Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
WSJ Story On LAX 380 Preparations  
User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4252 posts, RR: 29
Posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2379 times:

You need a subscription to view the article:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113322742931008654.html?mod=COMPANY

Some Highlights from the article:

Despite its renowned aviation tradition and fast-growing Pacific traffic, Los Angeles International faces increasingly tough challenges in revamping its cramped, 1960s-vintage facilities to get ready to become the busiest U.S. gateway for the A380. City officials have ambitious plans to build a spacious new terminal with expanded gates, along with plans to redesign the flow of aircraft around the field.

But for many months, controversy and inertia impeded even short-term fixes. Some of those logjams finally are easing, but worried airlines continue to hedge their bets by considering alternative U.S. destinations for the double-decker aircraft.


But as Airbus, which is 80%-owned by European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co. and 20% by Britain's BAE Systems PLC, surveys the extensive work still ahead, one of its biggest frustrations continues to be slow progress at LAX. While it isn't scheduled to receive its first A380 until the spring of 2007, LAX faces daunting political, legal and logistical hurdles.

LAX already has received a black eye from Virgin Atlantic Airways, which blamed lack of progress on upgrades for its decision to delay the start of A380 service to the city. After meeting last month with Los Angeles airport and city officials, Airbus managers stressed the need to rev up the pace of improvements. "If Los Angeles is not ready in time, a carrier can easily switch to San Francisco" to serve the West Coast, warned Willy-Pierre Dupont, who is spearheading the plane-maker's dealings with airports.


I'm not a racist...I hate Biden, too.
7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4252 posts, RR: 29
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2352 times:

Another interesting aspect of the story: Airbus' list of the airports with the most 380 traffic by 2023:

1. London
2. Tokyo (Narita)
3. Hong Kong
4. Singapore
5. Bangkok
6. Dubai
7. Beijing
8. Seoul
9. Los Angeles
10. Shanghai
11. Frankfurt
12. Taipei
13. Tokyo (Haneida)
14. Paris
15. Sydney
16. New York



I'm not a racist...I hate Biden, too.
User currently offlineLightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12406 posts, RR: 100
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2265 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Sort of Sad LAX will not be ready.  Sad Go forward with Alternate A!
http://www.airport-technology.com/pr.../losangeles/index.html#losangeles3

 spin 

And while they're at it, Build the Wilshire cooridor subway to LAX, the exposition blvd light rail, and damn the Taxi union, get the green line there too!  hissyfit 

Not to mention the nice plan for the bus terminal.  spin 

Ok, if large aircraft were the only concern, Alternate C would be a better runway layout (see above link). However, LAX is only ~20% widebodies, so a runway layout optimized for the single isle jets makes more sense to me.

Man, who would think politicians would be against jobs, increased tax base, and city wide economic growth!

Lightsaber

ps spell checker didn't launch.



I've posted how many times?!?
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2248 times:

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 1):
1. London
2. Tokyo (Narita)
3. Hong Kong
4. Singapore
5. Bangkok
6. Dubai
7. Beijing
8. Seoul
9. Los Angeles
10. Shanghai
11. Frankfurt
12. Taipei
13. Tokyo (Haneida)
14. Paris
15. Sydney
16. New York

Curious that Dubai is at 6, while EK already has such a big a380 order. And Tokyo at 2 and 13? IMHO unlikely unless ANA and JAL order some, wich right now seems unlikely.



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineJetMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2235 times:

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 1):

13. Tokyo (Haneida)

So they really seem to expect ANA and/or JAL to order the A380...


Regards,
JM


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2204 times:

Quoting JetMaster (Reply 4):
So they really seem to expect ANA and/or JAL to order the A380...

I am not sure if that is the correct inference. Starting in 2009, Haneda will be opened to international flights. (The existing flights to Seoul Kimpo are an exception)


User currently offlineTrvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2182 times:

Quoting RedFlyer (Thread starter):
"If Los Angeles is not ready in time, a carrier can easily switch to San Francisco" to serve the West Coast, warned Willy-Pierre Dupont, who is spearheading the plane-maker's dealings with airports.

It's not that easy. If airlines want to deploy the A380 to Los Angeles, it's because they want to serve the LA market, not SFO's. I'm not too sure they'd be so happy to fly this plane to other markets where it would perhaps be oversized.

That's not to say that LAX shouldn't step up the pace in accommodating the A380, or that SFO doesn't merit it either, but simply that airlines often make their fleet utilization decisions based on a more complex set of objectives. If LAX isn't ready in time, the A380s will go elsewhere, but it's certainly not the preferred option for airlines.

Aaron G.


User currently offlineIncitatus From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 3964 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2175 times:

Whether an airline will fly a 747 or A380 into LAX makes a tiny difference into the overall supply of travel at the airport - even on the seat availability in specific routes such as LAX-SYD. This is insignificant news, except that it is an opportunity to put airport officials and local government on the spot.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
LA Times Story On Air India LAX Problems posted Thu Dec 22 2005 07:47:56 by Laxintl
NYT Story On DL Pensions And DL Response posted Fri Nov 17 2006 21:35:54 by Positiverate
Did UA Use 747 222B Or 238B On LAX-NRT 1997? posted Sat Nov 4 2006 21:35:45 by 747400sp
WSJ: Article On VLJ's posted Sat Sep 30 2006 18:00:30 by Lightsaber
News Alert - Cnbc To Air Story On Embrear At Soon posted Tue Sep 5 2006 20:16:07 by Boeing Nut
Does Anyone Know The Story On PIT-MIA? posted Fri Aug 25 2006 23:34:45 by CentPIT
Near Collision On LAX Rwy 25R Wed 7/26 posted Sat Jul 29 2006 05:53:05 by Mizzou65201
What Aircraft Does SQ Operate On LAX-TPE-SIN? posted Wed Jul 12 2006 01:46:08 by Ssides
AA Adds Mainline Back On LAX-LAS posted Thu Jun 8 2006 09:22:19 by BALAX
WSJ Report On Legacy Recovery, Positive Out Look. posted Mon Jun 5 2006 17:02:17 by Gritzngravee