Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Is A380 Now A 525 Seater?  
User currently offlineRuscoe From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1566 posts, RR: 2
Posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 9149 times:

There was a similar topic (which has been locked) but it broke down into the usual A v B, and never answered the above question.

In short why would Airbus reduce the seat count, when it will make no difference to the way airlines compare it to the 748 or any other craft. They will all do their own calculations for their projected seat counts. It does give nominal range increase but once again the airlines could achieve this themselves without Airbus changing the numbers.

Using the Airbus argument about most airlines wanting more premium seating etc, it does give it an added advantage to the 380 over the 748 because the seat count goes down more in the 747 than the 380.

However airlines won't be side tracked by this so I find it an intriguing question.

What is the real reason?

Ruscoe

50 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3409 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 9063 times:

A380 Now A 525 Seat Aircraft? (by XT6Wagon Apr 27 2007 in Civil Aviation)

User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2212 posts, RR: 56
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8992 times:

Quoting Ruscoe (Thread starter):
What is the real reason?

So you can market something with "more range" than the competition?
So you can preempt the competition's improved offering claiming "more range"?
So the cargo hold isn't quite so bursting with LD3s full of luggage?
So you can claim even greater space per passenger than the competition?


User currently offlineRuscoe From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1566 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8980 times:

All those things are logical but an airline is not going to fall for that. They will do their own numbers.

As far as the obvious goes it seems to me to be a pointless exercise to lower the seat count.

Ruscoe


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10024 posts, RR: 96
Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8954 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Ruscoe (Thread starter):
Using the Airbus argument about most airlines wanting more premium seating etc, it does give it an added advantage to the 380 over the 748 because the seat count goes down more in the 747 than the 380.

That sort of answer the question........

Quoting Ruscoe (Thread starter):
However airlines won't be side tracked by this so I find it an intriguing question.

However, they might be if this is actually a more realistic representation of what will happen in real-life service...  Smile

Regards


User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 8924 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

As per a recent issue of Flight International, the new number of 525 more accurately reflects the number of seats that an airline will typically fit in an A380. This takes account of newer F and J type seating/suites.

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...irbus-reduces-a380-seat-count.html



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9097 posts, RR: 75
Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 8842 times:

Quoting Ruscoe (Thread starter):
What is the real reason?

The 555 seat on the 380 is based on seat pitches of F@68", J@48", and at Y@32", giving a capacity of 22F/96J/437Y.

Most airlines are now using a pitch of around 60" (EK/QF/TG/AC/AA use 60") for J, some going up to 70-80" (SA/BA 73", LH 80"), the 525 represents the cabin with a layout F@74", J@60", and at Y@32", the 525 layout is 10F/76J/439Y.

The seats disappeared when the 16 rows of J class on the upper deck went from 48" pitch to 60" pitch, the number of rows reduced, hence the seat count, same with F class.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 8797 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 5):
As per a recent issue of Flight International, the new number of 525 more accurately reflects the number of seats that an airline will typically fit in an A380. This takes account of newer F and J type seating/suites.

Indeed, that's all there is to it, so it seems.

Too bad for those who had hoped the reduction was due to Airbus trying to hide the A380 is not meeting its payload/range targets.

A380 director of product marketing Richard Carcaillet call Boeing's 467-seat count for their 747-8I "dream numbers".

He says that a realistic layout (using similar seat pitch numbers as on the A380) for the 747-8I is "around 400 seats".


If one uses the new Airbus approach to use market realistic seating configurations, rather than business seats which are more like economy plus seats, the 747-8I indeed turns into a 405-seater, compared with Boeing's standard three-class accommodation of 467 passengers,

That's quite a difference!

Didn't know Boeing had to prop up their seating numbers THAT much to make their numbers look much better.
Must be that without it, they can't come close to those of the A380, or they wouldn't bother being so untruthful. Wonder how the real 747-8i does against the A380?


