| Inicio >> Foro >> Is A380 going to fly?

Foro sobre la aviación civil

Is A380 going to fly?

Volver al index del foro - Enviar un mensaje en este tema

Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 01 Aug 10:03     The A380, latest product of Airbus Industrie, is going late in orders. Supposedly, the German components don't fit with the French components. Airbus planes are made in many countries and A380 is facing a problem. Is she gonna make the market? Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de captain bill - Enviado el 01 Aug 11:21     I would say so due to the large investment Airbus have made towards this project. Whither Airlines who have placed orders and optionf for A-380 stick with it is another case for as Airlines do their re-calculations on passenger numbers a number are looking more at A-350 / Boe787 size. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 01 Aug 12:59     Yes, that's a good point, but some airlines  threatened  to cancel the order. But ex. Singapore Airlines ordered it first and they're sticking with their decision. As for A350, it was Airbus's  answer  to the Boeing's Dreamliner, and A350 was made up so quickly that they had to change the whole outer design. But yeah, they've made a very big investment and she could fly. Let's wait and see. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de speedbird9468 - Enviado el 02 Aug 23:03     I think we could all be in for a very big surprise here, Once Singapore have it commercial service and the A380 is proving itself then I think we see more orders. Lets not forget its Airbus's first real stab at the 747 market. Which is to be honest a niche Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de Werkur737 - Enviado el 02 Aug 0:02     I agree with Captain bill, airlines are looking for at A350 and B787s, but many investments are made by Airbus to cancel many orders like this in the middle of many flights around the world showing the A380. I think like B747 in beggining, the A380 will take off for a few niche of airlines, not many ones. AIRFLEETS.NET STAFF PHOTO SCREENER Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de FLX - Enviado el 02 Aug 8:04     Oh yeah, Airbus will ensure the A380 will fly with SQ before End07 this time. Otherwise, I speculate that we'll see the biggest batch of order cancellation/suspension in the history of commercial aviation! However, compared with the launch of the original 747, A380 will be facing an even tougher mkt situation. Back in the late 60s/early 70s, there were no such things as mkt fragmentation and economical long-range mid-size jets(Tech barrier to enter mkt for the smaller guys). Major airlines had few competition to worry about on their rapidly growing key int'l trunk routes in a highly regulated environment. Non-stop intercontinental travel were only between a dozen or so key gateway cities in the world so there were always sufficient traffic to fill many 747s. For these reasons, it made sense and in fact, critical for them to get 747s for its unmatched economics and range in order to stay in the game in those days. Nearly all flag carriers(Even stated-owned tiny ones like Garuda and Aer Lingus) ended-up ordering at least a few 747s back then. Today, a mid-size 787(Same for the A350 in a few yrs) hv similar economics as an A380 over intercon routes. Big or small airlines can choose either type to run traditional trunk or thinner long range routes @ nearly the same costs. An A380 is no longer the only way to go like the 747 was. Moreover, it's getting harder for the majors to fill each A380 as more & more players enter & dilute the intercon mkts due to the global 'open skies' regulatory trend. Given all these limiting factors, it'll be nex to a miracle if sales of the current A380 in the nex 10 yrs can match the 747's in its 1st decade, let alone exceeding it. The way I see it, there's only 1 way to boost sales of A380 significantly in the future: Re-develop it fm the current metal based airframe into a predominantly CFRP one like the 787/A350. If built with similarly light-weight CFRP, the scale of the A380 over the 787/A350 will ensure its superior economics. Of course, this is only a pipe dream. Even if it's tech feasible, the development cost of doing this is probably not much diff fm doing a totally new super jumbo design from scratch! 1 last thing, the A350 was Airbus' answer to the 787 but not anymore. I'm starting to see the A350 more a competitor to the 777 than the 787. Take a look: 210seat 3classes mkt: 788 vs Nothing fm Airbus 250seat 3classes mkt: 789 vs A358(Replace A332) 300seat 3classes mkt: 772 vs A359(Replace A333+343+345) 360seat 3classes mkt: 773 vs A351K(Replace A346) 100 ton cargo mkt: 77F vs A359F(Replace A332F) Targeting 777 instead of 787 makes perfect biz sense for Airbus. 1st, look @ how many existing airbus products(All are 777 competitors except A332) the A350 program can replace. 2nd, if the A350 EIS in 2013 as planned, the oldest 772 will be at least 18 yrs old: Prime target for replacement. 3rd, unlike Airbus, Boeing has nothing launched to replace 777 @ this moment either fm Y3(Still a study) or confirmed 787-10(300seat 3classes) or 787-11(Mostly just something dreamed up by people fm online avaition forums). Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 02 Aug 11:37     FLX, you've got the point here. Nice analysis . The B787 isn't flying commercially yet, is it? Because A350 is a long way from it. If we see it as an airport, A350 is still in hangar while B787 is already taxiing to the runway. As for A380, if she doesn't fly commercially by the end of 2007, Airbus could really be in for a blow of a decade. Let's hope it doesn't happen. Furthermore, I suspect the leading airlines are gonna replace all their B747s with A380, beacuse they will have no one to flog the B747s to. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de speedbird9468 - Enviado el 02 Aug 13:48     What about the existing 747 customers who want the 747-800. Have they seen it yet? Doubt it. Where as if I was BA or LH, etc I would most definately go for the A380. Why. There is no sign of Boeing developing a new completely new Jumbo in the near future. The A380 is late entering into service yes it is. But the benifits will soon appear. The 747 was a great plane and still is. But its an old design whereas the A380 is completely new. Boeing always seem to update their current models Ie 737 Ng old design. While this is credit to the company lets see something fresh. The 787 ok great. But please boeing lets see something new. A new 727, 737, 757, etc etc. What about even a small regional craft to compete with EMB. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de captain bill - Enviado el 02 Aug 16:18     FLX you are once again spot on with your comments and if it wern't for my poor spelling I would have said almost the same thing. Re A-380 in CFRP I don't see this happening as costs to re-design and re-equip would bust the company. speedbird9468 Potential customers have seen a virtual 747-800 thanks to computer technology and operating statistics are available so potential customers know what to expect regarding range, capacity and operating cost on route segments. I am told although it will not have the passenger capacity of the A-380 it will have a lower passenger cost per 1000 miles that A-380. Which routes would you see BA operating A-380 on ? JFK is about the only one that springs to mind for remember BA have reduced the number of 747s for the smaller 777 due to what FLX has pointed out namely increased compitition on many Intercontinental routes. Why do Boeing need to develop a complete new  jumbo  The 400 is a totally diferent animal than the classic 100 srs first launched back in the 60s. Avionics and engines and electrics and realy everything is new and 800 will be the same - a new airliner. The same applies to 737 and as I said in another thread Boeing are looking at an airliner aroung the same size and range as 757 for the next decade. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de speedbird9468 - Enviado el 02 Aug 16:32     It has been rumoured that BA are interested. Didn't some of their senior VIP's go to Toulouse to get a futher look recently. I would probably see BA using it on their Asain network. Instead if lets say 2 777 use could use only 1 A380 surely this saves costs. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de SJR - Enviado el 02 Aug 16:47     I am sure that BA's future fleet plan will soon be revealed but for the time being i am going to reserve comment because this could swing either way. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de GBpilot - Enviado el 02 Aug 21:38     Yes BA are interested but they are stuck between the 787 and the A350. Im sure we will find out very soon. I hope BA/GB. I hope its the airbus myself as the A319/320/330 fleet that we have at the moment are extremely reliable and sturdy aircraft Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 02 Aug 21:56     speedbird9468, I also think BA would use A380s on asian routes, etc. Singapore, but also on australasian and maybe american routes. But from what we see, BA prefers Boeings as bigger planes and on longer routes. They use only A319 and A320 of Airbus for european flights. I wonder why they don't use Airbus more and why they don't participate in Airbus plane construction. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de speedbird9468 - Enviado el 03 Aug 1:04     Interesting. B340. I would have imangined they would have more Airbus in their fleet too. Only because its a European maker. Although I appreciate that Boeing make a very good product indeed I still think BA could be more loyal to their local economy and by Airbus A318, 319, 320, 321, 330, 340, 380 series. Then again there are a few US cariers that have Airbus so I must bite my toungue Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 03 Aug 10:22     With US carriers, they also have only A319s and A320s mostly, for short and middle range routes. They use Boeing more, which is much more understandable as Boeing is their aircraft maker. Whereas almost all european and most asian airlines have at least part of the fleet made of Airbus. Maybe advantage of Boeing's airplanes is that they have more twin- engine planes that can fly a long range (B777, B757 etc.). The only Airbus's twin-engine middle and long- range aircraft is A330. I specified twin-engine planes as maybe they're more economically profitable looking at no. of passengers and fuel consumption ratio. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de KO - Enviado el 03 Aug 19:16     Airports are choked by today’s large planes and the quantity of bags off loaded upon arrival. Double the passengers, double the bags, double the time it takes to get your bags. Not cool. If the operational economies of the A380 can be reflected in the 787 or the A350, give me the smaller plane. Another concern I have is that the A380 could be a terrorist trophy. Bringing down any plane is a tragedy, but the scale of this plane would be a disaster. I sincerely hope my fears never come to fruition but the times we live in dictate caution. The A380 is a monumental plane that will change the whole industry in many ways not yet identified. I hope Airbus is rewarded for their bold decision to proceed with this aircraft. By the way, I was told that Lockheed proposed the idea of a double deck jumbo passenger plane based on the C5 design in the early 70’s. Their research indicated that the 747s were not flying full and their L1011 was the right size for that market. Perhaps that is still the case. Full planes make money. Big full planes make lots of money. Big planes flying empty loose lots of money. Is it more profitable to fly smaller planes more frequently? The real frontier in this market seems to be at the other end of the airplane size spectrum. EMB and Bombardier are sharing a market that is very robust. Why can’t Airbus and Boeing compete in that market? Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de captain bill - Enviado el 04 Aug 9:18     The A-380 is an ideal airliner for airlines who have a  hub and spoke  operation like EK or SQ who are operating high load factor routes to and from DBX and SIN. Yes Willie Walsh at BA hes expressed interest but so far no decission has been made or so I'm told. What we also need to remember is eg BA fly from LHR to JFK six times a day with 747 not because they don't have a large enough airliner like A-380 to only go twice a day but it is to give passenger choice of times to fly on such a popular business route. This to the airlines is now very important as passengers require choice. We see this in Europe, USA, Canada and in many other areas where there used to be 2 or 3 daily flights with an A-320 / 737 type now replaced by a 4, 5 or 6 tymes daily flight with smaller aircraft like E jets or Canadairs so what happens in our domestic markets is reflected on intercontinental routes. Also what many carriers are loking at is the slow down in the rise in people flying which is manly due to ridiculous taxes being implimented by ridiculous governments giving in to the environmentalist who targett the airline industry continually as it seems to be an easy toutch for money. I hope A-380 is a success and we see it around the world for many years to come. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 04 Aug 12:56     KO, it really is a problem with choking the airports by big planes. On the other hand, they would make lots of money if flying full, and I think they would fly full as they would make a very good new way to fly. As for your saying that it maybe is more profitable to fly smaller planes more frequently.. Maybe it is, but what about longer distance flights? And on longer haul routes, the planes are mostly full, I think.. It would be better to fly A380 LHR-JFK, and 787 on LHR-CDG, for example. As for terrorist target, God forbid, the A380 would be a disaster. Not only for that flight, but for Airbus and for economy and air traffic of the country. Anyway, I think it stays like this: -people choose big, safer planes on long distance routes, and it is more convenient and time and money saving to fly directly rather than transfer on one or more airports -shorter distance routes require not so much full planes as long distances, because the loss of money is smaller when there's not enough passengers But in any case, Airbus made a very daring project when they started the A380, and I hope we will soon see A380 in our skies. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de aaaron3 - Enviado el 04 Aug 19:04     When 747 was just as new as A380 now, people thought that there will never be enaught people in one flight to fill the plane... so i think the A380 will have just as big market as B747 has now, because she is very economic,and because of that tickets will may be cheaper and there will be more people wanting to fly, and the only plane wich will be able to fly them is the A380 i'm sorry if there are mistakes in my comment, i'm not perfect in english. Aaron Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 05 Aug 9:03     Yeah aaaron3, I think you're right. It sure will be a sensation and everybody's going to want to fly. And don't worry, your english is just fine. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de speedbird9468 - Enviado el 05 Aug 13:17     Well said Aaaron. By the way your English is good Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de aaaron3 - Enviado el 05 Aug 20:04     Thank you very much...let us hope for the best for A380 Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 05 Aug 21:11     Yeah, let's really hope for the A380 to fly very soon. I think it will be, just to sort the details out. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de Werkur737 - Enviado el 06 Aug 5:57     You guys think Airbus will have more delays on A380 to enter service decenber this year or not? AIRFLEETS.NET STAFF PHOTO SCREENER Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de captain bill - Enviado el 06 Aug 8:13     I think there will be a concentrated effort to get the SQ SIN to SYD flight in the air and if they don't or if there are further problems with this particular aircraft or further production problems I do beleive you will start to see a good number of cancelations from carriers around the world. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 06 Aug 14:41     Maybe SQ will fly the A380 by Dec. this year, as they ordered them first. If not, we could witness the biggest crash in orders in the history of civil aviation. Let's hope not. captain bill, why should SQ fly SIN-SYD with the A380? They should fly SIN-LAX, which is now job of the A340-500. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de SJR - Enviado el 06 Aug 14:50     Singapore to Sydney is the first route that the A380 is to be used on. The second is the LHR route. They have chosen the routes they carry the most passengers on hence these decisions. I am sure that eventually the Singapore to LAX route will be seeing A380's rather soon but i think the routes that have B747-400's on will see them first. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de aaaron3 - Enviado el 06 Aug 16:01     I would be very happy if Singapore Airlines will use it's A380's enroute SIN-LHR because i'm living in Hungary and i can see every day some Singapore Airlines Boeing 747 cruising above my city, and i want to see also the A380 in my telescope. Do any of you know when Emirates will get it's first A380? Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de Werkur737 - Enviado el 06 Aug 18:00     I think Emirates will get first A380 on February or March 2008. After SYD, LAX and LHR, SQ may use the A380 on HKG, that is a short range route, but very used by a lot of B747s. I hope A380 not suffers more delays, but i think not enters on service in december, my opinion is to January 2008. Every first aircraft suffers a lot of delays, and happened with B747 in 1970s when delivered first aircraft to Pan Am if i'm correct. Here at PHL i will see the A380 only if Lufthansa put on route from Frankfurt. Untill 2006, FRA-PHL-FRA was B747-430s, but since October last year is using A340-300s. aaaron3, buy a camera and send to us of the site photos from BUD. AIRFLEETS.NET STAFF PHOTO SCREENER Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de aaaron3 - Enviado el 06 Aug 19:58     Werkur737 you are right, it is not easy to start the production of a new aircraft...are there any A380F's? yes i have a camera and i have a few photos from BUD but they are too big so i can't upload them...:( Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de Werkur737 - Enviado el 06 Aug 20:04     Fedex and UPS cancelled its ten order each operator of A380F, but Emirates has oreded two A380F, and if i'm correct too, Qatar ordered one A380F. The maximum size to upload photos on the site is 1220 x 900, if your photos match this size, send them to us. AIRFLEETS.NET STAFF PHOTO SCREENER Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 06 Aug 21:37     Werkur737, I believe Lufthansa will use the A380s to fly the USA routes, as they're business profitable. So, PHL might also see Lufthansa's A380s arriving from FRA. aaaron3, so you actually see the aircraft with the telescope? Cool.. If possible, send the picture, really. Also I agree, it's not eays to start a new aircraft, especially A380, but Airbus has advantage. B747 was the first aircraft of its kind. Perhaps no one knew how it would fly and so on, so maybe some airlines were reluctant to use the B747s. It turned out to be a very good aircraft, and it is now used worldwide. For A380, now there's no such  surprise  for a super jumbo coming to the market, even though A380 is a magnificient plane. But A380 might have an easier road to success as airlines have seen the B747, used it and now maybe they won't be so reluctant with buying the super jumbo. And.. I hope you don't mind me asking, but what is A380F? Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de Werkur737 - Enviado el 07 Aug 22:14     A380F is the cargo version of the super jumbo. F from Freighter. The two floors of the super jumbo will carry the loaders and pallets, and the usual cargo floor. AIRFLEETS.NET STAFF PHOTO SCREENER Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de SJR - Enviado el 07 Aug 0:15     Maybe Lufti will choose to use the B747-800I on the FRA-PHL route since if they have reduced capacity from a 747-400 to an A340-300 they are unlikely to use the A380. I hope i am wrong and that you do get the A380 but i wouldn't count on it happening. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de Arkangel07 - Enviado el 07 Aug 4:44     I was on lufthansa homepage before 7 months. They said that lufthansa will fly A380 in march. I was really amazed by this, so after 3 months I visited it again. There weren't any news about A380, so I realized that they didn't say the truth, OR the orders are late. As B340 says... ''...we could witness the biggest crash in orders in the history of civil aviation'' But, when I was flying to Bangalore before a month, I asked one of air-hostess about it... She told me that lufthansa will fly A380 by the begining of 2009... Can I trust her? Of course, she was damn pretty!!! ;-)... Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de FLX - Enviado el 07 Aug 6:08     B340, SJR: SQ can never fly LAX-SIN nonstop with A380-800 because it is out of its max range @ design load(15,200km) minus extra range allowance compulsory for the typical strong headwind/bad weather over the N.Pacific in winter. Great circle distance between LAX-SIN is 14,114km. SQ don't dare to fly scheduled flight on this route with anything in their long range fleet(Including 772ER+773ER) except their ultra-long-range A345(Max range: 16,700km). A380 CANNOT replace A345 on this route. The only other aircraft match or exceed this range+payload capability is 77L. Of course, SQ can easily fly A380 on SIN-NRT-LAX and SIN-HKG-SFO(Already announced) which are currently served by 744s. BTW, I hv just noticed that the max range of the A388 and the 787-8 or 9 are similar. Re Arkangel07 comments 7Aug: 1. CAs(Cabin Attendants) typically know may be a tiny little bit more than you & me about their own fleet deployment/development mostly through company internal employee communication materials. Based on my 14 yrs experience of biz travel, I usually find out more facts fm the aviation news media than fm CAs re their fleet. 2. The truth is that even the top management of her employer at LH doesn't know. LH didn't purposely 'lie' on their website. In fact, LH has been ready for real-live A380 ops long time ago with all practices & preps done on those early A380s test planes Airbus lend them for temporary use(e.g. Worldwide tours, airport visits, etc.). In other words, it's highly probably that LH were ready to roll as per the date indicated on their website. Only problem was Airbus had delivered nothing and therefore, poor LH has no A380 product to deliver to customer as per plan. 3. The only party which can possibly know the truth is the 'sacred' Airbus Industries. So the question you should ask is  Can I trust Airbus?  Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de captain bill - Enviado el 07 Aug 10:09     Had a conversation with a well connected airline guy yesterday and he said that he felt the A-380 could turn out to be  A SUB-SONIC CONCORD SITUATION. What he meant and for those of us old enough to remember when Concord was in the development and early production stages there was great interest in the airliner with many orders and options on the book. As time passed and production delays occurred and as production costs started to rise every carrier except BOAC and Air France cancelled. I don't think the same degree of cancellations will be seen with A-380 but I do think we will see a large amount not only due to production delays and rising costs but many carriers as I have said before are re-evaluating the routes where they expected to fly these giants and are discovering that passenger numbers are not growing as fast as was predicted due to an ever increasing number of new carriers coming on the same routes. A-380 will be an ideal airliner for airlines operating a HUB and SPOKE system where large numbers of passengers are going through places like DBX and SIN then on to other parts of the world. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de Arkangel07 - Enviado el 07 Aug 11:38     FLX, OK, so A380 can't fly SIN-LAX. A345 is also a great plane. And I think we can certainly trust Airbus. If A380 was something like A320, it would be delivered ages ago. The A380 project is slow, because no one even attempted to build something like this and came this far. So I think we can expect A380s by the beginning of the 2008. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de aaaron3 - Enviado el 07 Aug 12:08     i did not know that there is such a big distance beetween SIN and LAX, i thought it is about 12000 km's i have a question. As far as i now there are 3 tipes of A380: A380-841,861,A380F but why all 800? i mean all the aircrafts start with 100 or 200 like the first A320 is A320-100. maybe thats because of the 100 and 200 and all the others were those unbuilt tipes of A380 with 800 and 950 passengers, but they had not been built because they wouldt have been too heavy. but still i dont know why they are 800's? were there 7 unbuilt versions of A380? i hope some of you will probably tell me what i'm missing. thank you!!! Aaron Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de FLX - Enviado el 07 Aug 15:23     captain bill: U cannot be more correct about the dwindling prospects of new customers/orders for the A380. I consider it'll be a huge acheivement for Airbus if they just receive the minimum # of A380 orders just for the whole program to break-even. Yes, I do remember how the Concorde sales situation changed for the worse before and after program launch even though I was only a kid. I also remember AF, BOAC and the manufacturing consortium(BAe, Aerospatiale, Rolls-Royce, etc.) were all either owned or effectively controlled by the UK or French gov'ts. The Concorde's economics just didn't work for any purely commercial airlines(I'd argue including 'non-pure' AF and BOAC/BA) but as we know, airline economics weren't the priority of the UK or French gov'ts @ that time. Don't get me wrong, the Concorde was a great tech achievement and an amazing airliner to look @ even when it just parked on the ground. If I hv to choose something to represent the peak of 20th century commercial aviation, the honour will be shared equally between the Concorde and the 747....sorry, starting to drift off-topic = P Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that for any new airliner type to be a sales success these days, op economics dominate everything. When op economics are the same, say, between A380 and 787, airlines then look @ maximum utilization(Keeping planes in the air cos that's the only time they make $). Here, a simple truth prevails: U make almost the same $ no matter putting an A380 or two 787 on a high traffic route. On medium traffic routes or when the high traffic routes becomes medium traffic(Due to season temporary or competition permanently), U lose $ for sure using an A380 but can probably at least break-even if splitting deployment of the two 787s on 2 routes. Conclusion 1: A 787 will always hv more opportunity to stay in the air than an A380 because in this world, there're always many many many more medium traffic routes than the high-traffic ones. Conclusion 2: Airline tend to select plane type that has a lower risk of sitting on the ground. I think a lot of people(Except you) on this forum still fail to recognize the most important reasons why the 747/744 was successful which the A380 can't repeat now: 747/744 had the best op economics AND the longest range of any airliners for almost 30 yrs unchallenged by any competition. 747(1969-1988): A300,A310,L1011,DC10 are not too far off fm the 747 in terms of op economics but none of them are even close to the range of the 747. 744(1989-now): In terms of economics, 763ER, A332 and 764ER nearly match the economics while the A333, 772 and 773 exceeded it. Still none approach the 744's range. The 772ER and the A343 were the only planes that roughly match both the economics and range of the 744 for the 1st time fm the mid 90s. If we check Boeing's order record(Available on Boeing's website) during that period, a sharp decline in 744 pax model orders fm late 90s is very clear. That trend accelerated when 77W and A346, both hv superior economics and range than 744, were launched about 5-6 yrs ago. About 6 mths after the planned EIS of A388 later this yr, 788 will also EIS and hv nearly the same range of the A388. Most importantly, they'll hv the same economics....all A388 key advantages evaporate 6 mths after its EIS. If we learnt any lessons fm the 747/744 sales history, we know A388 won't hv anywhere near a 30 yrs monoploy like the 747/744 had enjoyed in this segment. U mentioned about airlines re-evaluating the routes where they expected to fly A388 and are discovering that pax numbers are not growing as fast as was predicted. Actually, I think it has already happened for a while. Hv U noticed that some major airlines that used to operate 747s/744s hv been partially/completely retiring their jumbos without a same or bigger size type(744, 748i or A388) replacement planned? AC got rid of all their jumbos in late 90s even though their fleet size is much larger today. NH has been reducing their 744 fleet since a few yrs ago coupled with an ever increasing fleet of 77W. JL's strategic plan says aircraft size downsizing is their current piority(Effectively kiss goodbye to anything bigger than 744) and keep focusing on more 737NGs. Same thing happens to numerous airlines with smaller ex/current 747/744 fleets such as PR, Aer Lingus, NZ, Iberia, Alitalia, S. African, KL, SAS, GA, etc. In the F(Freighter) mkt, the prospect is even worse for the A388F after the lost of 3 key customers: FedEx,UPS and ILFC. A388F order book today effectively listed 0 customer. It may be a very long time before we see A388F's EIS if at all. In contrast, it's interesting to see Boeing now list 65 firm orders for the competing 748F - a program launched quite a while after A388F's launch. The way I see it, the ONLY real potential