Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
JAL Chief Rules Out A380.  
User currently offlineManni From South Korea, joined Nov 2001, 4221 posts, RR: 22
Posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 10552 times:

The chief at JAL has said it wont purchase the A380. No surprise here (eventough, think about 'never say never'), but to say this in public, wathever the reasons are behind his comment it sounds
like an incredible dumb thing to say in public. Unless JAL rules out the 748i aswell, or an order has already been placed for the 748i.

from the article,

The head of Japan Airlines Corp has ruled out buying Airbus A380 superjumbos because of the plane's delivery-delay woes and a plan by the carrier to reduce the size of its fleet, the Financial Times said.

JAL Chief Executive Haruka Nishimatsu told the newspaper in comments published on Tuesday: "The A380 is a completely controversial concept to the present aviation market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

He's also commenting on the 787, seems like the aircraft is still as good as on schedule,...

from the article,

JAL had ordered 30 Boeing 787s, the first of which was due to be delivered in July 2008, it said.

"I met with the new president of Boeing last week and he said that the deliveries would be on time," Nishimatsu said.


"If there is a delay it should only be a month or two."


http://asia.news.yahoo.com/061031/3/2s48r.html


SUPPORT THE LEBANESE CIVILIANS
68 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 10521 times:

Quoting Manni (Thread starter):
Unless JAL rules out the 748i aswell, or an order has already been placed for the 748i.

Here's a link which might answer your question..

"(Japanese)Airlines bid 747 farewell / Jumbo jets being phased out for smaller, economical plan"

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20061031TDY03003.htm

cheers..



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6491 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 10522 times:

I think that a pattern can be discerned from this -- the compensation discounts given to A380 customers have made follow-on orders attractive. However, those carriers which were not locked in by contract (and thus do not have the benefit of penalty payments and launch pricing on options) may not find the financials quite as favorable for them, thus the lack of any major new orders in ages.

EDIT: added text in bold

[Edited 2006-10-31 07:05:16]


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21582 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 10491 times:

JAL is a huge 744 operator, but I don't see very many 748i in their future either. This was part of my argument against the A380 sales figure of 750. Some very large 747 carriers are not likely to buy the A380, and some won't even buy the 748i. And large 747F carriers look to be leaning to replacing those with 748F and 744BCF models going forward. Those are two blows to the A380 program, as they have to manufacture over 400 new VLA orders from carriers that don't exist yet or who aren't past VLA customers. How many EK like airlines will there be in the next 20 years? 7 or 8 more?

Possibly JAL could take 10 748i (or even A380s) later on, but the 747D program is dead and with airports in Japan ruling out 3 and 4 holers (despite how quiet some are...), it only encourages the 787/777 family more and more. Half of the demand from JL and NH for 747s was in the D market. Thus that isn't a market the 748 or the A380 can capture.

Now if Fuji or Mitsubishi is involved in the 350X, we might see that in the future. Which even points out further that Airbus would be wise to offer an A350X-300 version at A330-300 size and range for regional routes...

Quoting Manni (Thread starter):
"If there is a delay it should only be a month or two."

This is pretty much the maximum delay one can expect if, at this stage, Boeing is still telling customers there will be no delay. Even small problems from here on out won't amount to more than a month or two.

It would take a massive problem like the A380 suffered to slip more than that. Which could still happen, but Boeing has the benefit of watching it unfold and realizing how dramatic a problem it is and how important it is to avoid it.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineBDL2STL2PVG From China, joined Jun 2006, 151 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 10476 times:

I think that this is just what it appears to be. The chief of JAL is confirming their forward business plan / strategy. They will be getting away from VLA or Ultra-VLA and go more point to point. It is not a slam against the A380 but in fact a confirmation that their new business model just doesn't support the VLA. I do think that if they had any plan to go after the 748 then he would not have said this as it clearly lessens their negotiating power.

User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5946 posts, RR: 11
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 10416 times:

I am an avid Boeing fan, but Nishimatsusan's comments caught my attention:
1. No delay.
2. Delay of a month or two maybe.


