Gallois said in an interview that he expects United Parcel Service Inc., its only customer for the A380 freighter, to ''postpone'' its order for 10 planes by a decade.
A380 Freighter
Airbus ''in coming days'' will make a decision on whether to push back plans to produce a freighter version of the plane, Gallois said. UPS said last week it has yet to decide whether to retain the $2.8 billion order.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21025 posts, RR: 60 Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19896 times:
I'm getting tired of these face saving moves by Airbus. Just cancel the damn project, admit it wasn't best suited for the purpose, and move on. (A380F, I'm talking about, not A380 pax). Focus on the A350X, A330F, A389, and A320NG.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
NYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5147 posts, RR: 49 Reply 4, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19831 times:
A 10 year postponment in this industry is as good as a cancellation. Example, Phillippine Air's 744 order. It's been on the books for god knows how long but were postponed. Eventually they were converted to the 77W order. Can the same thing happen between Airbus and UPS? Sure but for now it looks like UPS won't be taking any A380F and Airbus won't be building any mega freighters.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26679 posts, RR: 83 Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19780 times:
Well it's obvious Airbus is going to stop development on the A380-800F.
What will be interesting to see if 5X is on the hook for A306Fs or A332Fs or if they get their deposits back to allow Airbus to stop that development.
So FX and 5X now have the luxury of waiting to see how the A380-800 program shakes out and whether or not passenger models become available for conversion.
It's good news for Boeing since in the interim, they will be buying Boeing dedicated cargo lift (767F, 777F, 747F).
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6256 posts, RR: 39 Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19785 times:
Translation: UPS doesn't want it; we don't want to build it for only 10 planes, but we don't want to give UPS their money back so we'll kick the can WAY down the road.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
TeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23 Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19782 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter): Airbus may also push back production of the A380 and a final decision is within days of being made.
We can safely assume Airbus won't be building whitetail A380F's. Seems like they've put the A380F in the coffin, but can't face burying it.
AirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2775 posts, RR: 43 Reply 9, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19704 times:
In ten years Airbus will have a good handle on the A380 program, and if it is worth pushing the capital in to the project to make it happen. Airbus might land a large order to start the process before then. UPS probably gets to freeze their prices, and probably gets a huge chunk of their pre-delivery payments back.
When is a cancellation not a cancellation? When it's the best thing for all parties.
Katekebo From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 671 posts, RR: 6 Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19702 times:
10 years postponement is a virtual cancellation, without calling it that way. With no orders with deliveires over the next 10 years it's obvious that the A380F will be shelved until enough demand exists to make it finacially justifiable. With the two potential largest customers (UPS and FedEx) saying that they don't want the aiplane (at least not during the coming 10 years), I doubt that Airbus can find enough potential buyers to justify the development of a freighter version. And if development of a new, more efficient VLA begins withing these 10 years (or at least Boeing start seriously talking about one), the A380F may never materialize.
ChrisNH From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 3804 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19636 times:
This falls under the description, 'You yank my chain and I'll yank yours...'
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21025 posts, RR: 60 Reply 12, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19601 times:
Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 9): UPS probably gets to freeze their prices, and probably gets a huge chunk of their pre-delivery payments back.
A would be better giving the deposits back than to freeze 2 year old prices for ten more years!
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
EvilForce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19517 times:
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 12): A would be better giving the deposits back than to freeze 2 year old prices for ten more years!
Usually capital equipment like this have "accelerator" factors built in. Meaning that the price is what it is + applicable rate of inflation based on an agreed upon measurement of inflation...ie US producer price index until actual delivery.
NoWorries From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 523 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19373 times:
Maybe UPS concluded that they don't need the A380F in it's current form so Airbus said: wait -- check back in 10 years and if the A380 gains some momentum, there might be a re-engined A388F or even an A389F with better ecconomics. Otherwise, all of this maneuvering seems like overkill if it's just face-saving to avoid using the "c" word in public.
TeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23 Reply 15, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 19175 times:
Quoting EvilForce (Reply 13): Usually capital equipment like this have "accelerator" factors built in. Meaning that the price is what it is + applicable rate of inflation based on an agreed upon measurement of inflation...ie US producer price index until actual delivery.
