A380 IS A GAS HOG (SUV of the AIR)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice vid from the evacuation test http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIaovi1JWyY, from that it would appear its 77.4 seconds to evacuate 871.
I agree though, the additional door pairs are a problem.
I agree though, the additional door pairs are a problem.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Estonia
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course an 850 pax machine wouldn't be built for the long haul routes. They would be high density machines like the 747s within Japan (if we remember).
Which airplane has the most seats?
NOT Japanese domestic. ANA had 594 seats on 747, but does not now have them.
The biggest plane now is Corsair 747-400. 587 seats. Including 558 economy and 29 premium seats.
And Corsair 587 seat 747-400s do fly long flights. Indian Ocean, I think.
The largest number of people carried by 2 engines is Japanese domestic. 524 seats on 777-300 non-ER, including 503 coach and 21 business class.
But Air France 472 seat 777-300ERs come close. And fly long distances, like Indian ocean.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course an 850 pax machine wouldn't be built for the long haul routes. They would be high density machines like the 747s within Japan (if we remember).
Why of course?
Why of course?
A bigger or heavier A380 would certainly be able to fly long haul but shorter sectors than a lighter one.
hth,
Dani
Last edited by Dani; 26th May 2008 at 21:28.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't see any problem with any emergency exit door.
Are you guys aware of different types of doors? You could, for example, install a "dual row" door, where there could evacuate two people at the same time simultaneously. I remember those door types on MD-11s (?).
Another possibility is to place two doors next to each other, like on a A320 overwing exit.
Or is somebody of you in possession of hard facts that there are no additional doors possible due to structural or other reasons? They have to redesign certain fuselage barrels anyway, and they have to prove the new aircraft in real evacuations again.
Please share with me your doubts.
Dani
Are you guys aware of different types of doors? You could, for example, install a "dual row" door, where there could evacuate two people at the same time simultaneously. I remember those door types on MD-11s (?).
Another possibility is to place two doors next to each other, like on a A320 overwing exit.
Or is somebody of you in possession of hard facts that there are no additional doors possible due to structural or other reasons? They have to redesign certain fuselage barrels anyway, and they have to prove the new aircraft in real evacuations again.
Please share with me your doubts.
Dani
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: AUS
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A380
Simple A380 figures based on average wind Component of 60 knots Headwind
Great Circle path SIN-LHR.
MTOW 569T.
80 Tonne payload.
An A380 will use around about 183 tonnes of fuel leaving 10 Tonnes reserve on arrival LHR.
These are just idealistic round figures, using IFPA.
ps. If you don't know what the IFPA is, I'm not going to tell you.
Great Circle path SIN-LHR.
MTOW 569T.
80 Tonne payload.
An A380 will use around about 183 tonnes of fuel leaving 10 Tonnes reserve on arrival LHR.
These are just idealistic round figures, using IFPA.
ps. If you don't know what the IFPA is, I'm not going to tell you.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rumour from the mob operating the A380 is that the floor in the cargo bays have not the strength to do same.
They are not talking about the underfloor cargo bays, but the ones on the upper deck. I don't think that the 74F can load anything on her upper deck (nor the 777
) so your comparison doesn't go a long way.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Neighter nor.
But obviously you all try to nail me down on my personality so it's a clear sign that you cannot handle my arguments
Otherwise - interesting discussion. I wonder why it has a 1 minus rating...
Dani
But obviously you all try to nail me down on my personality so it's a clear sign that you cannot handle my arguments
Otherwise - interesting discussion. I wonder why it has a 1 minus rating...
Dani
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the A380 is made for passengers & freight to fill her up.
The market has grown so hard that it is becoming increasing unneccesary / expensive to use passenger flights for freight.
The boys & girls from e.g. Atlas, Icelandair, Kalitha, Evergreen and the airlines dedicated freighters do it better, making fuel stops at smart locations, using cheap converted 747's etc..
IMO extreme fuel prices further make tons of nonsense in the belly an increasingly unattractive option.
The market has grown so hard that it is becoming increasing unneccesary / expensive to use passenger flights for freight.
The boys & girls from e.g. Atlas, Icelandair, Kalitha, Evergreen and the airlines dedicated freighters do it better, making fuel stops at smart locations, using cheap converted 747's etc..
IMO extreme fuel prices further make tons of nonsense in the belly an increasingly unattractive option.
Last edited by keesje; 27th May 2008 at 22:52. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: i don't know
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMO extreme fuel prices further make tons of nonsense in the belly an increasingly unattractive option.
The argument about better exploiting the rare slots in big hubs is true. Question is how many of these LHRs and JFKs will there be and this might determine the success of behemouths.
On the other hand the above argument plays into the hand of smaller equipment. If you can fill a 380 with enough break-even yield pax, good enough. Up to today most operators however fill their biggies with a lot of cheap fillers and this is hurting them now. Simply because even a small fuel surcharge does not cover the cost increase and the surcharge weighs more heavily on these low priced tickets and they lose that kind of customer.
The winners will be those airlines who can still generate a acceptable average yield. The common belief is that this is easier with big equippment, but imho it will be more difficult, see above. Especially with the flying pig, as it appears that filling it with good yield freight seems to be a problem. It is common knowledge that driving around in a half empty Hummer is less economocal than doing the same with a Camry.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai - sand land.
Age: 55
Posts: 2,832
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's true GMDS, but you don't pay 'landing' fees at heavily constrained airports in a Hummer now do you?
As well as being cheaper per pax per mile, the 380 will only pick up the one landing fee instead of the two if you're having to double up services to carry the load - and those fees can be fairly exorbitant.. Plus only one uplift of fuel, catering etc etc.
