A380 IS A GAS HOG (SUV of the AIR)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Macclesfield
Age: 53
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Numbers
I am at a loss as to how you get your fuel costings they make no sense.
The price in recent times may have increased, but to the levels you suggest.
FUELBOY
The price in recent times may have increased, but to the levels you suggest.
FUELBOY
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Gweriniaeth Cymru
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why are you comparing 777-ER (a single deck a/c) with the A380 (double deck a/c) - a more "real world" comparison surely would be the 747-400? n'est ce pas.....
and in a few years you can compare the 747-8, until then I look forward to seeing your revised figures.
Regards,
N1 Vibes
(neither living/working in two-loose or see-addle)
and in a few years you can compare the 747-8, until then I look forward to seeing your revised figures.
Regards,
N1 Vibes
(neither living/working in two-loose or see-addle)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll stay out of the debate on whether the fuel burn numbers are accurate or not other than to mention that Airbus does have a history of overrating their aircraft fuel efficiency such as the A340-500 which has been a sore point with SQ and other carriers. But the fuel efficiency may not be so much of an issue with the A380 as the larger number of passengers going into airports where slots are very valuable such as LHR. Airlines simply cannot fly two aircraft if they don't have the slots. That is where the A380 shines.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: middle of nowhere
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We just have to wait until the two aircraft fly the same route, the same day - and then the glory will be over (for which one i presume but do not know).
EK unveiled the 340-500s poor performance, when it flew the same route as the 777-300ER. On the ME thread there was two flightplans from LIDO posted lately to prove it.
I remember when i flew the MD11 out of JNB, with full load, and next to us was a 340-300, same load (we had to give numbers on r/t), flying very closesly the same distance. With three knots tail, they were stuck and we flew happily ever after. So much about how very much better the 340 was propagated.
It is in the field that they prove themselves. I would just want a flightplan for the same day SIN-LHR from both aircraft, full pax + remaining capacity in cargo, and then we'd be able to calculate per capita burn and per ton burn.
EK unveiled the 340-500s poor performance, when it flew the same route as the 777-300ER. On the ME thread there was two flightplans from LIDO posted lately to prove it.
I remember when i flew the MD11 out of JNB, with full load, and next to us was a 340-300, same load (we had to give numbers on r/t), flying very closesly the same distance. With three knots tail, they were stuck and we flew happily ever after. So much about how very much better the 340 was propagated.
It is in the field that they prove themselves. I would just want a flightplan for the same day SIN-LHR from both aircraft, full pax + remaining capacity in cargo, and then we'd be able to calculate per capita burn and per ton burn.
I've been told rough figures for the A380 are 12 tonnes an hour. The 747-400 burns around 10 tonnes an hour. So it burns 20% more fuel but doesn't carry 20% more pax!! 
I think you will find head to head a 777 will slaughter it over the same route.
I think you will find head to head a 777 will slaughter it over the same route.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Near sheep!
Posts: 915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you will find head to head a 777 will slaughter it over the same route.
I thought the purpose was to get a large number of passengers onto the ground, using just the one landing slot.
Anyone know the figures for a PA-28 passenger/mile. Because that would be just as relevant in this dispute!!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This reminds of the gent who walked into a Rolls dealership and inquired about the mileage. The sales agent responded, if you need to ask then you can’t afford a Rolls.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: brighouse UK
Age: 87
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Af Triple 7
Air France website shows Economy config as 3-3-3 on normal longhaul and 3-4-3 on Carib and Ind Ocean routes.Who is kidding who ?
Last edited by dh dragon; 16th May 2008 at 10:49. Reason: spelling
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been told rough figures for the A380 are 12 tonnes an hour. The 747-400 burns around 10 tonnes an hour. So it burns 20% more fuel but doesn't carry 20% more pax!!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in the magical land of beer and chocolates
Age: 53
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Comparing SQs 747-400 with similar proportion of first/business/economy 12/50/313 against 12/60/399 the A380 carries 25% more pax even given the larger first suites. So fuel burn per pax is slightly lower for the A380.
The A380 ,even with a close to max TOW, can very quickly proceed to the higher more economical flightlevels.
It is not uncommon for it to go straight to FL350 (in a relative short time) where it consumes about 12T/hr.
Just to compare ; the A380 has between 16 and 20 tons of fuel left after landing , IIRC,this is just a bit more than a regular 747 has left meaning the fuel consumption is really not that much higher on a 380.
Also when need arises and you're unable to get to higher flightlevels (let's say flying Europe-> US in the morning when most traffic comming from the US are clogging up the higher airways and you'll have to stay around 30000 ft or so) the supercritical wingdesign on the A380 makes only for a limited fuel penalty , on the older 747-200/300/400 the effect is certainly much worse.
Get to grips with it even if you're an avid Boeing supporter you'll have to concede to the fact that the 380 is a marvellous engineering accomplishment
and is by far the most economical thing flying these days (provided you can fill it enough on a regular base!!!).
The 787 and whatever else Boeing ,Airbus , ???, is going to come up with in the future is going to be hopefully at least as much a big step forward because if it's not the whole future of the airliner industry is going to look a bit bleak, hell we might even have to refer back to the old zeppelin if fuel prices keep rising like they are now today.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Estonia
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We just have to wait until the two aircraft fly the same route, the same day - and then the glory will be over (for which one i presume but do not know).
Guest
Posts: n/a
No axe to grind
I can't stop (unconsciously) comparing the 380 to the Spruce Goose.
The eight engined giant was built as a stubborn and assertive "Told you so" by an unhinged aviation great. The Airbus gives one a feeling similar to a camel (a horse designed by a committee). At a time when aviation had its wits, ETOPS developed (1990~). That was the time when others envisioned the 20 wheeled wonder from Toulouse. Hangar talk aside, aviation is almost always about profit and loss, so the jury will be out for a while (but I think not long). In the little ViperFan, money is no object.
PedantDetent:
(Yes I am aware the Hughes Hercules was built of Birch, not Spruce).
The eight engined giant was built as a stubborn and assertive "Told you so" by an unhinged aviation great. The Airbus gives one a feeling similar to a camel (a horse designed by a committee). At a time when aviation had its wits, ETOPS developed (1990~). That was the time when others envisioned the 20 wheeled wonder from Toulouse. Hangar talk aside, aviation is almost always about profit and loss, so the jury will be out for a while (but I think not long). In the little ViperFan, money is no object.
PedantDetent:
(Yes I am aware the Hughes Hercules was built of Birch, not Spruce).
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slip & turn, very well possible that you will never fly one (me neighter).
The A380 will become a great success for sure. Latest with the increased costs of kerosin. Latest when EK has some hundert of them on the tarmac, other airlines are forced to order. There is simply no airline that can afford not to buy it, except maybe US majors, where there is a different route structure. There were times that US majors also didn't have 747s btw.
The A380 will become a great success for sure. Latest with the increased costs of kerosin. Latest when EK has some hundert of them on the tarmac, other airlines are forced to order. There is simply no airline that can afford not to buy it, except maybe US majors, where there is a different route structure. There were times that US majors also didn't have 747s btw.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,095
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Dani but I disagree, you are correct to say there is a market for the A380, problem is it is too small to generate enough orders for the type to break even on cost. Airlines simply don't need that many, even with the price of fuel going airlines still require flexibility.
Don't be fooled by the EK order either, that could all change as market requirements become more obvious.
Don't be fooled by the EK order either, that could all change as market requirements become more obvious.