Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Extra Capacity And The A380 -no Advantage Imho  
User currently offlineEugdog From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 518 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 7804 times:

Airbus A380 main marketing point is that it will relieve congestion at over crowded airports. Lower cost is not a real advantage because passengers are more likely to have to change planes to get to their final destination because the A380 is too big to used for point to point travel.

But I would dispute the advantage of congestion relief for two main reasons

a) If cuts to flights need to be made at an overly congested airport then the flights you would cut will be the short hall flights to Europe (get a bigger plane then small 737 or 320s). You would not cut back on the 777s to new york or chicago when you can cut back on the 737s to Europe (they loose money anyhow!)
b) point to point planes like the 787 can relieve congestion at the hub airports because they direct to their destination bypassing the hub

Very large capacity planes do not give airlines to flexibility to adjust capacity to meet demand - if there are smaller two flights to a destination you can reduce capacity and cost by withdrawing one plane from the route in the slow season. This explains why "high cost" twin jets dominate the UK to Florida route (the 747 would be cheaper if all seats are filled up)

For the A380 or any large capacity plane to be competitve its seat costs per mile must be MUCH lower inorder to offset the intrinsic advantages of smaller planes . It would appear that the A380 does not realy have that huge advantage (it is cheaper per seat mile to the 787 but not by a big enough margin.)

Evidence for this can be seen in
a) British Airways has yet to order the A380 - this is the main operator at the most congested major airport in the world! The A380 was clearly made with Heathrow in mind
b) B747-400 sales had slowed down dramatically long before the launch of the A380 as airlines clearly perferred the 777/330/340s (the 747-400 is still the lowest cost per seat jet in service today - when filled up)

[Edited 2006-11-25 12:31:12]

38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7771 times:

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
Very large capacity planes do not give airlines to flexibility to adjust capacity to meet demand

Its perfectly manageable to swap between a 777/A33X and a A380 if you expect a slump in loads. If an airline ONLY owned A380's, then sure, but I know of not a single airline with only A380's on order.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
point to point planes like the 787 can relieve congestion at the hub airports because they direct to their destination bypassing the hub

If anything it would make congestion worse at LHR. You'd have dozens and dozens of 787's inbound from origins where the pax could have 'hubbed'.

In my opinion I don't think that the A380 was designed just for LHR. I do know of aiports that have been designed around the A380.



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlineCrazyHorse From Austria, joined Nov 2005, 328 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7740 times:

Quoting Speedbird128 (Reply 1):
Its perfectly manageable to swap between a 777/A33X and a A380 if you expect a slump in loads. If an airline ONLY owned A380's, then sure, but I know of not a single airline with only A380's on order.

Or an airline can add a new frequency to their destination with an smaller aircraft to be more flexible.
I think this is the better way for an airline to be profitable.


User currently offlineAerosol From Germany, joined Oct 2000, 560 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7741 times:

I forwarded this post to Airbus. They are going to close down the project as they did not see this coming.

By the way what do we do with the 748?


User currently offlineEGNR From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 513 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7724 times:

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
a) If cuts to flights need to be made at an overly congested airport then the flights you would cut will be the short hall flights to Europe (get a bigger plane then small 737 or 320s). You would not cut back on the 777s to new york or chicago when you can cut back on the 737s to Europe (they loose money anyhow!)

Those "money-losing" 737s are used to bring in passengers to fill up the 777s and also to offer connections to other destinations for people arriving on the 777s. Cut them, and you make your longhaul services less attractive.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
) British Airways has yet to order the A380 - this is the main operator at the most congested major airport in the world! The A380 was clearly made with Heathrow in mind



Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
b) point to point planes like the 787 can relieve congestion at the hub airports because they direct to their destination bypassing the hub

British Airways has not placed an order for the Boeing 787 and seems content to carry on with its 'hub to hub' or 'hub to point' strategy for the forseeable future - concentrating services on Heathrow rather than operating from regional (point) airports within the UK.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
b) B747-400 sales had slowed down dramatically long before the launch of the A380 as airlines clearly perferred the 777/330/340s (the 747-400 is still the lowest cost per seat jet in service today - when filled up)

Now we see sales of the Boeing 777-300ER increasing quite rapidly, showing the demand is there for larger aircraft, but the 747 has not seen passenger orders for some time - probably due to the age of the design. Airlines may be less willing to pay vast sums of money for what is essentially a 1960s design. The same fate has befallen the A300, B757 and B767 - airline orders dwindled to very few or none at all as they moved towards the A330, A321, B737-800/-900, etc.

