Teahan From Belgium, joined Nov 1999, 5287 posts, RR: 62 Posted (13 years 2 months 1 day ago) and read 1144 times:
It had been a few months since such a post. What are your A380 customer predictions?
Possible In The Near Future:
JAL (put a big Boeing ? next to that)
ANA (put a big Boeing ? next to that)
United (again no matter what people say)
Northwest (put a big ? next to that)
Corsair (Nouvelles Frontieres)
KLM (put a big Boeing ? next to to that)
Possible In The VERY FAR Future (Financial Problems etc..)
Air India (I said very very far future)
Alitalia (put a big ? next to that)
BA (no matter what people say, their main rival Virgin ordered it)
I am sure I forgot a few and that I may be wrong in many of my predictions. I am just a bit too optimistic.
I would love to hear your predictions.
Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
Juul From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 2 months 22 hours ago) and read 1046 times:
'A380 much less likely than 747-X, Boeing already have planes ready to convert Airbus have nothing.'
I'm not sure how to take this, but it seems you're not fully aware of the fact that the A380 has officially been launched by Airbus, and therefore WILL be built (7 customers have so far ordered 60 of them)
About Lufthansa considering the 747X: Every potential customer for the A380 naturally also considers the competing product, thus also Lufthansa.
Juul From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (13 years 2 months 22 hours ago) and read 1032 times:
AF did not order the 747X, they ordered the 747-400ER (former 747-400X) freighter, which is just essentially a heavier version of the 747-400. It is not to be confused with the 747X, which is much more than an improved -400.
747-451 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2417 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (13 years 2 months 20 hours ago) and read 996 times:
Very Large airplanes....(A380 (which IS coming) or 747X (which I HOPE comes) Note: the A380 is an excellent plane and I cant wait to fly it; hey, I'm a Boeing fan, but hat's off to Airbus for the coup de' gras!)
Lufthansa, United, Northwest, JAL, ANA, Singapore, Emirates, Qantas, FED EX, Virgin, ILFC, Air France, BA (they certainly have some routes to use it and screw Branson), Air Atlanta Iceland (who could make some major $$$ by leasing it out to others who may be sqeamish about actually buying their own; try before you buy), GPA, GATX, one of the African carriers (I don't know which, but I could guess that frequencies to UK/Us could make it worth their while)
Atlas, Polar, Saudia, Korean, Asiana, Air China, USAir (conditionally; if United does aquire them, I could see it used under perhaps a "shuttle" flight scheme, perhaps it would make sense), UPS,
Hawaiian (time to dump those DC-10-10's and -30's), Japan Air System
SAA, Alitalia, Air Canada, American (they don't even use the 747-400), Delta, Malaysia, Philipines, Mexicana, AeroMexico.
Some interesting observations:
I can see many airlines using these on high density routes. I could also see that airlines may buy them and wet/dry lease them off season (like for the Hadj). I also think that some of the carter operators could find use for them too. The VLA is a compelling issue.
I can see US carriers like USAir (or whatever it becomes amalgamated with) use it on some shuttle routes like on the east coast. (there are alternate airports that could accomodate it near where it's A320/737's currently operate eg JFK/Dulles as opposed to LGA/Reagan National) This would be quite a scenario since an airport like LGA, the worst in the universe, cannot accomodate more frequency and is facing cuts in the numbers of flights in and out. Instead, you fill could fill up an A380, and in that one flight knock off 3 737/A320 flights--plus use airports that are actually somewhat easier to get to. (if you think traffic to JFK on the Belt is bad you should try getting in and out fo LGA, which is absolutely horrible and disgusting all the time and beyond unbareable if a Mets game lets out at Shea!!!!).
RyeFly From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1391 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (13 years 2 months 12 hours ago) and read 927 times:
Ah lets see...
Pan Am 3
Oh! the A380, I'm sorry. My picks would be UPS, JAL, BA, UA.
The US Airways shuttle? LOL, That was a good one. Seeing that DCA doesn't allow widebodies and the ammount of room at LGA I don't think that will happen. Plus if you had two A380's going on that route how could you get them in unload 600+ passengers board 600+ passengers and back out every hour? The largest plane US Airways would might consider for those routes would perhaps be the A321 and thats not likely. They would rather have those planes packed out every hour.
Watewate From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 2284 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (13 years 2 months 12 hours ago) and read 926 times:
Lufthansa and Cathay. I think all the airlines with the potential to place big orders have signed on already. If Boeing doesn't go ahead with 747X, that'd be a different story. It would mean that ANA and JAL would be on for a big order, as well as all the other Asian carriers.
I can't see Korean Air and Asiana ordering A380 at all. Korean tie with US aside, Korean Air will have hard time convincing public that they can handle a whole new a/c type after their recent flurry of accidents. Asiana's growth has slowed somewhat and all the expansion will come through their acquisition of numerous 777s and a few 747s. Asiana operates 767s (that's right... 767 and not 747) to LAX sometimes and it still needs to covince its own people (Koreans) that OZ is the better way to fly.
Atlas Air? That's a tough one. But I think they'll go for Boeing as they have a massive 747F fleet and the type of cargo they carry suits 747s better than A380.
SailorOrion From Germany, joined Feb 2001, 2058 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (13 years 2 months 10 hours ago) and read 917 times:
I guess in the cargo sector, the 747X (when built) will be the winner, except airbus installes a door for outsized cargo. Why is the An124 so successful? can carry outsized cargo, short takeoff roll (much less than a 380), can land on a real rotten runway, and doesn't need complicated equipment. The 380F is very nice for the world's cargo hubs, but outside....nah!
Singapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13735 posts, RR: 19
Reply 19, posted (13 years 2 months 10 hours ago) and read 914 times:
I think some of us or over stepping hte gun here (or whatever). Not to be dissing you or anything I'm just saying. SOrry if it sounds like it
Ihardly think that all these airlines, Air China, Mexicana, SAA and whatever are going to buy the plane. One, I don't think they will need such an aircraft and two, I think only the major airlines will buy it. One because of price and two because of the status. These "little" (for the sake of this post) airlines don't need such a big thing.