Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner) If you're not a professional pilot but want to discuss issues about the job, this is the best place to loiter. You won't be moved on by 'security' and there'll be plenty of experts to answer any questions.

A 380 (Merged)

Old 21st Mar 2007, 12:27
  #281 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Derby
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"The A380 is a dead duck and may well take Airbus down with it."
Is this borne out of some degree of clairvoyancy or obsessively desperate hope? 747-800 anyone?
Just my 2 cents worth.
EGBM is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2007, 10:26
  #282 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Parabellum,
The A380 was intended as a B747 replacement with similar market share but that replacement is the B777 with all it's variants and those Airbus 340 that can compete. The A380 will never exceed fifty aircraft in any one company, unlike the B747-400 which exceeded 40 to 50 in quite a few companies.

The A380 is a dead duck and may well take Airbus down with it.
All I can say is 'hopeful' nonsense! The American carriers don't want/can't afford it. The rest of the world does. I've seen the traffic on the Europe/Far East routes. Look at the traffic through Singapore/Hong Kong! Assuming no great recession, all the European majors need it for their Far East routes and Atlantic prime services. The Far East majors also for those routes, and trans-Pacifics. There IS a market there- Boeing are developing the 747-800 for it! But the A380 will have the added cachet. See how the opposition flying whacked out 767s and 777s (I think the A340 will fade away) will fare then!

Thank you for re-quoting your words. I hope they will be flung back in your face in a few years!
Rainboe is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2007, 10:41
  #283 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Rainboe,

Different markets. You won't fill an A380 between Los Angeles and San Francisco - so NZ are right to put a 777 on that run - but you will fill an A380 between Singapore and Heathrow - so every man and his dog who is planning to, is right to run them on that run. Likewise you'd be barking to put anything bigger than a 767 between Manchester and New York.

To say that those running 767s and 777s on the same route won't be able to compete with A380s on the same run - that's a generalisation which cannot stand up to examination. Some carriers' business models will prefer one big run a day, whilst others will offer smaller aircraft more frequently. Under your logic, for example, KJFK-EGLL would today be run almost wholly by a smaller number of 747 runs. Instead, we have all the ex-EGLL carriers crowing about their frequencies - some of which are 747, but many of which are not.

Certainly there are some high-demand routes which will stand multiple A380 runs per day (eg. EK London to Dubai, which is why EK are buying 45 of them - and let's face it, it's not that big a leap from there to 50 airframes, which I am sure EK have in mind... ).

For others, it will be a chance to cut costs as if you do want to move 500 people a day from A to B, then it might be cheaper (considering landing and nav fees, G/H charges, etc.) to do it all in one big hit than two smaller airframes; but in doing so, you give your customers less choice in scheduling than with two flights. So horses for courses accoring to your business model and target market.

Whether one likes the look of the beast or not, there are some routes which will support an A380. Whether the manufacturer has over-estimated the number of such routes, only time will tell. We can argue about it all we like, as an EU taxpayer I hope it works so that my tax input (in whatever form) hasn't been wasted and I put a level of trust in all the EDHEC and INSEAD graduates crunching the numbers in Toulouse that there is a business case for it. It's called 'risk management' and every business does it in one way or another.
Taildragger67 is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2007, 10:55
  #284 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rainboe - In a rather untypical way you have totally missed the major point that I was making, (and which won't ever be flung back in my face ).
I agree, there IS a market for the A380, it is a niche market for a relatively small number of aircraft that will never, ever allow Airbus to break even. The opposition will actually be flying the B747, B747-800, B787 and possibly the A350 as well as some very young and able B777 of all variants.

So, it isn't hopeful nonsense at all to say that the A380 is a dead duck and may well take Airbus down with it. The European trade unions haven't finished yet so Airbus have some very difficult times ahead with the possibility of even further delays. At the moment the order book is shrinking which isn't a good sign.

Possibly a technical success but definitely a commercial failure.
parabellum is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2007, 11:22
  #285 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Derby
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
These are very confident predictions.
EGBM is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2007, 15:50
  #286 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Taildragger, you have no concept of the market. BA alone has 57 747s, about the same 777s. On their prime markets, 3 LAX 747s could become 2. 3 SINs a day could become 2 380s. BKK could go to 2. HKG to 2, without taking much option away from the passengers. I don't know how many Qantas 747s plow up to the UK. SIA has an incredible number. CPT to 2 A380s a day, JNB. That is today's traffic. If the Far East economies keep expanding, we can add another A 380 to each of those places....a day. And that is just BA and the UK! When SIA, Korean, China, JAL start attacking the US West Coast, wherever you have 3 747s, 2 A380s will handle it, allowing a third before too long.

