
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rumoured to be the two ex Skymark and one ex Transaero, delivery to ANA from 2017 onwards if I remember correctly.
The Skymark orders had selected RR engines, the Transaero order went with EA. I can't imagine ANA would be keen to have a mixed fleet.

However:

Serial numbers 162 and 167 have been in storage complete with engines, at TLS for some time, since the Skymark bankruptcy. I believe that they will only need to go to the Germany for interiors.

Serial number 185 was stopped at partial construction, with parts all assigned, and should be a relatively quick delivery.
I've no idea what order #185 corresponds to, but if it is Transaero maybe it didn't get too far down the line to be committed to the EA variant?
msbbarratt is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2016, 23:39
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 77
Posts: 821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
#185 was a Skymark order A380-341 (RR)

#167, another Skymark order appears to be complete and is reported as having been rolled out minus engines.:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/aircra...3528/lightbox/

#162 is complete and has at least the tail painted in Skymark colours.:
Photo Skymark Airlines Airbus A380-841 F-WWSL
As for the original remark re single operator etc etc:
The same applies to the B777x. The first series of orders at Dubai for 259 aircraft included 150 for Emirates. Two years later the total number of orders has grown to 306. 2015 saw 10 new orders.
Would this worry Airbus when their A350 order book currently stands at 775 across all variants?
KelvinD is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2016, 00:42
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We are approaching the interesting time when the early deliveries are due for replacement. The largest user seems to be holding out for a more efficient NG updated variant which may or may not happen.
Even a small number of used aircraft appearing on the market will have an effect on prices and may bring new secondary users into he picture.

The problem with having one very large user is that when they replace their fleet they will find it difficult to find homes for a batch of 50 or more used aircraft.
The Ancient Geek is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2016, 00:46
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EK uses the A380 because it suits their business model and because it allows them to provide a low-cost one-stop option for VFR travelers to a wide swath of the developing world to those who are very price sensitive.
Most of EK's passengers fly in the back of the bus and bought their tickets based upon price, not the promise of service or comfort.
If AI could ever get its act together, EK would loose a lot of its traffic.
It is not lost upon EK management that the airline comprises most of the A380 order book nor that they are the most likely source of future orders.
EK therefore feels entitled to tell Airbus exactly how the aircraft should be further developed and Airbus has little choice other than to listen.
Until and unless a larger group of carriers start showing serious interest in larger numbers of A380 aircraft, EK is the only real game in town for the A380.
Other carriers with less price sensitive buyers have nonstop flights to destinations developed world travelers actually want to go to and deal with slot constraints by charging higher fares for seats on smaller aircraft, which travelers more sensitive to time than price are willing to pay.
fdcg27 is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2016, 01:17
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A lot of the early Emirates examples are leased frames (10 year leases maybe ?) the question is what will the leasing companies do with these aircraft once they get them back? Do they still need to make a profit with them? or has the initial 10 year lease to Emirates paid back on the original outlay? theres lots of questionS that will only really be answered once these leases start to expire.
Dockwell is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2016, 02:49
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Land of 1,000 Dances
Age: 63
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by fdcg27
If AI could ever get its act together, EK would loose a lot of its traffic.
No fdcg27, the word you were looking for was not "loose", it was "lose". The two words look similar, but they have entirely different meanings.

Why, oh why, do Americans seem to have such great difficulty with the correct usage of these two words?
HighAndFlighty is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2016, 09:00
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bangkok, Paris
Posts: 54
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't usually post much here, being only SLF with a bit more knowledge about civil aviation things than average, but...
it allows them to provide a low-cost one-stop option for VFR travelers to a wide swath of the developing world to those who are very price sensitive.
(...)
Most of EK's passengers fly in the back of the bus and bought their tickets based upon price, not the promise of service or comfort.
I'm definitely within this target, and the A380 precisely is what made me switch my own tiny business as a frequent traveller between Europe and S-E Asia from Etihad to Emirates. They offer roughly the same fares, plus or minus variations based on season and promotions, but the service on the A380 is so much better than on the A330/B777 Etihad uses on these routes. Roomier, so much quieter. And yes, they do seem to manage to fill them up so I presume that these flights make money.

Not that's relevant in any way, but I've got a complimentary upgrade to business class for my first flight after enrolling into their frequent flyer programme so I even had a chance to experience the fabulous business class seats on their A380s... definitely something a class higher than what I had a taste of on Etihad's B777

I do feel safer aboard quads too, despite a point based on statistics that someone made in another thread. The fact that QF32 made it to the ground in one piece after so much damage is a testimony to the resilience of this aircraft too IMHO.
alainthailande is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2016, 12:10
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The thing with Emirates is that we all know that they want to buy another 200 A380s, provided the deal is right and they can persuade RR and Airbus to do it. Now that is a serious, serious deal...



Mate ,Airbus would never invest another how many additional billions of euro's in another Neo Project before earning the first dollar on their initial 25 billion dollars ( and counting) they spent on A380 ! Even the outgoing Airbus CEO Louis Gallois was far less optimistic than you..He said that A380 Project the only one we will continue to worry about ..According to many analysts the break even have risen to 700 planes( two years ago it was 450 ) and investing additional 5-6 billions in a new version before reaching that figure would be a disaster Airbus can't afford.
Would Mr Tim Clark participate in development costs? I don't think so? is he ready to sign a firm commitment for 200 aircrafts ? hardly , he might do that say for 100 aircrafts and that is not enough for Airbus to embark on another adventure and it seems that big Europeans Air France, Lufthansa, BA are no longer interested in A380 ..