The orders for the 787 show there is the requirement for a 767-sized airliner, but for a number of years, 767 sales have been extremely low - the 767 had reached the end of the preiod where it becomes an attractive purchase as a brand new airframe.



7late7, A3latey, Sukhoi Superlate... what's going on?
User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7691 times:

An much talked about but always interesting thread.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
a) If cuts to flights need to be made at an overly congested airport then the flights you would cut will be the short hall flights to Europe (get a bigger plane then small 737 or 320s). You would not cut back on the 777s to new york or chicago when you can cut back on the 737s to Europe (they loose money anyhow!)

Perhaps. But somewhere you will have to make cuts and reduce frequency or network coverage. Is there any reason why a 777 should be any less susceptible to this than a 737? It's the same effect just on a different scale, you double the aircraft size and reduce a frequency and/or destination and gain a spare slot. It's essentially arguing against fragmentation only to promote it.....

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
b) point to point planes like the 787 can relieve congestion at the hub airports because they direct to their destination bypassing the hub

Arguably. But there just isn't the demand for intense point to point we'd like. I actually doubt the transatlantic scene will change much at all, the 787 is larger than the 767, and although operating costs are lower, airlines are still going to want them on the most profitable routes. I suspect most of the 787 flights will be Hub-Point like DL at ATL. On the Transpacific and Europe-Asia routes though there will be changes, especially amongst the minor airlines, due to the increased range of the smaller aircraft. I wonder how economical the 787 will be when it's flying 7000nm compared to 3000nm though, but that's another thread.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
For the A380 or any large capacity plane to be competitive its seat costs per mile must be MUCH lower in order to offset the intrinsic advantages of smaller planes . It would appear that the A380 does not really have that huge advantage (it is cheaper per seat mile to the 787 but not by a big enough margin.)

I agree. It remains to be seen whether the 787 will be cheaper to operate per seat than the A380 though. The 787-10, maybe.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
a) British Airways has yet to order the A380 - this is the main operator at the most congested major airport in the world! The A380 was clearly made with Heathrow in mind

Well, BA have yet to order anything and are reviewing the 787, 777, 748, A350 and A380 at the minute. They do have the lion's share of slots at LHR though.

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
b) B747-400 sales had slowed down dramatically long before the launch of the A380 as airlines clearly perferred the 777/330/340s (the 747-400 is still the lowest cost per seat jet in service today - when filled up)

Yes but it's no where near as out in front as it used to be. And like you say....

Quoting Eugdog (Thread starter):
For the A380 or any large capacity plane to be competitive its seat costs per mile must be MUCH lower in order to offset the intrinsic advantages of smaller planes .

My 0.02GBP, and i welcome the nay-sayers. 

Rj111

[Edited 2006-11-25 13:41:49]

User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7691 times:

Nice to read your personal opinion; now, to read a recent professional opinion based on an in depth micro-analys of no less than 400 airlines and their future operations worldwide, go to:

http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/gmf/index.html

and read the 74 pages full of professional market forecasts like the one you are trying to make based on loads of statistical evidence from around the globe, analysis of the current market situation, airline opinions and growth predictions for the future from other industry sources combined...

I am sure it will contain interesting material for you...