That is true if the buyer defers the purchase. It's not at all clear whether or not Airbus is actually the party requesting this deferral. If Airbus is behind this, UPS may see an advantage to holding the option to buy A380F's relatively cheaply at a later date. I'd love to be a fly on the wall for this one...
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7439 posts, RR: 5 Reply 16, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 19117 times:
This looks like a good deal for both Airbus & UPS. I would guess that Airbus will avoid paying any compensation and UPS will get their deposits back until a new agreement is reached on deliveries.
Ten years from now the 380 will be a far better plane, especially with new engines, and UPS can make a decision based on their current needs. Airbus will, hopefully, have the 389 worked out and be able to design a 380F for less effort than it would take today.
Nitrohelper From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 463 posts, RR: 5 Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 19058 times:
How many 747-400s will become available for freighter conversions during the next ten years? Why not just keep converting -400s? Is there a delivery problem ? (What is the cost?)
Last question, would a converted 380F be heavier than a purposed built freighter?
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6256 posts, RR: 39 Reply 18, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 18978 times:
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 16): This looks like a good deal for both Airbus & UPS. I would guess that Airbus will avoid paying any compensation and UPS will get their deposits back until a new agreement is reached on deliveries.
It looks like a good deal for Airbus. They get to keep UPS's deposits for 10 years and don't have to do anything for it.
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 16): Ten years from now the 380 will be a far better plane, especially with new engines, and UPS can make a decision based on their current needs. Airbus will, hopefully, have the 389 worked out and be able to design a 380F for less effort than it would take today.
This may be the case; it also may be the case that the A380 has sold maybe 300 total by that time, and Airbus finally admits that it was a foolish plane to build and decides not to throw good money after bad and makes no further versions including the freighter. My bet is the A380F never sees the light of day.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
SirOmega From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 735 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 18977 times:
Sounds like an A350F order to me.
Or at least thats what I would try to do if I were Airbus - convert them to A350F instead of outright caning the order.
Dougbr2006 From Brazil, joined Oct 2006, 382 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 18953 times:
I think this could really benefit Airbus, I mean if they can transfer the development resources to the A350XWB they may well achieve the proposed EIS and cut Boeing edge with the B787 replacing older 777s.
This may also be an Airbus strategy. It would now mean that airbus have loosened up 20 slots for the PAX version if you add this to the FEDEX cancellation. it should help the PAX version get back on line as far as deliveries.
Of course this all depends if they have a solid contract that helps them retain or transfer the deposits for other aircraft then they should not be too unhappy. UPS have not really been voicing too badly about the A380 always edging their bets so maybe this was discussed over the last months after FEDEX cancelled.
As for what UPS will do to fill the GAP well I think that depends on the deposit situation, if its locked into Airbus then the A330F looks like a good proposal. If not locked will they follow FEDEX with the 777F, only time will tell !!!!!!!!!
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6256 posts, RR: 39 Reply 21, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 18930 times:
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26679 posts, RR: 83 Reply 23, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 18834 times:
Quoting Nitrohelper (Reply 17): How many 747-400s will become available for freighter conversions during the next ten years?
5X is actually buying new-build 744Fs and not 744BCFs.
Quoting Nitrohelper (Reply 17): Last question, would a converted 380F be heavier than a purposed built freighter?
Yes. It also would have a lower ceiling so it could not load pallets as high as the A380F could.
Quoting SEPilot (Reply 18): It looks like a good deal for Airbus. They get to keep UPS's deposits for 10 years and don't have to do anything for it.
I'd be surprised if 5X was willing to let Airbus sit on their cash for a decade unless they are 100% non-refundable.
Quoting SirOmega (Reply 19): Sounds like an A350F order to me. Or at least thats what I would try to do if I were Airbus - convert them to A350F instead of outright caning the order.
Yet does 5X want to wait a decade for the A359F? And what if sales for that model are as weak as the A388F's were? Will Airbus launch it on schedule?