There'll be a lot of 380's in the sky soon - I imagine here at Emirates they'll run them at a nice profit too!! Unlike the 773 that loses payload badly here in the summertime
As well as being cheaper per pax per mile, the 380 will only pick up the one landing fee instead of the two if you're having to double up services to carry the load - and those fees can be fairly exorbitant.. Plus only one uplift of fuel, catering etc etc.
There'll be a lot of 380's in the sky soon - I imagine here at Emirates they'll run them at a nice profit too!! Unlike the 773 that loses payload badly here in the summertime
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: i don't know
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WK
With so many parameteres we can discuss in circles all day long, i know. You are certainly right aswell.
Just to add to the merry go round:
How much higher are the landing fees of the 380? (i don't know).
The whole point of comparison stands or falls with the assumption that you would fly either with one 380 or with two 777 or 330. Now no one will contest that the seat mile comes cheaper by using one aircraft only. What i am saying is that not many routes will require that. The majority of routes will be amply served with one T7. If you have a higher pax volume, experience shows that you'd preferably fly twice a day with a lag of a half a day. Passengers prefer that, at least the high yield customer we're all after. If slots are scarce, agreed the 380 is the solution, but i don't think enough airports will force you into that.
As to the payload restrictions of the 777-300ER. It is not as dramatic as that. Experience tells us that operating a aircraft right at its limits is the most economical way. Therefore the T7 is well installed on the JFK at EK.
It won't be long until the 380 will be able to demonstrate its qualities here. It will fly the same route as the T7, the same day and that will be THE outcome we all can bitch over then.
With so many parameteres we can discuss in circles all day long, i know. You are certainly right aswell.
Just to add to the merry go round:
How much higher are the landing fees of the 380? (i don't know).
The whole point of comparison stands or falls with the assumption that you would fly either with one 380 or with two 777 or 330. Now no one will contest that the seat mile comes cheaper by using one aircraft only. What i am saying is that not many routes will require that. The majority of routes will be amply served with one T7. If you have a higher pax volume, experience shows that you'd preferably fly twice a day with a lag of a half a day. Passengers prefer that, at least the high yield customer we're all after. If slots are scarce, agreed the 380 is the solution, but i don't think enough airports will force you into that.
As to the payload restrictions of the 777-300ER. It is not as dramatic as that. Experience tells us that operating a aircraft right at its limits is the most economical way. Therefore the T7 is well installed on the JFK at EK.
It won't be long until the 380 will be able to demonstrate its qualities here. It will fly the same route as the T7, the same day and that will be THE outcome we all can bitch over then.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai - sand land.
Age: 55
Posts: 2,832
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed GMDS - but I was referring to 773, not 773ER - big difference in capability.. In fact I believe EK got the ER specifically to carry payload on the 7 hour flights, rather than use it for ULR such as JFK.
I think too that with the big increase in passenger numbers then the 380 is a REQUIREMENT on many routes, especially out of places like LHR, JFK, FRA, CDG etc. No point having a second service if you can't get the slot - and traffic is growing everywhere.
Also the other benefit of economy of scale is that you can in fact reduce ticket prices and benefit by carrying yet more people. Ok, lower yield per person but if you can encourage an extra 50 people to fly who wouldn't have done so previously then you probably will end up making more money! Although I'm not aware of figures - being just an aviator
I think too that with the big increase in passenger numbers then the 380 is a REQUIREMENT on many routes, especially out of places like LHR, JFK, FRA, CDG etc. No point having a second service if you can't get the slot - and traffic is growing everywhere.
Also the other benefit of economy of scale is that you can in fact reduce ticket prices and benefit by carrying yet more people. Ok, lower yield per person but if you can encourage an extra 50 people to fly who wouldn't have done so previously then you probably will end up making more money! Although I'm not aware of figures - being just an aviator
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, TnB, I didn't think you were insulting me. I merely stated that my arguments rested unanswered. Otherwise - I'll come over when come again to SIN
Dani
Dani
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twitter,
As per the SQ website, the 777-300ER has 278 seats, not 350 as stated in Whoop's post. That's a difference of over 20% and gives the A380 an advantage of 7% per seat.
I haven't bothered to check the other numbers he used. I'm not wasting too much time on somebody who can't get even get that basic a number right.
As per the SQ website, the 777-300ER has 278 seats, not 350 as stated in Whoop's post. That's a difference of over 20% and gives the A380 an advantage of 7% per seat.
I haven't bothered to check the other numbers he used. I'm not wasting too much time on somebody who can't get even get that basic a number right.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: netherlands
Age: 56
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keejse
Quote:
The market has grown so hard that it is becoming increasing unnecessary / expensive to use passenger flights for freight.
The boys & girls from e.g. Atlas, Icelandair, Kalitha, Evergreen and the airlines dedicated freighters do it better, making fuel stops at smart locations, using cheap converted 747's etc..
Ok but if you have space in your cargo hold in these enlightened times of "ebay" why should you not make good coin from the capacity. As freight does not need flight attendants, meals, FF lounges etc etc
Quote:
The market has grown so hard that it is becoming increasing unnecessary / expensive to use passenger flights for freight.
The boys & girls from e.g. Atlas, Icelandair, Kalitha, Evergreen and the airlines dedicated freighters do it better, making fuel stops at smart locations, using cheap converted 747's etc..
Ok but if you have space in your cargo hold in these enlightened times of "ebay" why should you not make good coin from the capacity. As freight does not need flight attendants, meals, FF lounges etc etc