Hmmmm... piqued my curiosity.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21582 posts, RR: 59
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 10322 times:

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 7):
1. No delay.
2. Delay of a month or two maybe.

I translated that to mean: "we are being told of no projected delays at this time, so even if something were to crop up between now and 2008, as the head of JAL I am confident that it couldn't be more than a month or two."

Nobody in the airline business at this point wants to say that any future plane will be completely on time, not with the current climate. Everyone is parsing words carefully. So he must both assure the public that the plane is on schedule, but also that if there is a delay, it will be minor and won't materially affect their operations. This has to be said because investors are very nervous, seeing how drastically airlines like SQ, QF have had to alter their plans.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineAerosol From Germany, joined Oct 2000, 560 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 10322 times:

I wonder where the representaives of "political decision" from the Lufthansa topics are!

Anyway - I hope to fly in a 747i/380 of JAL in the future.

It all depends on the economy - if there's a boom JAL will not be ableto fulfill demand.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21582 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 10305 times:

Quoting Aerosol (Reply 9):
Anyway - I hope to fly in a 747i/380 of JAL in the future.

I would too, but I don't see it for a long time.

Maybe one day, there will be 800 seat A380s flying Tokyo to Osaka. I'd sign up for that!



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineCarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2977 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 10044 times:

What difference does it make if the JL president announces they aren't interested in the A380 right now. They have enough problems as it is without worrying about A380 delivery delays, pilot issues, and a totally new type it will have to train up for.
First of all, JL is still bleeding red and continues to right size its capacity. More int'l route cuts or downgrading are ahead.

Frankly, its JL's way of saying go away Airbus. We ain't interested.  Wink


User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 10026 times:

Quoting Manni (Thread starter):
The head of Japan Airlines Corp has ruled out buying Airbus A380 superjumbos because of the plane's delivery-delay woes and a plan by the carrier to reduce the size of its fleet, the Financial Times said.

These are temporary reasons, it could look different in the future.

Quoting Manni (Thread starter):
JAL Chief Executive Haruka Nishimatsu told the newspaper in comments published on Tuesday: "The A380 is a completely controversial concept to the present aviation market.

Good Boeing cheerleading. But then, the 747-8 is not? Ruling out the A380 is not good for a negotiating position for buying 747-8, it seems to me that JL doesn't want those, as well. But aren't they the biggest 747 operator in the world?

Quoting Manni (Thread starter):
"I met with the new president of Boeing last week and he said that the deliveries would be on time," Nishimatsu said.

Another quote from the article
"The A380 has a much bigger problem than the (Boeing) 787 in terms of delivery."
So, the 787 has a problem, too?

Remember, the A380 didn't have problems before its first flight, either, who knows what will happen with the 787, after the first one is really complete. I read somewhere that they have weight issues, it started like that with the A380, too. Just a hint, Boeing, don't change the wiring too much.


User currently offlineSimProgrammer From France, joined Aug 2004, 193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 10024 times:

The reasons for Japans airlines refusal to even consider an Airbus product strikes me as political than rational.


Drive a bus, an Airbus, easier than a London bus!
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21582 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 9956 times:

Quoting SimProgrammer (Reply 14):
The reasons for Japans airlines refusal to even consider an Airbus product strikes me as political than rational.

Whatever.

I assume that if WN said they have also ruled out the A380, that's political, too?

JL and NH may very well be done with VLA altogether. How is that political?



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 9933 times:

I still wouldn't rule them out in the long term.

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21582 posts, RR: 59
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 9920 times:

Quoting RJ111 (Reply 16):

Neither would I. In 10 years, either might need a limited number. But not 30 to replace 30 744s. No way.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineAither From South Korea, joined Oct 2004, 859 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 9920 times:

When you listen the statement, if i did not know from who it was i would have bet from Boeing. He was using exactly some typical Boeing words like the now famous point to point ideology. Since when let say Sapporo Tokyo or Tokyo Honolulu are not point to point routes ?