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 8728 times:

There is nothing sinister in this. F/C seats have become much larger over the last 20 years. Airbus have simply updated their nominal seating specs to more closely conform with an evolving reality. Airbus should be commended for this, not subjected to aspersions. Hopefully, Boeing will follow suit soon.

User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 8644 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 10):
There is nothing sinister in this. F/C seats have become much larger over the last 20 years. Airbus have simply updated their nominal seating specs to more closely conform with an evolving reality. Airbus should be commended for this, not subjected to aspersions. Hopefully, Boeing will follow suit soon.

I wonder if they will, because for sure a 405 seating 747-8i will have a much harder time comparing to a 525 seating A380, than the 467 seating 747-8i had against the 555 seating A380.

A simple calculation shows that all Boeing numbers based on seat count will suffer an ADDITIONAL 10% penalty, on top of the penalty from using the more realistic seat counts.


User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 10, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 8606 times:

I've always wondered about that - good question.

You know when you see Leahy showing various people round the A380 mock-up - and things are said about how nice the seats are etc. You get whole segments on the luxury of the A380's premium class seats etc - surely thats just for illustration purposes only and all the customers will just fit their own seats or rather, provide the seats/specs for Airbus to do it for them?

Fact is - 525 is a ballpark figure - nothing more. Means very little I would think. VS for example will probably have a few more than that in there as they pack the Y class seats in tightly and their C class will be large and numerous, whereas SQ may have a few less because of the massive amounts of room their F class seats take up etc. Example - its been noted on here a few times that BA would have fewer seats on their A380 (if they ordered) than some operators have on their 744 - due to huge First and Club World products in terms of floorspace and weight. How near would they be to a nominal 525 figure? I would think 450 would be a lot more realistic. Any comments?

I wonder what the parameters are. (thinking out loud here)

Y class - how wide are the "seats" and whats the hypothtical pitch I wonder? 31" pitch and 18" wide is about average IIRC. Ten abreast in Y on both decks presumably? Would you say thats roughly industry average?

You would think EK would think seriously about having 11 abreast in the cheap seats and similar pitch to their 777s - whereas SQ would likely follow the above model more closely.

[Edited 2007-05-15 11:37:13]


What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 11, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 8577 times:

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 14):
its been noted on here a few times that BA would have fewer seats on their A380 (if they ordered) than some operators have on their 744 - due to huge First and Club World products in terms of floorspace and weight. How near would they be to a nominal 525 figure? I would think 450 would be a lot more realistic. Any comments?

I would expect BA's seat count, if they were to order WhaleJets, to be in the 450 to 500 range.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 14):
Y class - how wide are the "seats" and whats the hypothetical pitch I wonder? 21" pitch and 18" wide is about average IIRC. Ten abreast in Y on both decks presumably?

Y on the WhaleJet will typically be an 18" wide seat at 31 or 32" pitch. 21" pitch is impossible for adults. The WhaleJet will normally have 10 abreast on the maindeck and 8 abreast on the upper deck.


User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 12, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 8562 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 15):
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 14):
Y class - how wide are the "seats" and whats the hypothetical pitch I wonder? 21" pitch and 18" wide is about average IIRC. Ten abreast in Y on both decks presumably?

Y on the WhaleJet will typically be an 18" wide seat at 31 or 32" pitch. 21" pitch is impossible for adults. The WhaleJet will normally have 10 abreast on the maindeck and 8 abreast on the upper deck.

31" sorry typo LOL  Wink



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 13, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 8556 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 15):
WhaleJets

Have you actually had that term patented?  

I used it the other day in TG's credit report and sat down with the client discussing what was written and they knew exactly what I was referring to!

[Edited 2007-05-15 11:36:31]


What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineAntonovman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 720 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 8506 times:

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 17):
Have you actually had that term patented?

I used it the other day in TG's credit report and sat down with the client discussing what was written and they knew exactly what I was referring to!