Of course, if 5X can't get any of their deposit money back, then they probably just have to hope Airbus comes up with something they want or eventually just write it off as "bad debt".
BoeingFever777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 409 posts, RR: 57 Reply 24, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 18840 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter): Airbus may also push back production of the A380 and a final decision is within days of being made.
MISLEADING!!!!
You need to change that or your going to big time!
Looking worse for the A380F... Good thing 5X got some 767F's on order.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
25 SEPilot: It's the only explanation I can come up with why 5X hasn't bailed completely. They obviously don't really want the plane and Airbus doesn't want to g
26 Brendows: Not only that, it wouldn't carry as much payload as the A380F...
27 DAYflyer: 10 years of postponement is essentially a cancellation. But I will say I think the A-380 is well suited to package delivery of the type UPS needs. Ki
28 BoeingFever777: Since Airbus has finalize the design on the A350 right? Not looking like that til late 08'. EIS for what 2013-14? How much longer after that til the
29 Sangas: De facto cancellation. This is a smart way for FX and 5X to play the game . Wait to see if the A380 program emulates what happened with MD-11 in that
30 NYC777: Actually that is what Airbus is saying. Or at least what Gallois said in the article.
31 FXramper: If Airbus has to make another delay on the pax version it can scuttle more than one deal with current airlines.
32 Galapagapop: For 5X could this announcement have anything to do with the fact the deposits on their A380's are coming from the A300's they no longer wanted, but co
33 LHStarAlliance: Congratulations for your 3000th posts !! But this´ll not happen they´ve solved all wiring problems , so there´s no reason for another delay ...
34 NYC777: Thank you, damned 3000...I must be getting old!! What do I get for it?
35 David L: I think BoeingFever777 is asking if you're sure Gallois didn't say production of the 380F might be pushed back, not the whole 380 project?
36 Osiris30: I believe the press release last week regarding the 380s and UPS stated that either side had the right to cancel the order in the future without pena
37 NYC777: Oh. Yes quite correct I did mis-type and I did mean to say the A380F.
38 Isitsafenow: I think they can make some room at Pime Air Museum in Tucson for the thing. Scarebus might as well pull the plug and advance on the A350. safe
39 Areopagus: Why wouldn't 5X put the deposit money into A330F's sooner rather than A350F's later?
40 David L: Dangerous mistake to make on this forum.
41 Stitch: Because they may not need the A332F having just ordered over two-dozen 767Fs which, while not as capable as the A332F, are still in the same general
42 BoeingFever777: No, He did not! Read it twice. I hope you made the mistake NYC777... Jesus... I thought the world was going to end with that typo. VERY! "Here lies N
43 Glideslope: ROFLOL. I can imagine Boeing in 1994 saying "we will have a good handle on the 777 program in 10 years. The 380F is dead. Period.
44 NYC777: With a stake in the heart courtesy of the A.Net Airbus crowd!!
45 ATCGOD: Not to mention the fact that they probably got a heck of a deal from Boeing since this will help bridge the 767 line until the tankers come.
46 7cubed: Freezing the price would almost certainly make the puchase a losing proposition in 10 years. That would put a a350f eis close to the a380f. UPS wants
47 NYC777: In my defense I did correctly cite the A380F in the title of the thread though I forgot the "F" in the body of the post.
48 BoeingFever777: echo from reply #28. Yes you did... That is why I said I read the link twice and could not see Gallois, saying that. No worries... Just wanted to cla
49 AndesSMF: Has any airline ever postponed an order for 10 years and then finally receive the airplanes? IIRC, NW had A330s ordered, but those were cancelled and
50 LTU932: I believe they actually ordered the A340, but cancelled that order and later decided to get A330s.
51 HighFlyer9790: im actually surprised they didnt cancel....although i think 10 years buys them time to rethink it...
52 AVinutso: I could not agree more. I honestly believe that if the A380 pax version is going to make it, the F version needs to be scrapped. Then, maybe, the pax
53 Kaitak744: Postponing the A380F is good for Airbus. Now, they can concentrate all their engineers and resources to the A350 program and make a good plane out of
54 A5XX: Airbus just found an "elegant" way to kill the A380F. Airbus might offer UPS the A330F as an interim measure to retain the customer. One thing is sure
55 Nitrohelper: I think that would save Airbus & UPS the money being spent on studies! Build one for testing and display at headquarters. Thanks for the answers. Any
56 Art: I go along with your view partially. From all I have read, the A388F offers too few mission profiles where it wins over the 748 freighter. A future A
57 Coa747: It is as good as dead. The 747-8 has already taken the market for large freighters. The A380F just doesn't have the versatility of the 747-400F or 8F.