Airbus would not go ahead with a new version because

1- No other Airline would commit itself at this stage and the biggest airline markets USA and China are still not very enthusiastic
2- The future belongs to twin engine wide bodies as the tremendous success of 777-300ER and A330 clearly demonstrates.

Few years ago, I talked to a Virgin Atlantic maintenance technician who told me
that his airline deeply regrets the decision to buy the A-340-600 instead of 777
and they were loosing millions in long routes like London-Hong Kong- Sydney as a result of this and when I asked him why ? he said that as the launch customer for this aircraft they were offered mouth watering discounts Mr .Branson couldn't refuse.

Well, there must be a reason why 777-300 ER shut down the assembly line of A340....
skylon is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2016, 12:19
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It took 11 years before the original 747 passed 317 orders and it went on to sell over 1500 airframes




Mate, this is a very funny comparison I mean the time frames 1966-1977 and 2001-2012 in terms of volume of air travel ,passenger numbers ,aircraft demand ect ..
skylon is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2016, 13:24
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Westcoast - the only point I was making is that the original 747 was also considered to be sales disaster and a possible company breaker

Time will tell........
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2016, 15:42
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 4,099
Received 69 Likes on 44 Posts
Fair enough. The similarities end there however.
West Coast is online now  
Old 3rd Jan 2016, 16:22
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Skylon, if you describe the A380 as a complete failure, how would you describe the 747 800 passenger version?



Boe787..I'm afraid you are comparing apple with orange mate ..Boeing didn't even invest a fraction of the money Airbus spent on A380..The 747-8 is not an entirely new aircraft, most of the tools they use in assembly line belong to the old 747-400 so its is merely a different version of the old one which has earned its money many times over. The development costs of 747-8 is integrated in the old 747 program so that Boeing needs additional 30-35 aircrafts to sell in order to break even and they will achieve this in few years time as the freighter version of 747-8 is quite popular while A380 didn't build a freighter version ( as a result of John Leahy's arrogance , according to many aviation buff's , you are free to share or reject this view, I personally share it ).

But remember, even the new Air Force One planes will be 747-8 !

In a nutshell, Boeing will not leave any money on the table with regard to 747-8 .... Boeing is not worried about the future of 747-8, the only thing that could hurt Boeing would be a 3-4 years delay in 777xx..
Otherwise they are well prepared for the future with 787-8,-9 and -10
Airbus is worried about A-350-1000 they are still not sure about the final version especially after recent cancellations , one of them came form the Emirates !
skylon is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2016, 20:21
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...and yet...
One airline has done very well with a large and growing A380 fleet.
The A380 is turning out to be more of a niche product than Airbus or anyone else anticipated.
Airbus may not want to invest any more money in this program and they may not have to.
Where else can Tim Clarke go?
The question is whether other carriers could take the plunge in a big way and hub large amounts of traffic through some given point using these huge aircraft.
Thus far, nobody else has had the vision or the nerve to try.
fdcg27 is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2016, 00:16
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: On the lake
Age: 82
Posts: 671
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thus far, nobody else has had the vision or the nerve to try

Sorry, no.

Its mostly a matter of geographical location on the earth's surface between major population centers (and providing exceptional service along with a shareholder prepared to take a risk, backstopped by a generous uncle alongside to share it!).
twochai is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2016, 02:20
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 69
Posts: 4,554
Received 323 Likes on 157 Posts
Westcoast - the only point I was making is that the original 747 was also considered to be sales disaster and a possible company breaker
HH, I don't think you can make that claim either. The 747 was originally launched with a goal of only 200 aircraft being produced. The assumption being that it would be a short term stop gap until supersonic aircraft came on-line to take over the long haul market (which is also why it has the upper deck cockpit to facilitate conversion to a freighter).
Most of the money that Boeing hemorrhaged in the early 1970s was because problems with the JT9D engine held up the delivery of completed aircraft, and the cancellation of the Boeing SST meant the immediate write-off of the tens of millions that had already been spent.

Yes, Boeing very nearly went bankrupt in the early 1970s, but lack of sales of the 747 was not a primary factor.
tdracer is online now  
Old 4th Jan 2016, 02:34
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,789
Received 8 Likes on 4 Posts
The 380 would also do well in the slot constrained high density short haul scenario. Might be a replacement for the 747D.
Dan Winterland is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2016, 04:01
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by skylon
Few years ago, I talked to a Virgin Atlantic maintenance technician who told me[/COLOR][/COLOR]
that his airline deeply regrets the decision to buy the A-340-600 instead of 777
and they were loosing millions in long routes like London-Hong Kong- Sydney as a result of this and when I asked him why ? he said that as the launch customer for this aircraft they were offered [COLOR=#000000][COLOR=#252525]mouth watering discounts Mr .Branson couldn't refuse.
As much as I like him overall, I still remember Sir Richard saying how he ordered the 340-600 to provide European jobs(sort of like the whole reason for Airbus's and especially the A380's existence which has cost so many good jobs elsewhere). Glad to see it come back to bite him.
JammedStab is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2016, 04:25
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: FL, USA
Posts: 411
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
FWIW


Boeing did a study years ago and found that a majority of 747 buyers (80%?) bought the jet for it's range and not the size.


Scratching my head at Emirates when they add A380 service to places like DUB. I also wonder how the numbers would work for AB and Emirates with an upgraded A380 replacing earlier versions with residual values near scrap metal prices.


I may be wrong, but is it a fact the double decker design prohibits and afterlife as a freighter?
WhatsaLizad? is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.