I think it sounds awful, its the kind of slur the americans would use while they're constantly slagging off airbus


User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 15, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 8460 times:

Quoting Antonovman (Reply 18):
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 17):
Have you actually had that term patented?

I used it the other day in TG's credit report and sat down with the client discussing what was written and they knew exactly what I was referring to!

I think it sounds awful, its the kind of slur the americans would use while they're constantly slagging off airbus

True, but its sort of stuck - many people use it now. Many planes have derogatory nicknames that are held in some affection. BUFF, SLUF, FRED etc spring to mind.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineRuscoe From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1566 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 8403 times:

You all make good points but I still can't see the point.

The airlines would be doing their sums themselves anyway.

Making the 380 525 seats does not make the 747 any better or worse in comparison than it was before the announcement.

The airlines would have known this in their analysis, regardless of anything Airbus or Boeing say.

Cheers
Ruscoe


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 17, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 8379 times:

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 20):
You all make good points but I still can't see the point.

The manufacturers must either have or not have a methodology for determining nominal seat counts. If they are going to have such a methodology, then having one that is more representative of what actual airlines currently do with actual seat counts is better than one which is more representative of what airlines were doing twenty years ago -- as Boeing have.


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 8351 times:

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 20):
You all make good points but I still can't see the point.
The airlines would be doing their sums themselves anyway, regardless of anything Airbus or Boeing say.

What airlines think is only said when they order it and disappears from public attention soon after...

Manufacturer's presentation sheets and press kits all base their comparisons on a generic comparison, based on the numbers each manufacturer provides as 'standard seating configuration', rather than on the more logical yet often varying customer specific seating configurations.

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 20):
Making the 380 525 seats does not make the 747 any better or worse in comparison than it was before the announcement.

Wrong.

It is my view Airbus is forcing Boeing to publish more realistic and much less impressive operating cost figures for the 747-8I by lowering the seat count of their A380 through using a more realistic seating arrangement, to which Boeing will have to react.

Boeing can now either:

-) keep on pushing the 747-8i as a 467 seater, and compare it to a 525 seating A380, at which point it becomes visually obvious even to total aviation nitwits that something is fishy here, as the A380 would only seat 58 pax more.

-) follow Airbus' exemple and use the same level of seating comfort as basis for their seat count, by which they then will have to accept extra operating cost penalties on top of those caused by the seat reduction itself, since the seat reduction will be more dramatic for the 747-8I then for the A380.

-) do something in between (ex; claim the 747-8i is a 440 seater), and thus silently admit the 747-8i can only be compared favourably to the A380, by spinning the numbers...

Either way, this is going to be a PR decision which will leave some egg on the face of the 747-8I, and it will be watched closely no doubt...


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 19, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 8283 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 22):
follow Airbus' exemple and use the same level of seating comfort as basis for their seat count, by which they then will have to accept extra operating cost penalties on top of those caused by the seat reduction itself, since the seat reduction will be more dramatic for the 747-8I then for the A380.

That assumes Airbus made the same effort to squeeze as many standard size seats into the 747-8 SuperJumbo as they did with the WhaleJet. That's dubious. I haven't yet seen any sort of explanation why more realistic seating methodology would favor the WhaleJet over the SuperJumbo, nor have I seen any independent evidence that it would. All we seem to have is Airbus' assertion.


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 8229 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 23):
I haven't yet seen any sort of explanation why more realistic seating methodology would favor the WhaleJet over the SuperJumbo, nor have I seen any independent evidence that it would.

Oh, it definitely favours the superjumbo, it just depends on what plane you think is the superjumbo...
to most people on this planet, it undoubtedly is the A380.


Seriously now; working off the numbers provided in the FI article:

Before: 555 vs 467 -> 1.188

Now: 525 vs 405 -> 1.296

The seating gap between the A380 and the 747-8i is clearly widening and this to the disadvantage of the 747-8I if one is to calculate its operating costs on a seat basis.