In short: forget about seeing the A380 as a plane linking only the biggest airports in Asia or North-America to the biggest airports of Europe; the A380 will predominantly be a mass transporter on medium haul intra-Asian thrunk routes, much like the 777 or A330 is today.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8294 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7667 times:

^
Finally a dose of reality in this thread. The A380 is a suitable antidote for the medium haul capacity crisis that will hit the Asian region in under a decade's time. Just don't expect to see it in the Japanese domestic market. The Airbus sales pitch at Narita last week was a colossal waste of time.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently onlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3604 posts, RR: 66
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7593 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 7):
Just don't expect to see it in the Japanese domestic market. The Airbus sales pitch at Narita last week was a colossal waste of time.

Why was that? Narita is also one of the more slot constrained airports and the A380 is often touted as a solution for some if its problems.

Can you give any details?

[Edited 2006-11-25 15:13:43]


Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13202 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7572 times:

Long-haul pax and freight to/from China, India and other major Asian and South Asia countries that contain about 40% of the world's population will be the payoff for the A-380. Some of these countries are limited in creating new airports, they may want to limit access to non-home airlines to protect their own national airlines, the huge growth of trade and manufacturing causing more business demand and a growing middle class who will want to and will be able to afford to travel as pax are more factors that support the A-380.

User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4883 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7569 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 8):
Why was that? Can you give any details?

because they aren't building 35% of the airframe in Japan! Smile


User currently offlineOU812 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7524 times:

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...London+Heathrow+due+to+larger.html

DATE:22/11/06
SOURCE:Flight International

BA CEO Walsh warns Airbus A380 'could add to runway crisis' at London Heathrow due to larger separations

By Max Kingsley-Jones
Greater separation 'threatens Heathrow capacity': Walsh

British Airways chief executive Willie Walsh has warned that the Airbus A380's arrival at its congested London Heathrow hub next year will hampe rather than help the airport's runway capacity crisis due to the approach separation distance required for the ultra-large airliner.

Speaking at the Royal Aeronautical Society last week, Walsh said "the A380 sales talk" indicated that the 550-seater "was the likeliest short-term relief in terms of runway pressure" for Heathrow, "providing effectively three slots for the price of two".



User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7479 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):
now, to read a recent professional opinion based on an in depth micro-analys of no less than 400 airlines and their future operations worldwide...and read the 74 pages full of professional market forecasts like the one you are trying to make based on loads of statistical evidence from around the globe,

I'm sure the "old" A350 had tons of marketing analysis to support it too.

Garbage in; garbage out; as they say.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):
the A380 will predominantly be a mass transporter on medium haul intra-Asian thrunk routes,

The where are the orders from Asia?


User currently offlineEGNR From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 513 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7408 times:

Quoting OU812 (Reply 11):
BA CEO Walsh warns Airbus A380 'could add to runway crisis' at London Heathrow due to larger separations

"The chances that we will buy Airbus A380 are as good as ever. We have absolutely no doubt that EADS will resolve the problems surrounding the project," German newspaper Handelsblatt quoted BA chief executive Willie Walsh as saying in an advance extract of an interview to be published on Tuesday.

"There are good arguments for us to buy a few Airbus A380s," he said, adding that BA would need at least 10 of the jets to run its long-haul services efficiently.
LINK

Willie Walsh is giving out mixed messages on the A380...



7late7, A3latey, Sukhoi Superlate... what's going on?
User currently offlineJohnny From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7372 times:

Fragmentation and more point-to-point is a PR mare of Boeing - nothing more.

See the facts:

The B787-8 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 20percent on each flight
The B787-9 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 25percent on each flight
The B787-8 replaces the B767-200 - add capacity around 30percent on each flight

The orders for the B777-300ER are increasing more and more - THIS airplane is a hub-to-hub airplane.

Boeing is confident in launching the B748I with 467seats - a hub airplane as well...


Johnny


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7312 times:

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
Fragmentation and more point-to-point is a PR mare of Boeing - nothing more.

See the facts:

The B787-8 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 20percent on each flight
The B787-9 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 25percent on each flight

The 788 vs 763 is only 10% more with the former in 9 abreast. The 3 class 763 capacity is 218, the 3 class seating arrangement in 9 abreast for the 788 is something like 237.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8294 posts, RR: 26
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7295 times:

Why was that? Narita is also one of the more slot constrained airports and the A380 is often touted as a solution for some if its problems.