sales targets for A388 are: 1. Repeat orders fm existing A388 customers(May be EK will become even more ridiculous in flooding the mkt by adding 50 more...) 2. A few majors such as BA and CX who still control the bulk of traffic into/out of their home mkts but hv not made a decision re 748i vs A388 yet. 3. Incredibly large new orders fm India and China where: A) There really are no problems to fill all seats on nearly every A388 flights fm these 2 countries to any directions once the few last remaining travel obstacles are lifted for the majority of their newly created middle-class citizens B) Their gov'ts continue to tightly regulate int'l traffic and allow few competition on the major routes, both highly likely in the short-mid term future. Yes, technically, U can do a lot of things on an A388 which do not make any sense if done on a 787/A350. Things like swimming pool, dutyfree shops, spa, cinema, etc. Realistically, how many airlines do we expect will install these items? Still remember the piano lounges on the upper deck of the 747-100s in the early 70s? They were quickly replaced with more seats in the 1st 2-3 yrs. Economics overide everything in the 70s and still do today. I know I sound like a Boeing lover and Airbus basher. This is not true as I, e.g., always prefer A320 than a 737NG. The truth is that I think both the A388 and the 748i may be sold in ok numbers but only few airlines(Compared with the 747/744 era) will be interested due to today's mkt environment(a.k.a. Fragmentation). Also, I get a bit annoyed when people keep repeating that the A380 is such a monumental achievement that will change commercial aviation as we know it. Yes, it's the biggest, most luxurous option out there with a look that is substantially different fm anything else. However, if anyone in this forum pay more attention to look into the tech concept +content, it's extremely easy to find that the 787/A350 is at least 1 generation ahead of the A380. The use of the most advanced tech(e.g. Large scale use of CFRP) is the ONLY reason why a mid-size airliner can match the economics of an ultra large aircraft built with older tech. I can assure you that every new airliner design, big or small, fm now on will be based upon/benchmarked against the 787/A350, NOT the A380. This is what I call monumental. A380 could hv been a truly monumental acheivement if it came out sooner in early 2000s as per original Airbus plan and way before 787/A350 was even on the table. Nothing else could hv competed with it in terms of economics and tech content. Unfortunately, Airbus has been 'playing' with its development for too long resulting in the tech of A380 to be at least 1 generation behind the 787 only 6mths after its EIS. The A380 concept was conceived in mid-90s and I think it's a bit unacceptable today for any airliner development project, even a huge one like a superjumbo, to last 10 yrs. That's longer than the 747 development in the 60s when Boeing did not hv the convenience of many super-computers(CAD/CAM) and internet data transfer. Bigger truly doesn't always necessary equal to better. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de FLX - Enviado el 07 Aug 15:58     aaaron3: A388(A380-800) was the initial model @ program launch. There was never any -100 to -700 variants designed nor planned. As usual, last 2 digits represent customer code. I learnt 3 major reasons fm various aviation media and a big book on A380 why(Though unofficial reasons but highly reliable) '-800' right fm program start: 1. Target design range of A388 is set @ 8,000nm(Now 8,200) 2.. Airbus hope customers will see -800 as the near-ultimate variants of the A380 family so they won't adopt a wait-and-see attitude to wait for development fm -100 to -700 before ordering. 3. Number '8' represents prosperity in most Asian cultures(a.k.a. a lucky number)and Airbus know most of their biggest potential customers in Asia will love this model name more than any other. BTW, all 3 reasons also apply for the 788 and A358 and we'll see more of the same for future programs. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de SJR - Enviado el 07 Aug 16:17     Also the jump from the B747-400 all of a sudden to the B747-800 the next model in the family. No 500, 600 or 700 there. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 07 Aug 17:06     FLX: You've got the point, B747 was unchallenged for 30 years, but it can't fly forever. Eventually, companies will turn to the A380 gradually. Because, now there is a challenger to the B747, and a strong challenger. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de aaaron3 - Enviado el 07 Aug 18:25     FLX,SJR: You guys must be right because i have only heard about A380-100, 200 and 300 as the three gigantic models of A380 in the early ages, so i can beleve why they named the first redesigned one's A380-800 And the same thing with the 747...in the early 1990's there were planes for two tipes of 747's with longer tailes those wouldt have been the 747-500X and the 747-600X,but they have not been build because there were no enaught orders. so i now understand why thene came the 747-800 thank you guys for helping me out!!! Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de SJR - Enviado el 07 Aug 21:38     Wonder if the B797 will start with the 800 Series. This would be a little strange though since Boeing will more than likely need the earlier numbers for future versions of the B797. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de citation - Enviado el 08 Aug 2:15     Captain said it best that this could be the Concorde all over again Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de FLX - Enviado el 08 Aug 5:55     B340: Yes, 747s/744s and even the latest 748i/F can't fly forever. Frankly, I don't believe Boeing can do much more meaningful development to the 747 family beyond the nex 748i/F variants. 