If Boeing is to follow suit and adopt a realistic seating configuration, they will have to cut the seating capacity of the 747-8i. Obviously they will try to pump up the seating numbers of the 747-8i by as many standard Y seats as possible to the expense of a ridiculously small C and F class, but one can wonder whether this is truly in line with today's market needs then, nor would it make the generic 747-8i configuration any more real than it is today, something which the new generic A380 configuration definitely is.

Either way, the operating cost figures of the 747-8i must not look nearly as good as Boeing tries to make them appear, because they clearly lack the flexibility to be adapted successfully to new configurations which differ from the standard set by Boeing. A plane with operating costs so rigidly dependent on a totally unrealistic and long outdated seating configuration years before it enters service, isn't likely to have "stellar operating costs" (dixit EK's CEO on the A380) in the real world like a real Superjumbo does...

[Edited 2007-05-15 14:11:55]

User currently offlineNorCal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 8200 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 24):

It is hypocritical of you to shoot down Boeing's number of 467 and then hold up Airbus' 405. Airbus and Boeing are both very biased when it comes to this and will spin numbers in their favor. Don't assume that Boeing is lying if they come up with something a little higher than 405 (467 is unrealistic and shouldn't be trusted either)


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9097 posts, RR: 75
Reply 22, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 8183 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 24):
If Boeing is to follow suit and adopt a realistic seating configuration, they will have to cut the seating capacity of the 747-8i.

Boeing were using F@61", J@39", Y@32", compared to Airbus F@68", J@48", and at Y@32", Airbus already had 7" more pitch in F, and 9" in J. Boeing had no where near the space in F and J, their seat count would come down if a more realistic F@74", J@60", Y@32" was used.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineDougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 7976 times:

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 20):
You all make good points but I still can't see the point.

The airlines would be doing their sums themselves anyway.

Making the 380 525 seats does not make the 747 any better or worse in comparison than it was before the announcement.

The airlines would have known this in their analysis, regardless of anything Airbus or Boeing say.

Cheers

Mister, here's your mule.

Go back a couple months to the grand fandango and excessive media joyride that Airbus staged for the press, in which several hundred supposed journalists went stooging around for a couple hours. Read the articles. Some very interesting information about the A380 was released in those articles that pertains to the operating weight of the aircraft.

Next, take your AC43-13 and your pocket calculator and start doing the numbers.

It should answer all your questions quite nicely.


User currently offlineNcelhr From Vatican City, joined Jul 2006, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 4 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6618 times:

The bottom line seems to be that if Boeing wants to compete with the A380, they will need to design a new superjumbo from scratch and not be able to stretch the 747 to its limit.
Just like Airbus had to think about designing a brand new A350 against the 787 instead of proposing a 330 derivate.

Sounds like things are going to get costly for both manufacturers...