Can you give any details?


97% of Narita's traffic is international. I was referring to the Japanese domestic market. Nobody here is convinced that the A380 could find any success plying this country's high density domestic routes.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31435 posts, RR: 85
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7267 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
Fragmentation and more point-to-point is a PR mare of Boeing - nothing more.

For the record, Airbus buys into it just as much with the A330, A340, and A350(XWB) families.

Fact is, both companies believe in both patterns of travel and have appropriate families to address it.


User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4883 posts, RR: 14
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7259 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 12):
Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):the A380 will predominantly be a mass transporter on medium haul intra-Asian thrunk routes,
The where are the orders from Asia?

SQ, KE, TG, MH, CZ and last time I checked UAE and therefore EK are in Asia.


User currently offline11Bravo From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1725 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7259 times:

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
See the facts:...

That is spin and you know it.

The choice is not nearly as black and white as you suggest. There will still be hubs, AND point to point will increase. No one is suggesting that ALL air travel will become either hub-based or point to point.

There is clearly a trend toward fragmentation and increased frequency, but does that mean hubs will disappear? Of course not.

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
The orders for the B777-300ER are increasing more and more

..., and more than a few of those orders are replacements for B747s.

The order books for the A380 and the B747 speak for themselves on this issue. Could that change? Yes. Is there tangible evidence to suggest that we will be seeing hundreds and hundreds of new VLAs flying around in the next 5-10 years? Nope.



WhaleJets Rule!
User currently offlineEugdog From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 518 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7257 times:

Speedbird said that airlines could substitue the A380 with a smaller plane during the slow season such as a 777/a340. That is not the optimal solution since you have the costly A380 idle during the slow season . If you operate the route with two smaller planes then only one of the smaller planes is idle as oppose to a bigger plane. Also the two plane service has the advantage of giving customrs a choice of time to depart.

Cutting back on short haul flights is not cost free but the loss can be partially offset by operating larger planes (example A321 as oppose to A319). If many of the passengers are feeding into long haul flights then having a frequent schedule is not so important. All you need is specific flights to connect with the long haul flights. The taxi style business passenger flights is not so important. And besides such traffic is in decline as there are more direct flights.

I am not saying that hub and spoke is coming to an end - but there is not doubt that point to point will become more common and that hub and spoke requirements will shrink somewhat.

BTW I think the B777 is selling more and more because the long range A340 has become obsolete with its 4 engines! Also I think the B777 is gradually replacing B747 - I note that BA does not operate anymore 747 to New York - there was a time when it was exclusively 747 from LHR to New York

[Edited 2006-11-25 17:48:46]

User currently offlineJohnny From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7242 times:

@ Atmx2000

The seating arrangement for the B787-8 is 250 according Boeing.

The normal 3-class layout for the B767-300ER is around 205 seats.

Difference 45 seats - that makes 21,95 percent...


Johnny


User currently offlineAutoThrust From Switzerland, joined Jun 2006, 1610 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7177 times:

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
Fragmentation and more point-to-point is a PR mare of Boeing - nothing more.

See the facts:

The B787-8 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 20percent on each flight
The B787-9 replaces the B767-300 - add capacity around 25percent on each flight
The B787-8 replaces the B767-200 - add capacity around 30percent on each flight

The orders for the B777-300ER are increasing more and more - THIS airplane is a hub-to-hub airplane.

Boeing is confident in launching the B748I with 467seats - a hub airplane as well...

 thumbsup  Finally a rational post in this thread. Couldnt agree more.



“Faliure is not an option.”
User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7124 times:

Quoting Johnny (Reply 21):
The seating arrangement for the B787-8 is 250 according Boeing.

Boeing gives a range for the 3 class 787-8, stretching from 200 to 250, dependent on whether the aircraft is configured in 8Y or 9Y and on the particulars of the configuration in each class such as pitch.

Boeing shows a specifc configuration for the 787-8 in their aircraft brochure
that is 14C, 44J and 179Y for a total of 237.

