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 6th Jan 2016, 06:07
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 101
Received 21 Likes on 15 Posts
QF have had a couple of diversions there.
Chris2303 is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 06:16
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry - QF A380's diverting into Haneda or Narita??

Didn't think any QF A380 routes went near enough to Tokyo to be considered for a diversion....but happy to be corrected.
galdian is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 07:46
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 58
Posts: 957
Received 110 Likes on 60 Posts
Originally Posted by msbbarratt
In contrast, and if Emirates are anything to go by, it seems that Airbus have managed to make the A380 reasonably economic to fly....
And yet EK are apparently refusing to order any more A380 unless Airbus re-engineer it to make it more fuel efficient. Perhaps the economics are not quite as favourable as we’ve been led to believe?
Andy_S is online now  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 07:50
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,201
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
kiwi grey and others,

If we agree that 10 abreast on 777 is torture why people still flying on airlines with such a configuration?
Rwy in Sight is online now  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 08:20
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,977
Received 299 Likes on 154 Posts
Originally Posted by Andy_S
And yet EK are apparently refusing to order any more A380 unless Airbus re-engineer it to make it more fuel efficient. Perhaps the economics are not quite as favourable as we’ve been led to believe?
It's called negotiation. Never admit that you're satisfied with what you've got.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 08:24
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: England
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Andy_S
And yet EK are apparently refusing to order any more A380 unless Airbus re-engineer it to make it more fuel efficient. Perhaps the economics are not quite as favourable as we’ve been led to believe?
Hardly, EK have what? 71 A380 orders in the system, I can't see even them being in a hurry to increase that number..

As has been said, RR have updated the Trent 900 with the Trent 900EP and subsequently the Trent 900EP2, not vast steps but they quote 1% and 0.8% improvements in fuel consumption.

After this, there is talk of resurrecting the stretch version (A380-900) or similar with Trent XWB based engines (used on the A350).

None of this is 'new' info, they have been kicking it round for several years.

No manufacturer is going to leave a product to go stale, as new engines etc become available, it's natural they would look to incorporate them.

Originally Posted by Longtimer
my son flew from LAX to MEL on a QF 747 (refitted) and then back on their A380. He found the 747 much more comfortable (economy class both directions).
well, having done the same on the LHR-SYD route with Qantas, I go out of my way to avoid the 747 option, less room, smaller seats, less pressurisation, much more noise, etc etc.

As has been said already, I actively pick flight to use A380 over 777/747's.

If I am going to be on a plane for some 22+ hours, I would rather it be a nice one.
Scuffers is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 09:20
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Age: 68
Posts: 716
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
Galdian

You are well informed. The JCAB have fought tooth and nail to keep the 380 out of Haneda. At one stage they were insisting that Skymark prove the a/c on domestic routes prior to using it on international routes! They also were insisting on using the a/c for base training at Haneda.

The only reason ANA is even looking at the 380 is because it is part of a make good for Airbus and various other interests that were tangled up in the Skymark debacle.
VR-HFX is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 09:34
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: london
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ANA have officially denied this rumour.....
mudcity is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 09:49
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RR have made quite a few improvements to the efficiency of the Trent series since the A380 was introduced so it could well be possible to incorporate these changes into a revised engine for the A380. This could give a fuel burn improvement of maybe as much as 5% with only minor tweaks to the airframe.
This could be enough to satisfy customers without the enormous investment required for a full Neo variant
Not possible unfortunately.

As has been said, RR have updated the Trent 900 with the Trent 900EP and subsequently the Trent 900EP2, not vast steps but they quote 1% and 0.8% improvements in fuel consumption.

After this, there is talk of resurrecting the stretch version (A380-900) or similar with Trent XWB based engines (used on the A350).
More like it.

In fact Emirates have said that if Airbus can deliver a fuel burn reduction of at least 10% on an aircraft basis they will order a minimum of 100 neos. Airbus/RR know that this needs a step beyond the XWB engine hence discussion about the Advance. Combined with aerodynamic tweaks Airbus say this should get 12% net of installation losses. RR was pushing this strongly last year but seems to have gone quiet - maybe their recently revealed financial woes have led them to curtail investment?
Torquelink is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 09:53
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
what airline, of any size/experience - and without any outside pressure - would order 3 of anything??

mudcity: I'm sure any denial would have been made by an old, esteemed Japanese male and therefore his statement MUST be honest and correct based ONLY on the fact he's old, esteemed, male and Japanese.

Any facts to the contrary must be false....this is the Japanese way.


Gambate!