BA's hesitancy in ordering doesn't mean anything. In fact in the near future a 380 is coming to them to be closely examined. BA usually waits to place orders. I'm convinced in 20 years time, BA will be operating a very big fleet, SIA a ginormous one, JAL too. Meanwhile, US carriers, all in bankruptcy 'protection', will be telling everybody how knackered 777s and little 787s offer the customer 'a better travel experience'! Bit like their ancient 767s competing on prime routes.

Airbus is in nowhere near the situation Boeing was in 35 yeas ago. The 747 was close to breaking the company, and Seattle. And it had serious problems-gear collapses, excrutiating engine problems and flight control problems. Any airliner program has problems, that's why not every country can build them. Some of you are acting as if you'd never seen such a thing before. But now the spotters are up in arms.....over a 'firm' landing, a yaw on touchdown, rudders that deflect, engines that appear to be close to the ground, and wings that un-deflect on touchdown! Why do people who know nothing make so much noise?
Rainboe is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2007, 16:02
  #287 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Derby
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well Rainboe I think cutting through the crap it boils down either to the fact it wasn't invented "here" or it hasn't got a Boeing sticker on it. If it did there would be exactly the opposite occurring where suddenly "new journey opportunities" would appear and airlines would be stupid not to buy it.

These claims are made fully in the knowledge that Boeing are trumpetting the -800 to challenge the A380.

It seems there is some sort of Boeing fan club that can't cope with not having the world's largest airliner anymore, much the same when there was no real challenge to Concorde and it was hounded out of the US.

Really not a very mature attitude and a strange one for a "spotters" forum where you'd think variety would be welcomed. Crackers. But disappointingly not unexpected.
EGBM is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2007, 16:14
  #288 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Rainboe,
Mate I don't doubt the numbers you say; however you miss my point. I am not thinking only of BA, but all the mid-size carriers. There are some city pairs where the market wants frequency - to use BA as an example, that's why EGLL slots get clogged by littlies doing zillions of runs a day to Paris, Zurich, etc. rather than just one jumbo a day at 9am.

To use the same example on longer runs, is there enough traffic to do three Bostons a day with A380s? No, there probably is for one, but the market likes the frequency.

As to the mid-sizers, I stick with my example of the Air NZs of the world. Will they fill an A380 on some of their routes? Maybe, but probably not reliably enough to be able to drag a half-full one around the rest of the time. For them, better a consistent 80-85% full 777, with excess demand meaning that they can hike prices, than an average 60% full A380. That's why they stuck with DC10s for years despite QF, PA/UA and others having jumbos on the Pacific runs and why they're now very happy to gradually phase out their 744s for long-halu twins.

Aer Fungus dropped their 747s for A330s, finding it better to offer a few (full) 330s a day across the pond, rather than a few jumbo runs. The 747s nearly bled them dry. They are not the only carrier to have retreated from very large (eg. 747) aircraft. Air Canada, Swiss, most US majors, SAS, TAP, Pakistan spring quickly to mind.

Airlines have gone to the wall with full aircraft in the past, where just to fill seats, they had to drop prices to where it became uneconomic.
Like I said before, the A380 does have a place. But so do the long-haul twins. The latter point is what your posts so far do not appear to appreciate.

Last edited by Taildragger67; 22nd Mar 2007 at 16:28.
Taildragger67 is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2007, 17:53
  #289 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A380 UK Fly-Over - 26 March 2007

If anybody is interested in seeing the A380, here is its timetable for next Monday 26th March.