747 family will reach its limit very soon(Or already has) in terms of development potential. That's why Boeing hv been studying 'Y3' in which 1 focus is to see if they should/can merge the replacements for 77W+748i into a single future family/program/platform e.g. Y3-Small and Y3-Large Compared with the A380 program, Y3-Large is certainly only a dream @ this stage that I expect won't come true(EIS) until @ least 10 yrs fm now. Only A380, with its inherently bigger development potential, has the longer-term answer available to airlines' superjumbo question today. Yes,  companies will turn to the A380 gradually . But how many companies? Or more precisely, how many current 744 operators will turn to the superjumbos, regardless of A388 or 748i, eventually? I bet very very few. But I bet a lot more companies(current 744 operators) will turn to more 787/A350/77W instead. In fact, this has already started happening as per the examples I hv cited on my earlier messages. Large number of 744 operators will NOT gradually turn to A380 because it's a 'strong challenger' to the 747 or, dare I say, even outperform the 748i. They'll do so ONLY if they still need a 744-size or bigger aircraft and mkt trend is suggesting that won't be the case. Nothing wrong with the A380, it's just that the biz model of many current 744 operators hv changed and the model see little or no need for a 744 or larger airliner. On the other hand, I'm now thinking that the A380 may hv good sales prospects with leasing companies. It's highly probably that many airlines don't need to own a fleet of A380 but may hv short term need to lease a few for very high-traffic trunk routes. Leasing A380s provide the perfect financial+ops flexibility. Also, the biggest wild card to boost A380 sales which I hv failed to consider previously is the new breed of Intercontinental LCCs(Low Cost Carriers) starting to appear in the mkt. The biz model of AirAsiaX, Oasis HK, Virgin Blue(Int'l) is focused on low fare/margin but high-traffic volume due to their low overhead. Even when the op economics of a 787 and A380 are the same, it's more profitable for LCCs to fly A380 because: 1. LCCs' overhead(Unrelated to aircraft) is much lower than the traditional/major airlines. 2. On relatively fixed low fares, LCCs need the max # of pax to split its overhead costs. 3. Service frequency is a low priority in LCC mkts. My personal prediction: In 5-6 yrs, some powerful Intercon LCCs will be financially capable to lease/own a few A388s configured in not more than 2 cabin classes with 800+ seats - fully exploiting the true unique potential of the A380 but transforming its luxurious image into a gigantic air 'bus' for the masses. To avoid paying for the 2.5 inflight meals for my 12-13 hrs A388 flight, I'll bring plenty of food which will stuff-up my carry-on. Apparently, most of my 800+ fellow pax hv the same idea and we all fight for overhead bin space. Finally, since my A388 departs 06:00(LCCs love this kind of timing due to lower airport cost) from LGW to SIN and there has been a terrorist bomb threat issued for all London airports, I better arrive @ security 5 hrs prior to departure before the remaining 800+ show up. Wonderful, I save $ on a night's hotel. As I felt asleep on the cold bench in the terminal, I hv a bad dream about seeing myself paying 25% more online by VISA for an e-ticket to get on a 788 flying directly fm BHM(Birmingham) to (DPS)Bali. It's clear sky all the way so fm the 788's extra large dimmable window, I think I can clearly see we fly straight through LGW and then SIN to reach DPS.....And then I wake up fm such a nightmare.... haa, air travel A380 style, what a much more romantic & enjoyable experience = P Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de Werkur737 - Enviado el 08 Aug 7:01     FLX, i totally agree with your prediction, like 747 on the beginning of programe, Boeing promised many very good things and we can see today 744 to the masses. With A388 will happen the same, the swimming pool, spa, cinema and duty free will not works, only was marketing to sell numbers of aircraft, and some cases will be all Y class layout. SJR, the use pf version starting -800 will be on 797 for sure to face A388, i liked the old times 1970s and 1980 when i saw the variants -100, -200 more adjusted with the number of pax capacity, more real number variation. FLX, in this thread we tried to predict many things about A388, but your analysis sure was the best, you said all. Whats the Y3 programe, i don't know at all about it, tell us more. AIRFLEETS.NET STAFF PHOTO SCREENER Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 08 Aug 7:53     OK, FLX, seems you know the best. I really mean it. Now with you all saying this, I begin to think: is A380 really needed?! And Boeing really maybe can't develop 747 more. And by what I think, it doesn't have to. 747 is still superior to the A380. Of course, for now it's because the A380 hasn't made to the mkt. Two questions: What is a B797 (it isn't the Dreamliner, is it)? What's the Y3 programme? Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de FLX - Enviado el 08 Aug 9:22     Werkur737, B340 SJR: Y3 is part of Boeing's 'Yellowstone' concept study for the most advanced future airliner designs. Because this study will determine the long term future replacements for all current Boeing commercial models, it's very secretive(They don't mind U & me know but obviously don't want Airbus and perhaps Embraer know). Not much details hv been released to the public and I remember only little about where I got the limited info: http://www.halfvalue.com/wiki.jsp?topic=Boeing_Y3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Y3 Since Y2=787 program and Y1 is predicted to be nex in line for development, I guess it's reasonable to expect the 797 designation to be applied for the 737NG's replacement. Don't ask me what will the result of Y3 study most likely be designated after 797. If I'm so smart in predicting a future so far away, I'd be working as a Sr. Executive @ the Mkting Dept of Airbus or Boeing today = ) ............ Well, how about a Boeing 808? Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de Werkur737 - Enviado el 08 Aug 9:51     FLX, as i understund on links you posted, the Airbus lines are more modern than Boeing lines. Is only 787 can compete with the products of Airbus already in market? In Wikipedia says Y1, Y2 and Y3 competes with A320 family, A350 Family and A388. It seems all Boeing jets old. Now i would like your comments..... AIRFLEETS.NET STAFF PHOTO SCREENER Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de FLX - Enviado el 08 Aug 11:09     Werkur737: I hv no idea exactly where U get the idea that  Airbus lines are more modern than Boeing lines . However, feel free to believe all current Boeing jets are 'old' relative to current Airbus. My only advice: Do more research on the net to seek the truth. May be I'm wrong but these are the commonly accepted competitive pairs(Meaning roughly similar economics, tech, capability, etc.): 737-600 vs A318 737-700 vs A319 737-800 vs A320 737-900 vs A321 Y1 vs NSR(I guess you probably never heard of this 1 fm Airbus neither.) If U think 787(Or Y2), as a real plane, is  old  relative to the A350 which is currenlty only a computer graphic, I hv no further comment. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de B340 - Enviado el 08 Aug 18:05     FLX: you said it correctly; 787 can't be old relative to the A350 because as you said, A350 is only yet a dream, I daresay. As for Boeing jets being older than Airbus's, B's 747's first flight was a long time ago, but B747 exists in various editions and is still very widely used today, but is not old. OK, most of the companies admit that (for instance) A320 is one of the most modern mid-range jets in the market, and the same in long/range jets for A345 and A346. Btw. thanks for explanation about Y3. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de speedbird9468 - Enviado el 09 Aug 2:36     I think if we look at facts here I would also comment that Airbus's lines are more modern than boeings. Why? because nearly of all boeings models are old. Its that simple. 747 goes back to late 60's early 70's version still in production 400. 737 60's still in production (NG's). 767 early 80's . Ok we have the 777 and the 787 of the 90's and 2007 respectively. If you lok at Airbus A300 early 70's. A320 late 80's A330/A340 early 90's and the A380 for today. Airbus appears to be much newer and fresher and with fly by wire technology which Boeing havn't got yet. Although I like both types I think (in my opinion Airbus is in fact the most modern) But lets not count the e-jetsof EMB. Theyt are becoming a big player in their sector. Perfil del usuario Mensaje privado Sugerir supresión   Mensaje de FLX - Enviado el 09 Aug 9:37     speedbird9468: I still don't know why Airbus appears to be MUCH newer and fresher.... Exactly which part of which Boeing model is old? The model designations? Let's not kid ourselve with purely mkting factors such as model names linking the past if U call that a useful fact. Is it that simple ? Alright, let's go current model by current model, look @ the useful facts and see which 1 is truly older: 1. 737NG family vs A320 family: 1st variant launch: A320 EIS in 88 and 73G(737-700) EIS in 98. Original 731(737-100) EIS in 68 but the only key items that are common with 73G are fuselage cross-section, general shape, basic layout. All wings+stablizers, landing gears, engines, avionics, systems, cabin design, performance, etc. hv nothing in common between the 2. A 731 pilot basically has to start training fm scratch like any fresh 737NG pilot in order to transition into a 73G. There are that much diff. Now, lets' see A320 or 738(737-800) has better capability/performance in some key aspects: Empty weight: 738 < A320 (1000kg lighter) MTOW(i.e. Empty+fuel+payload): 738 > A320 Ops economics: 738 better than A320 Max range @ full load: 738 < A320 (Only 35km diff) Max pax 1-cabin class: 738 > A320 (Only 9 seats diff) Cabin width space: 738 < A320 Although 738 EIS after A320, I won't call the A320 'old' just because it came out 10 YEARS earlier given we all know how much tech can progressed in a decade. Let's say may be Boeing was lazy doing nothing & waited 10 yrs and came back hoping only to match A320 with an old design+some minor 'tweaks'. But wait, if the 'tweaks' are so minor, why is the 738 capability/performance @ least slightly higher than a supposedly 'newer' A320? A 'new' A320 design is worse than an 'old' 737 design???? As I said earlier, as a paying pax, I always prefer A320 family over 737NG due to slightly better comfort. Due to its familiar look in general, 737NG may look old to some photographers here and I suspect that's why many here think it's old. But as products which must function efficiently using latest tech, both 737NG & A320 are roughly in the same tech generation. Finally, if what I stated here are not true, why are the sales of 737NG and A320 family roughly the same not long after 737NG EIS? Airlines are not stupid. I suspect the only explanaton for this mkt outcome is that both products are roughly equivalent operators' view. 2. 777 family vs A330/340 family 1st variant launch: A333(A330-300) EIS 93 and 772(777-200) EIS 95 Here again, I won't call the A333 old because it came out earlier than 772. Correct me if I'm wrong but the 777 family share nothing with any previous Boeings except section 41(Nose to just before Door #1) fm 767. A330/340 share fuselage cross-section, general shape, basic layout with A300-B2(EIS 74). Wings, engines, avionics, systems, cabin design, performance, etc. hv nothing in common between the 2.......Wait a minute, hv we seen the same pattern here before? Perhaps 731 to 737NG? No, don't be silly, Airbus gave A330/340 a totally different model designation so it must be a completely 'new' model and has absolutely nothing to do with A300-B2......737NG is old because it's still a 737 but A330/340 is new because Airbus said it's not an A300-B2 anymore. Hmmm....interesting idea...but why do I always find the cabin width, seat layout and the slightly inclined rear cabin floor exactly the same when I fly on A300-B4, A310, A300-600R, A330-200/300, A340-300, A340-500/600? Hmmm...mkting, what a wonderful thing to mix perception with facts. It makes people think 'newer and fresher' for the whole company. FBW(Fly-By-Wire) was a cockpit t