25 BoomBoom : Why would Boeing want to spend $16 billion to compete with a plane that's only sold 160 copies after being on sale for more than six years? A plane t
26 Post contains images Ncelhr : My point exactly. I said: "If Boeing *wants* to compete with the A380". Obviously, they don't, and I don't blame them for that choice.
27 Thebry : There's something weird here. Why is it Airbus management consistently feel the need to use language like the above when referring to Boeing planes a
28 YULWinterSkies : IIRC it has been discussed that such a configuration won't fit and result in much narrower seats and aisles than on a 10-abreast 777. Airlines, who a
29 David_itl : Seeing that you've gone into the future and seen all the orders that will have been gathered, please can you supply me with winning lottery numbers f
30 AirTran717 : Again, someone is seemingly trying to turn this into yet another A vs. B thread. I'm sure there is a more logical answer than Boeing just outright ly
31 EI321 : They had no choice. They had lost too many customers to the A330, the sonic cruiser was rejected by airlines, so the only logical path was to develop
32 BoomBoom : Their oldest widebody is the 747. The "brilliant decision" was to build a plane that's has 567 firm orders before its even flown. It's called listeni
33 Buddys747 : These are two different aircraft. I guess we should compare the A330 and 777 then too, and so on.
34 Post contains images Glideslope : Boeing untruthful? Givin the misinformation from the A side over the past 24m, IMO, you my friend need a long vacation.
35 DeltaDC9 : Total BS. The Sonic Cruiser was the 767 replacement, it saw a great deal of interest until 9/11. 9/11 changed market conditions and Boeing adapted, r
36 Zvezda : It's time to apply a new 21st century metric to both and to all the other Boeing models.
37 Dougloid : I think the A380 is the last aircraft of its class that will ever be built. This decision is going to be talked about in the business schools as a ca
38 DeltaDC9 : Agreed, and Airbus needs to consistantly apply the same metrics to all thier models. To take it a step further, both need to do the industry a favor
39 Post contains links and images Keesje : I on the other hand think 4-5 serious new customers will join the impressive launch customer group in the next 2 yrs and the A380 bashing of the last
40 DeltaDC9 : Envy? No. Inability to understand why Airbus bet the farm on a niche market leaving a huge market all to Boeing? Yes. I would guess it will take a he
41 Post contains images Dougloid : As one of my old profs used to say "That's what makes for horseraces and lawsuits". Only time will tell, and that bitch settles ALL arguments. We'll
42 EI321 : Its not BS at all. The 787 is targeted squarely at the A330's market, just like the 767-400ER.
43 Post contains images BoomBoom : They had a choice. They could build a new VLA of their own, or they could build the 787. They made the right choice. They were losing sales to the 74
44 Post contains links EI321 : They are doing both, the 747-8 is Boeings answer in the VLA market http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...47-8-vs-a380-a-titanic-tussle.html
45 DeltaDC9 : Disagree with Boeing all you want, but the 787 IS the 767 and 757-300 replacement in their product lineup. If its only target was the 330 market, the
46 BoomBoom : What I meant by "new" is a totally new plane, not a derivative, but you knew that--didin't you?
47 Zvezda : Cabin floor areas: 767-200: 154.9 sq meters 767-300: 184.5 sq meters 767-400: 214.1 sq meters 787-3/8: 223.8 sq meters A330-200: 231.3 sq meters 787-
48 Post contains images EI321 : DC9, thats exactly what Im trying to say, whats the condusion? The 767 was getting roasted by the A330 and Boeings answer was to replace it with a 'B
49 DeltaDC9 : That might be an exageration. The 767 sold about 60 copies 2003-2006 and this year has sold 36. There are only 212 A-330-300s delivered and 254 A-330
50 Thebry : Interesting 380 picture in the footer of your note... the UPS logo is still present. Has something changed, or is this an old photo? It says 2007. So
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...
Why Is A380 Essential To LAX? posted Wed Nov 30 2005 23:00:31 by AirlineAddict
Why The A380 Now? posted Thu Jan 8 2004 23:19:02 by 767Lover
Why Is Airtran Slowing Growth Now? posted Tue Nov 21 2006 15:57:58 by Quickmover
Why Is Qantas In Lima Now? posted Wed Oct 18 2006 18:11:06 by Notdownnlocked
Why Is EK Ordering The A380? posted Thu Jan 31 2002 18:31:11 by SK A340
Why Is Airbus Comparing A380 To Boeing's 747X posted Fri Mar 2 2001 17:43:18 by Singapore_Air
Why Is AC Hiring Right Now? posted Sun Nov 19 2000 06:32:31 by No YYC
Why Is The 777-300ER Called The 77W? posted Sun May 13 2007 21:58:16 by Cba
Why Is ANA Taking Delivery Of New B763ER's? posted Mon Apr 23 2007 04:46:04 by EK413
Why Is PER So Bad? posted Fri Apr 20 2007 05:44:55 by Jasond