Some operators, and the most profitable ones/well managed, unlike JAL, did find an interest to buy the A380 on much smaller routes than JAL operates. If JAL cannot understand the benefit of using this aircraft, well they may learn the hard way when the A380 will enter into service in their direct competitor's fleet. They should also keep in mind that more and more japanese are less reluctant to fly non japanese carriers.



Never trust the obvious
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 9788 times:

For me this an indication that JAL likely won't order the A380 soon.

In 5 yrs with NRT stuffed with non Japanese A380s, circumstances might change.

After denying any interest a few years ago ANA lately has explicitly mentioned the A380 as an option. ANA is already an Airbus customer.


User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4376 posts, RR: 28
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 9745 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 19):
In 5 yrs with NRT stuffed with non Japanese A380s, circumstances might change.

Based on Airbus' current production schedule, there will only be around 100 WhaleJets flying in 5 years. How many of those will be "stuffed" into NRT at any given time?  wave 



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 9686 times:

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 20):
Based on Airbus' current production schedule, there will only be around 100 WhaleJets flying in 5 years. How many of those will be "stuffed" into NRT at any given time? wave

Almost every airline getting the A380 could use it to NRT. Imagine daily flights from AF, LH, SQ, QF, EK, EY, IT, KE, and TG. JL with a 77W would look pretty small, then.


User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4376 posts, RR: 28
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 9681 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 21):
JL with a 77W would look pretty small, then.

Gee, you mean it really is all about size?  Wink



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineAirbuseric From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 4277 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 9684 times:

There is no good reason for JL to order the A380. They simply doesn't need them at all.

-on any international flights to US and Europe, the passenger figures are not that much, hence the operation of mainly B772 and B773 (Europe) and B744 (with large F/C class) on US routes.
-the A380 for domestic use? No way. As said before, more and more Japanese airports are banning the B747 (4 engine), so this will also be the case for A380's.
And JL is better offering many flights to the domestic key destinations so the customer is able to choose the best flight departure/arrival from it etc. JL can mix very well in seats with B762/763/772/773/AB6/M80/M90/734, so they should be able to use the most suitable a/c at all times.
With the large order of B737-800 and B787's, which will mainly be for domestic operations, this just rules out the A380 for the future.

B748i - also a NO. It's too big. Also a NO for cargo operations (JL opted to reconfigure the pax B744 to BCF type). The current fleet of B744 will get replaced by B772/773 and B787's. Just reducing in a/c size.

Really packed full JL Jumbojets with >450 seats is history soon.



"The whole world steps aside for the man who knows where he is going"
User currently offlineAither From South Korea, joined Oct 2004, 859 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 9597 times:

Quoting Airbuseric (Reply 23):
on any international flights to US and Europe, the passenger figures are not that much, hence the operation of mainly B772 and B773 (Europe) and B744 (with large F/C class) on US routes.

Around 100 000 pax per month to the European capital not that much ?

Of course if you buy smaller aircraft, you will get less of that pie...

The bottom line is these guys just have no ambition. And in a competitive business, people retreating ultimately get busted.

Quoting Airbuseric (Reply 23):
And JL is better offering many flights to the domestic key destinations so the customer is able to choose the best flight departure/arrival from it etc.

For the domestic operations targeted by the A380s the schedules are already more than adequate.

Quoting Airbuseric (Reply 23):
the A380 for domestic use? No way. As said before, more and more Japanese airports are banning the B747 (4 engine), so this will also be the case for A380's.

That's a really stupid ban totally ignoring the benefits of modern aircraft. I really wonder the true reasons behind this.



Never trust the obvious
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 9560 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 15):
I assume that if WN said they have also ruled out the A380, that's political, too?

Is WN the world's largest 747 operator?

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 22):
Gee, you mean it really is all about size? Wink

In this case, with JL being a big international airline, it would be strange if they had way smaller planes then many others at their own home base.


User currently offlineUnited Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 9210 posts, RR: 15
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 9573 times:

Maybe a strategy to attract a better deal for the A 380?