Cheers all.
galdian is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 10:10
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
VR-HFX

I'd suggest it goes a tad deeper, Airbus were preferring the Delta option for Skymark until within 48 hours of the final crunch...then they swung to the ANA option.

Gotta be a reason for that, this is the beginning (Part 1) of the payoff EOFS.
Parts 2 and onwards to follow.

Bring on the sake...for further negotiations for the benefit of ..............
(insert the Japanese bureaucracy/politics/businessmen of your choice who you think will derive the greatest payoff....ahem, apologies, greatest benefit for the benefit of Japan).

Regards the JCAB fighting to keep A380's out of Haneda: individuals can decide for themselves how much of that was legitimate wake turbulance consideration/trafic flow Vs certain local airlines not being able to compete.
Both reasonable points.
galdian is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 13:06
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: England
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Torquelink
In fact Emirates have said that if Airbus can deliver a fuel burn reduction of at least 10% on an aircraft basis they will order a minimum of 100 neos. Airbus/RR know that this needs a step beyond the XWB engine hence discussion about the Advance. Combined with aerodynamic tweaks Airbus say this should get 12% net of installation losses. RR was pushing this strongly last year but seems to have gone quiet - maybe their recently revealed financial woes have led them to curtail investment?
it's unrealistic to expect the Trent 900 to make that kind of gains, infact, I can see RR not doing much more to the 900 that's not 100% backward compatible (as in older engines being upgraded), as they might just as well sell the Trent XWB as it's already some way ahead of the 900 in terms of fuel efficiency.

that said, to get 10% gains on the A380 is going to require more than just engine work.

XWB has already flown on the A380 (test flights before A350)



edit - and the latest XWB 97..

Scuffers is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 13:20
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WOW! 62000lb EXTRA thrust [reading across wiki info for both top rated Trent variants] in a quad installation....
glad rag is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 14:48
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: se england
Posts: 1,604
Likes: 0
Received 67 Likes on 30 Posts
This thread underlines an interesting point about making things that appeal to customers

The 777 appeals to Boeing customers in the form of the airline fiancial analysts but I will go out ona bit of limb and say its a pretty horrible plane to fly on. Too narrow , noisy and unstable in the sense that it rather wallows through the sky.I am not saying its bad plane because it is a terrific engineering achievement.

On the other than the much derided (at least on here) 380 is also an engineering wonder but its much smother and quieter with more room and much more comfortable cabin environment

So and I think this is true despite my small sample size passengers like the A 380 accountants like the T7 . So who are the real 'customers' for airliners

While the 380 is superior at hub to hub routes, again much derided here , the fact is that with the exception of Frankfurt and the ME most global hub airports serve global cities with a very very large 'local' population usually the most affluent in any given country so for me organic growth is going to push more existing and some new customers the way of the 380 even if it like the 74 takes agood few years to come into its own. All major airports are either slot constrained or will be in a few eyars anyway.
pax britanica is offline  
Old 6th Jan 2016, 20:13
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alaska
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Refitted QF 747

We fly the LAX-SDY roundtrip, QF economy, every year and seek out the 380 because it seems more comfortable to me but primarily because of the better Personal Entertainment System vs the 747-400. I would be interested to know what has been "refitted" on the QF 747's.
JD2010 is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2016, 00:05
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SLF here, flying DC to Europe from time to time and have always for whatever reason gotten a 777 no matter which carrier. Paid a little extra the latest time for one leg on the Air France A380. It was a great flight, so quiet, and lots of options for choosing a seat with a little extra room. One the way back I discovered that AF has now reconfigured their 777 for 10-across Again I paid a little extra for more room but the poor suffering bastards who did not were obviously miserable. I'm a fan and would go out of my way to be on the A380 again.
metrognomicon is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2016, 05:03
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: scotland
Posts: 119
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The refitted QF 747 is good, using the same seats and IFE as the 380 (I was a passenger on it a few times when it was running SYD-DFW), but I still prefer up the back of the 380 by a long shot. Unlike the cabin crew, who don't seem to like it at all.
nebpor is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2016, 08:31
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Think the Y class seat on the 744 is 17in wide while its 18in on the A380. I believe that the pitch is the same though.
Torquelink is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2016, 10:46
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not according to seatguru.

On both the QF A380 and B744 fleets the seat width is 17.5" with 31" pitch.
TopBunk is offline  
Old 7th Jan 2016, 10:53
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That's interesting - Airbus insist all A380 Y class seats are 18" but I guess if QF were standardising across the fleet they'd have to be the same.
Torquelink is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


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.