East Midlands Airport 11.20 - 11.30
RR Derby 11.30 - 11.40
Landing at BAe Filton (Bristol) 12.20 - 12.30
3DAero is offline  
Old 22nd Mar 2007, 19:40
  #290 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Taildragger
I don't doubt the numbers you say; however you miss my point. I am not thinking only of BA, but all the mid-size carriers.
I didn't miss your point. Your point was the A380 would not sell in enough numbers. Now you are talking about mid size carriers. I was making the point that the large carriers will buy the thing in enough numbers. I have no doubt AirNZ, PIA etc won't....it is not an aeroplane for mid-size or US carriers who want to concentrate on point to point- that is another discussion. The big people mover carriers will buy it big time. JAL needed 550 seat 747s 20+ years ago. In a few years we will be looking at stretched A380s- the design is begging for it. But the unique marketing and selling point of the A380 will be its size- just like the 747 which I couldn't wait to travel on and see.
And Aer Lingus had 747s for many years- I flew one of them, the famous 'PZ'. They could have gone for Trijets instead, but they didn't- eventually the A330 served its purposes better.
There seems to be a big problem with a lot of people unable to get their heads around this ratcheting-up in size in aviation. It's coming. It's needed. It was far more marked in 1971 when we went from 160-180 seat DC8s/B707s/VC10s to 350 seat 747s, just as the 1973 oil crisis and recession hit. Now we have a giant stirring in the Far East, the centre of this century's expansion- an enormous developing middle class who are starting to get cars and fridges- from the Gulf through to China. Next they are going to want to travel a bit and see the world as they get rapidly wealthier year by year. Western tourism is static under Governments overtaxing people to pay for their grandiose spending schemes. Much as I love the 747, having flown it for 18 years, it's not the aeroplane for the future. There is a place for 777/787/A350 point to point, but the big long range stuff is for A380. The 747 will make it great as freighters.
Rainboe is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2007, 03:29
  #291 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That's so annoying about the A380 at EMA. I havn't been out of the UK for nearly a year and I have a 4 day holiday to Tuscany booked for 24th-27th,and I only live 10 miles from EMA!
Oh well I suppose Tuscany can't be too bad.
andy_13 is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2007, 07:52
  #292 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Derby
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You might be able to catch it at Filton, Andy, I understand it's there for a week. Like you say though, Tuscany isn't a bad alternative
EGBM is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2007, 10:14
  #293 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rainboe - can you please let me know what you are smoking? An absolute minimum of 600 airframes to break even, no chance!
Your optimism is admirable and your vision is euphoric, time to return to planet earth.
parabellum is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2007, 11:10
  #294 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well you put it so nicely! I don't actually smoke....anything, in fact I'm a rabid anti-smoker. But back to the point. There are 1294 B747s, even in competition with trijets, they sold that many. The 747 cannot carry on indefinitely- it is a basic mid-60s design. In 20 years, it will have no sparkle anymore (a 60 year old design). With aviation growing at more than 5% pa every year, even allowing for larger medium aeroplanes (inc.777!) nibbling away at the bottom of the mass mover market, the A380 will have no competition. The 747 will not be able to match seat/mile costs. So it will have the market to itself. I see no reason why, in an expanding world market, the A380 should not top that figure. As a big people mover, it has no competition, and stretched, it will wipe the market clean. It will sell- they're all looking at it, and waiting. There will be a sudden rush of orders. Look at the DC10, fine aeroplane, but it couldn't match seat/mile costs of the 747- so what happened to it? A nice parking spot in the desert.

Where did you get the figure of breakeven of 600? It started at about 240 and went up, but I question 600? Is that your assumption?

I'm off on my hols now, so some of you blinkered people can now convince yourselves it's doomed without argument!
Rainboe is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2007, 11:39
  #295 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
3D Aero, Thanks for the info - but suely you mean Airbus UK at Filton rather than BAe? BAe sold out but Airbus stays in Britain.

Enjoy the big bird!

Saman
saman is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2007, 12:29
  #296 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 894
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Agree with Rainboe. What I think is misleading people is the rush or orders for the 787, which is a totally different market. The usual timeline for these things is a number of launch orders, maybe a few prior to entry into service, and then an increase in orders once it has proved it can cut the mustard transporting the SLF. In this respect it is the 787 that is proving the exception to the rule, as Boeing have been lucky enough to shift enough units that airlines are almost being panicked into buying it as available delivery slots move further into the distance.

You can largely ignore the USA as far as passenger 380 orders is concerned - 777 seems to be the maximum size that they will buy. Don't forget that it is 6 years since NW ordered their last couple of 744s, and nearly 10 since United did so. I don't see any of the newer US carriers going for them either. India and China are the obvious places where few 380s have been ordered, and I would think that will change in the next 3 years.
Curious Pax is offline  
Old 24th Mar 2007, 10:42
  #297 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: 39N 77W
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What surprises me is the order rate for the 747-8. The first order was about 18 months ago and they've already sold half as many as all the A380s sold in about six years since the first order. I thought the 747-8 was supposed to be very ho-hum. Agreed that most of the orders have been for the freight version.
seacue is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2007, 16:46
  #298 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BAe Filton is correct or rather BAe System Filton

The majority of the site, inc the airfiled is owned by them. Airbus lease parts of the site for their operation and a few years ago bought some of the older buildings which have recently been demolished for regeneration into New airbus facilities
gordonroxburgh is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2007, 18:51
  #299 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Read on the aero-news that the A380 had a hydraulic problem and was in HKG waiting for repair.

Did they get the thing sorted and is the visit to IAD still on the schedule?
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2007, 19:02
  #300 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: No Fixed Abode
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
vapilot2004,
is the visit to IAD still on the schedule?
It must be, passed overhead me about an hour ago in N.Ireland routing Frankfurt-Washington as DLH8948, F-WWJB.
Kestrel_909 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.