Seriously I see them going for the B 747-8 eventually. They can't keep on using smaller planes forever since a lot of their routes are always full. Not sure about the A 380


User currently offlinePVG From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2004, 728 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 9529 times:

There was something in the FT recently where they quote someone at JAL on their decision to use 777-300ER on the CDG routes in place of a 744. He said that while their overall costs increased by 1% their overall revenue from the flight increase by 10%. So, they make more money by carrying less passengers on a smaller plane. That is why they don't want the A380. They don't see that they will profitably be able to fill the seats. Makes sense to me, but maybe I'm missing something.

25 Aerosol : How can they make more revenue on a smaler plane? More 1st/business? More eco? (how is config?) More cargo? The amount of people does not change by c
26 RJ111 : Are you sure it wasn't revenue decreased by 1% and costs decreased by 10%? I don't understand how a smaller aircraft could bring in 10% more revenue.
27 Spacecadet : Last I checked, JAL flies HND-ITM *21 times* per day (plus return trips). That's with 777's and 747's, mostly, and they're mostly sold out. I don't k
28 Aaron747 : ^ Just a note, 747s are no longer used to ITM due to last April's ban on three and four-engined aircraft. The daily schedule is almost entirely 772s a
29 Aither : The revenue per seat is probably increasing. They're playing with revenue management. It's an old trick and it looks very good in the book... for the
30 Stitch : You better tailor to the "demand curve" by only offering enough seats to meet the demand of profitable passengers. So if you have 300 people who want
31 Airbuseric : B777's carry more cargo then B744 as the 777's are able to fly more pallets instead of containers (with JAL's configurations for the lowerdeck). So v
32 Jfk777 : The only destination where 800 japanesse travel daily is Hawaii. Honolulu would be the only JAL destination for a whale. Would JAL buy a small number
33 Post contains images Keesje : Maybe we are missing the logic. If all the others (starting with AF, LH, SQ, QF, MH, EK) start flying their shiny A380s with japanese crews & lots of
34 Post contains links NYC777 : According to ATW there may be another delay of three months on the A380!!! http://atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=6932 At least it's not another
35 Thorben : No need, because nobody wants to fly T7 or 747, when you can fly A380? Considering how much more space people will have in the big one. Space is impo
36 Post contains images Eatmybologna : Like Aither said (above in reply 29). They're playing with supply and demand. By creating a perception of scarcity of available seating, they can shi
37 Post contains images Leelaw : I think not, here is the representational schematic of the "logic" in question:
38 RJ111 : He's talking about revenue not profit. You're right, the argument is valid for profitability though. The RASM would increase but if you kept the pric
39 PVG : From WSJ Oct. 16th. Sorry, had it wrong, costs decreased 10%, revenue only decreased 1%. Also, it was frankfurt flights, not CDG. Knew that there was
40 Post contains images Jacobin777 : Maybe you didn't realise that its the opposite way...Boeing has seen trends in United States and Japanese Aviation..also, they have worked decades wi
41 Post contains images Scaledesigns : It striked me as funny that JAL is political because of the comments but LH is not political...They are both partly political..And the A380 did have B
42 Aerosol : Makes sense now!
43 Post contains links and images Keesje : I think Boeing is a closed book on the 787. Anything negative that comes out is denied, they only react on things that leak out when they have to. Bo
44 Zvezda : That's one way of reading it. Another way is: "we are being told that there are some issues with production that could cause a delay of a month or tw
45 Eatmybologna : I agree. Because the 787 manufacturing process involves trade secrets, Boeing must stay on top of information transfer in order to remain competitve.
46 Stitch : True, in that 400 passengers will provide more total revenue then 300 passengers will, but airlines most likely are more concerned with revenue per a