58 Stitch: Not really, but you usually need to perform a heavy maintenance D-check, as well (usually the reason airlines want to get rid of the plane - the cost
59 Art: Other way round, I think, assuming Airbus has not already spent the bulk of development costs on the freighter. In any event, the market for the curr
60 Osiris30: Engineering is done (or mostly) and production on components has started. So in a nutshell, no this won't bring the break-even point down.
61 Jbernie: Airbus has probably done a good amount of the development for the freighter version... probably just left with freighter specific needs. But this does
62 Sangas: Are you sure about that? Les Echos reported in January that the potential savings from the cancellation/suspension of the A380F development program c
63 Osiris30: @sangas: I don't know for certain. I do know that Airbus folks around these parts have hinted that there would be no major savings cancelling the F pr
64 Brucek: How critical is the A380F to the overall success of the program? If I read the posts above, it would appear as though a potential cancellation of the
65 FXramper: FX isn't interested in A380F and is currently pursuing other opinions.
66 BoeingFever777: I would say now being that in the last 3yrs that customers prefer the 747F/ERF/748F by a 13/1 over the A380F. EK, FX, and ILFC all canned theirs... a
67 XT6Wagon: I forgot the exact numbers, but my general memory of it was that Airbus expected 1/3 of all A380 sales to be A380F versions. In comparison Boeing exp
68 57AZ: My bet is that 5X will walk away from the A380F at some point in the not too distant future. They need ships available soon-not a decade from now. The
69 XT6Wagon: Since these were the two operators that the A380F was best suited to... its a death certificate. The other companies around the world that fly low de
70 WingedMigrator: I may sound like a broken record, but break even is a critical consideration only when you are deciding whether to invest in a project (the go / no-g
71 N844AA: Isn't this a near-textbook definition of the sunk cost fallacy?
72 WingedMigrator: It would be if there was no longer an economic case for the aircraft. However, even the most bearish estimates envision about 400 frames delivered. S
74 Osiris30: That's not even close to remotely true. I'm sorry but it's not. Here's why: Airbus has sunk n billion dollars into project to date (we all agree on t
75 XT6Wagon: Ok, note that Philip Lawrence is on drugs or very very bad at math. He claims 380 A380 by 2015. So if you only deliver A380 in 2008 -> 2015 that is 4
76 Thorben: Am I the only one who thinks this is good news? Fifteen airline CEOs are probably calling John Leahy non-stop now, in order to get the delivery slots.
77 SSTsomeday: If UPS doesn't want the bird anymore, even if it's due to a change in their business plan, can't they blame the lateness of the project in order to ge
78 A520: Isn't this work useful for the 389 anyway (reinforced landing gear + wing)? So it is not exactly lost.
79 XT6Wagon: The A389 is almost certain to never exist
80 A520: Why not? Apparently, the "first strech" version carries a lot of efficiency gain. Plus the cost of development is only a fraction of the original inv
81 SSTsomeday: This sounds a little too optimistic to me. I can't see Airbus developing these variants with sales on the original as anemic as they are. I'm of two
82 Sangas: This is a fairly minor point of information, however, in their revised break-even analysis/forecast released last fall, EADS/Airbus forecast they cou
83 Revelation: No, because you aren't getting the income from the FedEx and UPS frames, which were both still booked orders at the timethe 420 break even point was
84 UPS Pilot: UPS will receive 10 MD-11's in 2007 and 3 744's. In 2008 we'll receive 5 MD-11's and 8 744's. In 2009 we were to receive 3 A380's but with delays that
85 LHStarAlliance: Well If you see it like this it could be good for them ... IMO this is a cancellation but to avoid more bad press about Airbus they did it like this
86 Revelation: Just as many are calling to see if the ones they ordered will be delivered on time, now that Airbus has decided to downsize by 10,000 employees.
