Now we all know that the A318/736 are heavy for their size, and many airlines have simply opted for the A319/73G or RJ's, i believe because they (A319/73G) offer more revenue potential with only slightly higher operating costs.
I was wondering if a similar thing could be said for the A388 vs A389 if/when it becomes reality. The A388 was desinged with a stretch in mind, so if a -900 where released, the OEW may not be that significant. Yet the increase in avaliable revenue potential through seats and cargo space could be very high.
The difference however is that there are plenty of routes that could fill an A319/73G, yet i doubt there are many routes which could fill an A389. Could a reduction in ticket prices attract, allowed through lower CASM, attract more customers onto a route and ultimately make it more profitable though?
Also, does anyone have any outlined specifications for an A380-900?
Cedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 7894 posts, RR: 54
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3396 times:
Sure it'll happen. The more seats they can put in, the lower the seat-mile costs. I really think the future does not favour Boeing's model of high frequency; sooner or later (sooner, I'm guessing), jet fuel will simply become too expensive to make it possible to give people a choice of flight times. City pairs like London to Toronto will become a single A380 instead of two or three 767s or 777s. It makes little difference to the consumer really.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
ORDagent From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 823 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3376 times:
Quoting Cedarjet (Reply 3): City pairs like London to Toronto will become a single A380 instead of two or three 767s or 777s. It makes little difference to the consumer really.
This is only partially true. I totally agree with the fuel issues. However my business clients often tend to book on carriers with more service in the market they are flying into in order to have more flexibility which business travel often demands.
VirginFSM From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3373 times:
I think the -900 will definately happen. The -800 seems designed almost as a "shrink" of the -900 dont you think by looking at it?
I have also seen stuff in the VS offices talking about door numbering...........on the main deck its 1,2,3,4,5 BUT UPSTAIRS its 2,3,4! When I asked why this was I was told that it was so the rearmost upper deck doors will ALWAYS be "4" when the -900 is built.
Perhaps someone at Airbus can confirm (or Poo-poo) this?
A350 From Germany, joined Nov 2004, 1100 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3338 times:
In the year 2000 briefing they told that the stretch will have another advantage of 9% over the baseline version in fuel burn/seat. Since MX costs will be approx. equal at both versions, we'll see another efficiency jump with the A389.
Once an airline operates an A389 and succeeds to fill it (maybe EK), it will become very tough to compete with this airline using smaller birds.
Photography - the art of observing, not the art of arranging
Sebolino From France, joined May 2001, 3673 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3323 times:
I fully agree with Cedarjet, and as he says, the customers will perhaps not have too many choices in the future. The pression on the ticket price because of the fuel will be so high that there will be perhaps no other choice than big planes to make the maximum profit where it can be done.
BrightCedars From Belgium, joined Nov 2004, 1285 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3312 times:
I think the A380-900 will bring even more economies of scale than the A380-800 will already do. The A380 is not only meant to provide a competitor to the Boeing 747 nearly 40 years after its drawing started. The A380 is there to provide the world's largest carriers and alliances with a comfortable people moving solution to hub and spoke passengers between Intercontinental hubs. When there are already 3 or more 747-400 services per day between two cities over 12 hours and 6 time zones away, adding frequency doesn't really make sense anymore.
The A380-800/900 will not contribute to bring prices down that much. But at least they can remain steady (and go down against inflation) and the airlines can survive.
Definitely the A380 is built with stretch in mind, not shrink. Fitting 600 pax isn't that scary, is it? Ok, now what if Southwest or Ryanair go transatlantic with the A380-900 and put 1,000+ onboard...
MD95 From Italy, joined Apr 2005, 104 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3264 times:
It's true that the A380 will introduce economic benefits by reducing flights to city pair, but this require that the airlines joint together to operate it. Do you think this will happen among airline not in the same alliance? Or we will see multiple A380 flying half full. If the airlines will be able to operate jointly, what will happen to competition? For sure the cost of the ticket will not go down.
VirginFSM From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3047 times:
Quoting Trent900 (Reply 10): A few work collegues and me where talking about this a few weeks ago. We worked out they could operate 1 service a day STN - DUB with a A380-900 carrying 1,000 pax. Just imagine that
Emirates must have close to 1000 pax if they are going for 11 abreast on the main deck!