Scrapping of A380

[flysmiless]

Scrapping of two A380s lined at Tarbes L airport..

Actually these aircraft are removed from operations due to lack of business isn't it?
Not because of end of engine or structural hours isn't it?

If above is true, can't they use it for cargo only rather than scrapping,,

Video

[CurtainTwitcher]

Depends upon the economics. Conversion costs, fuel burn vs likely returns. Likely to be nil resale value.

[Imagegear]

Might make a really nice three up and four down. Well insulated and at less than the cost of a typical Notting Hill Semi.

IG

[cobol]

It's an environmental solution to the housing crisis. Mounted vertically, the holds can be the lift shaft & service tunnel etc. The wings can be fitted with solar panels and the top flat would be a penthouse for high net worth individuals.

Looks better than some of Foster's creations as well..

[kcockayne]

I think that it was originally stated that Hi Fly were taking 2 A380s, although this does not appear to have happened. Does anyone have any updated info. on Hi Fly's plans for the 380 ?

[Trav a la]

Originally Posted by kcockayne

I think that it was originally stated that Hi Fly were taking 2 A380s, although this does not appear to have happened. Does anyone have any updated info. on Hi Fly's plans for the 380 ?

1X A380 is flying for HiFly Malta.

[Less Hair]

It flew for Air Austral end of april.
The two scrapped A380s are very early ones that are non standard. Parting them out is more profitable than converting their cabins and reuse them as airliners.

[Rated De]

Rather amazing for an aircraft with development costs over $9.5 billion that the service life of the aircraft is far less than two decades. With a list price of USD$445 million that is a big bet gone wrong.
Given the hand and glove approach of the manufacturer with potential customer airlines, it shows that at times even the industry gets it wrong.

[Less Hair]

The A380 concept matured over tens of years. While the airline industry moved from carrying more and more passengers through hubs to point to point with smaller aircraft and a focus on business travellers. This is why there are 787 and A350 now.

[Rated De]

Originally Posted by Less Hair

The A380 concept matured over tens of years. While the airline industry moved from carrying more and more passengers through hubs to point to point with smaller aircraft and a focus on business travellers. This is why there are 787 and A350 now.

Agreed.

The pressure to be fuel efficient will only increase as the drums of climate change continue to beat.
A whole different discussion. However what is pertinent is that the industry perceives a 'business as usual' approach with incremental technology changes will be sufficient. The jury is out on that one..

[DaveReidUK]

Originally Posted by Less Hair

The two scrapped A380s are very early ones that are non standard. Parting them out is more profitable than converting their cabins and reuse them as airliners.

Though they did both fly for SIA for nearly ten years.

[Less Hair]

And then SIA ordered five new built ones to phase out their five oldest. SIA was the first airline to operate A380s. Airbus optimized many details over the years, materials, wing twist, more common cabin systems and such.
The earliest aircraft were to much custom tailored and had needed wiring and rib repairs.

[flying phil 2007]

Those two early heavier A380’s were owned by a leasing syndicate.. they have now cashed in their investment and made a very good return. Worth more as parts. That’s business.

[Less Hair]

The lease didn't work out as planned. They had hoped for at least a full second term. The first term mainly covers the aircraft and the leasing company's cost, the second term usually is the profitable one for the investors. SIA took them only for one term (as planned) and no second term customer could be found.

[atakacs]

Originally Posted by flying phil 2007

Those two early heavier A380’s were owned by a leasing syndicate.. they have now cashed in their investment and made a very good return. Worth more as parts. That’s business.

Do you have any backing for that (I mean the "good deal" part)? My understanding is that their total return was a little over 1% p.a.

[737 Driver]

Originally Posted by flysmiless

If above is true, can't they use it for cargo only rather than scrapping,,

Concur with why these two aircraft are being parted out. It is also my understanding that the A380 will not make an easy cargo conversion because of the work required to beef up the cabin floor. Maybe someone else who has a better background can comment?

[Jack330]

Bad investment

I wonder what Emirates will do with more than 100 380’s in the future, unlike a B777 or 787 or even a 767, the A380 will have a value of zero in a decade or so.
basically a big part of ek fleet could be considered a loss of money, I don’t think airbus will help at all since the production stopped and there’s no aftermarket at all.
The good times are over for those Middle East carriers, they all lose money despite the fake forget numbers they show off to the public.
A350, B787 B777x are the future I guess

[tdracer]

Originally Posted by 737 Driver

Concur with why these two aircraft are being parted out. It is also my understanding that the A380 will not make an easy cargo conversion because of the work required to beef up the cabin floor. Maybe someone else who has a better background can comment?

The A380 simply does not pencil out well as a freighter. Max Zero Fuel Weight is too low - it has great range but can't carry a heavy load - and the cargo market is based around 3,000 to 4,000 mile legs so range above that doen't have much value (747 Freighters seldom even use the center wing fuel tank for that reason - better to carry more payload and make a stop for gas). The main deck would need massive strengthening to carry a reasonable cargo load, and the upper deck is all but unusable for freight - even if it was strengthened, you'd need new, specialized (i.e. expensive) GSE to get the stuff up there. Plus all that extra structure would increase the empty weight without raising the MZFW so now you can carry even less cargo. Of course, there is the option of increasing the MZFW, but that's a huge, very expensive effort (both non-recurring development and recurring to upgrade the individual airframes). The flight deck location effectively rules out an opening nose door for oversized stuff.
Or you can go pick up a 747F and be good to go.

BTW

The pressure to be fuel efficient will only increase as the drums of climate change continue to beat.

Although better fuel efficiency was an early claim for the A380, the bottom line is that the A350, 787, and soon 777X have significantly better fuel burn per seat mile than the A380 (even the A330 NEO is probably better). And the big twins will take you where you want to go, not to some hub where you have to get on another flight to get to your destination.

[The AvgasDinosaur]

Let’s not forget these A380s now being withdrawn are the very early non standard ones. Not unlike the very early production B.787s. Which have also proved very difficult to sell. We may get a better picture when later built examples come to market.
Be lucky
David

[CargoOne]

Originally Posted by Jack330

I wonder what Emirates will do with more than 100 380’s in the future, unlike a B777 or 787 or even a 767, the A380 will have a value of zero in a decade or so.

B777 will be difficult too. Very limited number of operators outside the first tier and they typically operate just a couple of aircraft. Remarketing of 777s is difficult already today and we are not into the massive wave of re-deliveries from original operators yet. There is no room for 1300x 772&773 on second hand market except freighter conversions.