For the 763ER they have a config of 18C, 46J, and 154Y for a total of 218 on the website and a config of 18C, 42J, and 150Y for a total of 210 in the airport compatibility document. Both of these configurations are premium heavy, making the 788 look larger.

Regardless, the relative increase is around 8 to 13%, using a 9Y 787 configuration. The difference would be less with a 8Y configuration.

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 22):
   Finally a rational post in this thread. Couldnt agree more.

Too bad his numbers are wrong.

[Edited 2006-11-25 19:01:48]


ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 month 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7098 times:

Quoting Eugdog (Reply 20):
I note that BA does not operate anymore 747 to New York - there was a time when it was exclusively 747 from LHR to New York

I think you meant "doesn't operate only 747's anymore to New York"..... Wink



"Up the Irons!"
25 Johnny : @ Atmx2000 YOUR figures are wrong...! Check the floor areas of both airplanes and see the difference. Standard config. for the B767 is 2-3-2 and for t
26 Dutchjet : Yet another BIG A380 vs SMALL 787/777 thread........we have done this before and there is no definitive answer. This is yet another take on Boeings "m
27 Atmx2000 : I'm perfectly aware of the larger cabin. But it looks like a lot of that extra space has gone into making the premium cabins more luxurious, with wid
28 Dw747400 : How exactly does this prove that fragmentation is not occurring? Just because they are slightly larger than 767 doesn't mean 787s are not intended as
29 Dutchjet : If its nothing more than PR.......why is Airbus hoping to develop the A350/XWB? And why do A330 sales continue to be a bright spot in Airbus' recent
30 Slz396 : Why does everybody assume fragmentation will also ALWAYS lead to smaller planes? Fragmentation is leading to smaller planes ONLY in the traditional av
31 Johnny : Fragmentation means existing hub-routes with big airplanes will be replaced by non-hub flights with smaller airplanes. In german "Fragment" is the sam
32 Eugdog : from SLZ396 "An airspace around such a point/hub can only handle as much traffic as it can fit into it and full is full (e.g. London), at what time th
33 SSTsomeday : Well, my take would be: Tokyo has experienced a very clear, ongoing example of fragmentation over the years. Originally, Tokyo was the single interna
34 Alessandro : Of course it´s a big advantage with bigger capacity, people tend to forget about Hadjj flying, also when foggy and with limited number of takeoffs yo
35 Post contains links and images 787engineer : Actually the 787-8 is designed for 210 to 250 (http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787family/787-8prod.html) passengers depending on 8Y/9Y and the seati
36 Slz396 : Okay, and how much salt do you take for Boeing's market outlook for VLA's? 800 in 2004 900 in 2005 990 in 2006 1100 in 2007??? Apparently BOTH manufa
37 RJ111 : True but short haul routes are much more sensitive to frequency. Also the only airline that does fly those 2 routes is BA and there are 7 daily to JF
38 Post contains images 787engineer : Never said I take Boeing's market outlook at face value, nor should anyone. I'm just saying to tout the advantages of the A380, a better professional
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...
Let The Truth Be Told : ORD And The A380? posted Mon Aug 21 2006 21:11:59 by Ordryan28
SIA And The A380 posted Sun May 21 2006 09:41:04 by Industrybuff
EK And The A380 posted Tue Feb 7 2006 02:04:33 by RyGuy
AF And The A380 posted Sat Jan 21 2006 21:43:16 by TwoLz2Rn
ANA And The A380 posted Thu Jan 5 2006 12:55:39 by Manni
North America And The A380 posted Sun Nov 13 2005 17:51:51 by AirworldA320
Air France And The A380 posted Tue Oct 11 2005 18:04:27 by Okees
Japan And The A380 posted Sun Aug 21 2005 21:12:28 by Centrair
SIA And The A380 Delay - Rebranding Issues? posted Thu Aug 18 2005 03:00:27 by TheBigOne
Kingfisher And The A380? posted Sat Jul 30 2005 15:17:08 by Georgiabill