87 Sangas: I really can't disagree with your overall assessment regarding the "state" of the A380 program, however, calculation of the actual break-even point h
88 BN727: The French are never wrong. They do everything to perfection. Yes, I am being sarcastic. lol
89 Nitrohelper: Is it time to start a new "how many 380s built by 2020" thread? I voted 380 total in another thread about "How many Total", but I'm too old to see tha
90 TeamAmerica: Maybe! But nothing wrong with being an optimist. Not exactly. Airbus can deliver some more A380's a bit less late than expected. That may reduce comp
91 SEPilot: I agree with the part about the deposits being locked; I don't completely agree about the second part. Airbus has obviously been very reluctant to re
92 Osiris30: You know here's the crux of the Airbus problem... a 389 would be a much more compelling frame than the 388 from a CASM perspective (just a psuedo edu
93 Rbgso: Are A380 slots in that much demand? No sarcasm meant, just a question?
94 Sangas: As it turned-out, given fundamental changes in the marketplace since the A380 was launched, primarily the composite fuselage/advanced technologies ju
95 Khobar: From what I'm reading, Airbus claims the 747F wastes space because of its 10' cabin height but 8' high load door(s). What I can't seem to find is the
96 Ikramerica: Those are not the most bearish estimates. Maybe the most bearish ones you want to acknowledge?
97 Jdevora: by a decade. OR to the next decade ??? I just saw the article Airbus to take industrial decision on future of A380F 'within days' as UPS extra thinkin
98 Brendows: Who on earth would want to operate an A389F, its payload vs volume capabilities would be horrendous, unless they bump up max payload by more than 30t
99 Sangas: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ys-as-ups-extra-thinking-time.html Sounds like they're still very much in the "cancellation zone."[Edited 2007
100 Osiris30: Ummm point of order: The next decade runs from 3 to 13 years from now... a 10 year delay is still in the next decade. They are not mutually exclusive
101 NYC777: Ok it is official, Airbus Postpones the A380F indefinetly. They plan to still build the A380F but doesn't give a date for EIS. http://biz.yahoo.com/ap
103 Osiris30: " target=_blank>http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-....html I think this firmly cements the 380 programme as a whole as one of the most poorly concei
104 Kaneporta1: Whether a lot of people know this or not, The A380F is structuraly a different aircraft to the A380. A lot of extra tooling and manufacturing work wou
105 NYC777: What is surprising is the lack of due diligence on part of Airbus on the freighter market. A lot of freight haulers went with the 748F because of the
106 Confuscius: "I think this is tantamount to a cancellation of the project." I don't think manufacturers ever cancel a project, they just put them on hold like the
107 Osiris30: Ok stop making up numbers. $2B huh? Prove that please. No one, not even the most adamant Airbus supporter has thrown out such a stupidly large number
108 Sangas: $2.0B in potential savings resulting from cancellation/suspension of the A380F development sounds overly optimistic since there's only approximately
109 AndesSMF: So they 'save' $2B instead of making $8B? Can you imagine how much money Boeing would have 'saved' had they not built 747 freighter versions? However
110 BoeingFever777: Where are you getting 2bln from, do you have a source for this? I doubt A will be saving that much since they were so deep into the F program as is.
111 NYC777: Comment from UPS, not good: United Parcel Service Inc., Airbus's only remaining customer for the plane, said the Airbus move took it by surprise. ''We
112 Osiris30: Woah.. that sounds like some SERIOUS positioning to cancel without penalty and with full refund of deposits. I honestly don't think UPS will order an
113 SEPilot: I think Airbus just figured that with the biggest plane out there of course people would want it as a freighter. The fact that it is singularly ill-s
114 Dank: No, but for Airrbus, if they could get some of the pax versions out earlier, then they wouldn't have as much compensation due to the pax carriers. My
115 DEVILFISH: Industrial decision on A380F to come soon according to Flightglobal report..... http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ys-as-ups-extra-thinking-time.h
116 RedFlyer: You can kiss the A380-900 goodbye... "The plane the A380 was really intended to be."
117 Osiris30: " target=_blank>http://www.flightglobal.com/articles....html That seems a bit out of sync with what Airbus has already said publically...