47 OldAeroGuy : I think a better way of stating this is that the A380 didn't have any announced problems until after the first flight. The manufacturing problems wer
48 Post contains images Eatmybologna : This is true. For example, I recall watching a fascinating episode on T.V. last year that covered the manufacture and assembly of the A380 super jumb
49 Flysherwood : Who cares what the size of your aircraft is if you are making money? That is what being in business is all about. The only airlines who think like th
50 Ikramerica : So obviously, you are looking at the past (not present) and projecting into the future. 747s don't fly into ITM anymore. It's all 777s for JL and NH,
51 Flysherwood : I don't know about you but I have never felt cramped in a T7 or 744. I have felt like that on a A340 on LH however. Especially without an inflight en
52 FlyingHippo : There are plenty of big international airlines with no A380 on their books. BA, CX, UA, AA to name a few. AA doesn't fly anything larger than a 772ER
53 TAN FLYR : Could be..but then again maybe JL will be the only one making a profit on that 777 vs a half or 2/3 full 380 that broke even at best!?
54 Post contains images Eatmybologna : Perhaps not, as many airliners will adapt the strategy of using a higher quantity of smaller planes leading to improved frequency. I thought I read h
55 PlaneHunter : The size of a plane alone is not really relevant for a profit orientated airline. Don't forget JAL is not really slot-restricted at NRT, unlike most
56 N328KF : Yes, and this also goes a long way towards explaining BA's apparent apathy towards the A380.
57 Zone1 : The size really doesn't matter, it's how you use it. If NH and JL can operate smaller equipment more profitably than larger equipment, then they will
58 Glideslope : Agreed, and a growing pattern, IMO. Not good news at all.
59 Post contains images Glideslope : The indication should be, "never." In 5 years there will not be 100 380's in the air. I'm going with 50. Ok, mentioned as an option. Let's see how ma
60 EbbUK : Airbus better close the programme now. If JAL say no to the 380, it has no hope at all. Shocking news.
61 Post contains images Stitch : I agree it's hardly a death-blow to the program, but a number of Airbus afficiandoes have raised JL as a possible source of tens or even scores of or
62 Post contains images EbbUK : I will if B6 announce to the media that the 380 doesn't feature in their plans. JAL may come back to the 380 though, an outside chance but when they
63 Post contains links and images Keesje : Yes, for now that is. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/boe226.shtml
64 TAN FLYR : Same point I have been trying to make. If JAL figures they can make more money with 2 777's on a route at 2 convenient times for customers vs 1 A380
65 Warren747sp : Is Narita's airport's terminal even ready to accept the A380? But don't worry they have at least 2 more years to consider!
66 Carpethead : Yes it is. Air field - no problem. Terminal - handful of gates at each terminal will be A380-capable.
67 Centrair : Maybe we should all consider the fact that not every Japanese traveler or people coming to Japan travel through NRT anymore. A large percent does but
68 Jimyvr : With NRT's 2nd runway extends to 2500m and Haneda opens 4th runway which generates 300000 annual slots, as well as significant result of increasing yi
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...
Singapore Airlines Rules Out A345 Replacement posted Mon Jul 31 2006 09:29:43 by Leelaw
€urope Rules Out AF - Alitalia Anti Trust Deal posted Sat Jun 29 2002 09:57:56 by Singapore_Air
UK Again Rules Out Open Skies With USA posted Wed Jun 13 2001 08:57:18 by Singapore_Air
Branson: A380 Cancellation Not Ruled Out posted Tue Nov 21 2006 15:59:55 by NYC777
The Real Villain: Out Of Position Work On A380 posted Mon Jul 24 2006 22:04:06 by Dougloid
Second A380 For SIA Rolls Out Without Tail Livery posted Fri Jul 14 2006 16:06:30 by Leelaw
First JAL 744BCF Out Of The Hangar posted Fri May 12 2006 19:21:08 by AirbusA346
A380 Evac Latest: All Out In 80 Seconds posted Sun Mar 26 2006 16:42:55 by Speedmarque
A380: MSN012 Is Out Of The Hangar posted Fri Mar 17 2006 09:00:16 by AirbusA346
Ex-Airbus Sales Chief Rips A380 Forecasts posted Tue Mar 14 2006 19:47:19 by Dhefty