118 Douwd20: Check out the other thread. Airbus has shelved the program for now.
119 Sangas: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...s/EU-FIN-Germany-France-Airbus.php Even David Sutton's (of FX) very sanguine projection back in 2005 was for a
120 Sangas: The Flight International story, based primarily on Mr. Gallois' remarks yesterday, was published hours before the latest news broke on the newswires,
121 Stitch: I think that both comments are being made with benefit of 20-20 hindsight. Remember that Airbus positioned the A388F against the 744ERF. Airbus proba
122 Kaneporta1: My mistake, instead of converting 1b euros to dollars, I converted £1b. The actual number is $1.3 $0.5b at best? Who's making up the numbers here???
123 Stitch: Airbus has formally halted development work on the A388F - Eads Halts Work On Freight Version Of A380 (by AirMailer Mar 1 2007 in Civil Aviation). We
124 TeamAmerica: The other thread: Eads Halts Work On Freight Version Of A380 (by AirMailer Mar 1 2007 in Civil Aviation) Interesting to review some of the comments a
125 PolymerPlane: How true is this gonna be? Since the tooling will be much different than the pax version, It has to put more tooling specialized in making pax versio
126 Dank: Aren't they assembled on the same line in the end, though? If so, then it frees up slots in assembly (given that they can get all the parts built, bu
127 Sangas: Before the various delays and cancellations the first A380F assembled was to be MSN0037, which was presumably going to serve as the test aircraft as
128 Dank: I'm not sure it matters when assembly is ramped up to capacity because planes are still going to be late (from the original delivery dates) long afte
129 SSTsomeday: Well, with respect, my understanding is that the pax 380's strong point has never been CASM, but rather it's ability for airlines to increase passeng
130 Osiris30: I used the phrase IMHO, which means in my opinion. I didn't come out and state it like a fact. Futher more as others have pointed out, publically rel
131 Stitch: By definition, increasing the number of seats lowers the CASM (as you have more seats to spread costs around), so both were reasons why carriers migh
132 SEPilot: To some extent I plead guilty, but having some experience in moving freight if I were doing air freight I would't even consider a double decker unles
133 Sangas: If you look closely at the numbers I'm not sure the "dropping the A380F helps the A380 pax" argument holds much water. We know that if 5X indeed canc
134 SSTsomeday: Just so that I understand: I agree that more seats would be a factor in determining CASM, but if those extra seats come at the price of the A/C weigh
135 Dank: Of course, once pax aircraft are available earlier, then it will be easier to sell them, since slots are available . These "extenuating factors" are
136 SSTsomeday: Ah yes, thank you - these would be other things contributing to CASM besides weight. Hmm - I was under the impression that it did, as a result of it'
137 Stitch: Weight per pound alone does not determine CASM. One also needs to add in fuel costs, maintenance, financing, crew costs, and other such things. So wh
138 XT6Wagon: No, The 744 had lower CASM, but lower revenue given less cargo space once filled with bags. Couple that with the lower risk using a 777 vs 747 you qu
139 Sangas: Well, in terms of the first four years of deliveries (2007-2010), there will be one additional slot available in 2009 (MSN037) to substitute a pax pl
140 EBJ1248650: They assume this will happen or UPS has said it's considering this move?
141 Nitrohelper: All of the 380s built so far have had plenty of hanger time, they should be well rested ! Hopefully the dispatch won't be hindered by those guys with
142 Stitch: It looks like the denouement has been revealed - UPS To Cancel A380 Order (by Airportplan Mar 2 2007 in Civil Aviation)
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5147 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Brazil, joined Oct 2006, 382 posts, 
big time!
Printer friendly format 
